Two new video interviews with Gary Johnson – Attempting to bring in Ron Paul supporters

Presidential candidate Gary Johnson is continuing to rack up media interviews, but ones that are a little more niche. The first is a short, fast paced interview on Polipop, a youtube channel with many different affiliates posting their own philosophical views, and the occasional debate.

The second is an interview with Ron Paul Flix’s Israel Anderson, a site dedicated to promoting news and views for Ron Paul. Gary Johnson was on for 30 minutes to try and make his case to Ron Paul supporters on why they should support him in November.

PoliPops website can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/user/POLIPOP

Ron Paul Flix website can be  found here: http://ronpaulflix.com/

58 thoughts on “Two new video interviews with Gary Johnson – Attempting to bring in Ron Paul supporters

  1. zapper

    Insignificant niche interviews that no one will see. The Johnson campaign is working hard, raising money, and due to a lack of campaign management skills, accomplishing nothing.

    It’s so sad to watch another POTUS campaign cycle wasted due to the complete lack of campaign management ability.

  2. zapper

    Listening to Gary Johnson talk in his various interviews, he seems to be slowly learning about what it means to be a Libertarian. It would have been far better if someone inside his campaign would have helped him to learn a bit earlier on the election curve – Maybe by November he will get it. Johnson should have done his studying before the convention at the very least.

  3. NewFederalist

    I think I agree with #4… who is going to see this? It isn’t all that bad but who is it reaching?

  4. Austin Battenberg Post author

    Well the second one is probably going to be seen by a lot of Ron Paul supporters that frequent the Daily Paul or the Ron Paul forums. A lot of them believe incorrectly that Gary Johnson is a neocon, or a reboot of Barr, or whatever. I think Gary did that interview to try and appeal to the Ron Paul supporters. As for the Polipop interview, to be fair, they were at a LP convention, and it looks like he was asked to be interviewed. Even with a small audience I see nothing wrong with agreeing to be interviewed, even by a minor niche website.

    Better then Virgil Goode, who hasn’t had a single article or video in almost six days.

  5. Austin Battenberg Post author

    @2 I agree. Tom Woods said it best at the Texas LP convention that when a libertarian says they are fiscally conservative or responsible and socially liberal or tolerant, to the average person it just sounds like libertarians cherry pick various issues and mash them together. We as libertarians have philosophical beliefs, and our politics caters to that. But to each his own.

  6. Mike Kane

    Just my two cents:

    Johnson says “most people are FC and ST and that’s what libertarians stand for” which sounds like political catering.

    Instead, I’d like for him to say something more along the lines of this (copied from http://www.lpva.com): “The Libertarian Party believes, with Thoreau, “that government is best which governs least”. We believe that as long as people are peaceful and honest, the government has no business interfering in their lives. Along with personal freedom comes economic freedom. We believe that governments have no right to seize the fruits of an individual’s labor without his or her consent.

    Libertarians seek a return to the basic principles that made America great. We support an unfettered free market economy as the best way to provide abundance and prosperity for all. We defend America’s traditional civil liberties and personal freedoms as the foundation of a tolerant society. We believe in the protection of people from dishonest business through liability in the courts. We endorse a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace, and free trade as prescribed by America’s Founding Fathers. Unlike the two major parties, for whom the only debate is whether the government should be enormous or merely huge, we believe the size and scope of government must be substantially reduced. Individuals should have sovereignty over their own lives as long as they do not interfere with the rights of others.”

    I’d also like for him to attack the national debt crisis with more passion. The US government spends $4 billion dollars EVERYDAY that it doesn’t have, and 40% of all federal receipts pay JUST THE INTEREST on the debt. What that equates to is $14 dollars per person per day (note not taxpayer) that the government spends that it doesn’t have. Each PERSON’S contribution to the national debt is $5,000 per year, and that of course doesn’t include the heavy taxes/fees already imposed on us.

