Judge Jim Gray Posts Vice Presidential Question On His Facebook Account

Judge Jim Gray has occasionally posted on his Facebook account, which has over 1200 friends. Tonight, less than ten minutes ago, he posted this question as a status: What would you think of Judge Gray running for Vice President?

So far, responses have all been positive, though that is to be expected. IPR has put in an email to Judge Gray and is awaiting a reply. Presumably this is the Vice Presidential candidate of Gary Johnson’s choosing and the one who spoke to Steve Kubby on the phone today.

86 thoughts on “Judge Jim Gray Posts Vice Presidential Question On His Facebook Account

  1. Oranje Mike

    This is the first I’ve heard of Judge Jim Gray. His website looks like it will provide interesting reading and I will be sure to educate myself. Judge Andrew Napolitano would be a fine choice.

  2. Trent Hill Post author

    Napolitano is a pipe dream–he very likely would not even consider it.

  3. Trent Hill Post author

    I’ll say this though–maybe Gray is just jumping into the race because he wants to be VP. Perhaps he has not been approached by Johnson at all.

  4. bruuno

    Gray would be a solid choice. Not a headline grabber but an intelligent man who would represent LP well. As for Napolitano he is far too into being a celebrity to sacrifice his Fox News job to do it. Plus the pro-life and dabbling in “Trutherism” could be problematic

  5. Bernie

    Before jumping to conclusions, let’s actually examine Judge Gray’s un-libertarian ideas.

    “Our policy should be changed for specified drugs like marijuana to be strictly regulated for distribution to adults — and taxed — and users of other drugs should be allowed legal access to them under the strict supervision of medical professionals. Medical programs of this kind are successfully reducing crime, drug usage and health problems today in countries like Switzerland and Germany , and we can emulate their success. ”

    Notice how he doesn’t say legalize all drugs. He advocates for strict regulation. He still wants the government to control the ‘harder stuff’. Not very libertarian to me.

    “Combat the present Crisis of Childhood Obesity. The rates of childhood obesity, childhood diabetis, and high cholesterol are shockingly high. This is the first time in our history that our children’s life expectancy is lower than our own. We should sponsor programs of education to parents about the fat content of the “foods” our children are eating, and the importance of physical activity for our children. ”

    Does this sound anything like the food police? Wants to spend your tax dollars on telling other people how to raise their children. (Sound like Michelle Obama?)

    “Rejoin the rest of the world and quickly phase in the Metric System into our business and personal lives. ” – I truly hope he’s kidding, but if he’s not, I wonder how much U.S. tax dollars he’d like to use implementing this.

    “Increase our utilization of nuclear energy. If Japan, which is the only country ever to experience the horrors of nuclear war, now uses more than 50 nuclear reactors to generate about one-third of its electric power, we also should seriously look into increasing our utilization of nuclear power as well. Yes there are still problems with the disposal of nuclear waste, but other countries are dealing effectively with it, and we can as well.”

    Rather than suggest the reduction of government regulations on the nuclear industry that would increase supply and entry into market, he simply claims that we should increase our utilization. I’d like to know how.

    “Gray has also received letters of commendation from the Orange County Board of Supervisors for his creation of a successful drinking-driver sentencing program,”

    Why doesn’t Gray advocate for stricter laws for people who actually harm others in crashes? Drunk driving by itself is a victimless crime. Laws such as these increase the police state in America.

    “Reform our country’s Income Tax system by replacing it with a Flat Tax, FAIR Tax, or National Sales Tax. By doing this, almost everyone will receive a huge “tax break” by a reduction of fraud, administrative and accounting expenses, and favoritism, even if they actually continue to pay the same amount of taxes.”

    Fair Tax . No thank you.

  6. paulie

    Sounds in line with Johnson’s views.

    Like Johnson known for marijuana as a primary issue – that’s good from my pov as it connects us better with the youth/left audience, as opposed to the crowd Barr/Root was aimed at.

  7. Carol Moore

    Judge Gray was on the LP’s Israel Lobby sh*t list in 2004 for proposing a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine situation as part of his inter-religious group. (No longer on his web site but at http://digital.library.ucla.edu/websites/2004_996_049/index.php%5EmenuID=Page&pid=98.htm Plus a statement on the subject at http://digital.library.ucla.edu/websites/2004_996_049/index.php%5EmenuID=Page&pid=99.htm )

    Lobby leader Bruce Cohen quit Gray’s Senate campaign, labeling him “anti-Israel.” That’s all that I saved in my files, but I’m sure there was more fallout among the big “libertarian” Israel Lobby in California.

