This past weekend, the Libertarian Party celebrated its 40th birthday by choosing its candidates for President and Vice President. The Libertarians selected former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson for President, and retired judge James Gray of California for Vice President. The convention was broadcast nationally on C-SPAN , and received coverage on National Public Radio.
What are these candidates like, and how do they compare to their opponents?
Gary Johnson is probably the most accomplished athlete in the 2012 contest. He has climbed Mount Everest. In fact, he has climbed the highest mountain on 4 continents. He has competed in Hawaii’s Ironman Triathlon Championship several times, and competed in the eight-day Adidas TransAlps Challenge bike race. He has even run a 25 mile desert race wearing combat boots and a 35 pound backpack. And he was on his high school track team in Albuquerque.
But Johnson is most famous for trying to legalize marijuana.
As Governor of New Mexico, Johnson called the War on Drugs a failure, comparing it to alcohol prohibition in the 1920’s and 1930’s. He became one of America’s highest ranking elected officials to advocate legalizing marijuana, calling for it to be handled as a health issue rather than a criminal offense. During his debate with runner-up R. Lee Wrights at the Libertarian Party National Convention (which can be viewed here ), Johnson said, “We should be able to make our own choices when it comes to drugs…. [The] Libertarian Party, 40 years ago, talks about legalizing drugs. Well now, in this country, we’re at a tipping point. We’re at a tipping point where 50% of Americans now want to legalize marijuana. That has never happened before, and who deserves credit for that? The Libertarian Party deserves credit for that.” According to Wikipedia , Johnson used medical marijuana to control pain from 2005 to 2008 after a paragliding accident left him with a broken vertebra, knee, and rib.
Johnson also scores big on other civil liberties issues. In fact, the American Civil Liberties Union gave him a higher score than President Obama or any of the Republican candidates in its 2012 Candidate Report Card on Civil Liberties . Johnson supports gay marriage and wants to repeal the “Patriot” Act. He opposes government interference with the Internet, torture of prisoners, and invasive Transportation Security Administration procedures. By contrast, President Obama and Mitt Romney both supported extension of the “Patriot” Act, “enhanced interrogation” of prisoners, and current TSA security measures. President Obama has been criticized for being non-committal on gay marriage , and signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement last October without submitting it to the Senate for approval.
Johnson opposed military intervention in Afghanistan and Libya. He has promised to cut the military budget 43% in his first year, including closure of several overseas bases.
Johnson is against government bailouts of private corporations. He is also opposed to unnecessary government spending, and has promised to submit a balanced budget to Congress in 2013. When Johnson was termed out of office in 2003, New Mexico was one of only 4 states that had a balanced budget.
Johnson’s policies, and how they compare to Obama’s and Romney’s, are covered in more detail here.
Johnson started a door-to-door handyman business to pay his way through the University of New Mexico. His business eventually became one of the largest construction companies in the state.
Although he was only allowed to participate in two of the Republican Party presidential debates this year, Johnson came up with the best one-liner of the entire campaign season when he said, “My next-door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than [Obama’s] administration.”
Johnson’s running mate, James P. Gray, is a retired judge who lives in Newport Beach, California. He earned his undergraduate degree from UCLA, and a law degree from the University of Southern California. He spent 23 years on the bench in the Santa Ana Superior Court (then Municipal Court) and the Orange County Superior Court. Before that, he taught in the Peace Corps, served in the Navy’s Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and worked in private practice.
Judge Gray is best known for advocating drug decriminalization. He spoke in favor of the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 and helped write the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine initiative. Gray’s first experience in politics came in 1998, when he lost the Republican primary for the 46th Congressional District seat in California. In 2004 he won the Libertarian Party nomination for U.S. Senate, defeating former California Libertarian Party Chair Gail Lightfoot, but losing to Democratic incumbent Barbara Boxer in the general election.
Gray has written a musical and three books, including Why Our Drug Laws Have Failed: A Judicial Indictment of War on Drugs and A Voter’s Handbook: Effective Solutions to America’s Problems . He also writes a weekly column for the Daily Pilot, a newspaper in Newport Beach, California.