    The US debt isn’t sustainable. And if it continues at current rates, we will experience a real economic collapse of monumental proportions. Think massive hyperinflation – as in the 10,000% range. we will be praying to return to our current rates of 9-11%. Unemployment from 70-80%. All empires inherently fall but truly wise people learn from other people’s mistakes.

  7. Greg

    I wonder if he will speak at the Paul Fest as well.

    Unfortunately I don’t think he impressed very many Paulistas 4 years ago at the Rally for the Republic, in a speech that managed to come off both conceited and boring.

  8. NewFederalist

    @9… your thoughts are great but everything is about the 20 second sound bite.

  9. Mike Kane

    @NF . The first paragraph I said could easily be condensed down to 20 seconds.

    Another stolen one “A libertarian is one that prescribes to the Jeffersonian ideal that government that governs best is one that governs least. Libertarian philosophy is based on the concept of individual freedom and personal responsibility. As a libertarian, I feel everyone has the right to live their life their own way and free to make their own decisions for their own lives. The Libertarian Party is the third largest in the country and has scores of elected officials serving through out the nation. “

  10. Steve M

    Keep in mind that Governor Johnson started off as a handy man working his way through college. From that start he built one of the largest New Mexico construction companies.

    I bring this up to highlight the idea that Garry is probably pretty good at making sales pitches. I think his use of “Fiscally Conservative and Socially Tolerant” is a pretty good starting point for showing non-libertarians how we are different from the other two main parties.

    By the way PPP just released a poll showing Garry is at 7% in Colorado.

  11. Steve M

    Talking about Jeffersonian democracy or Thoreau’s writings are a pretty good way to get peoples eyes to glaze over and tune you out.

  12. Austin Battenberg Post author

    @9 The only problem with that is that saying “the government that governs best governs least” is what Reagan said once, and everything else you mentioned is mostly about economics and the free market. What Gary is trying to do is get left leaning voters to consider him because Obama hasn’t been liberal enough on social issues, so I understand why he is framing it the way that he is. I like what you say, and I agree with it, but somehow something needs to be included that would appeal to those on the left, not just the right.

    @10 I agree his Rally for the Republic speech wasn’t his greatest. He really has to nail down foreign policy in order to get Paul supporters on board. The way he flubbed the interview on Ron Paul Flix probably turned off many Paul supporters. I doubt he will speak at Paul Fest…both events are occurring at the same time.

  13. JT

    Zapper: “It’s so sad to watch another POTUS campaign cycle wasted due to the complete lack of campaign management ability.”

    What leads you to this conclusion? Is it just that you haven’t seen national TV ads, or something else?

    I don’t know how someone could conclude that there’s a “complete lack of campaign management ability” six weeks after the national convention.

  14. Robert Capozzi

    Jt, great point. Zapper sits in judgment of Team GJ with no obvious inside information on what the campaign’s operations. It appears he only knows that the Zapper Plan hasn’t been adopted…

  15. Matt Cholko

    I’ve never liked the “fiscally conservative, socially tolerant” thing, as it immediately strikes me as designed to appeal to “conservatives”

    If we must use something like that, I prefer fiscally responsible and socially tolerant. However, I really don’t like that one either. It doesn’t say much. I prefer to say something along the lines of “we want government to leave you alone, stay out of your wallet, and out of the rest of the world’s business”

  16. Root Sucks

    Do people here seriously think that more Paulists will vote for Goode than for Johnson? Or rather is it that more Paulists on this site will vote for Goode than for Johnson?

  17. Ryan C

    “we want government to leave you alone, stay out of your wallet, and out of the rest of the world’s business”

    Insert “stay out of your bedroom” and that’s a pretty succinct talking point/tagline/sound bite.

  18. Eric Blitz

    I can understand libertarians not liking the ‘fiscally responsible, socially tolerant” language as it is merely a slogan playing off of labels, not a statement of a libertarian principle. But like all political slogans, they are designed to open the door to the 90% of the public that are so apolitical that they not only don’t know what a libertarian is, but lack the conceptual framework to understand a more detailed description of the political philosophy (even in its most simplified expression) and have the expression return to concrete politics (rather than stay an abstraction). Even “maximum liberty” can leave people baffled at times, as you can see them searching for ‘well what does that mean in practice?’ type questions. The slogan is a bumper sticker, nothing more. But notice that Gary tends to use it early in interviews to open up the audience using those labels, then more concrete policy issues are discussed.