    In 2009 Gray did a blog entry on the ADL saying it was against bigotry vs.Muslims in 2009 which also probably got him in some trouble with them.
    Or maybe he’s come to some accommodation with them. Anyway, if you see the elitist cabal opposing him vociferously and wonder why, that may be the real reason.

    Just an FYI.

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    I’ve met Judge Gray and read his book. He seems like a nice guy, smart guy, personable, etc.

    But he also seems like a strange match for Johnson on a presidential ticket.

    They represent the same narrow sliver of libertarian ideology/party faction (“moderate”), same strengths (some credentials), same weaknesses (don’t exactly set the world on fire as speakers, etc.).

    I’m just not seeing what he brings that isn’t already there, either pre- or post-nomination.

  9. Carol Moore

    Obviously it would be good to have a real radical, hopefully someone who could get MORE attention than Johnson. Hey, isn’t Norma Jean Almovodar attending the convention???

  10. Robert Capozzi

    11 tk, I do see something. Team GJ is playing for getting in the debates. It’s a stretch goal, one that makes sense to me.

    Usually, the LP VP is not an especially active role. Root carved it into one, as I think his intent was to build this into a career.

    Gray could be viewed as an insurance policy. My first preference remains a demi-Koch, eg, Mackey. I like the idea of Stockman or Goldwater, though the latter apparently has said “not interested.”

    If there was NO chance for getting on the debates, and no money guy or notable pol wanted the slot, I’d probably prefer Wrights over Gray mostly for internal harmony. But since GJ is packaging the best product he can, I’d say Gray is indicated.

  11. Carol Moore

    For those not in the know, that’s “Cop to Call Girl” Norma Jean who was the LP of CA’s Lt Gov candidate in the 1980s and runs a sex workers group currently.

  12. matt cholko

    I don’t think ill be voting for him. Wrights is likely to be my choice for VP if Johnson wins the presidential nomination, and Wrights runs for the spot. Based on my conversation with Mary Ruwart a month or so ago, I believe that he was planning to do so at that time. I wonder if anything has changed his mind? Maybe he would decline to run if he saw no significant chance of winning?

  13. Chuck Moulton

    Tom Knapp wrote (@11):

    I’ve met Judge Gray and read his book. He seems like a nice guy, smart guy, personable, etc.

    But he also seems like a strange match for Johnson on a presidential ticket.

    They represent the same narrow sliver of libertarian ideology/party faction (“moderate”), same strengths (some credentials), same weaknesses (don’t exactly set the world on fire as speakers, etc.).

    I’m just not seeing what he brings that isn’t already there, either pre- or post-nomination.

    I agree with Knapp. I don’t think Gray provides good ticket balance with Johnson.

    If he’s not going to have another governor (like Bill Weld or Jesse Ventura or Mark Sanford) or a senator (like Mike Gravel) or a congressman (like Barry Goldwater Jr. or Ron Paul) or a millionaire (like John Allison or John Mackey or Peter Thiel or T.J. Rogers), then he should add someone who appeals to a different demographic or is a dynamic speaker or brings academic credentials. I’d like to see someone like John Stossel, Walter Williams, Judge Napolitano, David Friedman, David Boaz, Tom Palmer, Tom Woods, or Michael Munger. On the single issue front, someone like David Walker on spending or Grover Norquist on taxes or Rob Kampia on marijuana legalization would be good.

    If he Johnson doesn’t find someone with a lot of money or credentials or star power, I’ll be supporting Lee Wrights for VP to unite the radicals and the moderates in the party and keep Johnson honest on his less libertarian positions. Gray doesn’t do it for me.

    Also I suspect some people will hold Gray’s role in upholding the floor fee /poll tax on the Judicial Committee against him.

  14. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC@13,

    “I do see something. Team GJ is playing for getting in the debates.”

    I fail to see how Gray as VP makes that either more likely, or more profitably exploitable if accomplished.

    “Usually, the LP VP is not an especially active role. Root carved it into one, as I think his intent was to build this into a career.”

    I didn’t notice that Root was especially active as VP compared to past LP VP candidates.

    It’s true that Campagna was particularly inactive — because the presidential campaign basically shut him down after a poor debate performance, a weird claim that Gandhi endorsed him, and the understanding that he’d lied about the money he could bring to the campaign in order to get nominated in the first place.

  15. Brian Holtz

    I supported Kubby over Root for VP in 2008 for left-right balance and to make the War On Some Drugs a central campaign theme by combining a former drug warrior with a drug freedom fighter.