Alan Pyeatt is an award-winning Civil Engineer who lives in Monrovia, California. He also enjoys music, organic gardening, economics, and audio/video production.
Carol, you post that in how many threads, address it to me, and assume I know what the issue is? Once again for those who did not read the other responses to the same comment in all the other threads you posted that in. What is REPUBLICAN about those shots? They are just pics of Johnson as far as I can determine. Does he have REPUBLICAN written on his forehead or what?
Also: I have no photos. I took none. None were gifted to me. If I did a search I would grab whatever I could find and not know the difference. I would not own the rights and in most circumstances I would not care.
Paulie et al. Still no good Gary Johnson, Judge Gray, LP Convention 2012 shots for Wikipedia.
All that is up now is REPUBLICAN stuff
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=Gary+Johnson&title=Special%3ASearch
It easy to register at http://commons.wikimedia.org and upload; you do lose $ rights to photos but not bragging rights. Do it for the cause.
If you don’t want the hassle and just want me to do it, send me the best shots and I will attribute to you as long as you include email giving me explicit permission to upload to Wikimedia. You retain the bragging rights.
I just read it a couple of nights ago. There were “pre-release” copies for sale at the Vegas Convention. I imagine it will go up for sale on the website/amazon soon. I’ll see if I can find out what’s up with that and post it here.
Someone earlier mentioned that they read Johnsons “7 Principles of Good Government” book. I remember being interested in reading it back in May of 2011, but then it was pushed back and as far as I know was never released. I tried looking it up on amazon and I can’t find it. Did his book come out? And if so, why does he not promote it on his website? I mean, I never even heard him MENTION his dang book!
@85
Wayne on RT
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/2012/05/14/ron-paul-has-not-suspended-his-campaign/
“Asked if this is a dropout, Paul’s campaign manager Jesse Benton said ‘Absolutely not! We are focusing our efforts squarely on winning delegates and party leadership positions at state conventions.”
@47 @50 & to that end I saw an RT youtube clip about Paul’s latest campaign announcement — I played it & the unfortunate guest was noted nitwit Wayne A Root who blurted out “IT’S OVER” as soon as he opened his mouth, regurgitating the matrix-stream media nonsense.
@39 – You should unplug from the matrix as well, maybe check out http://www.dailypaul.com for news on the GOP campaign rather than Fox/CNN. Delegates are selected ultimately at state GOP conventions, where Paul forces have been competing hard and even routing the establishment — and many more such conventions remain. Even if there aren’t enough Paul & “stealth Paul” delegates to successfully engineer a Presidential nomination, there could be enough to put Ron or Rand on the ticket as VP regardless of who Romney himself actually nominates.
Paul supporters still participating in the GOP state convention process could be disqualified from that process if they participate in or donate to AE, LP or CP. So harassing them to donate to Johnson/Gray at this time is alienating and counterproductive.
lol (lots o’ lurkers)….
I cheated too by calling myself LG , but the results were the same
I “cheated” because my name tag said Paulie but I got that same thing too.
the IPR connection is undeniable , since this is really the only place I rock the name LG , many people came up to me based on this name and told me they like what i say on here…
That’s my best guess.
so a little of everything seems likeliest ….
Various degrees of knowledge.
Many were Johnson fans, LP newbies, or people who are active on the local/state level but know little if anything of national LP controversies.
However, I’d say at least 10% (especially of those that remained by the time downticket LNC races were held) read IPR comments or places they get transmitted at least some of the time, and those talk to other people who don’t, so I think the info did filter down to some extent. I don’t have enough info to know as to what extent exactly.
I do think Brian is correct that mic time had something to do with it.
I’m just not sure how much each of the two weighed against the other.
you think most delegates didnt know Wayne or much about why people love or hate him?