    @Mike, #9 and 12, those are not just too long, but too abstract. However, this language of your second part is (in my opinion) very strong:

    “Libertarian philosophy is based on the concept of individual freedom and personal responsibility. As a libertarian, I feel everyone has the right to live their life their own way and free to make their own decisions for their own lives.” That is both short enough and provides a concept and then a concrete quickly enough for most to follow. It also uses the rhetorical trick of expressing polar opposition in a consistent phrase, which is easily remembered by people.

  19. JT

    Phillies: “@16 zapper means that Johnson is not implementing zapper’s retro political strategy.

    I’d like to hear what he means directly from him.”

  20. JT

    The quotes were messed up. the second quote should appear after the word “strategy.” My comment is under it.

  21. zapper

    @16 & 18

    The Johnson campaign is raising little money – the latest “money bomb” was a minor event. They are not running any media, not raising funds to run media and are doing what every LP campaign has done in the past. They are wasting money on office space and staff and doing nothing. The only thing that counts as doing something is what we can see outside the office – things that reach millions of people on a repetitive basis.

    And the Johnson campaign should not be judged as being just 5 weeks past the nomination. They were running for a year before the LP convention, they should have been planning before that, and they’ve had since December to plan what they would be doing now with the LP nomination, since they announced their intention to seek it – and they should have been planning that decision and their activites through November even then.

    They have missed the entire Spring and early Summer advertising windows – an essential time to get early support that raises credibility in the eyes of the media, awareness among the public and locks in supporters, donors and voters who are uncommitted and looking early in a campaign.

    The July through early September period is not as useful for advertising or campaigning and cannot make up for the earlier months that have now been squandered. It’s the summer vacation and silly season and the public is disengaged.

    From January through June, the Johnson campaign could have run targeted major network ads that could have launched their campaign on an entirely different, accelerated trajectory – and slight changes early on can have a much greater impact than greater changes later – this is true in space travel, compound interest and political campaigns, among other things.

    There was plenty of money to be raised for such a campaign; there are plenty of people who would have donated; pre-convention fundraising for advertising could have been very effective since donors could max out twice; and early advertising has the greatest impact – but it takes a little campaign management expertise, not much, but at least some, to recognize and grab opportunities. Of course, don’t forget, they’ve had since December to think of something to do.

    They’ve done nothing.

    The money they could have raised will now never be raised. There are many donors available who will only donate, or will donate far larger sums, when the purpose of the fundraising is guaranteed to be spent on something positive and worthwhile. And the chance of raising double maxed-out donations no longer exists.

    It is now too late.

    Advertising after the beginning of September means there is no time to affect the polling to have any opportunity to get into the debates. That window for that long-shot hoped for eventuality has now closed.

    It’s also too late because the airwaves will be more saturated with competitve advertising – so, for an LP POTUS, it will be harder to get noticed – and there are far fewer wavering and undecideds floating around.

    Advertising at the end of a campaign – Oct through election day – is great for campaigns that are established and running to win. They are trying to scrounge up the last few percentage of undecideds. For us, however, it’s too late. It just makes us look like losers if we seem to have advertised and gotten so few votes.

    You see, it’s way too late then. These late period ads come after most who might have listened have decided. It’s too late to raise useful funding from any additional supporters found. In fact, with absentee, early voting and military ballots, a significant percentage will have already voted.

    Fundraising guaranteed to be spent 100% on ads and targeted Advertising should be the first and second priority items for an LP POTUS campaign – before renting an office or hiring a staff – between January and June of the election year, in several cycles. None of these highly paid, totally overpaid and essentially worthless professionals which they apparently owe large sums to should be hired.