    Johnson doesn’t have the right-imbalanced problem that Barr did. I’d be happy to clone Johnson, because the LP VP spot doesn’t work on the level of accreting a geographic or demographic constituency. Instead, the role of the LP VP is to earn more free media for the LP and its ticket.

    Judge Gray would be a great pick for either spot on the ticket. Even without having campaigned for President, he still has double the mentions in Google News archives that Lee Wrights has. And Gray has already proven himself in terms of access to, and performance on, the top tier of media:

    I haven’t heard of Tom Woods, but I’d be thrilled with any of John Stossel, Walter Williams, Judge Napolitano, David Friedman, David Boaz, Tom Palmer, or Michael Munger. However, the only ones on that list we’d ever have a chance of getting are Munger and maybe Friedman.

  16. Robert Capozzi

    18 jt: Also I suspect some people will hold Gray’s role in upholding the floor fee /poll tax on the Judicial Committee against him.

    me: That would be a poor reason, IMO. The JCers gave a measured, legal interpretation of the floor fee, not the wisdom of the floor fee. And, really, in the grand scheme of things, to hold THAT against Gray strikes me as exceedingly petty.

    19 tk: I fail to see how Gray as VP makes that [getting in the debates] either more likely, or more profitably exploitable if accomplished.

    me: I agree Gray doesn’t particularly help get in the debates compared with Wrights. IF it happens, though, my judgment is that the Judge is more able to hold his own against Biden and, say, Portman. And that he has a credential, he would not look too “small” on the stage.

    tk: I didn’t notice that Root was especially active as VP compared to past LP VP candidates.

    me: Root claims to’ve done something like 1000 small-market radio appearances in 08, iirc. That seems more than his predecessors, but I can’t say for sure…

  17. bruuno

    Mr. Moulton I think you have to remain realistic. Most of those you mentioned are very unlikely to accept such a slot. Having said that I think Wrights would be a fine choice as well. Either way it should make the convention more fun to watch.

  18. LibertarianGirl

    is it true that the JC said theres no evidence that we never charged a fee before….one of the LPN officers said that…when i told him that lingtime activists and even a founder had said we never charged one and that records could prove it , he said records were sketchy and that the JC cited that…true or no??

  19. Wes Wagner

    LG @25

    You are correct in your line of reasoning… if you have witness testimony of people who have attended conventions all the way back to the founding of the party AND no documentary evidence to the contrary, typically the finding of fact would be that no fees were previously assessed.

  20. paulie

    Johnson doesn’t have the right-imbalanced problem that Barr did.

    True, but he’s not a radical libertarian so it may be good to have one as VP candidate for balance in that sense.

  21. NewFederalist

    “How many women have been mentioned as VP candidates?”

    Hey! Tonie Nathan is going to be there. Let’s ask her again!

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC@22,

    “I agree Gray doesn’t particularly help get in the debates compared with Wrights.”

    The chances of the LP’s presidential slate getting into the debates range from “none” at one end to “slim” on the other, and I don’t see either Gray or Wrights as veep nominee moving the needle away from the former and toward the latter to any measurable extent.

    The only thing that would likely move that needle is if the VP nominee was very famous and/or could invest a lot of money (tens of millions) in the campaign.

    The difference I see there is that moderate political reformist Gray would likely not stand out much in ways that really contrast the LP slate with the other two, where radical reformist Wrights would.

    Not to be mean, but “I think we should move the deck chairs six inches further apart than Romney advocates, and six inches closer together than Obama has moved them” is just not as strong a contrasting message as “hey, why don’t we all GET THE FUCK OFF THE TITANIC, people.”

    I hadn’t considered the possible impact of Gray’s activities on the Judicial Committee on his prospects.

    His record there is mixed — he voted to uphold the bylaws versus executive committee overreach in the Oregon matter, and to void the bylaws versus convention committee overreach on the floor fee.

    Since he joined the majority opinion in each case rather than writing separate concurrences, it’s difficult to know what logic underlies his decisions, so to the extent that delegates factor that into their decision (which probably shouldn’t be very much), they should probably assume 100% good faith and 50% poor judgment. Which, in baseball, is more than passable.

    It just seems to me that the key factor in choosing a veep candidate, assuming his positions aren’t completeley unpalatable of course, is “is this candidate likely to make the campaign more successful?” And I’m still not seeing how he would.

  23. Robert Capozzi

    23 p: There isn’t [any chance for getting on the debates].

    me: If you give me 1000:1 odds, I’ll be sending you $10.

    tk: “is this candidate likely to make the campaign more successful?”

    me: I would say that monied Ls are more likely to give to a Johnson/Gray effort than a Johnson/Wrights one. Since money is probably a bigger factor in political success than anything else, I’d say +1 Gray.