I hope and trust you mean RTAA, not me. I don’t hate RTAA, Root, or for that matter even Obama. I come closest to hating Obama, but I really don’t even hate him; he’s just the latest in a series of puppets and mouthpieces for the permanent ruling class. I certainly don’t hate Root, although I disagree with his conflation of libertarianism with Reaganism and what the Tea Party has become. I also think he is too “relentlessly” focused on Obama, but at least it helps him make a decent living. The same can’t be said for RTAA, whose Root …”relentlessness”….couldn’t possibly be all that rewarding, except in the sense of overcompensation, which seems a bit pathetic. And it’s hard to hate that. Compassion seems more called for.
Actually I think Brian has a point. I think the real reason is a combination of what he said and what I said.
His explanation may even be more of a factor than mine, since most delegates are not well informed of party controversies – altho info does filter down second and third etc hand in many cases.
Ruth Bennett and Carla Howell set the convention speakers, and Nick Sarwark’s move combined with Rutherford/Knedler’s counter move and Redpath’s ruling ended up taking up most of the time LNC nominations for non-chair offices would have had. Hence the division of mic time. William Sparkman had a lot to do with who all made up the mix of delegates.
However, I still think my explanation had a lot to do with what happened as well. Brian is of course free to disagree.
@73 …unless you are Wayne Root , who reads and remembers everything on IPR
Wayne Root did not come in 5th based on his mic time…ROFL . but way to try and neuter his massive defeat..
Id like to think , in s0me small way , his joining and mass disaffilliation of LPNevada activists scared and turned off just a cpl people:)
72 p, good point on Reagan and Clinton. Both faced incredibly weak challengers and both were in the flow of good times.
So, yes, I take your point: Incumbents don’t need to go negative, but are more likely to go negative (brawling) than challengers.
Pat Buchanan tried to use the throwback, pre-TV, hot approach with his Pitchfork Brigade. Perhaps I’m projecting, but I think people are tired of the TR/Huey Long/George Wallace angry pol thing, by and large. Pols still employ negative ads, but that’s different than them standing on stage pounding the podium like infants demanding their bottle.
Now it’s all about having the will to chill.
Root went from first to fifth in At Large votes
His amount of microphone time dropped even more precipitously. Delegates vote based on their gut reaction to what they hear on the floor — not based on the unread rants of IPR haters.
GHWB was kinder and gentler in 1988. In 92, he was checking his watch.
D’oh! Mixed up the Bushes. I wouldn’t make a very good landscaper.
Once we get to see how they operate for 4 years in the WH, modern presidents generally run for re-election in a nastier, Knappian/brawler mode.
Not always. I don’t recall either Clinton or Reagan being especially negative in their re-election.
Both Bushes went negative in round 2 — one more successfully than the other.
70 p, GHWB was kinder and gentler in 1988. In 92, he was checking his watch.
Yes, though, W v. 2000 was a uniter not a divider, but in 04 he was decider in chief. It’s probably right that incumbents become fighters, as the cooler positioning works better for this year’s model. Once we get to see how they operate for 4 years in the WH, modern presidents generally run for re-election in a nastier, Knappian/brawler mode. Since we see what hypocrites they are, they have few options but to go negative.
In 2000.
By 2004 he was the ass kickin deciderer.
65 tk: People view political issues as challenges and fights, so they tend to rally around people who meet challenges and like a good brawl.
me: Perhaps. BHO was IMO an above the fray candidate. W campaigned as a uniter, not a divider. Bubba felt our pain. GHWB was kinder and gentler. It was morning in America for RWR, though he did stand up when he paid for the microphone. Carter seemed incapable of brawling.
Buchanan’s pitchfork brigade was a flop.
Nixon may’ve been the last angry presidential candidate.
The days of the firebrand seem over to me. TV is a cool medium and politics is played on TV.
We are collectively weary of all the fighting.
I’m not convinced that is true.
It is true that after a protracted battle and a narrow victory by the non-Root/Rutherford side in the race for chair, many of the Rutherford supporters left and/or stopped voting, so the results downticket were not so narrow. It’s also true Root went from first to fifth in At Large votes and may have been off the LNC altogether if not for Johnson’s endorsement. Finally, it is true that he has fewer allies on the LNC now.