    Yes, a website, address, campaign committee and an office out of the backseat of an old Pontiac or in a spare bedroom are needed to facilitate fundraising, but that’s it. Fundraise for advertising, then advertise.

    The third and fourth items on the agenda would be: fundraise for more advertising, then advertise some more.

    Repeat.

    When the campaign has raised several millions of dollars and run several flights of targeted major network TV ads in the first 14 targeted states, they might consider office space and a paid person or two.

    Yes. Absolutely, we can see the Johnson campaign heading down the same worn and failed campaign trail that the LP has followed since 1982 in Presidential and off-year elections.

    Sure, they might do a little better in terms of quality, get on a few more very minor interview programs and a few more print and broadcast stories and get all the way up to 0.8% of the vote …

    But this is a two term governor … popular governor … he could have had some credibility.

    The opportunity has been squandered.

    Weeks ago, when I raised the alarm, there was still time to do something.

    Now, the greatest chance has passed by. The effectiveness of early advertising is multiples of what is left, and that window has closed.

  22. Ike Corona

    There is still a window but it gets to be less as time goes on.

    If the campaign is not doing what they should, start an independent PAC or SuperPAC and raise money through that to do what they should be doing.

  23. Austin Battenberg Post author

    My guess is that he is trying to build the Libertarian Party first. He has said in the past that he might consider running again in 2016. But right now, if he is doing door to door campaigning, town halls, and media interviews, plus the endorsements of various candidates, it looks to me that (unlike Bob Barr in 2008), he is trying to bring more people into the LP, hone is message so that way in 2016, he can run a more effective campaign since Ron Paul won’t be in it taking away any potential support he might have.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but that sounds like a possibility.

  24. paulie

    Best thing for that would be full list sharing real time between the campaign and LPHQ. I understand that there has been some resistance, possibly from both.

  25. Robert Capozzi

    27 z: They were running for a year before the LP convention, they should have been planning before that,

    me: My feedback, Zapper, is that I’ve been impressed by your intellect and some of your insights. (I may even know who you are personally.) But this statement is – I’m sorry – ridiculous.

    I’m confident that if you think it through, you’ll see why it’s ridiculous.

    But, OK, GJ 2012 is a bust even before it happens. Massive disappointment. You are Monday morning quarterbacking a week before the game!

    I can see you screaming at the TV. While the Giants are in a huddle, you’re “telling” Eli Manning he should run the draw. Instead, he throws an incomplete pass to Victor Cruz. You stomp out of the living room…

  26. paulie

    The Johnson campaign is doing a lot of things I actually like.

    There are other things they could add to their repertoire, such as fundraising for particular projects rather than just the campaign in general.

    I don’t think negative feedback will cause positive changes but I think phrasing it this way may help reach some people.

  27. Robert Capozzi

    32 p, yes, offline I suggested raising funds based on a project to someone in the campaign a few months ago. They haven’t done it. I don’t know why they haven’t done it. There may well be a great reason not to do it, I just don’t know. I don’t have enough information to make an evaluation.

    Zapper seems to think he DOES have enough information. It appears he’s either impatient, conceited, or both in this regard.

    Trust works. Let it be.

  28. zapper

    @31 It is perfectly logical to expect that a candidate for POTUS would have thought about what his or her campaign would do and how it would be run before actually announcing and beginning to run. That is not ridiculous, but actually essential.

    As I stated, the Johnson campaign should have thought about what it means to campaign and how to run a campaign even before announcing over a year ago – and, of course, this was as a Republican … but many of the same issues and problems were involved even then … including the accumulation of excess campaign overhead and expense that prevents the delivery of an actual message and reaching out to potential new supporters, donors and voters.

    But, since December and the switch to the campaign for the LP nomination, all the particular elements involved in this different type of LP POTUS effort should have been planned for, and they too should have been considered before announcing the switch.

    The Johnson campaign is doing no advertising and reaching few people. Time and other resources have been and continue to be wasted. This is a sure sign of a lack of campaign management expertise.

    This is not Monday morning quarterbacking before the game.

    Here is a better analogy:

    A man looks out and sees a car drive by, heading down a bad road that gets worse and worse and runs into a swamp. The car sinks from sight and disappears.

    Time passes, and another car takes the same road … and another … and yet another … 15 cars pass, each sinking into the muddy swamp. The cars disappear. The occupants walk away. Some occupants have returned as drivers or riders again and again with each new car …

    So, the man points out to the next car that comes along just what has happened to the other cars … he shows them a fork in the road that will lead in a different direction, across a bridge in the distance that will allow them to avoid the swamp. He explains about other cars that have taken the turn and avoided the swamp. The drivers and occupants of the car don’t listen, but continue on their way toward the swamp.

    There is no reason to expect a different outcome. Even if there is a better driver and Miss America is riding in the front seat for all to see … they have missed the turnoff to the bridge and they are still headed for the swamp.

  29. Austin Battenberg Post author

    The analogy is bad because what road goes directly into a swamp? And who in there right mind would drive directly into one?

    All kidding aside, If you go to Gary Johnsons youtube page he has LOTS of online advertising. Right now that is the cheapest way to get the message out. Most people who aren’t overtly political don’t care much about politics at this stage of the game, and would gloss over any commercial with the same sort of enthusiasm as they would for a cereal commercial.

    TV advertising matters, but not as much as it used to because of the rise of the internet. Especially since it costs so much to put TV advertising on cable, more so on broadcast television, and yet even more during prime time, when it matters most.

    Instead, he is going to conventions, doing interviews, and getting his name out with his youtube videos. Yes, the interview with Polipop won’t reach many people, but it reaches a little more then not doing it at all. The fact that he is willing to do any interview means to me he is willing to do anything to get his name out there that won’t cost a fortune.

    I am pretty sure that IF (and that is a big if), he raises a decent amount of money, THEN you will begin to see traditional TV advertising. Until then, I think he is doing just fine. You did realize that three different media outlets just covered him, and it is posted here at IPR. Every day I find something new about him.

    Can’t say the same about Jill Stein or Virgil Goode, or any of the past Libertarian candidates like Bob Barr.

  30. Ike Corona

    The road does not go direct into a swamp but it does get pretty muddy. There are plenty of places to turn off the road but they go up a steep hill. As you miss the turnoffs over and over the hill you have to go up gets steeper and steeper. Still not a perfect analogy but better IMO.

    The reason why they don’t do project fundraising is most likely because they have a small staff and they have to keep them paid and not enough money is coming in for that.

    That is unfortunate because project fundraising is badly needed. But basic operating expenses take precedence. A quandry for many small organizations.

    The reason why better videos are not coming out or ads are not being placed or (name lots of things here) is because there is not enough people and/or money to them. People saying what needs to be done are a lot easier to find than people actually doing stuff.

    Ads on cable are not very expensive. Ask Doug Craig from Georgia who was on the last LNC.

    The reason why lists may not be shared as much as they should be is because both the HQ and campaign are more worried about the other cutting into their short term fundraising than they care about long term synergy. Again a byproduct of having a staff that expects regular paychecks in full to pay their bills.

    Grassroots unofficial activities on behalf of the campaign would help.

    They certainly help a lot with Ron Paul, whose success is much more due to the grassroots than to the paid staff of the official campaign.

  31. Robert Capozzi

    34 z, I’m pleased to see that you recognize that running as a R to win the nomination is a different exercise than running as a L. I’d say it’s a completely different dynamic.

    Obama threw his hat in the ring in 07 as a freshman senator who was not well known. Now he’s president. (This out-of-nowhere stuff tends to happen more on the D side, but I’d guess that GJ was rolling the dice as a R. He’s not really rolling the dice as a L, he’s advancing a message, which is IMO COMPLETELY different.)

    z: “the man points out to the next car that comes along just what has happened to the other cars … he shows them a fork in the road that will lead in a different direction,”

    Me: And “the man” in this case is a character calling himself Zapper on IPR comment boards, yes? You have — perhaps grandiosely — cracked the code, like Moses descending the mountain, etched tablets in hand. The Red Sea will part IF ONLY the LP bought the Zapper Plan…am I getting warm?

    I’d say the truth looks more like this: The LP will follow the path that it will. Those with eyes to see will recognize that the path may or may not produce positive results, but all should recognize that the degree of difficulty of this journey is extraordinarily high. Events may shift like they did in the 1850s to 1860s to open up avenues for the black swan to appear.

    In the meantime, our job is to do the best we can with the resources we have, few as they are. But the journey is best made with the joy of making the journey without expectations for any particular outcome.

    Enjoy the ride, and nothing else matters.

  32. Ike Corona

    Some past candidates were not even nominated until July. I’m for early nomination but there are still things that can be done. Yes earlier is better.

  33. zapper

    @35 I never claimed they were in their right minds. In fact, I claimed that they have a complete lack of campaign management ability. The would be akin to a driver who had no idea that there were better roads in the world or what that funny aparition he sees ahead could be.

    Internet advertising is cheap, as you say, compared to cable TV and prime time network advertising is the most expensive.

    True.

    Advertising that works is much more expensive than advertising that doesn’t work.

    There is an old saying that you get what you pay for, however, very often those things that are cheapest are worth nothing at all. You don’t get what you pay for. Suckers trying to save money buy junk that doesn’t work or breaks quickly and end up with nothing at all. This is the case with most internet advertising.

    These items have all been explained thoroughly on other threads. However, you have repeated the oft stated and most silly comment that shows the problem:

    “I am pretty sure that IF (and that is a big if), he raises a decent amount of money, THEN you will begin to see traditional TV advertising.”

    This is the road that leads to the swamp.

    It doesn’t work.

    You have to raise money for advertising.

    Promise the donors that 100% of the money is guaranteed to be spent exclusively for major network targeted broadcast TV advertising. The first action is to raise money and the second is to buy the TV time.

    Instead, the Johnson campaign, like all the others before, has wasted money on offices, staff and froufrou. There will be nothing left for advertising.

    They have wasted money they could have spent on advertising. They have failed to plan to do advertising. They have failed to raise money specifically for advertising.

    In addition, this lack of campaign management ability leads to a large reduction in total funds raised.

    They money they have not raised will not be donated for general campaign purposes because many donors – including many large donors – expect that general campaign fundraising will be wasted on unnecessary expenses.

  34. Mike Jones

    Well, I’m glad the campaign is getting a message out through the means it has available, even if that is not the best we can hope for.

    Critical comments on IPR don’t seem to accomplish much.

    Try making your own youtube videos, or submitting letters to the editor (newslink.org makes this very easy) or maybe raising money for ads through your own list (you can compile one from state websites, delegates lists and public info sources if you don’t have one already).

    I like to complain too but I try to balance that by actually trying to help as well.

  35. zapped

    Zapper, you have had a year to get involved in the campaign, raise the funds necessary to fund the advertising campaign of your dreams, teach them how it is done (since you’ve obviously have already lead a successful presidential campaign) and thereby displace the management team, and yet you have done nothing! Now all is lost! You have done nothing! (repeating a message means it must be true). You have really let down the libertarian party, libertarians inside and outside the party, and the American people. Most upsetting is that you know exactly what is being done (or not being done) by the management team and yet you still did nothing. /end sarcasm.

    —And no, I don’t think criticism of the campaign should be withheld, but zapper’s method of pretending omniscience about what is being done and then asserting an unlimited capacity to snap one’s fingers and get results aren’t valid methods of discerning whether GJ’s team is doing a good job or not. Especially annoying is the premise that the fundraising necessary to operationalize 80% of his/her suggestions is possible. Though it is none of my business, I do wonder just how much he/she has donated to the campaign so far. If it isn’t $5,000, then I know the first project he/she can undertake…

  36. zapper

    @36 You said:

    “The reason why they don’t do project fundraising is most likely because they have a small staff and they have to keep them paid and not enough money is coming in for that.”

    Which is why they should not rent an office or hire a paid staff until after they have raised money and begun TV advertising. Use volunteers and a spare bedroom for an office. Get the money coming in and the message going out first.

    Johnson should know this. I’m sure that when he started his handyman business he didn’t rent a big office and hire an office staff before he started doing some work and earning some money.

  37. zapper

    @41 You have missed the point:

    They money they have not raised will not be donated for general campaign purposes because many donors – including many large donors – expect that general campaign fundraising will be wasted on unnecessary expenses.

    Donors do not donate when they believe that their money will be wasted.

    I do not believe that the Johnson campaign will change course. What they will attempt will be too little, too late or likely both. They will continue the excuse of needing money for overhead – overhead that never should have been created.

    They had time to change when I started writing, but that would have involved certain individuals giving up their vested interests and admitting error in their previous efforts.

    They will not change course because the paid staff in place will not fire itself and forgo its own excessive pay.

    This excessive pay was revealed in the filings of individuals trying to collect outrageously large sums from the campaign – as posted here on IPR and elsewhere. Perhaps these postings were in error and the Johnson campaign doesn’t have any paid staff. However, they never denied owing large sums to staff and contractors, only timing of payments due and amounts were in dispute.

    So, no I don’t expect anything from the Johnson campaign.

    I’ve always felt that a decent LP POTUS campaign would be a team effort of at least 4 to 6 years of planning and building – perhaps 8 years.

    First we need a team that can see what has failed and why and are willing to take a different road and do something new for the first time.

  38. Robert Capozzi

    39 z: There is an old saying that you get what you pay for, however, very often those things that are cheapest are worth nothing at all.

    me: Yes, getting a Tesla or a high-end Benz might be something to dream about. But if all one can afford is a 98 Hyundai, then the Hyundai seems the better option. Walking is impractical for most.

  39. Robert Capozzi

    42 z: Which is why they should not rent an office or hire a paid staff until after they have raised money and begun TV advertising.

    me: Legacy cost. The campaign (which I think is actually outsourced to a firm, actually) was being run to catch-fire as an R. The pivot’s been made to advance a message as a L. Maybe GJ should’ve fired the firm, but OTOH Team GJ had a certain momentum that they wanted to maintain.

    Maybe, 3 months ago, if GJ knew there was a campaign strategist par excellance residing in, say, South Korea, he could have changed course. Maybe that would have been better. Maybe not.

  40. zapper

    @43 The video you referenced actually reinforces my point very well.

    The video you posted has over 2 million hits – I’ve watched it a few times – but it has taken nearly 5 years for the video to get there, plus a few other little things:

    2 presidential campaigns as an R
    appearance in the Republican Party debates, being attacked by Guiliani,
    decades of direct mail campaigns,
    hundreds of millions of direct mail letters sent out under Paul’s name over those years,
    contunually running for office since the mid 70s and raising and spending millions of dollars in the process

    All resulting in a huge, direct mail data base of personal fans and supporters

    decades of being consistant on the issues
    unwavering support for liberty
    even his 1988 run for POTUS as an L may have helped his long-term struggle to be credible

    all kinds of advertising from yard signs to blimps to drive viewers to view this spot

    and millions of dollars in paid, targeted, major market network TV ads in key primary states

  41. zapper

    @47 Yes RC.

    It’s legacy cost and it’s overhead.

    It also is incompetent campaign management.

    They are currently raising money to pay themselves. They hope to finish in November with all their paychecks in hand.

    … and if they can have a little campaign along the way using all the free resources they can find – and that a campaign of volunteers with no money could have found just as well – then, well that’s nice too.

    And when they have failed, they will blame the LP or Libertarian principles for being too extreme instead of admitting their own failure.

    But, make no mistake. This failure will come not because of the LP, nor because Johnson is a bad candidate, nor because Libertarian principles are too extreme and should be watered down …

    Johnson’s outsourced team is incompetent. He should have fired them. He has probably been roped in to some terrible contract with penalties for doing just that. Too bad.

    It is Johnson’s incompetent campaign management team that is preventing him from having an advertising campaign with a shot at making the 15% he needs for the debates and a breakthrough.

  42. JT

    Zapper: “It is Johnson’s incompetent campaign management team that is preventing him from having an advertising campaign with a shot at making the 15% he needs for the debates and a breakthrough.”

    Well if this is your goal, then you’re going to think that any campaign management team is incompetent. Johnson isn’t getting 15% in the national polls no matter what his campaign did/does. I know you have your surefire plan by which that would happen. I disagree. I also think they might know something or other about economizing their resources that you don’t, given their position on the inside & yours on the outside.

    And while I think you’re correct that in some cases you can raise $ for specific projects better than for a general fund, I really don’t think many Libertarians view a candidate for President having a modest campaign office & a small, reasonably paid campaign team as this egregious waste of resources.

  43. Eric Blitz

    They are the same management team that successfully ran Gary for Governor against very long odds in a 2 to 1 Democratic state, twice. The first time they elected a person who had never held political office before to the top position in the state. They know what they are doing, with the limited resources at hand.

    We may not win this cycle, but we can advance the cause of liberty. Rabble rousing as a backbencher doesn’t help anything but your ego. Pick up a shovel and start digging.

  44. zapper

    @51 They ran him for NM Gov as a Republican with R sized funding.

    Now they are sucking their million dollar fee from a campaign that will only raise about that much.

    If they were competent or honest they would promise to take their fee starting from the second million in donations as a percentage – after the first million was spent on TV ads.

  45. Joe Buchman

    Eric @ 51 — True of my experience with the campaign as well. This is also the team that ran several successful Congressional campaigns, has done “something like 5,000 polls” and has significant corporate memory and resources. They didn’t make much of a dent in the RP Primary though, but they are neither incompetent nor dishonest in my experience here.

  46. Humongous Fungus

    Well, it does seem some people talking to the campaign read this, so if any good ideas are being posted here hopefully they are filtering up…and if they are being rejected, too bad.

    Let’s try to make it as successful as we can anyway, even if it will be disappointing to some extent, which is highly likely.

  47. Austin Battenberg Post author

    Zapper @47

    I know it took five years to get to 2 million views, but even in 2007 when it first came out it was THE most popular Ron Paul video, and reached 1million views before the end of the election.

    Look at the Kony video. Even though there are a lot of problems with the video itself, it still has been seen by millions of people. Awareness has spread not because of the mainstream media, but because of the internet.

    The internet can be a great tool. The reason it isn’t working as well for Johnson as it was for Paul is because he doesn’t have the dedicated grassroots that Paul has. Plain and simple.

  48. zapper

    @56 … yes, it took 5 years and all those dedicated grassroots supporters …

    … and how did he get those supporters …

    *2 presidential campaigns as an R

    *appearance in the Republican Party debates, being attacked by Guiliani,

    *decades of direct mail campaigns,
    hundreds of millions of direct mail letters sent out under Paul’s name over those years,

    *contunually running for office since the mid 70s and raising and spending millions of dollars in the process

    **All resulting in a huge, direct mail data base of personal fans and supporters

    *decades of being consistant on the issues
    unwavering support for liberty

    *years of congressional service and attention

    *even his 1988 run for POTUS as an L may have helped his long-term struggle to be credible

    *all kinds of advertising from yard signs to blimps to drive viewers to view this spot

    ***and millions of dollars in paid, targeted, major market network TV ads in key primary states during his two R presidential runs

  49. Austin Battenberg Post author

    I never heard of him till that first Republican debate on msnbc. But I didn’t become a follower until A New Hope. I didn’t become a libertarian until after a few months of listening to him.

    All his previous runs for congressional office and his 1988 presidential run meant nothing to me. The biggest help was online information and videos.

Leave a Reply

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