    Again, Gray doesn’t get GJ in the debates. Gray is positioned as someone who could hold his own in debates. The monied likely agree, I suspect.

    Odds are very long that Johnson/X get in the debates, but GJ2012 is running AS IF they COULD. That’s the first step in actually doing something…behaving in a plausible, appropriate manner, saying the appropriate, compelling stuff.

    Max Headroom could repeat the NAP over and over again…

  24. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC@33,

    “I would say that monied Ls are more likely to give to a Johnson/Gray effort than a Johnson/Wrights one. Since money is probably a bigger factor in political success than anything else, I’d say +1 Gray.”

    I sense several problems with that take.

    The first is that given the size of the likely donor base and the campaign finance limits on contributions from outside the ticket, the difference between minimum and maximum donations that can be reasonably expected is so small as to be insignificant in the scheme/scope of things.

    That is, absent a veep candidate who can make large contributions himself, the likely range is $1-$2 million, and whether the campaign raises near the bottom or near the top of that range is unlikely to make any huge difference in outcomes.

    Secondly, some “monied libertarians” support the LP ticket because they want to spend their money promoting a radical libertarian message, and Johnson/Gray offers them zero, zip, zilch, nada to support. Just as the 2008 ticket of two conservative Republicans left a lot of donor money on the table (raising about as much as Badnarik 2004), so would a 2012 ticket of two moderate reformists. That’s part of the whole “balance” equation.

    I assume that “monied libertarians” didn’t become “monied” by being stupid. Therefore they know two things:

    1) Gray isn’t going to be in the debates, so it doesn’t matter how well he would “hold his own” in them; and

    2) If the VP candidate does get in the debates, it’s better to have a strong message and pick up some new supporters, than “hold your own” and be forgotten within 48 hours along with your “kind of like those other two, only a teensy, weensy bit different, but without their money, name recognition, credentials or popularity” message.

  25. Chuck Moulton

    bruuno wrote (@24):

    Mr. Moulton I think you have to remain realistic. Most of those you mentioned are very unlikely to accept such a slot.

    I agree. However, I don’t think it is unreasonable for Johnson to ask them.

  26. justwondering

    If Lee Wrights was the front runner for the nomination and the rumor of the day was that Wright’s was going to pick Judge Gray as his running mate, the praise from the IPR crowd would be unending. It would call an intelligent choice that will unite the party.

    As usual with the IPR crowd, since it is a Gary Johnson rumor, it is flawed. The usual suspect are gleefully piling on as if the choice was going to be Wayne Root.

  27. Jill Pyeatt

    BH @21: I’d like to suggest you familiarize yourself with Tom Woods. He’s a good spokesman for the liberty movement. His speech from last May at the “Nullify Now” event in Los Angeles truly moved me to tears.

    http://youtu.be/qp5hMiTS2dg-

  28. Jill Pyeatt

    jw@ 37: Your comment is odd. If Lee Wrights were to become the LP’s presidential candidate, Judge Gray would be a great vp because they would balance the ticket quite well. Conversely, I don’t think he’s the best choice for Johnson because their strengths are in the same area. A good choice, maybe, but not the best choice.

  29. paulie

    If Lee Wrights was the front runner for the nomination and the rumor of the day was that Wright’s was going to pick Judge Gray as his running mate, the praise from the IPR crowd would be unending. It would call an intelligent choice that will unite the party.

    Wrights picking Gray to be VP would be more of a unifying move. This is more analogous to a Wrights-Kubby ticket if you want to make an analogy.

    As usual with the IPR crowd, since it is a Gary Johnson rumor, it is flawed. The usual suspect are gleefully piling on as if the choice was going to be Wayne Root.

    No, I think there would be a lot more objections to Wayne being on the ticket again from people here.

  30. NewFederalist

    I still like the prospect of Johnson/Goldwater… it reminds me of ’64 but in a good way.

  31. Thomas L. Knapp

    justwondering@37,

    Just to be clear here, I don’t “object” to Gray as VP. As a matter of fact, given my personal goals with respect to the LP, a Johnson/Gray ticket works just fine.

    But of course my personal goals with respect to the LP are … um, well … different from what I assume to be the goals of most LP members.

    What I’m trying to understand is how a Johnson/Gray ticket advances LP members’/supporters’ presumed goals rather than my own. I’m just not seeing it.