On the other hand, the LNC and LSLA now co-own the LNC’s database and could, at least in theory and perhaps in practice, use it to raise as much as or more money than the LNC. They can also build their own database and FR, issue press releases, and just about anything the LNC can do.
And I’m not clear what if anything the LNC can do about it. I’ve heard different theories on that. If Starr’s theory turns out to be true, the answer is “nothing.”
Even if you turn out to be correct and they turn out to be wrong, they already have the database. Who is to stop them from using it, and how?
Even supposing the LNCC can be, and is, decommissioned by the LNC – and supposing further there is a court order to stop Root, Starr, Rutherford, Knedler et al from using or sharing the database – they can create new organizations and confirm the database information through independent research.
*And*, they can’t be unseated by delegates at the next convention – whereas the LNC can be.
The side that lost narrowly may well rally and win two years from now, whereas it is far less clear whether the side that just won narrow control of the LNC will be able to do anything about the LNCC which Root chairs.
@63, what you call “obsession,” Root calls “relentless.”
Root is relentless about Obama. Others are relentless about Root.
And it’s because of our relentlessness — always reminding everyone about Root’s misdeeds — that Root’s influence in the LP is diminishing.
Obsessed or relentless, it brings results.
Exactly what I was trying to say ealier…thx!
Should a person’s athletic accomplishments be treated as political credentials?
Probably not, although I could make a case for “executive experience” for some athletes in team sports and such. Captaining an 11-man football squad to a winning record seems like as decent an analog to putting together a cabinet that functions as some other qualifications that might be thrown out.
But Johnson’s Everest ascent isn’t good stuff because it’s an athletic accomplishment per se. It’s good stuff because it says “here’s a guy who sets difficult goals and achieves them even if unforeseen handicaps, barriers, etc. get in his way.”
I’m not a fan of Teddy Roosevelt by any means, but a good portion of his appeal boiled down to that. NYPD is corrupt? Teddy will take it on (police commissioner). The New York civil service system is even more corrupt? Put Teddy in the legislature, he’ll reform it. War? Teddy puts on his cap, gets on his horse and goes off to whip ass.
People view political issues as challenges and fights, so they tend to rally around people who meet challenges and like a good brawl.
Obama looks like what Spike Lee calls “a magical Negro” to his fans, and a Black Panther/Muslim Radical to his detractors.
To me, he looks more like Duh!bya with a tan than either of those.
@61-62
@61 Bodes well for Johnson. Not sure why you worked Root into that; he isn’t running for anything this year, and has already won the only election (for LNC At Large) that I am aware of him participating in for this cycle.
Discussing the positives in Johnson’s personal life is (sadly) more helpful in getting votes than is talking about substantive issues.
Most people (yes, most) vote for top-of-the-ticket candidates based on their gut reaction. That’s what read, and I believe it.
I read an article in 1993, in which a progressive woman said that George Bush lost re-election because of what she called, “The Ich Factor.” She said that Bush reminded every woman of “her first husband,” and when women saw and heard Bush, they just went, “Ich!”
Likewise, many men reacted as negatively to Hilary, seeing her as a shrill, nagging, harpy.
Many men saw Bill “Bubba” Clinton as “a guy you could have a beer with,” more so than Bush 1 or Dole. And Bush 2 was seen more as “a guy you could have a beer with” than was Gore or Kerry.
Some hate Bush and Romney because they look like a rich, racist, bullying frat boys.
Obama looks like what Spike Lee calls “a magical Negro” to his fans, and a Black Panther/Muslim Radical to his detractors.
Yes, I believe most people vote based on their gut reactions.
There are excellent rational reasons to oppose Root, but the fact that he looks and sounds like an oily used car salesman doesn’t help his cause.
Ruwart’s book is excellent. I haven’t read Johnson’s yet.
Just finished reading Johnson’s Seven Principles of Good Government.
There has never been, IMO, a book by any candidate for any public office which had more candor, honesty and self-revelation than is contained in this book.
I’m left with the impression he would have, if elected, the most open, transparent and honest administration in history.