  32. Trent Hill Post author

    “Does the anonymous original article poster have any evidence at all that he is the Johnson running mate and not the Wrights running mate?”

    I’m not anonymous. As always, once you click on the article my name isn’t in the byline–but on the main page it is.

    My source says it isn’t a Wrights VP candidacy.

  33. paulie

    Trent

    I?m not anonymous. As always, once you click on the article my name isn?t in the byline?but on the main page it is.

    Simple way to fix it so it’s visible when people click on the article or arrive at it by a link

    in the dashboard (only you can see this file):

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-admin/theme-editor.php?file=/themes/cutline-3-column-split-11/single.php&theme=Cutline+3-Column+Split

    This line (I?m changing angle brackets to square so it shows up)

    [h4][?php the_time(‘F jS, Y’) ?][!– by –]

    The comment tags need to be removed (!?, ?).

    It says ?You need to make this file writable before you can save your changes. See the Codex for more information.?

    http://codex.wordpress.org/Changing_File_Permissions

    That would require server access, not just the dashboard, as far as I can tell.

  34. Thomas L. Knapp

    SB@45,

    Just trying to help the process along 😉

    Barr was denial.

    Root was anger.

    Johnson is bargaining.

    While it’s not a sure thing, Johnson/Gray might be a way to help LP bitter-enders leapfrog right past depression and to acceptance.

  35. JT

    Capozzi: “Odds are very long that Johnson/X get in the debates, but GJ2012 is running AS IF they COULD. That’s the first step in actually doing something…behaving in a plausible, appropriate manner, saying the appropriate, compelling stuff.”

    What recent Libertarian candidate for President hasn’t run as if he could get into the debates? The ones I know of all thought it was a strong possibility months ahead of the debates (even though it wasn’t) and that was part of their campaign plans.

  36. Thomas L. Knapp

    JT,

    “Tom, just so I understand, you’re saying you want the LP to be dead?

    Not exactly.

    It’s dying whether I want it to be dead or not.

    I’d like to see its passage be the least painful, least tumultuous, and least damaging (to the libertarian movement) passage possible.

    Johnson/Gray seems to fit that bill — “went to sleep one night and just never woke up, and nobody noticed at first because just being around made us doze off, too” pretty much, or at least a major step in that direction.

    If I wanted the LP dead, and didn’t particularly care how painfully it died or how many infectious bodily fluids and such it spewed all over the movement in doing so, I’d be shouting “Root/Boortz 2012!” from the rooftops.

  37. Andy

    “Darryl W. Perry // Apr 28, 2012 at 11:55 am

    During the 2010 Freedom Summit in Phoenix, AZ Jim Gray stated publicly that he opposes jury nullification. IMO, one more strike against him.”

    I met Jim Gray in person years ago (I think it was either 2002 or 2004) at a Libertarian Party meeting in San Fernando Valley, CA. He seemed like a good guy, but during the meeting he said that he opposed jury nullification. His reasoning here was because he said that as a former family law judge, that he’d be afraid that there’d be some guy on a jury who’d think that it is OK for a guy to smack his wife around, and that this person would vote innocent even if a guy was guilty of domestic violence. I don’t agree with his reasoning here at all, because I think that far more damage is done by juries mindlessly upholding anti-liberty “laws” because they believe that they have to go with whatever the “law” says (or what the judges and prosecutors say that the “law” is), rather than judging the merits of the “law” itself.

    I consider jury nullification to be one of the most important issues that there is, and it is one that the Libertarian Party ought to be far more vocal about than it is.

  38. Carol Moore

    I don’t care if candidates have some bad positions, as long as they tell interviewers their personal positions on this or that issue are different from the parties, don’t talk about them much at all, and concentrate on the libertarian and libertarian direction issues. What I have a problem with is the attempt to squeeze out radical libertarian candidates by gutting the platform, trying to control state parties to discourage radicalism, and discourage radical candidates. And doing this through fraud and psychological force. Nonviolent extremism in defense of liberty against these bastards is necessary. See my CONVENTION WEB SITE http://carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/bootroot (still somewhat under construction – please send emails quick with suggested changes – liberty _AT* carolmoore.net

  39. Andy

    “Trent Hill // Apr 28, 2012 at 12:10 am

    Napolitano is a pipe dream–he very likely would not even consider it.”

    Andrew Napolitano has sounded very good over the last couple of years or so. I’d love to see him seek the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination.

  40. Major Opinion

    [Judge Gray] voted to uphold the bylaws versus executive committee overreach in the Oregon matter

    The majority’s ruling, that the government is the default arbiter of what entity in a state is the Libertarian Party of that state, has no textual basis in the LP bylaws.

    and to void the bylaws versus convention committee overreach on the floor fee

    Bylaw 11.3.a distinguishes between “accreditation” and “registration”: “delegates shall be those so accredited who have registered at the Convention.” The Bylaws thus mention “registration” but do not describe it. Robert’s describes “registration” and says it “normally” includes “paying the registration fee.”

    is it true that the JC said theres no evidence that we never charged a fee before

    Some (but not Mr. Ploeger’s brief on behalf of the Petitioners) argue that not having a registration fee is a custom that has now become binding. However, not all prior conventions have available minutes, and surviving minutes do not record such registration procedures. We do not even know when between 1972 and 1989 the registration language was added to the Bylaws. In the absence of reliable evidence about this alleged custom, the Party of Principle should be governed not by lore but by the text of its rules.

  41. Robert Capozzi

    jt, ya know, I don’t read minds. I would say that unqualified (no resume) candidates and way-outside-the- mainstream (extremist) candidates are not meaningfully running debate-worthy campaigns.

  42. paulie

    If I wanted the LP dead, and didn’t particularly care how painfully it died or how many infectious bodily fluids and such it spewed all over the movement in doing so, I’d be shouting “Root/Boortz 2012!” from the rooftops.

    That’s probably the stage you’ll reach by 2016 🙂

  43. paulie

    “Trent Hill // Apr 28, 2012 at 12:10 am

    Napolitano is a pipe dream–he very likely would not even consider it.”

    Andrew Napolitano has sounded very good over the last couple of years or so. I’d love to see him seek the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination.

    I think Trent is correct.

  44. JT

    Capozzi: “jt, ya know, I don’t read minds. I would say that unqualified (no resume) candidates and way-outside-the- mainstream (extremist) candidates are not meaningfully running debate-worthy campaigns.”

    I know saying that you don’t read minds is your catchphrase, but you were still able to make the claim that GJ is running as if he could get into the debates. So I asked which candidate, based on whatever criteria you used to make that claim, didn’t run in the past as if he could make the debates. I guess your answer is that not espousing “way-outside-the-mainstream” ideas (in whatever way you define that) means running as if one could make the debates.

  45. Robert Capozzi

    61 jt, yes, along with looking and acting the part. Doing TV and events, etc.

    And maybe even taking the occasional “limo” from the airport. 😉

  46. JT

    Capozzi: “61 jt, yes, along with looking and acting the part. Doing TV and events, etc.”

    Well that’s what I thought you were referring to. And in that case, that’s every recent Libertarian candidate for President.

  47. Robert Capozzi

    63 jt, OK, then we disagree, as I’d say our only qualified candidates have been Paul, Barr and now perhaps Johnson. I trust that GJ will do a better job than Barr did.

  48. Darryl W. Perry

    paulie

    If I wanted the LP dead, and didn’t particularly care how painfully it died or how many infectious bodily fluids and such it spewed all over the movement in doing so, I’d be shouting “Root/Boortz 2012!” from the rooftops.

    That’s probably the stage you’ll reach by 2016 </div

    I intend to be the anti-Root in 2016 – it will be refreshing for the LP to have a radical Presidential nominee.

  49. paulie

    trust that GJ will do a better job than Barr did.

    I think he will. He may also run in ’16, in which case, Darryl, will you be the anti-Johnson?

  50. Robert Capozzi

    66 p, yes, qualitatively GJ’s almost sure to perform better than BB. He’s been running for a year already, has a team in place, is reflexively L without BB’s baggage and will likely have a more unified LP behind him.

    Downsides:

    * Obama was merely a threat in 08; now voters have seen the reality. Ousting him seems more urgent than stopping him was.

    * Romney is not as weak IMO as McCain was. He looks like a prez and seems vigorous, in contrast to McCain’s aging and broken body.

    The “stop Obama” impulse will be more pronounced this time. BB tried to be – in effect – the “real conservative” alternative, which was poor positioning. Real conservatives vote against mulattoes with Muslim African names!

    If GJ goes guerilla on the Internet, he may be able to exploit the dissatisfaction with the Rs and Ds, especially in deep red or blue states. It’s easier to vote your conscience when you live in a state where the worst of 2 evils is going to win anyway…

  51. paulie

    Johnson’s support seems to come more from disappointed previous Obama supporters than from disaffected conservatives. The polling info I saw was 10% of self described “very liberal” voters would support him now vs. 5 or 6% in all the other categories from somewhat liberal to very conservative.