Next up on my reading list — rereading Mary Ruwart’s Healing Our World. Something I’ve not done since just before the Denver convention.
@57 I would Grant that more than one or two war generals have inhabited the presidential office of the US.
@ 43 RC I think you can roll that start date for being a war general as a ticket to the white house a bit further than 1952. Take a look and you’ll grant that it’s been done a few times, by George.
Rmoney 😛
The important issue is that the Republican Convention Rules Committee finally gave a ruling on what one of their rules means, and noted the 2008 precedent for Romney.
The remaining beauty contests are all primaries.
The caucus states have a multi-stage delegate selection process. The first stage has taken place in all states.
For the early caucusin’ states additional stages have taken place. For the latter ones, not yet. Ron Paul supporters will continue to contest those.
44 p, near as I can tell from RCP, the rest of the dates are primaries, not caucuses. Am I incorrect?
@50…well said
Absolutely agree with Paulie @50
Any libertarians out there would be smart to give their “Thanks” to Ron Paul, but give their money in campaign contributions to Gary Johnson. Paul won’t be on the ballot in Nov. Gary Johnson WILL !
That’s a pissing match we won’t win. Best bet is to be patient with Ron Paul’s hardcore supporters and encourage them to at least throw a little bit Johnson’s way as a “plan B” or at least keep him in mind after the NSGOP convention.
If you go negative all you will do is piss them off.
Remember, they have other options: AE, Romney, Obama, Goode, Stein, not voting, writing in Ron Paul whether it counts or not, etc.
Be friendly to their cause even if you think it’s delusional, and they are more likely to be friendly to you and to us.
Not to mention Ron Paul doesn’t need any money from campaign contributions. He has enough wealth that he gives back a portion of his pay back to the treasury, and he has a lot of gold, which I’m sure has made him pretty wealthy. And unlike Gingrich, or even Johnson for that matter, he has zero campaign debt. Any additional money he raises will likely go to a number of liberty oriented organizations or campaigns.
keep drinking the kool aid!
What koolaid and why?
@33 Ron Paul didn’t drop out. He just isn’t spending any money or resources on future primaries. The money he is raising is going towards conventions because he is still picking up delegates
@37 Every delegate that Ron Paul wins is one less for Romney. The more delegates he has at the convention means the more fun the Republican convention is going to be. It is yet to be seen how the delegates are going to effect the process, but it certainly won’t be a giant rally for Romney like the giant rally for McCain in 2008. I agree that Paul supporters should not start to support and donate to Johnson (or Goode), but you have to understand that many Paul supporters won’t give up until after the convention, and after we see what they end up getting for all their effort. Methinks it isn’t going to be some token victory, that SOMETHING has to come from it. Why lose respect for the man who is still challenging Romney and is preventing him from coasting to the nomination?
Climbing Mount Everest is an awesome achievement, but it doesn’t have a damn thing to do with being President, and anyone who says that it does is a naive fool.
The ability to achieve in one area indicates capability to achieve in others. There’s more to holding office than having the right views.
@37, 40
Funds can’t be converted to personal use but they can be transferred to, e.g., Campaign For Liberty or to Rand Paul 2016, etc.
@39 The key is difference between caucuses and primaries.
41 A: Climbing Mount Everest is an awesome achievement, but it doesn’t have a damn thing to do with being President, and anyone who says that it does is a naive fool.
me: Since at least 1960’s “Profiles in Courage,” things that might seem irrelevant have often been critical to winning the WH. I could make the case that being a war general could roll the start date back to 1952.
“Think about it this way. Suppose that half of the people vote based on principles, and we manage to convince that group and win a majority among that group. Fine.
Now suppose that the other half of the voters chose based on who they like – personal issues, attractiveness, feelings etc. Wouldn’t it be foolish not to at least present our candidate in such a way as to garner some of those votes as well. If we do not, we will always lose, even if we get a majority based on issues.”
I see where you are coming from here, and I agree with your point, but it just seems to me that leading with Gary Johnson’s athletic accomplishments makes the article seem like more of a fluff piece that the mainstream media does on the major candidates rather than focusing on the issues. It’s like, “Hey, look at this guy, he climbed mountains and ran in marathons. Isn’t that cool? You should vote for him because of this.”
“The man is used to accomplishing the impossible, and realizing the unimaginable. Not only are those excellent qualifications for president. They are the hallmark of a man that will change this world.”
Climbing Mount Everest is an awesome achievement, but it doesn’t have a damn thing to do with being President, and anyone who says that it does is a naive fool.
@37 “When a politician retires they can convert all past campaign funds over to their private accounts.” No, that’s been illegal for a long time now.
34 p, I dunno, this sounds like the end for all intents and purposes: “Moving forward, however, we will no longer spend resources campaigning in primaries in states that have not yet voted.”
Maximizing delegates in states that HAVE voted might be a worthwhile endeavor, but it doesn’t sound like something an actual candidate would do. It sounds more like a former candidates positioning for some internal party pull.
37 listen: When a politician retires they can convert all past campaign funds over to their private accounts.
me: Anything’s possible, but I say “uncool” for you to imply that RP is in it to maximize personal benjamins.
@34 to me – A clearly delaying tactic. It’s over but Paul and his people will SUCK the last cent possible from the cult like following even though the race is LOST for Paul ! Sad however it makes me lose respect for Paul. When a politician retires they can convert all past campaign funds over to their private accounts.
Any libertarians out there would be smart to give their “Thanks” to Ron Paul, but give their money in campaign contributions to Gary Johnson. Paul won’t be on the ballot in Nov. Gary Johnson WILL !!!
https://donate.garyjohnson2012.com
Brilliant article, Alan!
Like Gary Johnson & Jim Gray, your article is head and shoulders above everything our corrupt political establishment offers — in this case, what passes for political news and commentary. Please recall, for example, the fuss they made about what Mr. Obama and Mr. Romney did to dogs, decades ago.
Like all good things, I want more.
Ok Mr Toby Knight keep drinking the kool aid!!!!!!
per Phillies:
PoliticalTicker’s headline is wrong. Paul says clearly he will not be contesting *primaries*. He is not withdrawing. He will be contesting caucuses
And now Ron Paul has effectively dropped out, so the opportunity is now officially bigger….
31 toby, and yet, while I’ve not met him, GJ seems extremely modest and humble. An interesting combination of qualities, esp. for a pol…perhaps the anti-pol pol or something.
Climbing Mt. Everest, while an athletic accomplishment, is also an exercise in planning, logistics, execution, determination, goal achievement, and the all important capacity to overcome daunting odds.
To visualize that climb as a goal takes a lot of guts to start with. To execute that climb is the sign of an indominatable spirit that only a handful of men and women can claim as their own. For a man like Gary Johnson to do so with a broken leg only 4 months healed?
Godly.
The man is used to accomplishing the impossible, and realizing the unimaginable. Not only are those excellent qualifications for president. They are the hallmark of a man that will change this world.
When I read “Into Thin Air”, the statistic at the time was that one out of 7 people who attempted to climb Mt. Everest would die in the process. The cost was at least $20,000 per attempt, and it took months in preparation because one has to become acclimated to the thin air in stages.
We have a local teenager who climbed it at 14. It’s a remarkable feat few people are able to accomplish.
broken leg, actually, according to GQ. http://www.gq.com/news-politics/politics/201111/gary-johnson-republican-candidate-debate-interview
Yes, for those who do metaphors, it’s a great one!
Thanks to Alan for a great article that will hopefully make inroads with its original intended audience, and to Jill for posting it here.
BTW I have heard/read that Gov. Johnson climbed Mt. Everest with a broken foot.
If true, I can’t think of a more apt metaphor for an alt party presidential campaign.
iirc, back in the day, I met Marrou at a small fundraiser. He told the story that he’d been to a Jewish group during the campaign, where he didn’t disclose to them that he is a Jew. That he happened to be Jewish should not matter to them, he reasoned.
IMO, that was foolishness. I respect his desire NOT to pander or play identity politics, but I’d say Marrou was overcompensating….