    I’m not sure how many voters are sophisticated enough to understand state by state electoral analysis. Judging from comments from non-signers and wavering signers of petitions a large percentage aren’t.

  52. Robert Capozzi

    70 p, right. So, for ex., what if there were an internet ad that targeted NYers that had a narrative saying, NY is a lock for Obama, so why not vote your conscience?

    It could work the other way, too. TX is a lock for Romney, so why not vote your conscience?

    Might work. Good advertising does educate, after all. Just because most are not aware of something doesn’t mean that won’t grasp it when they are told and reminded repeatedly.

    Again, let’s remember GJ isn’t going to win. BUT…this exercise is to build the brand and get the numbers up as high as possible. Maybe, if all breaks right, he polls at 15%. Maybe he breaks 1MM votes. I say do the things that get GJ and the LP on the shelf.

  53. Robert Capozzi

    72 p, yes, but I would put things like events, e.g., college speeches, as a low priority issue. My gut tells me that those have very high opportunity costs in time and expense.

    I’m just throwing out some ideas on strategy, to be clear. I don’t think BB 2008 was a good one, but there may be others for GJ that are optimal for 2012.

  54. paulie

    I don’t think they do. I think a lot of college speeches would be great. The other things you mention don’t require the candidate’s physical presence as much.

    I would especially like to see Johnson (and other possible 2016 candidates) make a lot of college speeches for the entire next 4 years.

    Say 100 speeches a year for 4 years.

    That would be awesome.

  55. Robert Capozzi

    74 p, now there I agree. I’d love to see GJ giving speeches at colleges for the next 4 years, too.

    I don’t see it as being mission-critical during the campaign, though. I don’t oppose doing them…not at all. But a campaign has limited resources and time. Trying to do everything > doing a lot of things half-assed.

    Candidate time should mostly be 1) fundraising and 2) media.

  56. Robert Capozzi

    76 p, I always liked Gov. Wilder’s notion of distinguishing between the “need to’s” and “nice to’s.” Yes, nice to do some side speeches at colleges when in town doing a fundraiser, for ex.

  57. Bruce Cohen

    Carol Moore @ 9
    I was fired by Jim Gray, I didn’t quit.
    The reason why I was fired is certainly more interesting.

    Judge Gray had three other staff members.
    All Muslim.
    One believed the Mossad was in charge of the September 11 Twin Tower attacks.
    Another believed Jews drink blood and make matzoh with it.

    As far as Miss Moore suggesting a ‘Palestinian’ girl for me, even the Arabs now admit there is no such thing as a ‘Palestinian’ and that almost all the Arabs claiming said heritage are Syrian, Egyptian or Saudi.

    Get your facts straight, Miss Moore.
    Your Jew hate and Israel bashing at least ought to be accurate.

  58. Arabs in Israel are Israeli Arabs

    even the Arabs now admit there is no such thing as a ‘Palestinian’ and that almost all the Arabs claiming said heritage are Syrian, Egyptian or Saudi.

    If the Arabs living in Israel or its West Bank & Gaza are not Palestinian — then they can only be Israeli Arabs.

    Egyptian Arabs live in Egypt. Syrian Arabs live in Syria. Israeli Arabs live in Israel.

    I’ll take your word that there’s no such thing as Palestinian. So then, logically, Israel should give citizenship and voting right to all Israeli Arabs — including those in the West Bank and Gaza.

    Independent Statehood or Full Israeli Citizenship for the Arabs in West Bank & Gaza are the only democratic/libertarian alternatives.

  59. Trent Hill Post author

    I’m not sure I’ve ever understood the notion that there “is no” Palestinian people. If a people declare themselves to have a common culture, then how exactly does one suggest that they do not? Do you understand that ethnic groups, such as they are, have been evolving and changing for thousands of years? The “English” are a mixture of Anglo-Saxons, Irish, Scots, Picts. The “Irish” are a mixture of Celts, Gaels, Picts, and Anglo-Saxons. The “French” are a mixture of Gaulians, Celts, and German tribies, etc etc etc.

  60. Thomas L. Knapp

    Newt Gingrich got into a little trouble for referring to the Palestinian Arabs as an “invented people,” but it’s true (“Americans” are also an “invented people,” as are “Israelis”).

    Both major concepts of Palestinian “national identity” — the Jewish one, aka Israel, and the Arab one — are products of the 20th century, and frankly the latter is largely a product of the former.

  61. Carol Moore

    Hey, Bruce Cohen. Sorry if I misread your email below. I guess AFTER he got a copy he fired you. I think most people would have. Are you working on his campaign now???
    ____________
    From: “Bruce Cohen”
    Date: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:38 pm
    Subject: Judge Gray – Anti-Israel?