I think its a good story. People want to know about the candidates they vote for. They want to know what sort of education they got and what sort of jobs they held. Liberals look down on Romney because he was a venture capitalist that made money even when businesses failed. But an athlete that has climbed Mount Everest is something that anyone can say is a pretty amazing achievement. It won’t gain him any votes (mostly, I have a friend that is a huge geek when it comes to working out and bike riding, and will vote for him because he relates to him, but I think that is an exception, not the rule), but overall I think its a good story and it makes him more appealing.
More to Andy @17
Think about it this way. Suppose that half of the people vote based on principles, and we manage to convince that group and win a majority among that group. Fine.
Now suppose that the other half of the voters chose based on who they like – personal issues, attractiveness, feelings etc. Wouldn’t it be foolish not to at least present our candidate in such a way as to garner some of those votes as well. If we do not, we will always lose, even if we get a majority based on issues.
Of course in the real world it’s much more complex, but like it or not, packaging is part of the product. It affects how open the listener is to the messenger, how the listener perceives the message, and constitutes part of the criteria as well as part of the decision making process of a large percentage of voters.
You convinced me – I’m voting for them!
Good article Alan.
Johnson has beaten very long odds and achieved the extraordinary on an ordinary basis. Here’s hoping he can do it again with his campaign. Thank you Alan and Jill for bringing this good news to additional eyes and ears.
I would consider President Obama pretty athletic too.
more…
but you’re right, Andy. In fact, that GJ was a solo handy man who built his business into a large construction company ALSO doesn’t matter from a policy perspective. An entrepreneur/Everest climber COULD be a Marxist Nazi, after all! 😉
You may not care about these character-establishing datapoints, but for OTHER voters to be inspired and to vote for a 3rd party candidate, they need more than a Max Headroom candidate. Politics is not conducted in a Petri dish.
Think symbolically, Andy. Here’s the narrative: “If anyone is going to fix Washington, it’s a former governor who has climbed Mt. Everest and is not party of the 2 party system that got us in this mess in the first place.”
Associate “fix Washington” with “climb Mt. Everest.”
@15 The particular achievements reflect self-determination under adversity.
Arnold Schwarzenneggar was a world champion bodybuilder and a movie star. Were these good reasons to vote for him? Heck no.
I could care less what Johnson or any other candidate does. All I care about are the issues and the credibility of the candidate. The ability to get the message out is important as well (if the message is one worth getting out), but issues and credibility are the two most important things.
I’m just about the least athletically-minded person around, but I’m darn impressed that Johnson made it to the summit of Mt. Everest. It show tenacity and the ability for great self-sacrifice in order to reach a goal. If anyone is not familiar with the fascinating world of rock climbing, I’d like to recommend “Into Thin Air” by Jon Krakauer. It’s one of the best books I’ve ever read, and really explains the sport very clearly.
Why is it important to include some information about Gary Johnson’s athletic accomplishments and other personal characteristics?
It’s because it is quite common and also quite rational for voters to be interested in the character and activities of the individuals they will be choosing for public office.
Some voters are attempting to measure each individual and make a rational choice. They and we can learn about a person from choices they have made and things they have accomplished in their lives. The expression, “Actions speak louder than words” is a trite but true summation of this sentiment.
People want to know about the man or woman they vote for. They want information that allows them to percieve the character of a candidate. We should provide such information that paints the best protrait and puts our candidates in the best light.
This, in fact, is an area of campaigning and rational decision making that Libertarians too often overlook.
Very well-written article Alan. And thank you Jill for posting it.
@6 You got it, BRAVO
Beast
http://www.thedailybeast.com/videos/2012/05/10/gary-johnson-the-best-of-both-worlds.html
Dylan Ratigan
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/dylan-ratigan-show/46931356#46931356
Gary “IRONMAN” Johnson 2012: The Athlete’s Guide to Good Government – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/15/FmDLD4h7Ydg
The Gary Johnson-Obama-Romney race.
Gary Johnson on Obama’s Shovel-Ready Jobs 9/22/11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZY-MZROgc4&feature=related
Great Job Mr. Pyeatt ! If 2012 more LP members would start doing similar things the LP would begin to grow again and all vote total records for the LP up and down the ticket would be shattered once and for all time! I welcome all of you to join the
Subject: GARY JOHNSON BLOG PROJECT 5-12-12
To: Me (and now you)
From: ANDREW MILLER
Email Andrew and ask to sign up, that is if you want to do something !
5-12-12
GARY JOHNSON BLOGGING PROJECT.
We need your help to spread Gov. Gary Johnson’s message through the blogesphere
Today’s blogging is to help raise awareness of Gov. Gary Johnson ‘s candidacy
Here are a few technical points to remember.
-Utilize more then one email provider for your blogging ( gmail, aol, yahoo, hotmail, etc)
-Be sure to insert your commentary into stories that are relevant in order to avoid being blocked for spam.
-A NEWS and BLOG search on “Mitt Romney” or “Barack Obama” and “Ron Paul” will yield many places to blog.
– Keep your comments short and succinct and positive –remember to reword everything in your own words as many bloggers will be utilizing the SAME talking points.
– Quantity is as important as quality. HIT EM HARD AND HIT ‘EM OFTEN.
TODAY–Samples
Sick about the choice between Romney and Obama? Check out the 3rd choice ( link)
Gov. Gary Johnson is the alternative to the Obama/Choice. Check out Gov. Gary Johnson (link)
If you like Ron Paul–You’ll love Gov. Gary Johnson (link)
There is a 3rd Choice- Gov. Gary Johnson the Libertarian candidate ( link)
Use these links
MSNBC Alex Witt
http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc-tv/47135002#47135002
Old Cavuto clip –
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/cavuto-tells-gary-johnson-the-systems-screwing-you
Cavuto this week
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX64eVVg_7E
Stossel jobs clip –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7QOSX5vvO_I#!
THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HELP,
ANDREW J. MILLER
Oranje Mike // May 13, 2012 at 6:56 pm
Judge Jim Gray is not cut from the same cloth as Washington insiders ……. Great Guy ……… has been for years!
Thanks, Bill!
Good article Alan!
Andy, since OpEd News is a “progressive” website, I was trying to lead with something interesting to draw the readers in. This is not preaching to the choir, and I wanted to keep them reading long enough to get into the meat of our candidates’ credentials on civil liberties.
Please note that I didn’t spend a lot of time on economic issues, either. Not because they’re not important, but because civil liberties are going to resonate more with OpEd’s audience.
Gary Johnson is not cut from the same cloth as Washington insiders. His athletic feats are interesting and make for good copy. It beats hearing about the typical Ivy League years or being raised the golden spoon. Follow it with common sense ideology and you have a winner.
Readers should consider how often the other parties run famous athletes for Congress, or former athletic coaches or the like. It’s a selling point to a particular audience.
What comes to my mind when I first read about Gary, mountain climbing, marathon etc was he likes taking on huge challenges and he has a no quit attitude, he has drive, unlike a couch potato .
3 a: What in the hell does being an athlete have to do with running for political office?
me: In theory, nothing. In practice, it helps to illustrate character.
It does seem odd to lead with this fact, though.
“Gary Johnson is probably the most accomplished athlete in the 2012 contest. He has climbed Mount Everest. In fact, he has climbed the highest mountain on 4 continents. He has competed in Hawaii’s Ironman Triathlon Championship several times, and competed in the eight-day Adidas TransAlps Challenge bike race. He has even run a 25 mile desert race wearing combat boots and a 35 pound backpack. And he was on his high school track team in Albuquerque.”
What in the hell does being an athlete have to do with running for political office? How is this relevant to any political issues? Would it make any difference in regard to the issues if Gary Johnson was an unathletic couch potato?
It’s cool that he’s done some interesting things, but it really shouldn’t have anything to do with the actual political issues or his political strategy for getting his message out.
… he said, “My next-door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than [Obama’s] administration.”
ROFL
ROFL
ROFL
Thank you for that.
Keep the media coverage coming!