    Dear Friends,

    Most of you know I was a part of the Judge Gray Campaign most of the
    Election Season. I personally collected enough signatures to put him
    on the ballot. I’ve worked my ass off to make him a success,
    fundraising, recruiting volunteers, organizing, writing and more,
    much more.

    Well, as of last week, I’m no longer with the campaign.
    I still help out a lot, but not nearly to the level I did before.

    I support Judge Gray, though there are issues I sharply differ with
    him on. One of those issues is the status and treatment of Israel.

    From the very first time I heard his position I disagreed with him.
    I’ve told Jim he’s wrong on the history and the facts, not to mention
    policy.

    Still, I felt this was a no-win issue for him, as a candidate.
    I advised him to stay away from the issue, and not take a public
    position. I feel as a Candidate, as a Libertarian, and as an
    American, he has more important things to focus on. I made this
    point very clearly in a meeting with him, another Libertarian, a
    Muslim leader and an anti-Israel Democratic Activist. All of us
    agreed he ought to leave this alone, for a host of reasons.

    Judge Gray has chosen to go ahead and make this a big issue in his
    campaign. Certainly, his huge financial support from the Muslim
    community plays into it.

    Now. It’s gone beyond policy.
    He’s actually organizing around this issue.

    He’s created an event that many feel has an Anti-Israel agenda.
    It’s called `The Race For Justice’.
    I’m not sure why they picked that name, much less what it means, but
    there it is.

    The forum, allegedly for discussion, has a set agenda and conclusion
    before it even begins. I quote, “All people in favor of pursuing
    peace as set forth above are invited to attend and sign the enclosed
    Unity Resolution.” Folks that disagree aren’t welcome, in other
    words.

    And wait until you read the resolution they want you to sign.
    Here’s a quote from it: “be it resolved that each one of us
    individually and with all of our strength and fortitude guarantee,
    and recommend that our country and the world community guarantee, the
    existence and security of the State of Israel and the State of
    Palestine”

    As of Today, Judge Gray has come out of the closet.
    He’s advocating for the creation of a “Palestinian State”, which as
    we all know, would lead to the total destruction of the State of
    Israel. In my opinion, it would also lead to the massacre of
    millions of Jews.

    This is cloaked in a statement he’s asking people to sign.
    In it he `guarantees’ Israel’s right to exist in exchange for Israel
    giving up another half of it’s land.

    Of course, we know the USA and others already gave that guarantee,
    including the world’s terror leader, Yasser Arafat.

    I’m not sure how giving one of the most evil and corrupt people on
    the face of the planet more money, land and power will suddenly get
    him to change his stripes.

    Yasser, the man who invented skyjacking and suicide bombing is only
    interested in what he wanted in 1964. When he founded the PLO, he
    advocated the eventual destruction of Israel, and “pushing the Jews
    into the sea”. Nothing has changed since then.

    Mister Arafat, born, raised and educated in Egypt, is the leader of a
    worldwide anti-Semitic movement. He’d like nothing more than the Jim
    Gray solution.

    France is being overrun with Jew haters and a mass exodus has begun
    from France to the USA and Israel. This event only makes the world a
    more dangerous place for Jewry.

    I’m hoping that you will call the Judge Gray campaign tomorrow and
    express your displeasure with this agenda item. 888 Judge-Jim is
    their number.
    Talk to Judge Gray personally, if you can.

    Bruce Cohen
    Libertarian for US Congress
    http://WWW.GetBruce.Com
    949 813-8001

    PS When you call, please tell him you support him as a Libertarian.
    If he feels you don’t support him, he won’t listen. Better yet, make
    a small donation and say it’s to support him in other ways.

    PPS His website http://WWW.JudgeJim.Com says that all Federal Candidates are
    invited, but I can tell you I was not. I can also tell you as a
    supporter of Israel, I would be very uncomfortable there.

  62. Carol Moore

    Gosh, Bruce, why didn’t you mention all those Muslims and 9/11 in the letter? Or was it just easier to make something up later that would embody bigotry and stupidity than to make a more lengthy argument that might be open to rational debate??

  63. Bruce Cohen

    I said it at the time.
    Openly.
    I went to Judge Gray about both different women and their statements, which they still stand by.

    He chose to ignore me regarding the situation.

    I didn’t include it in the letter as I was trying to still convince people to vote for him. You’ll also notice I didn’t point out that I was fired, I just said I was no longer with the campaign.

    Very simple explanation, and thanks for asking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *