Press "Enter" to skip to content

John McAfee announces he will seek Libertarian presidential nomination

mcafee

John McAfee has announced that he will discontinue his “Cyber Party” campaign, and will instead seek the Libertarian nomination for President. USA Today reports:

SAN MATEO, Calif. — John McAfee, Libertarian Party candidate for president of the United States.

The mercurial McAfee, who this year announced his run for the presidency under the Cyber Party to “disrupt the political status quo” and warn of the “dangerously ignored issue of cybersecurity,” said in a phone interview today he will join the Libertarian Party, where he is likely to land the nomination.

“They have (10) candidates (for president), none of whom have personality,” said a laughing McAfee, who is is running on a platform to pardon all marijuana users in prison and “stop the U.S. from being the world’s policeman.”

The unconventional presidential run is McAfee’s latest headline-grabbing adventure. The 70-year-old cybersecurity pioneer, who was named as a “person of interest” in an unsolved 2012 murder case in Belize and later claimed he is a target of a Central American hit squad for his criticisms of the Belize government, has been the subject of profiles in USA TODAY, network news, Wired magazine and the international press.

Read the rest at USA Today.

About Post Author

Andy Craig

392 Comments

  1. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 31, 2015

    Caryn,

    I suppose you could be right. I’m basing my prediction on a few things:

    1) Johnson has put off declaring. There are probably a number of reasons for that, ranging from a desire to pay attention to his business for as long as possible before focusing on the nomination to the reasonably certain knowledge, until McAfee threw in, that he probably wouldn’t have a big fight on his hands.

    2) Johnson would presumably prefer to go out as, to date, the LP presidential candidate with the highest vote total, rather than the LP presidential candidate who got his ass whipped when he went for a second nomination.

    Personally, I think having Johnson in the race would be interesting and add a little drama, perhaps boost the media coverage and so forth. He might even be able to hold out for a couple of ballots, depending on how many committed delegates Perry, Kerbel, Feldman et. al bring to Orlando. But he just doesn’t strike me much as someone who would want to commit a lot of time, effort and money to a losing effort for the nomination this time around.

  2. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 31, 2015

    Tom,

    I don’t think that would dissuade Johnson. I think actually he would see it as a way to distract everyone else so he can take the experienced professional route.

    Johnson is past the dissuading point. It is now just a matter of time.

  3. georgephillies georgephillies December 31, 2015

    Tom raises an excellent point about the Cyber Party boiler plate. McAfee running causing Johnson to cancel running would be good. Austin Petersen will make clear where our not so libertarian wing of the party is.

  4. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 31, 2015

    The more I see of McAfee, the better I like him and the more seriously he seems to approach things, using his wild public persona as a springboard.

    A McAfee campaign done right could come off like the Battle of Aspen, in which Joe Edwards ran for mayor of Aspen, Colorado and Hunter S. Thompson ran for Sheriff of Pitkin County, Colorado on the “Freak Power” ticket. It’s highly unlikely that McAfee would do as well at the polls (Edwards lost the mayoral race by six votes and Thompson lost 204-173), but if his campaign managed that kind of combination of serious and ENTERTAINING, he could quite possibly do much better than an LP candidate has done before.

    As far as how libertarian he is, naturally I still have concerns about his published platform. I have been privately assured that most of it is ghost-written boilerplate written for or by the “Cyber Party,” that McAfee is, as he seems in his interviews, much more libertarian than that, and that it’s getting fixed. I guess we’ll see. Personally, the McAfee I’d want to see atop the LP ticket is the McAfee I saw in the Anarchist interview.

    I’ve also been privately told that he’s making arrangements to attend a number of LP state conventions, and hold public events aside from those conventions. Once again, I guess we’ll see.

    A prediction: If McAfee is rolling out a real, aggressive campaign for the nomination by early January, I expect that Johnson will not announce. I could be wrong, but my impression is that Johnson doesn’t want the nomination badly enough to engage in a time-consuming fight for it that he might well lose.

    Another prediction: To the extent that McAfee is perceived as “not libertarian enough,” we’ll find out whether or not that’s true at the national convention debate. I’ve not seen all the other candidates in action, but nobody’s going to sneak any authoritarian BS past Darryl W. Perry in a public conversation.

  5. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 31, 2015

    The interview he did today was pretty good. He needs to pick up a few interviewing skills, such as avoiding hand movements to the face, looking away from the camera while talking, etc. Those are minor, but something that every candidate needs to learn.

    He did not appear foolish to me in the video (again, speaking of today). But to most americans, the “funny videos” — which most of us in IT understand were meant to be funny — will be an issue he’ll have to deal with if he gets our party’s nomination.

    I came away from the interview he did today with a much better impression than I had. I’m still far from convinced that he’s the proper choice, but he showed that he isn’t a one issue candidate.

  6. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 31, 2015

    John has never been political in any party.
    I think that he has tried to stay away from the bickering and childish behavior that we see on TV. (I don’t mean you guys I mean the dems and rpubs).

    If you watch any of his appearances on Fox TV, he turns the conversation away from politics.
    John just is not a very hateful person and politics, as shown here, tends to bring out the snark in people.

    He favors the second amendment completely and emphatically. The government will get his gun when they can pry it from his hand and then he will just reach down and get the next one.

    He favors each individual person to be left alone by the government to live their lives how ever they choose. If you are a consenting adult, and not harming anyone else’s rights, then you are free to do as you please.

    He is wholeheartedly against the government spying on it’s own citizens. He also would abolish the TSA. Do you feel safer now that they have seen my underwear and socks? I thought not.

    The Cyber Security was the issue that made him throw his hat into the ring. We are currently at war. Only this war is being fought on the internet. China and Russia are leaps and bounds ahead of us. We need to catch up and catch up fast. I have done the research on this subject, extensively.

    The so-called Legal baggage is this:
    John’s neighbor, Gregory Faull was executed. one bullet to the back of his head with a 9mm gun. John favors a smith and Wesson revolver. It is a heftier gun, He found out after the police started running around that they wanted to take him in for questioning. He has been feuding with the Belize Gang Squad. They had been taunting him for months, landing or patrolling along his beach. In Belize, “take you in for questioning” means lock you in a cell for up to 30 days with no charges or representation and if you are lucky you come out alive. Most people do not. So he ran.
    He blogged and did phone interviews while on the run because he wanted someone, anyone, to know his side of the story. He entered Guatemala illegally where his then Girlfriend had a relative who was a lawyer. Because of the carelessness of the Vice reporters with him, the Guatemalans found him. They treated him quite well. Yet because of political tensions between Belize and Guatemala they deported him back to America.
    The Belize authorities say they just want to question him. He has offered to talk by phone, by Skype, in a neutral country, like say the Belize investigators can come here to question him. They refused all of those things. They want him. He knows stuff about their government and they don’t know how much he knows. He knew they were selling passports to terrorists. This is well documented. He knew they were harboring a known drug Kingpin of the Sinaloa Cartel, again well documented. Our own government had a travel warning on Belize because of the dangerous conditions there.
    He was never a suspect. An irresponsible journalist posted that even before it was reported that Gregory Faull was killed, isn’t that interesting? Funny thing about the internet. If the Wayback Machine doesn’t index it fast enough, times and dates can change.

    The other Legal matter, the one for the DUI, which in this case meant driving under the influence. John had just had his prescription of Xanax filled.John is a recovering addict so certain medications may act differently for him. he was slightly impaired. But then he dropped his phone off the seat which caused him to swerve a little. He was pulled over. They found guns in his car, all perfectly legal. They found his prescription bottle, again perfectly legal. He agreed to a blood test and was booked and then let go. As far as I know I think they made him spend a day in jail. Which compared to the day he spent in Hattieville jail in Belize was like the Ritz Carlton.
    He, like many of you, has hit his breaking point when it comes to this government. He loves his country. He believes in the constitution and the wisdom of our forefathers. Somewhere along the way all that got lost. He is the type of guy to do something, not just bitch and moan. The Cyber stuff was the beginning. Give him a little time to catch up. he will.

    All those funny videos, he did them because it was amusing. You may see a clown or a fool. I see a man who is able to laugh at the absurdity of life and let us in on the joke..

  7. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 31, 2015

    Libertarians are “very opinionated, and very stubborn”???

    Say it ain’t so!

  8. langa langa December 30, 2015

    Shivany,

    Fair enough. As I said above, I try to treat people with the same level of respect that they treat me. Also, I’m not big on holding grudges. So, if you would like for us to start over, I’ll be happy to do so.

    Also, if you do encounter the occasional snide remark here (either from me or someone else), please don’t take it personally. There is a good bit of verbal jousting that goes on around here (as I’m sure you’ve noticed), but we’re all friends, and with a few rare exceptions, I don’t think there are many people here that have any real animosity toward one another. It’s just that libertarians tend to be a very opinionated, and very stubborn, group of people. Those traits naturally lead to frequent disagreements, and some of those can get pretty heated. But again, 99.9% of the time, it’s nothing personal.

  9. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 30, 2015

    Hopefully that wouldn’t be his entire platform. We’re five months from the convention. The field of candidates could change significantly by then, so a platform of just cyber security would be a weak case to put in front of the delegates.

  10. georgephillies georgephillies December 30, 2015

    McAfee joined the party and announced h is running fro our party’s Presidential nomination, all in the same week. And he will run it seems on cyber security as his platform.

    This puts him ahead of Kip Lee, but only slightly. Cyber security at least exists.

  11. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 30, 2015

    Shivany is correct about IT. It is a shame, but the industry is highly biased. I’d disagree with only one part of her analysis: the bias is toward “white” (aka western european) and asian men below 30.

  12. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 30, 2015

    NewFederalist wrote:

    Chuck- would you work with someone like Jesse Ventura on those same terms?

    Yes, if Ventura actually wants to campaign as a Libertarian then that sounds great to me.

    Same with Gary Johnson if he decides to campaign as a Libertarian (i.e., stops advocating for a big new tax and welfare plan).

    Of course that’s just a litmus test… if there are multiple candidates running on libertarian issues (and we don’t switch to approval voting), then I will have to pick one based on an additional criterion.

  13. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 30, 2015

    Jesse Ventura has already stated that if he got the LP’s nomination he’d just run on his own beliefs and ignore our platform. I know it was on IPR a few months back.

    Since Ventura has already stated that he’d ignore us, Chuck (and those of us who agree with him) would not be likely to want to risk nominating him.

  14. NewFederalist NewFederalist December 30, 2015

    Chuck- would you work with someone like Jesse Ventura on those same terms?

  15. Pete Blome Pete Blome December 30, 2015

    It’s been an interesting thread, but none of this changes John McAfee’s unelectability. The persona he’s decided to show to the world still speaks of an indulgent, irresponsible, and unstable character no matter what issues he might highlight as a Libertarian. As intellectually gifted as he might be, he cannot now shout loud enough to overcome the noise he has already created for himself. Notoriety is no substitute for a lack of leadership substance. The Libertarian Party will grow with real leaders who have the strength to live up to the crushing responsibility they seek, whereas McAfee’s life seems to be about avoiding responsibility. McAfee running for President will only appear to the public as an antic child seeking his parents attention in one more personal project that will go no where. The LP doesn’t need that.

  16. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 30, 2015

    Shivany Lane wrote:

    I can tell you that at the core, he is Libertarian. to take each plank and whack him over the head with it will only gives him a headache and you splinters. He started out as a one issue candidate, Cyber Security. The rest of the platform was probably written bu committee. It is not carved in stone And it does not reflect all of John’s beliefs.

    I can’t speak for anyone except myself on this:
    I am willing to support candidates who aren’t libertarian on all issues at all times; however, if such a candidate wants my vote for the LP nomination he must:
    1) recognize those disagreements;
    2) campaign on the issues where he is libertarian; and
    3) either remain silent on the issues where he diverges with libertarians or state “the Libertarian position on issue X is Y” (as many past candidates have… e.g., Bill Redpath on gun rights when he was LP chair)

  17. paulie paulie December 30, 2015

    Shivany,

    No worries at all and of course you can stay. We almost never kick anyone out, when we do it’s after months at least or sometimes years of repeat bad behavior, and every one of the cases where we have done it sets of multiple rounds of argument and consternation, which you may well see revived with this note. It’s happened all of three times in 7.5+ years and nearly 266,000 comments on over 16,000 articles.

    I’m going to send you an email a bit later on. My contact info is further above if you want to call or write me first.

    If you want ballot access work, we are getting signatures to get the LP on the ballot in Oklahoma, it pays 2.50/sig and I will have more work coming up doing ballot access now til August or September. Hit me up and we will get you set up if you can make it here. I’d like to work with the campaign on IPR coverage, joint appearances/debates with other campaigns seeking the nomination, hitting the ground in ballot access states. And as I mentioned earlier I am willing to work with John on platform issues if he feels like it, but that’s up to him. Scroll up for contact.

  18. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    This is an Open Comment to the entire IPR community and an apology

    It appears we go off to a bad start. I admit I was snarky, argumentative and took things too personally.

    I had good intentions and at some point they totally went off the rails.
    I am not mentally ill, though I do suffer from depression occasionally.

    I am not unhinged, my hinges are all where they are supposed to be, I checked while I was showering.

    I am normally a very nice person and try to stay out of the deeper political discussions.

    If you will let me continue to be a part of your community I will try to keep my snarkiness tucked away. I will endeavor to be non-confrontational and most of all I will be a little thicker skinned. We are all human, we have our faults and our virtues

    I have known John McAfee for over 3 years. During that time I have had many conversations with him and I consider him to be a close friend. John is fluid. You never know what will come pouring out of that beautiful mind of his.

    When he announced he was going to run for President under his own party, the Cyber Party, I knew that he would not magically appear on any ballots. It took a few conversations to convince him that we needed a real party site where people could sign up and register for ballot access. We also needed a real platform and a few other things.

    Research and data analysis being my thing, I did what I do best and found the one person who knew the most about Ballot access. More conversations later and I had John’s blessing to do what I needed to do. As many of you know, some states make it easier with the party name while others make it damn hard.

    In the very beginning I suggested he sign on with an established party. Given the way he lives his life, the Libertarian Party seemed the most likely choice. Yes, I admit, his platform is not exactly like yours and in some places completely contradicts yours.

    I can tell you that at the core, he is Libertarian. to take each plank and whack him over the head with it will only gives him a headache and you splinters. He started out as a one issue candidate, Cyber Security. The rest of the platform was probably written bu committee. It is not carved in stone And it does not reflect all of John’s beliefs.

    He has just announced. As time goes on and he settles in and gets to know the party population better, things will evolve.

    I love my Country. I am a third generation Californian. My great grandparents were immigrants.We were poor. I come from a single mother household and I have vowed that my children will have a better life than I did. I have mostly succeeded I think. They are my biggest accomplishment.

    For the first time in my voting life, the choices foi candidate from the main two parties are completely unacceptable. We need a third party to step in Libertarians, this is your moment, your time to shine. John may not be the candidate you want, but he is the candidate you need. I will do everything I can and everything he asks me for to make that happen. That, along with suddenly losing my job in the campaign of getting him on the ballots, make me a little emotional and raw last night. For that I truly and sincerely apologize.

    I am willing to give it another go, if you are. There is so much mis-information out there about John that I would like to set the record straight if possible.

    I await a reply from a few crtain people that they are willing to be bigger than our egos and work together, I know I am.

    Thank you for your time if you made it this far.

    Chhers..

  19. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Thank you Jill. Yes, this has been an issue for a long time.
    Men don’t want to acknowledge it and even many women don’t.
    There is also a race issue though that is is less noticeable.
    A study was done, I wish I had the link, not too long ago that discovered that almost all of the tech startups are started by white men. Very few women and less people of color.

    It has nothing to do with their skills or drive and more to do with historical biases.
    By my age, most female developers have moved on into management or project managing or even left the field altogether. This tends to mask the bias even more.

    It really starts when we are young. Girls, at least when I was in school, were steered away from the STEM subjects. When in reality, many women are much more adept at Science and Math. I was a 4.0 student in the math and sciences, yet my guidance counselor told me I should be a teacher.

    I raised my daughter that she could be whatever she wanted to. It just turns out she leaned towards English Literature. My son id the Mathematician.

    You are a very caring person Jill, and I appreciate that.

  20. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Shivany, you have been whining, and you have been phenomenally rude.

    Not to begin with and only when attacked.
    I am not used to people being so vicious.

    phenomenally rude? really? did I question anyone’s personal mental state?
    Did I attack anyone personally, or did I make a point about their words and behavior?

    My son and daughter in law went to Notre Dame.
    I raised 2 of the nicest, intelligent, free thinking individuals you would ever want to meet. I admit I can be catty, but not phenomenally rude?

    I could do that so you can compare and contrast.
    Or, people can start being nicer, like you are. I will ignore lynga, langa, ding dong. Unfortunately this antiquated forum does not give me the ability to just do that.

  21. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 30, 2015

    Oh, Shivany, I go by Jill Catherine on Facebook, if you do Facebook. Also, I get snippy a lot because of the stresses in my life, and the commenters here just ignore me until I get back to normal. They’re class acts.

  22. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 30, 2015

    Shivany, it appears you and I may have a few things in common. I’m an older woman, with one son (who just graduated from one of the top colleges in the country, btw). I’m fairly computer-savvy for someone in my age group, yet I enjoyed being the sole woman writing and commenting on IPR for a few years. I’m not sure why other woman came and went. We’ve had a few trolls come and go (mostly) who have been rude and insulting, which has made the site unpleasant sometimes, but for the most part we all get along fine. I know the men here well. I’ve read this whole thread with only a comment or two. My commen nowt:

    Shivany, you have been whining, and you have been phenomenally rude.

    The good thing is that you can turn things around by stopping all the personal talk and truly conversing. That means that if someone asks a question, you may wish to answer that without making everything all about you.

    I’m pretty thick-skinned, so don’t waste your time insulting me. My name is on the internet several places, in case you’re interested in my credentials. I’m highly curious about John McAfee, already like him because he likes curvy women (obviously, I am one), plus he has a fantastically sexy voice. That’s where my shallowness ends, though, and now I wish to know how he would represent me and my party if he became our nominee.

    One last comment: these men are so nice that they allow me to brag about my kid whenever I can, and never ask me to stop. Trust me, they’re a bunch of sweethearts.

  23. langa langa December 30, 2015

    First off, what kind of name is lynga?

    It’s not a name. It’s a product of your insanity. Seriously, are you blind, or illiterate? l-a-n-g-a

    I have thought about it for a while and just cannot figure it out.

    Shocking.

    You do know what Wikipedia is don’t you?

    Yes, but apparently, you don’t, as Knapp points out.

    Do not call me unhinged and never question my mental health.

    It seems I’ve hit a nerve.

    It is apparent that I was [unhelpful].

    Hey, look, you actually said something correct for a change. Miracles never cease!

    Shivany drops the mic…

    I think I’ve figured it out. When you were a small child, one of your parents tried to drop the mic, but instead, they accidentally dropped you on your head. That would explain quite a bit!

  24. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    ” “Thank you for your illustrious presence” is not polite.”

    Totally wrong. It is ornately phrased but in real English it is not an insult.

    In the context of you all tearing me to shreds, it was an insult. Real English or otherwise. Context matters. Though he did apologize and I do accept that.

    You georgephillies, should have just let it lie. You just wanted to twist the knife a little. I expect that now.

  25. georgephillies georgephillies December 30, 2015

    ” “Thank you for your illustrious presence” is not polite.”

    Totally wrong. It is ornately phrased but in real English it is not an insult.

  26. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    So Shivany, are we to take it that you believe https://mises.org/library/which-seen-and-which-not-seen is in error because the Mises Institute republished it over a century later? I first read the Tao Te Ching in an edition published by the state press of the People’s Republic of China, but it never occurred to me to hold the actions of the Communist Party against the wisdom of that ancient book.

    If, perchance, you are willing to examine That Which Is Seen and That Which Is Not Seen on its own merits, I would be interested in where you think it goes wrong. If it helps you to read it somewhere other than mises.org you may wish to see

    http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

    Among many other places.

  27. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    Shivany,

    I wouldn’t classify anything in that piece as “findings.” It is an opinion/polemic piece that, even by my fairly anti-LvMI standards, is so far over the top as to be laughable. And I’m not sure why or how it belongs in this conversation.

  28. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    “Drew was associated with his campaign. I do not know if he still is.”

    Interesting. Things sure do move fast in the McAfee campaign. That press release came out within the last week – in fact, if I am not mistaken, yesterday. Perhaps, if Mr. Thompson has in fact already parted ways with the McAfee campaign, it may still be interesting to get his perspective on it.

    “I do not know that other person, he is likely someone much more well informed as to Libertarian values so he can coach John.”

    Or perhaps that individual only believes that he or she is so much more informed. One might perhaps begin by looking up his or her contact info, such as has already been provided, and seeing where it leads.

    “The Core Libertarian values as I understand them, John has believed in before it was fashionable to be Libertarian.”

    Core libertarian values include free market economics and a minimal government. Libertarians believe that the government governs best which governs least, both in the economic and social/civil spheres and both at home and abroad. Is this what he believes? Does it comport with his replies to Mr. Doherty a few days ago?

    “Wang-Tang Fu, you don’t even notice when you are being rude. This is sad. “Thank you for your illustrious presence” is not polite. It is meant as an insult.”

    My sincere apologies if you took it as an insult. My English is exceedingly poor, and I meant no offense. Perhaps someone else would say such a thing and mean it to be an insult, but I reassure you that I meant it most sincerely and forthrightly. For all we know, I could be talking to the future First Lady of the world’s sole remaining superpower, after all. And, even if you are not Mrs. McAfee as some have alleged, I bow to the spark of the divine within you (Namaste).

    “I thought I could be helpful. It is apparent that I was the opposite. ”

    It’s not necessarily too late. You still have every opportunity to try to make a more convincing case if you so choose.

    “The goal of the collective group was not to find out more about John, it was clearly more about ridding yourself of the cancer, which is me.”

    I can’t speak for the collective, not being a collectivist, but I am in no rush to get rid of you. Actually, your charms are beginning to grow on me. But, I must beg your apology, as I do in fact wish to know more about John, and you in your great wisdom have made me work very hard for the knowledge I seek, which remains ever elusive. Perhaps the quest to learn more about John is all about the journey, and the knowledge to be gained eventually is that the journey itself is in fact the destination?

    “I am a wealth of information, unfiltered, and non-party line. If you truly have a question about John, please ask. If you want me to leave, I will.”

    The questions are above. Please do scroll up and find them, and answer them if you wish. I won’t ask you to leave, as you continue to teach me a great deal, even if it at first does not appear to be any kind of reply to the questions that have been asked.

    “Be honest, tell me how many Major news organizations have ever covered any of your candidates? ”

    Pretty much all of them, although not nearly as much as we would like. However, let me caution you that the point of running our candidates is to try to move public policy in our direction, and as intermediate goals, build up our organization and educate people about our philosophy, so getting more coverage would only be a positive step if it serves those goals, not if it eclipses them.

    “Do each of you place a plank from your platform and wear it as a mask so you cannot see, hear or speak anything but that one issue?”

    On the contrary, I see our beliefs as all being interconnected. We want government to stop transgressing on our economic lives as much as our personal lives, and vice versa.

    “My first clue was the picture you chose for this thread. ”

    I didn’t.

    However, I have in fact chosen photos for some of our other articles. Usually, it’s the first or one of the first search engine results. I haven’t ever spent more than ten seconds in choosing one.

    I would not assume that this one would have been any different.

    “Yes John needs to convince a shitload of delegates that he can be your standard bearer.”

    Only if he wants the nomination. There will be others trying to convince them as well.

    “I gave you all my email address and no one wrote.”

    I’m sorry to hear that, Shivany. If you would still like me to write, even after I called you illustrious (my apologies again for my exceedingly poor grasp of your language), I will.

  29. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    Shivany,

    I’ll shoot you an email in a minute. I’m surprised that no one else did. I didn’t because I assumed you would receive several and saw no reason to bother you.

  30. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Too bad on the internet you cannot hit a reboot button.

    Drew was associated with his campaign. I do not know if he still is.

    I do not know that other person, he is likely someone much more well informed as to Libertarian values so he can coach John.

    The Core Libertarian values as I understand them, John has believed in before it was fashionable to be Libertarian.

    No I do not represent his campaign. I came here simply to answer what questions I could since I know him quite well. Do not take my statements as official ones coming from the campaign.

    Wang-Tang Fu, you don’t even notice when you are being rude. This is sad. “Thank you for your illustrious presence” is not polite. It is meant as an insult.

    Y’all seem to think that personal attacks is OK. In my world it is not.

    I do apologize for jumping feet first into a viper pit. I thought I could be helpful. It is apparent that I was the opposite. The goal of the collective group was not to find out more about John, it was clearly more about ridding yourself of the cancer, which is me.

    I am a wealth of information, unfiltered, and non-party line. If you truly have a question about John, please ask. If you want me to leave, I will.

    I sincerely apologize if it seemed as though I was picking a fight with anyone. That is not my nature.

    Be honest, tell me how many Major news organizations have ever covered any of your candidates? Fox doesn’t count, they are shills. Are you so entrenched in your individual pet peeves that you cannot see the world as a whole? Do each of you place a plank from your platform and wear it as a mask so you cannot see, hear or speak anything but that one issue?

    My first clue was the picture you chose for this thread. It is the worst one he has ever taken, and seriously, that is saying something. Yes John needs to convince a shitload of delegates that he can be your standard bearer.

    Oh and Thomas…. I do not whine.I just didn’t want miss lynga’s statements about my mental stability to be out there in the universe. It is most unfortunate that this forum has no process for addressing such disgusting behavior. Every other forum I have joined does, and for good reason.

    Thomans, write to me, we can talk. You will see that as a person not being attacked….I am quite amiable. I gave you all my email address and no one wrote.

  31. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    TLK @ 0855

    Thank you, at least we have some solid information now.

    However, as noted, many substantive questions remain. We shall see whether they shall be answered, when, how, and by whom.

    Meanwhile, for Mr. McAfee’s sake, I sincerely hope that Shivany Lane is not in fact Mrs. McAfee.

  32. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    “I copied and pasted a description of a long dead economist from Wikipedia”

    This remains an unproved allegation unless and until you post the exact link and exactly which section you are quoting.

    “Janice and John were married while he still lived in Portland. It is well documented.”

    Since this is important to you, please provide a link to this documentation.

    “Her facebook page lists here as Janice McAfee.”

    And as we all know, facebook always demands verified documentation that is thoroughly examined before allowing a name to be used with an account.

    I’m starting to get the sneaking suspicion that you are actually trying to hurt Mr. McAfee’s campaign, not help it. Perhaps someone should start by inquiring with Drew Thompson at the 334 number on the press release linked above regarding Shivany Lane, Janice Dyson/McAfee, and Algernon Edjetshow. Then, if Algernon Edjetshow checks out, inquire with him regarding Shivany Lane and Janice Dyson/McAfee as well.

    “John started out as a single issue candidate, Cyber Security. His campaign people felt that he needed more of a platform. What you are reading is what was thrown together when he first announced. He has not had time to amend any of it since he has been busy PROMOTING YOUR PARTY.”

    Except that he continues to espouse those same exact positions in an interview with Mr. Doherty just in the last few days, since switching to the LP race.

    “When the excitement dies down, he will fold your platform into his. ”

    How very kind. Suppose for the sake of argument that he does exactly that. Why should LP delegates assume that he won’t switch back to his prior platform, or something else entirely, in the event that he wins the nomination? How sincerely held can his views be if he changes them so easily, and why should we expect them not to change just as easily again after the nomination? Has he experienced a sudden conversion on numerous public policy issues that has yet to make its way into his interviews that have taken place since he declared himself a candidate for the LP nomination? And, if we take your word that he has, why should we assume that the conversion is genuine and not a temporary subterfuge to capture our ballot access that has been won through decades of hard work?

    These are real questions for whoever represents Mr. McAfee’s campaign regardless of whether or not Shivany Lane in fact does.

  33. NewFederalist NewFederalist December 30, 2015

    “New Federalist, then why on earth would you belittle me when you didn’t find evidence of mine????
    Were you hurt as I child? I mean that sincerely. Did people bully you so now you feel a sense of accomplishment by being snarky and confrontational to everyone you meet online.” – Shivany Lane

    *sob*… *sniff*… I feel so belittled and victimized by this horrible person’s bullying behavior! I guess I’ll go have a good cry, find my binkie and curl up. Have you ever seen such cruelty?

  34. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    WTF,

    Here’s a Bing web search that turns up several stories mentioning their marital status. Ms. Lane was correct in her statement to that effect.

    It had just never occurred to me to inquire as to whether or not they had gotten hitched and if so whether or not she had taken his last name. Now that I know, a very belated congratulations to them!

  35. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    “And may I remind you that she is Janice McAfee, not Dyson.”

    Honestly, I don’t care, but since there is no substantive reply on the issues, I may as well inquire as to when and where the marriage took place and how someone may verify whether in fact this is true should they wish to.

  36. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    Well, Shivany, here’s the thing.

    People will call you anything they want to call you.

    People will question anything they want to question.

    You don’t have to like it. That’s how it is whether you like it or not.

    If you’d like to get this conversation back on track, your best bet would be to read Wang Tang-Fu’s last comment attentively. Name-checking the LOIC, not so much, if for no other reason than that to my certain knowledge there are people on this thread who have actually used it (although likely not lately — Anonymous deprecated it some time ago).

  37. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Thomas,

    I do recall “picking any fights”. This all happened because I copied and pasted a description of a long dead economist from Wikipedia and then the dog pile happened.

    Janice and John were married while he still lived in Portland. It is well documented.
    I believe it may have had something to do with their trip to Canada. I have no inside knowledge of that.

    Her facebook page lists here as Janice McAfee.

    I don’t pick fights, I do take offence at personal attacks. Attack my views, my positions, my politics all you want. Do not call me unhinged and never question my mental health.

    I can show you unhinged.
    I can show you mentally ill.

    I doubt many of you have ever had to go through the hell that a person with mental illness goes through, or watch a loved one go through it. I thought that with the suicide of Robin Williams maybe we were past using that as an insult.

  38. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    Shivany,

    Whining isn’t “fighting back.”

    Yes, there are quite a few assholes here (I’m often one of them, although I’ve tried not to be in this thread).

    Ignoring them is an option. Actually taking them on is another. Whining about them just encourages them.

  39. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    Shivany Lane,

    That’s Wang Tang-Fu, or if you prefer Mr. Wang, and I did ask you nicely. When, whether and how you answer is up to you.

    You seem to think that it is our job here to convince you of the rightness of libertarianism. It is not. Mr. McAfee chose of his own accord to seek the Libertarian Party’s nomination. It is up to him, and you if you think you can do a credible job representing him here, to convince Libertarian delegates, a fair number of whom read this blog, that he is in fact a libertarian. Based on his statements on economic issues, and yours, there is considerable doubt regarding that claim.

    Nothing compels you to address these concerns, but if you continue to play the dozens, throw out misdirection (supposedly a quote from an unnamed wikipedia article about the Mises Institute, which was only named for and not created by Mises, as allegedly some reply to a cite of Bastiat? Seriously?), “drop the mic and walk off the stage” over and over, pretend that you are being bullied, et tedious cetera the concerns remain unaddressed.

    Reject our reality and substitute your own all you wish; it won’t get Mr. McAfee any closer to winning the nomination, except perhaps in your reality. Then, come June 2016, you can try to get the Cyber Party on the ballot in whatever states you still can with whatever resources you have at that point, or not, in everyone else’s reality.

    Regarding libertarian approaches to education, you may wish to start with http://www.schoolandstate.org/case.htm and explore the rest of the site as you find time (or not; but someone else could if they wish). You may also wish to consider that there is quite a caste system in government schooling as it exists today. That is, of course, if you really want to know the answers to your questions, and nothing in your demeanor suggests that you do.

    Now, if you wish to continue to represent Mr. McAfee here, you may wish to consider who should really be convincing who here. The party will have a nomination, and Mr. McAfee may or may not win it. You will yourself at best get one vote in that contest, unlike the online polls you boast about rigging. If you don’t think you need to convince Libertarians, and that we only need to convince you, then you may wish to think again whether seeking this particular party’s nomination, given our ideology and our proclivities, is really the path you wish to take and whether it can lead to anything productive for you.

    If, however, the issue is personal, you may wish to inquire with the campaign whether they think you are representing them well here or whether they might try again with a different spokesperson.

    https://mcafee16.com/john-mcafee-to-seek-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ lists a contact number for Drew Thompson. Separately, one of the bloggers here was contacted yesterday by an Algernon Edjetshow who claimed to represent the campaign; the contact info for Mr. Edjetshow can be seen above at paulie
    December 28, 2015 at 14:03

    Perhaps some inquiries can be made by inquiring minds as to whether you really represent Mr. McAfee and his campaign accurately or for that matter at all, or whether they have better answers for the questions likely LP delegates are asking here.

  40. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Thomas,
    So let me get this straight in my pretty little head.

    I can sit here and take all the bullying that has been going on towards me and do it with a smile on my face because…feedom

    Or I can join the conversation and try to fight back, thus I am called “looking pretty bad” and “being an ass”.

    I am only responding to the nastiness that has come my way.

    I was raised a little better than some of you apparently. It is not in my nature to be so mean and nasty and worst of all, personally attack someone and their mental health.

    You all are in charge of the tone of the conversation. Be nice and so will I. Attack me and I will fight back. It really is that simple.

    John is more forgiving, I am not. I am not John. I could never in my wildest dreams aspire to be as caring, forgiving and loving as John is.

    Now, as far as the platform you all refer to on his web page. John started out as a single issue candidate, Cyber Security. His campaign people felt that he needed more of a platform. What you are reading is what was thrown together when he first announced. He has not had time to amend any of it since he has been busy PROMOTING YOUR PARTY.

    When the excitement dies down, he will fold your platform into his. Make no mistake about it though, Cyber Security will stay.

    I apologize to all of you who think that being as mean as nasty as you are is casting a bad light on John. Should I blame all of your friends for the way you have treated me? You don’t know me. Don’t even try to pretend that you do. My actions, my words, are my own. SOLELY MY OWN.
    Isn’t that what freedom of speech is all about? Or have you removed the first amendment from your platform without my knowledge??????

  41. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    “I apologize if you find my behavior to be an asshole while you praise their behavior.”

    Feel free to point out any case in which I “praised their behavior.” You won’t, because you can’t, because I didn’t.

    “You all chose to dislike me as a result of your dislike for John”

    I don’t dislike you, nor do I dislike John. I do dislike you picking a fight and then whining when you get one. The main reason I dislike that is that it makes you look bad and is easily correctable. You could stop picking fights, or you could stop playing the victim when you get them.

    “And may I remind you that she is Janice McAfee, not Dyson.”

    Well, you can tell me that, but it would not be reminding me of anything since I never knew it to be the case before. I had not heard that they married, nor had I heard that she changed her name when and if they did (not all people do).

  42. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Thomas,

    I am but a mirror of what you call your community here.
    I am not making an ass of myself.
    I am defending myself.

    I came here with good intentions. It was your brethren who decided to attack me.
    I apologize if you find my behavior to be an asshole while you praise their behavior.

    You have all already made up your minds about John McAfee. This much is clear.
    I am not Janice. And may I remind you that she is Janice McAfee, not Dyson.

    I am my own person. You all chose to dislike me as a result of your dislike for John, not the other way around. Once you start telling yourself the truth, perhaps you will then be set free.

  43. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    “Meanwhile. perhaps you can enlighten me as to how Libertarians, you know you hardcore ones, expect a child to be educated?”

    That one’s easy. Check out the book (there’s a free download version available) Unschooling Dads. My two kids are highly literate, well-informed, and on track for college.

  44. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    New Federalist, then why on earth would you belittle me when you didn’t find evidence of mine????
    Were you hurt as I child? I mean that sincerely. Did people bully you so now you feel a sense of accomplishment by being snarky and confrontational to everyone you meet online.

    Let me guess, you probably are not a very successful person irl so you take it out on people here.

  45. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 30, 2015

    Do you realize you’re making yourself look pretty bad here, Shivany? And that for some, that evaluation will extend to McAfee as well?

    Some people seem to be convinced that you’re actually Janice Dyson. Based on my own research, I don’t think that’s the case. But whoever you are, if you’re really a supporter of McAfee, the first step in convincing people would be to stop making an ass of yourself in association with his name.

  46. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Wang Tu,

    If you ask nicely, I will answer nicely. If you are rude, you will get rudeness in return. This is the way the game will be played. You all may accept the concept that people have to be rude and nasty. I reject your reality and substitute my own. So, ask me nice and i will respond in kind.
    Meanwhile. perhaps you can enlighten me as to how Libertarians, you know you hardcore ones, expect a child to be educated? Do you favor a caste system?

  47. NewFederalist NewFederalist December 30, 2015

    “If I googled your name, would I find out what an illustrious career you have had?” – Shivany Lane

    Nope

  48. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    And now a word for my bully, lynga.

    First off, what kind of name is lynga? is it short for linguistic? is it the first part of a troupe of bell ringers named lynga dinga-ding dong. I don’t know. I have thought about it for a while and just cannot figure it out.

    My name came from my character in Second Life. She has a pretty good business and many friends there. I have a few bullies there too. The thing is, I know how to crash their computer by sending lots of pixels to their Second Life screen in rapid concession and it crashes the client, problem solved. Unfortunately the developer of the program found out about that little trick and fixed it.

    I wish there was a way to aim an LOIC at you. Unfortunately, the WordPress developers tend to shut down the holes and bugs in their systems quite rapidly.

    The little description of your favorite economist, did you sleep with him or something? just saying…. I pulled straight from Wikipedia. You do know what Wikipedia is don’t you?
    Well if their assessment of your dreamboat economist is incorrect, simply correct it. Because when you mention a name, the first place anyone will go is Wikipedia. It is intended to be a croud sourced Encyclopedia. If you refuse to contribute, you have no right to call me unhinged or mentally ill for citing it.

    If I used too many words for you to understand what I am saying, I can break it down into words that you maybe can understand.

    Meanwhile, you are not e. e. cummings so try and us a Capital letter the next time you pick a screen name.

    Shivany drops the mic, walks of the stage and smiles.

  49. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    Thank you for gracing us with your illustrious presence again, Shivany Lane. Would you please take the time to explain how Mr. McAfee’s positions on economic issues (featured in excerpts from Brian Doherty at Reason.com which I highlighted at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/brian-doherty-anti-virus-pioneer-john-mcafee-enters-libertarian-party-presidential-race/ ) are “100% compatible with the Libertarian Party principles”? (https://mcafee16.com/john-mcafee-to-seek-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination/ )

  50. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 30, 2015

    Ahh NewFederalist, you are so quaint.

    Shivany Lane is my main Moniker. I am also a long time resident of the virtual world known as Second Life run by Linden Lab.

    You also must not have looked deep enough, meaning only seeing what you want to see.
    I have a facebook page, a twitter account, an entire Google presence and belong to many online communities.

    I have been a member of the internet for over 20 years.

    I never said my career was illustrious, I leave that to my heroes like Linus Torvalds, whom I have met personally.

    Computer programming is my second career. I don’t program under the name Shivany Lane though I have been known to use her for commenting on various forums. I have a presence on Daily Kos.

    I am not a remarkable person. I have never claimed to be. My most incredible thing I think I ever did in the area of politics is help get a lawyer fired from his job for spreading lies about John Kerry. You see. I do not like liars of any stripe.

    Oh yes and I also have worked for MoveOn.org and participated in the great campaign I fondly like to refer to as “skew the polls”. Online polls are sorely lacking in security and sophistication, therefore it is trivial to “skew” them if you know how to use Perl and set your mind to it.

    If I googled your name, would I find out what an illustrious career you have had?

  51. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 30, 2015

    NF, See William Saturn above,
    December 27, 2015 at 02:35

    And check out the examiner.com link in that comment.

  52. NewFederalist NewFederalist December 30, 2015

    I’m afraid we’ve seen the last of Shivany Lane. I took her up on her offer to do an internet search of her name. It appears to me all she does is bounce around the internet defending McAfee from those who question his products, ethics or honesty. If she has a long and illustrious career in the computer software business I missed it.

  53. paulie paulie December 30, 2015

    I don’t think that accounts for most of the difference, even if true. Consider, for example,

    http://www.examiner.com/article/gary-johnson-breaks-libertarian-party-records

    Alabama 0.61%
    Alaska 2.49%
    Arizona 1.26%

    And so on.

    There simply aren’t enough African-American voters anywhere except DC to account for that level of discrepancy, and in DC Johnson got 0.67%.

    What you say about imbalanced LP outreach has some truth to it. Copying and pasting from an older comment in a prior thread:

    There have been different surveys done whch have measured libertarian in different ways – NolanQuiz results, self-identified libertarians, and so on. I think the Pew research that you are referring to is https://web.archive.org/web/20120217034033/http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa580.pdf page 16 which shows black people at 12% of the population and 7% of libertarians. Whites in that survey are at 80% of the population and 82% of libertarians (not 93%, which you may have mistakenly arrived at by assuming all non-blacks are white), in other words the rate of libertarians among non-whites in general is no different than among whites. Groups other than blacks or whites aren’t covered in the chart. In other words if whites are 80% of the population, non-whites are 20%, and if 82% of libertarians are white then 18% of libertarians are non-white on that particular survey.

    Page 17 shows a different survey, which does include Hispanics as a separate category. It shows that in 2004 Hispanics were 7% of the overall total and 6% of libertarians – in other words not dramatically different from their rate in the overall population. That survey has whites at 71% of the population and 81% of libertarians.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20120302143842/http://server.theadvocates.org/quiz-faq.html

    In September 2000, Rasmussen Research, one of the world’s leading polling organizations, administered the World’s Smallest Political Quiz in a “Portrait of America” poll of a broad cross-section of likely American voters.

    This was the first time that the Quiz itself had been used in a scientific, non-commissioned poll conducted by a professional pollster.

    Using the Quiz questions and political divisions, Rasmussen surveyed 822 likely voters by telephone and found:

    32% were centrists; 16% libertarians; 14% statists; 13% liberal; 7% conservative; and, 17% bordered one or more categories.

    While the test identified 16% of the voting population as libertarian, only 2% of the respondents identified themselves with that label when given a chance.

    Other interesting results:

    * Libertarians and centrists were equally distributed throughout the Democratic and Republican parties.

    * African Americans comprise the least number of left liberals (9%) and the highest number of libertarians (21%).

    * Non-church goers are just as likely to be libertarians (18%) as left liberals (19%). Those who attend church four or more times per month are slightly more likely to be libertarians (15%) than right conservatives (11%).

    In other words when the definition of libertarian is based on quiz results rather than self-identification labels, blacks are more likely than whites to be libertarian, not less.

    Clearly, however, this is not reflected in the composition of most LP conventions and meetings.

    I’m not sure where the LP vote lands on that spectrum, but I would agree that we haven’t done nearly as good a job as a party at reaching all the different kinds of people who show an affinity for our beliefs as we could.

  54. Andy Andy December 30, 2015

    I think a big factor in low vote totals in some southern states, as mentioned by Paul above, is the large black population. This is not to say that blacks can’t be libertarians, but rather that out of the ones who vote, many have been brainwashed into voting Democrat no matter what. Also, the Libertarian Party has done a very poor job at reaching out to the black community. LP outreach is severely lacking as it is, but what little outreach that takes place tends to be geared toward disgruntled Republicans and computer geeks, which are not the best places to reach large numbers of black Americans.

  55. paulie paulie December 30, 2015

    Then again, maybe she is on to something about Alabama…..

  56. paulie paulie December 30, 2015

    Aside from Austrians, @Shivany also condemns LVMI for being based in Alabama… which is the current state of residence, and campaign HQ, of one John McAfee.

    Yes. In fact, his campaign HQ is in Opelika, which is part of the same metro area as Auburn. In one of the videos he mentions previously living in the Birmingham area in the 1980s.

  57. paulie paulie December 30, 2015

    Leave me out of any of your conversations.

    What you have said in a public forum is open to being addressed in that same public forum. It’s your choice whether you wish to continue replying and/or reading the responses you receive.

    Apparently your community does not know how to conduct political discourse

    I don’t believe I’ve been impolite to you. And if some people have been impolite to you, please consider that equating us with nazis and the like isn’t exactly considered polite by most of us, either.

    I wanted to make myself available to anyone having questions about John which is why I stayed in this post.

    I appreciate that, but you also made some very highly incendiary comments as well.

    You offended me.

    I offended you? How so? Have you considered the possibility that you offended some people as well?

    The clip I pasted was from Wikipedia.

    You still haven’t identified which exact sections of what you said were from which wikipedia articles, nor does being in wikipedia automatically mean it was accurate…but in any case, to even address that much we would need to know exactly what words were in which wikipedia article and how they were sourced within wikipedia, whether they were discussed in the talk: page, and so on.

    If anyone would like to dispute how the republicans created their stronghold in the south with the Dixiecrats, we can discuss that. It is well documented.

    How is it relevant here, would be the more pertinent question.

    I know a thing or two about the now Republican dixiecrats, having spent quite a few years in Alabama. They, at best, pay lip service to free markets. These are the same folks who backed George Wallace not that long ago; the same George Wallace who was huge on government infrastructure development projects. These days they make up some of the loudest fans of Donald Trump, who also recently said that the money spent in Iraq would have been better spent, not by taxpayers it was taken from under duress, but by the government on….you guessed it, infrastructure development. In between, a lot of these same dixiecrats cheered candidates like Pat Buchanan. Their commitment to free markets is very weak; they are more apt to support Republicans due to their military hawkishness and their coercive social conservatism. In other words, pretty much the opposite of libertarian in all three major areas of public policy. And indeed, the south is where LP candidates are on average weaker than anywhere else in the country, while the west is where they tend to be strongest overall.

    As for why the Mises Institute is in Auburn, it’s thanks to early LvMI financial supporter John V. Denson being from that area.

    None of this or any other specific comments about LvMI were directly pertinent to what you were supposedly replying to.

    Other that that, just leave me alone. You all have just displayed why it is that a large percentage of the American population stay away from your party.

    Nothing compels you to continue to participate, or even read, these comments. However, John McAfee may wish to address the larger issues of the massive disparities between his economic platform as spelled out on his campaign website and that of the party whose nomination he is seeking. How he, or you, choose to address it is up to you all.

  58. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 29, 2015

    Hey, here’s an idea: How about instead of bowing to me, you climb down off the goddamn cross and quit pretending that every time someone disagrees with you, you are somehow being victimized.

  59. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 29, 2015

    Wow you are clever… I bow to your superior intellect

  60. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 29, 2015

    Shivany,

    I’m not sure what you mean by “leave me alone.”

    In order to read the comments here, you have to point your web browser at this URL and actively look at them.

    If you want to do that, that’s up to you.

    If you don’t want to do that, that’s up to you, too.

    If you don’t want other people to say things you don’t like, well, that’s NOT up to you.

    If that offends you, well, being offended and $4.50 will get you an iced white chocolate mocha latte at Starbucks.

  61. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 29, 2015

    Leave me out of any of your conversations.
    Apparently your community does not know how to conduct political discourse in a polite manner so I am done here.

    I wanted to make myself available to anyone having questions about John which is why I stayed in this post.

    You offended me. The clip I pasted was from Wikipedia.

    If anyone would like to dispute how the republicans created their stronghold in the south with the Dixiecrats, we can discuss that. It is well documented.

    Other that that, just leave me alone. You all have just displayed why it is that a large percentage of the American population stay away from your party.

  62. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 29, 2015

    Aside from Austrians, @Shivany also condemns LVMI for being based in Alabama… which is the current state of residence, and campaign HQ, of one John McAfee.

    Then again, maybe she is on to something about Alabama…..

    😉

  63. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 29, 2015

    Absolutely. And I think in a sense calling him a refugee from the Nazis is also correct. He refused to return to his homeland while the Nazis ruled it (in part out of legitimate fear that he’d be arrested or killed if he did), and then was prevented from doing so by the war, during which he was a loyal British subject and supporter of the Allies. Indeed his most famous popular work was, of course, targeted at the American and British public during WWII, urging them to resist maintaining wartime command & control socialism in the coming peace. He even refused to accept German citizenship when Hitler annexed Austria, that’s why he became a Brit that year.

  64. paulie paulie December 29, 2015

    Mises was, Hayek wasn’t. Hayek was already in Britain at LSE when the Nazis came to power, and didn’t return to Germany/Austria until long after the war. He chose to acquire British nationality in 1938.

    Thank you, that is correct. However, I don’t think anyone can make a serious case that Hayek was a nazi or nazi sympathizer, if that’s what Shivany was trying to imply. The ideology does not mesh at all, and Hayek spoke out strongly against both nazism and totalitarian communism. It’s highly unfair to tar him with that brush just because he was born in Austria.

  65. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 28, 2015

    “The Austrian individuals you referred to other than Hitler were Jewish”

    Mises was, Hayek wasn’t. Hayek was already in Britain at LSE when the Nazis came to power, and didn’t return to Germany/Austria until long after the war. He chose to acquire British nationality in 1938.

  66. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 28, 2015

    Shivany Lane wrote:

    Are you all mean an d nasty or only a few of you?? Just saying.

    Only a few.

    Also, this forum is not necessarily representative of the composition of opinions among the Libertarian Party as a whole or the convention delegates specifically.

    That said, I don’t think the reception to Keynesian economics will be very warm. I would suggest reading explications of free market economics with an open mind. Bastiat is spot on, but not necessarily the most accessible to a newcomer. Try “The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible” (see a sample chapter, the whole book in PDF, or buy the book) or the Keynes vs. Hayek rap video posted earlier for lighthearted introductions that build intuition.

    Shivany Lane wrote:

    OK children here is your basic economics lesson for today:
    Joe is lucky enough to get a job with the Big Bad Wolf (Government). He works hard all day while his wife stays home tending to the children. Joe comes home on Friday with a paycheck. An honest wage for an honest days work. Mrs. Joe goes to the grocery store, or in your world the local produce stand. She buys food for her family. Because we all know that with proper nutrition her children will grow up strong and healthy.

    The produce stand either pays his supplier or keeps that money for himself which he goes and spends on a new tractor. The tractor manufacturer is now able to source many jobs like the people who he employs and all the suppliers who supply him with goods and services. When the tractor is delivered, Mr. Tractor builder is able to easily deliver it to Mr. Farmer because Joe helped build a mighty fine bridge. This cut Mr. Tractor’s delivery time in half so he has more money to invest in his business or hire new workers.

    This, is called the free market and capitalism in it’s plainest form. Now I will agree with you that the CEO of say, GM, makes an insane amount of money and he produces absolutely nothing. That is a crime.

    The government pays Joe, Joe buys food from the grocery store, the grocery store buys food from the farmer, the farmer buys a tractor, etc.

    That is what is seen.

    But in order to pay Joe, the government took money from someone else… let’s call him Bob. Bob would have used that money to buy food from the grocery store, the grocery store buys food from the farmer, the farmer buys a tractor, etc. Now he can’t and doesn’t.

    That is what is unseen: the opportunity cost.

    If you only look at the benefits but ignore the costs, you can appear to get a free lunch. When you look at the benefits AND the costs, we see that it is a wash. There is no stimulus.

    So what remains is whether it is better that Joe get the money (government intervention) or Bob get the money (the free market). From a moral perspective, libertarians would argue that government ought not rob Peter to pay Paul. From a utilitarian perspective, the question comes down to which first payment is a better use of resources (the latter steps are irrelevant, as there is no stimulus).

    Some economists believe there are public goods that only governments can provide. Others (myself included) believe history and empirical evidence has shown that all so-called public goods can be provided by the free market, and government uses resources less efficiently than the free market due to the knowledge problem (knowledge is distributed… no central planner can make better decisions than the multitude of people can through the price mechanism).

    “Make work” means just that… paying money for things that serve no useful purpose, hoping that employing people will cause a stimulus. This is not public goods like the Hoover Dam; it is digging up ditches and filling them in again. John Maynard Keynes advocated just that: digging up ditches and filling them in again. Paul Krugman said hurricane Katrina was great because it would stimulate the economy. Krugman also suggested if we spent a bunch of money preparing to rebuff a space alien invasion, that would be great because it would stimulate the economy — even if no aliens would ever actually invade. Bastiat was responding to contemporaries who suggested breaking windows to stimulate the economy… thus the name “the broken window fallacy“.

    In all those cases there is no actual stimulation because you are just moving the parade of whisper down the lane spending from one source to another. What’s left is clear: you have a lot of damaged homes from hurricane Katrina, a bunch of broken windows in Bastiat’s example, and a bunch of holes dug up and filled in instead of those people doing useful work. We’d be better off without the destruction and without the wasted effort.

    Infrastructure spending (like Hoover Dam) is another argument entirely. That’s not “make-work”, though it may still be a bad idea for other reasons (the free market is more efficient than government).

  67. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    It is actually excellent news if John McAfee were to give talks in Oklahoma particularly to university students. A good chance to collect signatures.

    One factor working in McAfee’s benefit is the rising issues of cyber crime, warfare and hacktivism. I doubt any other candidate can speak to how we protect networks while not breaking the freedom of the internet.

  68. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 28, 2015

    Shivany Lane wrote:

    I am over qualified for many of the jobs I apply for and they always choose the man. This cannot be coincidence. The industry need a kick in the arse. The first real programmer was a woman.

    There is definitely gender discrimination in programmer hiring. This is starting to be corrected in the free market. First, the male only culture tends to be one of competition rather than collaboration, which is not an optimal environment for software development. Second, women programmers are an undervalued resource; therefore, entrepreneurs can hire women more cost effectively and will make higher profits than their discriminatory peers.

    I met one of the first woman programmers through a good high school friend, who was the granddaughter of John Mauchley (ENIAC inventor) and Kay McNulty (ENIAC programmer). Kay was a wonderful person… super-nice and interesting. There has been gender discrimination in computer science hiring and credit for contributions since the early days.

    My mom taught computer science for 40 years. She was paid less than her male counterparts. She was repeatedly denied interviews even though she was overqualified — because the hiring committee was intimidated by her ivy league education. Finally she had to leave her doctorate off her CV to sneak through the first pass, then have friends get the academic dean to demand that she be interviewed. She also had to leave her first Ph.D. program because her advisor refused to grant a degree to a woman.

    I’ve witnessed a lot of discrimination over the years, but I don’t believe government is the solution. Cultural shaming and free market incentives will get the job done in the long term.

  69. langa langa December 28, 2015

    The Austrian individuals you referred to other than Hitler were Jewish. They were in fact refugees from Hitler. Unlike Hitler, who advocated and practiced big government (including “public works”), they advocated minimizing government both in the economic and social spheres, domestically as well as internationally, the opposite of Hitler’s big government policies. While I don’t think anyone should be expected to agree with every single thing in the LP platform – for example, I personally disagree with the last sentence of the immigration plank – it’s also rather bizarre to expect that the LP would ignore the main thrust of our platform on economic issues in picking a presidential candidate.

    These are all excellent points. And I will reiterate that the essay I linked to was written by Frederic Bastiat, who was French, not Austrian, and who died approximately 80 years before Hitler came to power. So, even if all that bizarre stuff about the Mises Institute were true, it still has nothing to do with Bastiat’s essay, or the ideas contained therein.

  70. langa langa December 28, 2015

    If Wikipedia is wrong, then correct it. Anyone can you know. I have corrected it many times. That is the point of Wikipedia, it is a crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

    No, thanks. I have tried “correcting” things on Wikipedia in the past, and that experience has taught me that I have far better things to do than engage in protracted flame wars with people who have an ax to grind, and wish to use Wikipedia to do so. Instead, I will leave the editing to others, and simply remind you (and everyone else) to take whatever they read there with a grain of salt.

    People can disagree on issues without making them personal, apparently you are incapable of that…

    Honestly, I think if you ask any of the longtime readers and commenters here, they will tell you that I am capable of being quite civil. On the other hand, I am also capable of being quite rude (more so than I have been on this thread). Generally, I try to treat people with the same level of respect that they treat me. Also, I am a very blunt person. I tend to say what I mean, and mean what I say. You, on the other hand, appear to display some rather passive-aggressive tendencies, which, I will admit, I find rather irritating. Politeness and civility are good if they are genuine — but I have no patience for them if they are merely feigned.

  71. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 28, 2015

    tk, yes, but when things started to swing, the State facilitated/forced the issue of same-gender marriage. There are still today a very large segment of the pop who oppose these marriages as a legal matter. Once the issue was identified as righteous AND garnered strong minorities, the State’s apparatus flipped away from the status quo, rather quickly, I’d say.

    Are same-gender marriages legal in Rojava? My quick research elicited no hits on the subject.

  72. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 28, 2015

    RC,

    The point I was trying to make to Shivany was that the state tends to act in a way that conserves the cultural status quo.

    It didn’t really MATTER what Obama or Clinton REALLY thought about same-sex marriage. They were in the same position as FDR when he told a delegation asking him for some kind of action, “OK, you’ve convinced me — now go out and bring pressure on me.” It didn’t matter what he thought. Like all smart politicians, even though he tried hard to LOOK like a leader, he was actually a slavish follower of public consensus.

    The state is the last, not the first, institution to get behind cultural change. So Shivany’s implicit argument that we need the state to get rid of e.g. sexism and ageism has it exactly backward. The state will only really be against those things only once it’s apparent that everyone ELSE is against those things.

  73. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 28, 2015

    tk: The political establishment, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, publicly endorsed and supported maintaining that evil rule right up to the minute that it became obvious we were going to destroy it.

    me: True as far as it goes. I think the more interesting question is why did BO and HC hold the positions they did? And did either of them really, truly object to same-gender marriages?

    I’d say they probably didn’t. They instead probably took the pulse of the electorate and sensed that same-gender marriage was still far too unpopular. The “evil rule” was a longstanding social norm that was for centuries a widely accepted one.

    Now that doesn’t make it “right,” of course, but it does make it understandable. The opening up of the marriage institution to same-gender couples took a relatively short amount of time for certain states to see the light, and then ultimately for the Supremes to concur.

    I don’t think it’s wise for elected pols to lead on taboo matters. It’s not in their nature. Their nature is to representatives, not vanguard figures.

  74. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: me
    Date: Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:44 PM
    Subject: Re: John McAfee at LPAL/LPMS convention, Oklahoma events
    To: Leigh LaChine , Tina Lou , edjetshow@gmail.com

    CCed address – Algernon Edjetshow, is working with John McAfee campaign seeking our presidential nomination. They are looking to schedule John McAfee as a speaker or part of a panel of candidates at events such as state conventions and Liberty on Tap. We had a phone conversation and they would be interested in the Alabama/Mississippi convention as well as Liberty on Tap events in OKC and Tulsa (January would be best if the speakers have not been scheduled yet), Oklahoma convention if/when one is scheduled, and other LP/liberty crowds to address. The number Algernon called me from was 813-495-5440 in Florida, and the email is copied in the address field above.

    http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/mcafee-will-run-for-the-libertarian-party-presidential-nomination

  75. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    Now as to your other point I admit it was a low blow bringing Herr Hitler into the argument, however, very few people I know who come from Austria admit it. They say Germany or Belgium. Maybe it’s because I am old and WWII is still a memory for me and them.

    The Austrian individuals you referred to other than Hitler were Jewish. They were in fact refugees from Hitler. Unlike Hitler, who advocated and practiced big government (including “public works”), they advocated minimizing government both in the economic and social spheres, domestically as well as internationally, the opposite of Hitler’s big government policies. While I don’t think anyone should be expected to agree with every single thing in the LP platform – for example, I personally disagree with the last sentence of the immigration plank – it’s also rather bizarre to expect that the LP would ignore the main thrust of our platform on economic issues in picking a presidential candidate.

  76. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    If Wikipedia is wrong, then correct it. Anyone can you know. I have corrected it many times. That is the point of Wikipedia, it is a crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

    If you quote wikipedia or any other source please include links to the actual articles so that they can be seen in context and corrected by those who choose to engage in correcting wikipedia articles (I personally don’t, but some here do).

  77. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    Also they promised to put me in touch with John McAfee, so we should be able to schedule an interview as well.

  78. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    Langa,

    I think you are probably a lovely person irl.
    Forums tend to bring out the worst in people.
    I read a large portion of the post you gave me. I apologize that I am getting old and cant digest large amounts of test that have no references in them. So I went to Wikipedia.

    If Wikipedia is wrong, then correct it. Anyone can you know. I have corrected it many times. That is the point of Wikipedia, it is a crowd-sourced encyclopedia.

    Now as to your other point I admit it was a low blow bringing Herr Hitler into the argument, however, very few people I know who come from Austria admit it. They say Germany or Belgium. Maybe it’s because I am old and WWII is still a memory for me and them.

    People can disagree on issues without making them personal, apparently you are incapable of that so this is the last one I will make to you.

    Mentally Ill is a condition to only be determined by a psychiatrist, is that your profession?
    Unhinged, usually means I went full Godwin on you, which I did not and blathered nonsense, which again I did not.

    In another political forum I belong to, the community has a say in who has to stand in the corner for a day or two to cool down their rhetoric. This commenting system is too simplistic for that so I am self regulating myself since it appears as though the community would rather I not shed any light on one of your Candidates.

    Love him or Hate him, wouldn’t you prefer to make an informed decision as intelligent people do. You are an intelligent person are you not, langa? I wish you would just apologize, but I know pwoplw like you and you never back down so I am not holding my breath.

    My offer still stands that anyone who wants to email me personally may do so. I say early on that you may not want to ask your question in this forum lest you be run over by the bullies.

    And yes, I am not “special” because I know how to use the command line. On the other hand, I do not run around yelling fire when the server is spinning out of control because some rookie made and endless loop and caused it to spin out of control. I use my trusty command line and stop the process.

  79. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    Just had a call from the McAfee campaign. It said they are in fact planning to do various state and local events so the “no personal appearances” thing referred to above must be outdated, assuming of course the call was what it purported to be, and I will assume it was unless I have reason to believe otherwise. They asked me about hooking them up with events in Alabama, Mississippi and Oklahoma.

  80. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    TLK, I think you got your threads crossed.

  81. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 28, 2015

    FYI,

    For anyone reading the lyrics posted by steve m above and thinking he’s a racist troll, nota bene: Those are sarcastic lyrics by one of the founding members of Rock Against Racism, the Tom Robinson Band (early punk era).

  82. paulie paulie December 28, 2015

    langa get hell out of my corner…

    Sorry…what does that mean?

    are my comments being censored?

    No, and langa’s won’t be either. Warren did forward the complaint to the writers/editors team here, and it’s unanimous.

    i ask because I have typed a couple of comments TWICE!

    Not seeing anything in spam, sorry.

  83. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 28, 2015

    Shivany,

    Yes, institutional sexism and ageism do still exist. They’ve always existed, and they probably will always exist.

    BUT!

    Political government is always “conservative” in the sense that it tends to support the social status quo. Every movement for freedom and every movement for legal equality has always been opposed by that status quo, and has had to BEAT the state to make things better.

    As an example, take marriage apartheid. The political establishment, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, publicly endorsed and supported maintaining that evil rule right up to the minute that it became obvious we were going to destroy it. Then they suddenly changed positions 180 degrees.

    You’ve mentioned libertarian “utopia” a time or two already. There’s no such thing. There will always be social ills. And the state will always do its damnedest to maintain, extend and enhance those social ills. Getting the state out the way wont magically fix everything, but it will make it a lot easier to fix things.

    Just for fun, try watching McAfee’s interview on Anarchast and apply what he says about governments as such to every issue you can think of:

    http://anarchast.com/front/2015/2/2/anarchast-ep-193-john-mcafee-everyone-is-spying-on-you.html

  84. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 28, 2015

    sl: No economic system is perfect. We are people. We have souls, emotions, free will. You can not apply a bunch of theories and calculations to predict what we will do.

    me: Yes, makes sense to me. And therein lies the problem with governments attempting to manipulate the economy, including “make work” projects.

    At this point, government already has “created” plenty of “make work” projects, as there’s a huge, embedded political class whose livelihood is funded by taxpayers.

    Myths about political economic history sometimes seem to make sense on the surface. With a little patience, I’m pretty sure you may find it eye-opening to see that there are other sides to the story.

    Repeating what you were taught in school assumes that what we were taught in school is the best interpretation. I’m convinced otherwise.

  85. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 28, 2015

    andy 1: We want to abolish all of these things [Social Security, government welfare, make work]

    andy 2: Robert, I favor phasing out Social Security which leads to its abolition.

    me: To me and to most I suspect, “abolition” or “abolish” connotes ending something immediately. I’d submit that in the US, when we use the word “abolition,” most think of the Abolitionists, who advocated the immediate end to slavery.

  86. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    langa get hell out of my corner… are my comments being censored? i ask because I have typed a couple of comments TWICE!

  87. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    Langa get the hell out of my corner

  88. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    Shivany, we here on IPR and the rest of the world doesn’t owe you an easy life. I haven’t had one. I made my own way. I am highly sympathetic to people who also are working hard to make theirs. I am not so sympathetic that a knowledge of the command line makes you important,

  89. langa langa December 28, 2015

    Reported your posts as being inflammatory, bullying and not adding to the conversation.

    Oh, no! I hope the teacher doesn’t make me stand in the corner!

  90. langa langa December 28, 2015

    I am not mentally ill.

    Your comments here say otherwise. Either that, or you’re going for the Troll of the Year Award.

    Whatever happened to the polite society I grew up in where opposing points of view discussed things rather than called each other names?

    Oh, you mean polite like implying that anyone born in Austria must be like Hitler? Or maybe polite like insinuating that Southerners would be more likely to believe something if it were couched in racist terms? Or maybe you mean polite like slandering the scholars at the Mises Institute, who have done far more to promote the goals you claim to believe in (like peace and freedom) than John McAfee has ever done, or likely ever will do. Yes, you’re very polite, huh?

    The so called essay you linked to was not very well written for general consumption and quite frankly is was TLDR;

    Translation: You’re either too lazy to read it, too dumb to understand it, or more likely, both.

    Dispute the points I made.

    What points? You threw out a pile of lies, stereotypes, and half-baked conspiracy theories, none of which had a single thing to do with the article I posted. There wasn’t a single iota of substance in there — just a lot of deranged rambling.

  91. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    Ah Yes, The Party of Personal Responsibility at it’s finest.

    I have been civil and nice until I started being attacked. So when one attacks another, whose responsibility is that? Mine because I left myself open to attack, or yours because you can’t help but be mean and snarky… You decide.

  92. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    dothis -h

    how hard is it to learn?

  93. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    Well Shivany if you cant compete… is it my problem or yours?

  94. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    Such a compassionate and empathetic human being.

    I will remember this the next time I have to teach a new programmer making more money than me how to use a command line.

    Thank you for playing.

    Are you all mean an d nasty or only a few of you?? Just saying.

  95. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    The universities have not failed us. Their focus is teaching technology not history. While history is useful it is not mandatory for the next technology leap.

  96. steve m steve m December 28, 2015

    Shvany Lane, I have worked in silicon valley and have been in charge of development teams for various high tech start ups.

    Yes there is an age and sex bias. But it can be overcome and I have specifically sought out skilled programmers whom others would have ignored.

    I also have experienced starting my own company. Which is what I recommend to others. The upfront costs are low and the potential rewards high.

    So stop blaming others and focus on what you can achieve.

  97. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    William,

    Write to me personally, I will see that he at least is made aware of it. Can’t promise anything but at least he will know its there

  98. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    lynga -> Reported your posts as being inflammatory, bullying and not adding to the conversation. I hope you enjoy your miserable life.

  99. William Saturn William Saturn December 28, 2015

    “Ask him a question or many questions. He loves it. He will answer you.”

    No he won’t. I tried to do an e-mail interview with him back in September. Bottom line: it never happened.

  100. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    langa,

    Wow. Just Wow.

    Actually I got that quote from Wikipedia. Maybe that makes me stupid, but not unhinged.
    I am not mentally ill.
    Whatever happened to the polite society I grew up in where opposing points of view discussed things rather than called each other names?

    The so called essay you linked to was not very well written for general consumption and quite frankly is was TLDR;

    langa, I have no idea who you are, just as you have no idea who I am. It is not only extremely rude to call a person unhinged and mentally ill because they do not agree with your point of view, it also shows a certain amount of ignorance and lack of argumentative skills..

    Dispute the points I made. Then go and correct Wikipedia.

    I will not be bullied by someone who hides behind an anonymous moniker on a less that efficient forum. Is that how you win arguments? By Bullying. There is another person I can think of who does that, Donald Trump. Maybe you should go work on his campaign.

    Public discourse has no room in my book for name calling and bullying.I will no longer reply to any of your posts. You clearly just wish to harass and bully me. I don’t have time for such things.

    You necro’d an economist who is over a century old whose theories were never really put into practice to make your point. That is a straw man argument. Do you have any other tricks you do? Can you balance a ball on your nose while reciting Meine Kampf?

  101. langa langa December 28, 2015

    I am over qualified for many of the jobs I apply for and they always choose the man.

    Perhaps they have a bias against hiring the mentally ill…

  102. langa langa December 28, 2015

    After reading Shivany Lane’s bizarre rant about the Mises Institute, it should be plainly obvious to everyone here at IPR that she is either mentally unhinged, some sort of LP infiltrator, or both.

    If she were really interested in helping McAfee get the LP nomination and/or spread the basic libertarian message, then she would have actually read the essay I linked to (which was written by a Frenchman, not an Austrian, who died almost 100 years before WWII), rather than trying to deflect with some beyond absurd conspiracy theory that sounds like something the neocons at The Weekly Standard would come up with, if they had been dosed with a staggering quantity of hallucinogenics.

    In any event, if Mr. McAfee is anywhere near as clueless and delusional as Ms. Lane, he would be, by far, the worst candidate in LP history (and yes, that includes Bob Barf).

  103. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 28, 2015

    I am by nature a loving, loyal positive person. For the longest time I did not believe there was a gender/age bias.
    Then I found myself interviewing again in the work force. First off, no one wants to work with their mom.
    Second off, many men still believe we can’t develop software,
    Third off the young men interviewing me are younger than my children and have no idea what I am talking about.

    The Universities have failed us. They teach the latest and greatest technologies and neglect to teach the foundation that got us there. Some of them ask questions I knew straight out of school but never used in the real world. Also many developers have never seen a command line. Have no idea how the Full Stack works and could not plug the holes in their buggy software even if they admitted that ….heavens to Betsy….they made a mistake.

    I had one guy interview me just to ask me about John McAfee. He had no interest in me whatsoever and he had already made his decision.

    My real name is ambiguous, could be either Gender. I get these phone calls asking for me. When they find out me is a girl, they ask like 2 questions and hang up.

    I am over qualified for many of the jobs I apply for and they always choose the man. This cannot be coincidence. The industry need a kick in the arse. The first real programmer was a woman.

  104. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 28, 2015

    Sorry your work life hasn’t been rewarding lately, Shivany. I hope you find a job soon.

    I suppose I discriminate against men in my small business because I like to hire women who could use a new start. I train them and get them licensed in a field that will be around a few years. It really is possible for women “of a certain age” to get employment.

    You might not be in the process of being discriminated against because of your gender. I’m in CA also, although, I’m in Southern CA. There simply are more applicants than jobs. My highly educated husband has been out of work for 5 years.

  105. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    Andy (the non post one)

    It’s a dirty job but someone has to do it.

    All I ask is that before you pass judgement on John, listen to him. Ask him a question or many questions. He loves it. He will answer you.

    I am not as well educated or eloquent as he is. I grew up on the streets. My “refinement” didn’t happen until around 19 so please forgive some of my transgressions.

    Of course in your world, I would be dead. So never mind.

  106. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    Thomas Knapp,

    Thank you, I appreciate your honesty and tolerance.

    If you have been following the John McAfee that I have been following then you will know that to his core he lives and breathes the purest Libertarian ideals. I have often told him he was a libertarian to which he would smile and say, maybe, but I don’t do politics.

    You should think of this as a gift. Who in your ranks has the name recognition and personal connections to be in front of the American Public? Who among your ranks can speak eloquently about Abraham Lincoln and what he meant to this country then shift seamlessly to a more modern topic? If you have someone, bring him on.

    There are many stories and many theories as to why John liquidated all his assets and moved to Belize. The most common one is because he was being sued. On a side note, McAfee believes that lawsuits like those are a pox on our society. It will not bring your dead relative back and seriously, is 2 million dollars the price of your grief? Who in their right mind can put a price on grief. The accident he was being sued for happened when his nephew and another man went out flying one of their trike gliders. They both were killed. It happens. Dangerous sport means you risk dying, life is not Disneyland.

    John was distraught at the loss of his nephew. More importantly, he had grown weary of being sued for every little thing just because he had money. So he liquidated for pennies on the dollar and moved to Belize. He was led to believe that in Belize he would would be free. No wiretaps or government intrusion. None of the stupid politically correct laws. Just go there, buy a slice of Paradise and live as you wish as long as you don’t hurt anyone. Is that not the core belief of the Libertarian?

    It all went south when the government tried to elicit a bribe from him.he said no and if you enter my property again I will shoot you. Is this not a Libertarian ideal??

    The Gang Control Unit was dispatched to rough his compound up, handcuff him for many hours in the sun without food or water, break everything in his lab and then for good measure, just so you knew they meant business, shoot his dog in front of him. They carted him to jail on a trumped up charge which was resolved the next day.

    Then while he was still grieving the loss of his dog and trying to put his compound back together, the original bribe asker showed up and said, now will you donate. He refused again. Even in the face of possibly losing his life and everything he owned he stuck to his core Libertarian values!!!

    Thus began the fued between John and the Belize government. It is all well documented.

    Footnote: John had a lab because one of his company idea was to create antibiotics from jungle plants thus usurping the out of control big pharma. John has always been a man of the people. He just doesn’t brag about it. It is just who he is.

    Now I am going to try to be productive and apply for jobs that likely will dismiss me because of age and gender. But then isn’t that situation all part of your platform? To make it ok to discriminate for employment because you have gotten rid of Big Bad Government’s rules against that.

    I will be thinking of you all as I get my rejection letters. And how your Utopian society will not include me.

  107. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Wow, twisted history & philosophy “lesson” from Shivany Lane. That was really creative. I will give you that.

  108. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    Oh great, another guy trying to sell us on Republican retread ideas.

    So not interested.

  109. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    Tom,

    ==Well, the question is, is he “playing the game” — just telling us what we want to hear — or is he an imperfect supporter of the Libertarian Party’s principles who will make an honest effort to get more consistent about that?===

    I think most candidates just tell us what we want to hear. Whether that is him or not, I don’t know. It was meant more of a positive… at least he isn’t coming in thinking he is going to school all the Libertarians on what they should believe… unlike someone else. That was all I was saying.

  110. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    Jill, you make an excellent point and I agree with your sentiment. I also know that only a percentage of those taxes will go to the war machine. If there were a way to separate them, I would. The exercise was more to display the circle of how economics basically works, not to impart all the nuances that go along with it. But your point is well taken. Personally I do not have a problem paying my property taxes knowing that it goes to improve the schools and my neighborhood.

    Now to langa….

    OK, so let me understand where we are with this. There is an old Austrian economist who came up with a theory for Austrian economics, BTW Hitler was Austrian too, and some organization has commandeered his writings and teachings and located them in… wait for it… Alabama?

    Through this organization let us take a look at what they have accomplished thus far.

    Baron Von Mises (key Austrian Economist who invented praxxing), Baron Von Hayek (nobel prize winning Austrian Economist), and and Kaiser Von Habsburg (would-be emperor) all knew each other and all were Austrian Nobility at one point or another. They all hated FDR for refusing their requests to use American power to reinstate the Austrian nobility/monarchy after WWII. They put this institute to work combating his ideas placing it in the deep south to win over disillusioned racists to libertarianism, but also to inspire a new right-libertarianism.
    How do you get southerners, who have a long-standing rebellious streak, generally few wealthy areas, and strong opposition to banking establishments and trading floors, to want to deregulate Wall Street? These things are not in their best interests. To that end, Mises embarked on “Christian Reconstructionism”, marrying neo-confederate author Gary North to Rousas Rushdoony’s daughter. Rousas Rushdoony is the founder of christian reconstructionism, a movement which seeks to take the finer points of Calvinism and insert that into Southern Baptism
    So they’re actively working from multiple angles to combine racism with wealth worship and empirical science denial. Use fuzzy libertarian math to prove that segregation is good and millionaires are great and the poor (read: black) deserve to suffer. Now, get church to re-enforce that message, and bam, you’ve got “The Republican South” for the first time ever.

    And thus began the roots of what we know now as the Tea Party. You didn’t embrace them so they went to the next big thing, the Republicans. Now, turn on your television and see what they built with all that energy, The current Republican Clown car with Billionaire Donald Trump driving towards the cliff. You break it, you own it.

    No economic system is perfect. We are people. We have souls, emotions, free will. You can not apply a bunch of theories and calculations to predict what we will do.So just quit it, while you are ahead, stop fighting each other and learn to get along and create a tent for everyone rather than your umbrella which apparently is only for the “cool kids”

  111. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    I followed Nolan, Badnarik, and Russo in the build up to 2004 National Convention, and I thought that all three of them were “libertarian enough” to be the nominee.

  112. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Government make work programs do not stimulate the economy. Government does not produce anything. It takes resources from the public via taxes, fines, fees, and currency inflation.

    If people want to build something they should raise the money through voluntary means.

    Also, government construction jobs are known to be filled with waste and fraud.

  113. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 27, 2015

    Caryn,

    Well, the question is, is he “playing the game” — just telling us what we want to hear — or is he an imperfect supporter of the Libertarian Party’s principles who will make an honest effort to get more consistent about that?

    I assume that there are still videos available somewhere of the 2004 debates between Aaron Russo, Michael Badnarik and Gary Nolan.

    When it came to talking the talk, the candidate whose answers to questions and arguments on issues most closely comported with the LP’s platform and statement of principles was, hands down, Gary Nolan.

    Russo and Badnarik both deviated significantly from the platform on various issues.

    Russo was, to be honest, something of a loose cannon. Hit him with an issue that he hadn’t thoroughly thought out, and he’d just throw out some personal idea on it. In particular, at the convention debate, he got way out into the weeds on foreign policy, referring favorably to “police actions,” even though he had previously positioned himself as the peace candidate, when he stumbled on a question.

    Badnarik argued one position (not the platform position) on abortion until shortly before the national convention, then unveiled a different position (not the platform position) in an interview published in a newspaper distributed AT the national convention, before switching to the platform position, word for word, a month or two AFTER the convention.

    Nolan was a good speaker, he knew the platform cold, his answers and arguments were always, as best I can remember, platform compliant … and yet he placed third of the three candidates on the first two ballots.

    Why? Because quite a few LP members didn’t TRUST him.

    My working premise vis a vis McAfee is that he seems to be a straight shooter and that others will likely agree as they “get to know him.”

    And if he is a straight shooter, and if he is philosophically libertarian, he’ll convincingly correct his campaign platform as the convention gets closer. Hopefully earlier than, say, Russo or Badnarik did.

    If he’s not the real deal, we should know THAT by convention time too.

  114. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 27, 2015

    Shivani, there was a sentence you forgot to put into your “happy country, happy citizen” story above. I’ve added it for you below in italics:

    “Joe is lucky enough to get a job with the Big Bad Wolf (Government). He works hard all day while his wife stays home tending to the children. Joe comes home on Friday with a paycheck. An honest wage for an honest days work. But first, he must have 20 to 30 % taken out of his check so the government can make those jobs, among other things like murdering people in other countries, which makes it so that his paycheck now won’t pay all his family bills, so he needs to use credit cards to make ends meet.”

  115. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    I meant to write 3/4 of the planet. I would revise it to probably 7/8 to be realistic.

    Shivany drops the mic and walks off stage….

  116. langa langa December 27, 2015

    Where is your economics degree from langa?

    Understanding the folly of “public works” programs requires no formal economic knowledge at all. It merely requires a modicum of common sense. If you lack that, you could try reading this:

    https://mises.org/library/which-seen-and-which-not-seen

    I think you will find it rather eye-opening.

  117. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    ==The McAfee campaign says “My Presidential platform is 100% compatible with the Libertarian Party principles.”==

    He said “compatible with” not identical to. A guy has a right to tweak the words a little. This is after all not only his first run for President, it is his first Foray into the “Mad Max” style pit we call politics.

    And principles. Your basic principles are his. Basically, leave me the fuck alone. Don’t spy on me, don’t arrest me for what I do in my own house with my own self, and maybe we should reboot the government since it is dysfunctional.

    He is a techie, always has been. He thinks analytically. While his mind can race faster than probably over 2/4 of the planet. He just announced what 2 days ago? He doesn’t actually manage his website, his campaign does. Cut him a little slack so he can get up to speed on what to do next.

    Some of you are being brutal. Only a hardcore Libertarian is going to agree with every word of your platform. That makes them a sycophant. John is not a sycophant and he does not like having them around. He values free thinkers, free doers. .So lets give him a break and let him get home before bashing him around OK???????

  118. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    ==The McAfee campaign says “My Presidential platform is 100% compatible with the Libertarian Party principles.”==

    Well at least he plays the game. Unlike someone else who says they openly repudiate it and is all shocked when Libertarians repudiate him.

  119. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 27, 2015

    Andy,

    Your “Libertarian Zone” idea is interesting.

    We don’t live in your “Libertarian Zones.”

    If you don’t favor freedom for everyone, you don’t favor freedom.

  120. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    The people who wrote the Liberland Constitution (Liberland is an attempt to create a libertarian country in Europe) included a BAN on communists, Nazis, and theocrats in Liberland.

    So the people behind Liberland agree with me, and disagree with Tom Knapp’s ridiculous and delusion assertion that the ideology of the people entering the territory that you occupy does not matter.

    Either ideology matters, as I say it does, or ideology does not matter, which means that there is no difference between a libertarian or a socialist or a communist or a theocrat, and that all views should be accepted, and people holding these views should be made registered voters, so they have a chance to achieve political power.

    I say surround yourself with ideological libertarians, and you will have a libertarian society. Surround yourself with socialists, communists, and theocrats, and you will not have a libertarian society.

    So accept the libertarians and repel everyone else.

    How do you do this? Through an enforceable contract. Do a search for The Libertarian Zone on this site.

  121. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    How old are you and when did you grow up and where????

    The so-called “make work” programs started during the great depression. Where in the hell do you think things like the Hoover Dam,and many of our existing hospitals, public roads, airports and bridges came from?!

    Do you think they fell from the sky?

    Where is your economics degree from langa? You go try and live in a country that has less of an infrastructure than we do and tell me that the “make work” projects were a waste of money.

    OK children here is your basic economics lesson for today:
    Joe is lucky enough to get a job with the Big Bad Wolf (Government). He works hard all day while his wife stays home tending to the children. Joe comes home on Friday with a paycheck. An honest wage for an honest days work. Mrs. Joe goes to the grocery store, or in your world the local produce stand. She buys food for her family. Because we all know that with proper nutrition her children will grow up strong and healthy.
    The produce stand either pays his supplier or keeps that money for himself which he goes and spends on a new tractor. The tractor manufacturer is now able to source many jobs like the people who he employs and all the suppliers who supply him with goods and services. When the tractor is delivered, Mr. Tractor builder is able to easily deliver it to Mr. Farmer because Joe helped build a mighty fine bridge. This cut Mr. Tractor’s delivery time in half so he has more money to invest in his business or hire new workers.

    This, is called the free market and capitalism in it’s plainest form. Now I will agree with you that the CEO of say, GM, makes an insane amount of money and he produces absolutely nothing. That is a crime.

    Leave the little guy alone and let him just live his life. Government jobs have proven time and time again to stimulate a stagnant economy. Or would you rather people like me just die? And my children just die? Because I do not fit in your little Utopian Society.

  122. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    And as I also explained to trolling again last time trolling again trolled up this lie about the law of nations:

    “law of nations” is yet another canard in trying to imagine a power for Congress that it never had, and migration in this context refers to the same people as “importation,” i.e. those referred to by the interstate commerce clause at the time. It’s a reference to bringing slaves across state lines, as some states were already outlawing slavery. Someone is spreading lies and bullshit here alright, but it isn’t me.

  123. langa langa December 27, 2015

    “Public works” programs, by definition, involve paying people to provide goods or services for which there is little to no demand (or at the very least, insufficient demand to make the task a profitable one). It is hard to imagine how such activities could possibly help the economy, or how someone being paid for such work could be considered anything other than a burden.

  124. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    As Andy Craig already explained to trolling again;

    It doesn’t fall under “law of nations” because it’s a matter of domestic law. Piracy, or attacking another nation, etc.– those are “offenses against the law of nations” because it is an action that embroils the United States in hostilities with another nation. Prohibiting immigration has nothing to do with that, whether we do it or not it isn’t a question of “law of nations,” outside of whatever ratified treaty obligations may apply.

  125. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    trolling again is trolling again. The law of nations canard was addressed previously.

  126. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 27, 2015

    “trying again” — it’s odd that you write so well, given your demonstrated inability to read.

  127. trying again trying again December 27, 2015

    Mr. Knapp is straight-up lying about the US Constitution, which gives the US Congress the power to restrict migration as part of its powers to define and punish offences against the law of nations, with the caveat that such power be held in abeyance to the year 1808.

    Perhaps Mr. Knapp is a senile time traveller from 1795. More likely he is an ignorant ideologue willing to lie in order to work backwards to his desired policy conclusion.

  128. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Yeah, I believe in peaceful people crossing borders, unlike yourself, who believes that socialists, communists, and religious theocrats should come right and and destroy what is left of freedom in this country.

    Tom Knapp is a suicide pact “libertarian.” Any socialist parasite, communist gun grabber, or religious theocrat totalitarian is welcome in Tom Knapp suicide land.

    I make a distiction between peaceful people, ie-libertarians, and everyone else.

  129. trying again trying again December 27, 2015

    The McAfee lady may not understand the meaning of “make-work.” Very very few people are in favor of the govt [paying people to dig ditches and then fill them in again. Most everybody when talking about govt-sponsored jobs are thinking of something like building infrastructure projects, which would at the least add some capital to the economy. (That it may or may not be the most efficient way to build physical capital is a legitimate point of debate, of course.)

  130. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 27, 2015

    Quoth Andy,

    “Robert, I favor phasing out Social Security which leads to its abolition. This is not McAfee’s platform plank on Social Security.”

    And you favor conditioning people’s right to travel across gang turf lines on them agreeing with you about the meaning of the Constitution (which, as it happens, forbids the federal government to condition people’s right to travel across those lines at all).

    Libertarians, and John McAfee, disagree with you.

    About the only thing I’m certain we can all agree on is that there are very few perfectly libertarian libertarians. Basically just me and the handful of people who agree with me in every particular on every issue 😀

  131. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Robert, I favor phasing out Social Security which leads to its abolition.

    This is not McAfee’s platform plank on Social Security.

  132. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 27, 2015

    @Shivany

    No problem, and site design is not my bailiwick.

    As for make-work stimulus and the like: I don’t think there are many self-professed libertarians (and even fewer Libertarians) who would agree with that. Libertarianism is founded on free-market small-government classical-liberal economics as one of its core elements. Five libertarians have won the Nobel Prize in economics. More-so than any other field its is probably the biggest bastion of libertarianism in academia. A plurality if not a majority of foundational 20th C. libertarian thinkers have been economists of one sort of another. A lot of that– going back to the Great Depression and before– has been about debunking and disproving those sorts of economic fallacies. The first modern American libertarian movement institution was founded in 1946, under the name the Foundation for Economic Education. That’s not a coincidence. There is no libertarianism- at least not in the American and LP sense- without that. There are dividing lines among the party and movement as to which particular school of free-market economics is superior (Austrian, Chicago, etc.)— but almost by definition all libertarians have some affinity for one or more of them, and they all reject the sorts of economic theories you’re talking about.

    It’s certainly possible for a candidate to go into a convention arguing in favor of Keynesian stimulus spending and mandates for employer-based health insurance, but don’t expect a very warm reception. That was pretty much the mistake Mike Gravel made. A famous Senator, well-known from the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, who had started off seeking another-party nomination and made some name for himself at it in spite of being known as…. somewhat eccentric, shall we put it. He went into the convention talking about government-provided healthcare and the virtues of majoritarian democracy, and as I recall also the need for stimulus spending and the welfare state. He just really didn’t give an impression that he was even familiar enough with our positions to know when he was disagreeing with them. Being anti-war and a civil libertarian and in favor of personal liberty on ‘social’ isssues is great, but that’s not all there is to it. Long story short: the nominally highest-ranking elected official, and one of the bigger names, to ever seek the LP nomination got 11% and 4th place, losing to what was probably the least-popular and most-regretted ticket ever nominated.

  133. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 27, 2015

    sl, Andy is confused. The LP platform says this:

    “Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system.”

    That, thankfully, is not “abolition.”

  134. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Andy Craig,

    My deepest apologies. No offense but this forum really sucks for following a conversation.
    I am used to the ones that nest. It makes it easier to ignore the ones you don’t care about and follow the ones you do.

    As a lifelong developer, those types of UI mistakes irritate me.

    So please accept my apologies. Want some chocolate? It’s atisian 🙂

  135. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 27, 2015

    Just so we’re clear, you’re speaking to two different Andys.

  136. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Andy

    As a freedom loving individual, I can agree and get behind most of your platform. John does not receive Social Security as far as I know. Nor has he ever taken part in a make work kind of program. He is a self made man. He has earned and lost more money that most people even can fathom.

    Social Security is a stickler for me personally. While I can get behind you abolishing it, I feel that you would be punishing those of us who have paid into it. However, if you paid each of us one lump sum equal to our share then that would be ok and I would invest it in the free market. I know that you have strong beliefs that may not be shared by a large part of the population, however, you can soften the blow by finishing the thought so that they will not feel cheated.

    I would have to respectfully disagree with you about make work programs not stimulating the economy. It has been proven by Economists much brighter than I am, that it does. It is a short term patch, agreed. However, a job is more than just a paycheck. A job is your dignity, A job is feeling like you contribute to a community. Humans are pack animals. We need that interaction and we need to feel we are not a burden.

    If you live near Northern California I would love to meet with you and we can discuss these things.

    What is your position on Healthcare? Am I, as an unemployed, older person who has always relied on health insurance offered by my employer supposed to just die? I am not speaking metaphorically. One of the medications I take has withdrawal symptoms that would make me jump off a bridge and kill myself. And I am a pretty healthy person.

    It is all well and good to feel that individuals should be left the hell alone and get off my lawn while you are at it. Our country was not founded on those principles. We can rewrite the constitution, or pass an amendment declaring all papers written before, say the year 2000 to be null and void, in the grand scheme of things, you and my new party would be most unpopular.

    Read some Issac Asimov, The Foundation Trilogy, which is actually a Quadogy?, then come talk to me.

  137. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Andy,

    In answer to my affiliation to John. I was the person who volunteered to try and get him, and the Cyber Party where possible, onto the general election ballot. I am his friend. I also have done work for him on data analysis and research for many of his articles.

    Like all good data analyst/researchers… I know quite a bit about John, public and private.

    Like all super smart people, he is always going from one project to another. I am one of the people who helps him to make an idea into a product.

    I have no real affiliation to the campaign side. One of my frustrations has been that they (his campaign staff) would not return my emails. I am in Northern California and they are in Alabama.

    As far as traveling to the state conventions. I have no inside knowledge of that. I know he has the means to be able to. He is quite Healthy except for a persistent cough that flares up when he is indoors. In my opinion, I believe that if it is required for his nomination, he would show up.
    Security is a concern for him since there have been attempts on his life in the past so do not be surprised if he doesn’t stay in one place for a long time.

  138. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    FYI, Libertarians do not support the Social Security system, the government welfare system in general, or government make work programs. We want to abolish all of these things.

    Government make work programs do not stimulate the economy.

    We also favor legalizing all drugs, not just marijuana.

  139. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 27, 2015

    @Shivany

    You’re certainly welcome to comment here on IPR, and anything you have to add about McAfee’s candidacy from somebody who knows him personally is appreciated. He has a lot of people to convince if he wants the requisite majority support in the party, and I’m one of them, but I’m glad he’ll give it an attempt and either way I think it will hopefully spark some interest in the LP and its nomination process. As I said above, the baggage is too much for me, and I think his platform also needs some serious work….. but all things considered, I don’t think McAfee is the worst we can do (and I’d say we have done worse).

    Just out of curiosity though, do you have any actual affiliation with his campaign? Or just a friend?

    Also, there’s been some speculation here about if he plans to travel to state conventions and make personal appearances while seeking the nomination. Do you have any idea what his plans might be in that regard?

  140. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    Is it possible to get a better picture of John to be the top picture? That one makes him look bad. I have many pictures to choose from. Write me and I will send you one.

  141. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Andy,

    Have you read the constitution lately?

    You do know that the President really doesn’t have that much power right?

    Should John win at your convention, and holy hell win in the general, who do you think his staffers will be? The Libertarian Faithful. They will have the real power. It is sad how the American public blame Obama for so much when he has so little power.

    I will do my homework, thank you. I’m certain John already has. That interview was 2 years ago and he has only entered the political arena. Good Lord, give the man a week or two to read the materials before testing him.

  142. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    The website I built for making a mask of John’s face, similar to the Guy Fawkes mask associated with Anonymous, can be found at:

    http://iamjohnmcafee.org/

    It was a contest. I didn’t win because it took so bloody long to lay everything out. I am still not happy with it but it is close. Enjoy….

    Oh and I was planning on other things to add. I am the girl in the red silk pajamas wearing the mask. Not even close to John. He towers over me.

  143. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Paulie,

    Yes, even though my profession is in the tech field, my head was down and immersed in Perl code when all these new fangled, ferkata programs became popular. Please forgive me and my apologies in advance if anyone feels offended by my posts.

    This is an important event for, now since I joined, our party.A candidate for President should be well vetted. However, vetting takes an honest and scientific approach, not something your Uncle Saul says or you saw somewhere in a tabloid.

    My email address is shivanylanesl@gmail.com

    Anyone who would like to write to me personally, please feel free. I am not the foremost authority on John, however I do know quite a bit. I would be glad to have a civilized and intelligent conversation with any of you as I value all opinions and all people.

  144. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Leaning towards the Libertarian Party is not the same thing as being a libertarian.

    If one does not understand or know the Libertarian platform/philosophy, there is plenty of reading material about it online.

    Do some homework on the party & philosophy before declaring oneself as a candidate for the party’s nomination.

  145. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Paulie,

    My apologies. The comments in this forum are hard to follow.
    So the platform? I will need to look at that more closely.

    Your core beliefs he does share. There was an interview with him, maybe 2 years ago where he openly stated that of all the American parties, he leaned towards Libertarian. He has always stayed out of politics.

    Something happened that was a trigger for him to decide that if not now, when and if not him, who. That was when he announced his presidency. He chose his own party because he has people like me who will work our asses off to make it happen.

    The smarter choice, which I suggested in the beginning, was to choose an existing party. He chose you. That really should mean something. Apparently some of you do not know who John is. You listen to Fox, You watch sensationalism shows like dateline and say, aha, that is who he is.

    You couldn’t be further from the truth. Dateline is entertainment based loosely on fact. I could find an equal number of people in Belize who would say what a wonderful man he is. Of course they would do it off camera for fear of retaliation from the Government.

  146. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    Caryn, I don’t believe there’s been a woman as Chair of the LP,

    That was already covered above. There have been three actually, but all before 1993.

  147. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    @paulie,
    I am fairly new to this party…
    When you said:

    Since you are also fairly new to IPR, you may not have realized that the bracketed text above is a form of quoting what you are responding to. Or, perhaps you may be confusing the comments as being those of the person above whose name they appear, whereas in fact they are those of the person below whose name they appear. I already offered to consult with John on the platform; see above.

  148. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Andy

    You do know how to use the Google don’t you?

    Google my name. I am all over the internet.
    I have web pages and twitter accounts and probably a few older things that may be older than you.

    I am not John McAfee.

    I could only aspire to be as eloquent and well educated as he is.

  149. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    Andy said that, not me. I believe the reference was to the platform/issues stances.

  150. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 27, 2015

    Caryn, I don’t believe there’s been a woman as Chair of the LP, but many states have had or have female chairs. California has had at least two, to my recollection.

  151. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @paulie,
    I am fairly new to this party…
    When you said:

    It is too late for any candidate to modify their issue stances to be acceptably libertarian for convention delegates, at least in my opinion it should be.

    If a candidate doesn’t “get it” this close to the nomination then they probably should not be candidates.

    Please elaborate which part of IT does John McAfee not get?
    And I am not being snarky or confrontational. I know that about 90% of Americans know John only from what they have read or seen about him. Sound bytes on Fox news does not make a man, nor should it define him.

    So please @paulie, do go on…..

  152. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    I have got to wonder if Shivany Lane is John McAfee.

  153. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    @Jill He likes and values all women, short, tall, skinny, curvy. I think he prefers women he can actually bear hug with and not feel bones.

  154. Jill Pyeatt Jill Pyeatt December 27, 2015

    It’s nice to see that he likes curvy women–

  155. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    I watched the Dateline piece. I do not believe for a second he killed his neighbor. That one girlfriend of his though…

  156. Mark Axinn Mark Axinn December 27, 2015

    Of course it is Brett Pojunis in the photo.

    Kudos to Brett. Although he is not a favorite with the purist IPR crowd, he is clearly ahead of the curve on this one.

    Whether McAfee lasts to win in Orlando is another story, but Brett clearly wins the publicity award this week.

  157. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    Andy Craig,

    ==I”m not saying that broader disparity is good, of course. Most years we’ve had an all-male field, just like the Ds and Rs always did until very recently. Just that the LP isn’t really unique about that, and if anything we’re a bit better than the duopoly parties.==

    I think so too. But let me be really clear. I don’t care. I don’t play identity politics at all. I care about qualifications not biological or identity differences. Which is why I had no idea if there had ever been a female Chair. It is pretty irrelevant AFAICS but it was an interesting bit of trivia.

  158. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Very interesting interview with David Nolan posted by steve m. I always wondered who all was at that first LP meeting in Colorado.

    Another thing I’d really like to know is who was attended the first LP meeting in California. I know that Ed Clark was there, and he said that a FOIA request he did on himself back in the 1980’s revealed that there was a government plant who attended the first LP meeting in California, but the name of the plant was redacted. He said that everyone at that meeting remained active in the LP for years after this, which means the government plant who was at this meeting was a long term government plant in the LP. I’d like to see if we can find out who this rat is or was (if they are deceased) through a process of elimination, but we need a list of who all was at that meeting in order to do this. I suspect that this government plant was not working inside the party alone, and that the plants are still among us today (which is one of the reasons the party is not more successful, as in we have been, and are still being, internally sabotaged by government rats posing as Libertarians).

  159. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    From the way that picture looks, I think McAfee will be making appearances and conducting a legit campaign for the nomination.

    It’s a positive indication, but it takes more than just one appearance to make that determination.

  160. steve m steve m December 27, 2015

    http://www.freecolorado.com/colib/0111nolan.html

    “The original group of five was myself; my then-wife Susan (whom I’ve lost track of, but she dropped completely out of any activity in the Libertarian Party); a gentleman named Hue Futch, who lives up in Bailey, or at least did up until a few years ago, out in the mountains (I guess it’s not as far out in the mountains as it was 30 years ago — he’s surrounded by civilization now, which probably doesn’t please him as he’s kind of a mountain-man type); a college student named Dale Nelson, who disappeared shortly thereafter and has never been heard from again; and a fellow named John James, who was a young architect who lived in Denver. John was our first candidate for U.S. Congress, I believe in 1974. Those were the original five.”

  161. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    I am just astounded that any Libertarian Party member would consider a candidate who has major platform problems this close to the nominating convention.

    Then again, given what happened at the last two LP presidential nominating conventions, perhaps I should not be.

  162. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Was Susan Nolan related to David Nolan? I know that David had a wife named Elizabeth. Was he married more than once, or was Susan his sister, or what?

  163. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    It is too late for any candidate to modify their issue stances to be acceptably libertarian for convention delegates, at least in my opinion it should be.

    If a candidate doesn’t “get it” this close to the nomination then they probably should not be candidates.

    You’ve said that at least two other times in this thread. Will it become more or less true with repetition?

  164. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Especially not for President. We are not talking about some low level local office about which few people care. We are talking President, the highest office in the land. The presidential candidate is seen as our party’s standard bearer. We need a candidate that actually represents libertarianism.

  165. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    According to wikipedia, past and present LNC Chairs:

    Nicholas Sarwark 2014-present
    Geoff Neale 2012-2014
    Mark Hinkle 2010-2012
    Bill Redpath 2006–2010
    Michael Dixon 2004–2006
    Geoff Neale 2002–2004
    Jim Lark 2000–2002
    David Bergland 1998–2000
    Steve Dasbach 1993–1998
    Mary Gingell 1991–1993
    Dave Walter (political activist) December 1988-1991
    Jim Turney (political activist) August 1985-December 1988
    Randy VerHagen May 1985-August 1985
    Paul K. Grant 1983–1985
    Alicia Clark 1981–1983
    David Bergland 1977–1981
    Ed Crane 1974–1977
    Susan Nolan 1972-1974
    David Nolan 1971-1972

    I assume that they note two people as political activists because there are other people with the same name who have wikipedia articles, not because the other people listed are less active politically.

    So, three women (Mary Gingell, Alicia Clark and Susan Nolan), but none since 1993. Caryn for Chair in 2018?

  166. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    It is too late for any candidate to modify their issue stances to be acceptably libertarian for convention delegates, at least in my opinion it should be.

    If a candidate doesn’t “get it” this close to the nomination then they probably should not be candidates.

  167. Andy Andy December 27, 2015

    Peter Schiff also has what I’d call a (philosophically) whimpy view on taxes. He favors ditching the current income tax system, which is good, but he said he wants to replace it with a sales tax (although he does NOT specify whether or not he supports the FAIR Tax plan) or a flat tax (I could not find any specifics on what his flat tax plan would be either).

    I would prefer a candidate who advocates ending the income tax and replacing it with nothing, and cutting government spending.

  168. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    Has there ever been female Chair? I am sincerely asking, I don’t know.

    Yes, more than one. Off the top of my head, Mary Gingell and Alicia Clark. There may have been others, too.

  169. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 27, 2015

    I don’t think we compare that unfavorably to the major parties on female candidates. Like the Democrats, our close runner-up in 2008 was a woman. We nominated a woman for Vice President before either major party, who was also the first woman in American history to get an electoral vote. Unlike either major party, we have nominated a woman for VP more than once (3x). This year we have the same number seeking the nomination as do the Republicans and Democrats (one).

    I”m not saying that broader disparity is good, of course. Most years we’ve had an all-male field, just like the Ds and Rs always did until very recently. Just that the LP isn’t really unique about that, and if anything we’re a bit better than the duopoly parties.

  170. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 27, 2015

    Chuck,

    ==1) You are overestimating selectivity of the implied audience (men) by adding the “really” there. “hot girls” could probably get away with inane live streams. Maybe even “marginally attractive girls”.==

    I used to do a lot of technology reporting back when life streams were the biggest thing… and it was a certain phenomena amongst very attractive females. A few attractive guys tried, it didn’t work as well. Even the female audience liked watching the other females (this was more in response to Paulie’s question). I am straight and I would rather watch a girl too.

    ==2) You are being modest / self-deprecating by saying “the rest of us” rather than “the rest of you”.==

    LOL, I won’t scare anyone away, but I don’t meet the age threshold. I am not modest… for my age group, I am very attractive. Competing with twenty-somethings? No.

    ==3) Although it’s easier for women to command an audience doing inane things, I’m sure there is a segment of the fairer gender that would watch attractive men do inane things.==

    Most women I know prefer watching women. We like watching each other.

    ==Let’s face facts: given the choice between a coherent, well articulated platform grounded in libertarian philosophy on the one hand and dimples on the other hand, the former isn’t always going to win more votes than the latter.==

    That is true. I have been known to have terrible political crushes.

    ==More importantly though: Anyone else notice that the LP presidential field every 4 years is a sausage fest? Why so few women candidates? Do they all have better things to do? Less women have the attention whore egos men need to seek the presidency?==

    Has there ever been female Chair? I am sincerely asking, I don’t know.

  171. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    Please write to me if you want any questions answered. I will do the best I can and forward the rest on to John.

    At which address would you like people to write you? I can see what you entered in the IPR box but haven’t tested it to see if it’s a real address, and I want to make sure it’s the one you want people to write you at before I post it for everyone to see; right now only IPR editors can see it, and only if they look in dashboard.

    My offer to consult on the issues platform remains open.

    205-534-1622
    paulie.frankel@lp.org
    https://www.facebook.com/paulie.cannoli

    And I am thankful that I don?t have to kill trees in the process of getting him on any ballots.

    The LP still needs help getting on the ballot in a bunch of states. If John wants to put himself in good standing with delegates, you guys can come down here to Oklahoma and help us with that right now. There will be more opportunities to do so in 2016.

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/lp-oklahoma-update/

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/austin-petersen-2016-ballot-access-in-oklahoma-needs-our-help/

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/2015-election-results-and-2016-presidential-ballot-access-map/

    http://www.lp.org/files/20151114_LNC_Meeting_Ballot_Access_Report.pdf

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/austin-petersen-2016-ballot-access-in-oklahoma-needs-our-help/#comment-1278807

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/12/austin-petersen-2016-ballot-access-in-oklahoma-needs-our-help/#comment-1279236

  172. paulie paulie December 27, 2015

    Caryn and Chuck, why the hetero bias? I am sure there must be plenty of gay and bi guys who want to watch Austin clean his gun, euphemistically or otherwise, in addition to all his female fans.

    Also, the internet is full of all kinds of weirdos. There’s probably someone out there who wants to watch my fat ass taking a dump from a toilet bowl cam. Maybe not as many people, but they nevertheless probably exist (no, I haven’t checked, and don’t have any interest in checking). So, it’s simply not true that only hot women, or women of any kind, or good looking people of any gender can attract that kind of attention. You simply have to be willing to seek it, if that’s your thing.

    More importantly though: Anyone else notice that the LP presidential field every 4 years is a sausage fest?

    I enjoyed the catty female rivalry Christine Smith directed at Mary Ruwart on the 2008 debate stage. Otherwise, yes.

    Why so few women candidates? Do they all have better things to do? Less women have the attention whore egos men need to seek the presidency?

    Caryn for President!

    Also, I’m hoping Avens runs when she becomes old enough.

  173. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 27, 2015

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    Oh poor AWP- his gun cleaning video got overshadowed by this. Maybe the live stream dental cleaning later this week will be better.

    Pro Tip: only really hot girls get away with inane live streams. For the rest of us, not so much.

    1) You are overestimating selectivity of the implied audience (men) by adding the “really” there. “hot girls” could probably get away with inane live streams. Maybe even “marginally attractive girls”.

    2) You are being modest / self-deprecating by saying “the rest of us” rather than “the rest of you”.

    3) Although it’s easier for women to command an audience doing inane things, I’m sure there is a segment of the fairer gender that would watch attractive men do inane things.

    Let’s face facts: given the choice between a coherent, well articulated platform grounded in libertarian philosophy on the one hand and dimples on the other hand, the former isn’t always going to win more votes than the latter.

    More importantly though: Anyone else notice that the LP presidential field every 4 years is a sausage fest? Why so few women candidates? Do they all have better things to do? Less women have the attention whore egos men need to seek the presidency?

    https://www.lp.org/candidates/presidential-candidates-2016/

  174. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 27, 2015

    Shivany, does John intend to modify his issue statements to such an extent that they become reasonably consistent with the Libertarian Party platform?

  175. William Saturn William Saturn December 27, 2015

    It seems every time an Internet story is posted about John McAfee “Shivany Lane” shows up seeming to have intimate knowledge of McAfee and even insight into his thoughts. For example, see http://www.joshnagel.com/?p=988#comment-23753:

    “John McAfee favors a good old American Smith & Wesson revolver.”

    “John had always thought, and still does think, that someone in the government poisoned his dogs.”

    See http://www.examiner.com/article/john-mcafee-announces-project-to-make-the-internet-unhackable#comment-1066380978 which makes claims about the identity of “Shivany Lane.”

  176. Ken Moellman Ken Moellman December 27, 2015

    I welcome McAfee to the race. As a likely voting delegate in Orlando, I will give him fair consideration. I look forward to seeing and hearing more from him, and the rest of our candidates for that matter. Regardless of anyone’s individual viewpoint, McAfee will definitely shake up the race for our nomination. That’s not a bad thing, in my mind. No offense to those running, but, on a scale of 1 to 10, the energy level in the race right now is around -1, and that’s even with Petersen’s was-entertaining-but-growing-old NAP-trolling.

    Once everyone who claims they might/should/would jump in does so, I’m thinking about running a poll of likely delegates in late January to find out where they stand. It could be very interesting.

  177. Mike K Mike K December 27, 2015

    Cool story bro.

  178. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    I have always hated that picture you used at the beginning of this thread.
    John McAfee is very photogenic, yet there have been times in his life when he just doesn’t look like himself. Stress, sleep deprivation, many factors go into that, just as they do for all of us.

    Before you write him off as a kooky choice for President. Please do some deep research into who he really is.

    John is a certifiable genius, yet he is humble enough to not admit it. John has live among the very rich and the poor and middle class. He prefers us middle class to poor people. He values authenticity in a person.

    He is a visionary yet his head isn’t so far in the clouds that he does not come down and rescue a dog from the pound. He has a kind heart. At his core is kindness, authenticity and more love than anyone I know other than myself. Please write to me if you want any questions answered. I will do the best I can and forward the rest on to John.

    This is a great day for your Party. And a wonderful day for John. He will be able to run his campaign more professionally than I, as a novide, would have guided him. And I am thankful that I don’t have to kill trees in the process of getting him on any ballots.

  179. Mike K Mike K December 27, 2015

    If the convention was today, I’d write in Starchild or Doug Craig on the first ballot.

  180. Mike K Mike K December 27, 2015

    What the LP really needs is another Harry Browne, or at least someone who’s able to sell liberty like him.

    I can think of 10 people, some of which are on this exact thread, who could do a great job of selling liberty… The real question is who’s willing to step up..

  181. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 27, 2015

    The picture was taken recently and in Las Vegas. If anyone has any questions about John McAfee, feel free to direct them to me. Believe it or not, the fictional McAfee is much more exciting that the real one. Though the real one is pretty damned entertaining

  182. Joe Wendt Joe Wendt December 26, 2015

    From the way that picture looks, I think McAfee will be making appearances and conducting a legit campaign for the nomination.

  183. trying again trying again December 26, 2015

    Much of modern society is built upon irrational, delusional thinking and the neuroses that result rom that. Neurotic, delusional people vote for Denocrats and Republicans and are considered “well-socialized.”

    Sociopaths are not well-socialized. People who aren’t well-socialized are often suspected of being sociopaths.

  184. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 26, 2015

    Oh poor AWP- his gun cleaning video got overshadowed by this. Maybe the live stream dental cleaning later this week will be better.

    Pro Tip: only really hot girls get away with inane live streams. For the rest of us, not so much.

  185. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 26, 2015

    I was confused too. I thought it looked like Brett, but I always see him clean shaven and wearing suit and tie.

  186. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I would not have guessed Pojunis. I do not recall ever seeing him with facial hair.

  187. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    Ben Swann did a story on the Ron Paul newsletter controversy. He obtained copies of all of the newsletters. There was actually a byline in one or two of the issues with the offending comments that said that the content in question was written by James B. Powell.

    It is true that the Ron Paul newsletters frequently contracted with a revolving staff of writers, and they did not always post who all of the writers were, but the stuff written by James B. Powell had the same writing style as found in the other offending passages that did not have an author listed.

  188. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    Brett Pojunis. I don’t know when but Pojunis just posted it so I am guessing recently.

  189. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    Who is that in the picture with McAfee?

    It looks like it could be one of the guys you went on one of those RV trips with, but it also looks like it could be somebody else.

  190. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    Who’s that with him? And when was it taken?

  191. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 26, 2015

    Well damn I was going to post that. 🙁

  192. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I’m not even a big Gary Johnson fan, and even I think he was a significant improvement over Bob Barr 2008.

  193. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I do not for sure if Gary Johnson 2012 was run worse than Bob Barr 2008, but it should be pointed out that Johnson 2012 got a heck of a lot more votes than Barr 2008, and that Johnson 2012 did not repel as many libertarians as Barr 2008 did. It appeared to me that Johnson’s campaign materials and outreach was much better than Barr’s as well.

  194. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    “now watch Tom and George say that providing pro bono medical services to non-whites is a part of their ‘cover’ as racists”

    Nice try, but as I have ALWAYS said, I have no idea whether or not Ron Paul is a racist. But I do know that he’s a liar.

    Yes, in 2007 Ron Paul said that a ghost writer, whom he did not name (but some people say it was Powell, or possibly Lew Rockwell), wrote the racist stuff and that he did not agree with it.

    But in 1996, Ron Paul said that HE had written the racist stuff and that he stood by it.

    And of course when it was first written and when Ron Paul was knocking down six figures a year for it, he was making that money by putting his name on it and claiming he wrote it.

  195. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    Oh, and Ron Paul also hates Jews, which is why two of his biggest influences were Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, both of whom were Jews, and it is also why there were some Jews who worked on his campaigns for President, like Peter Schiff who signed on as an economic adviser.

  196. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    First off, it has already come out that the offending newsletter remarks, which were contained in like 8 or 9 issues, out of something like 143 newsletters, were written by a guy by the name of James B. Powell.

    Second of all, I do not recall any of the offending remarks calling for government legislation, nor did Ron Paul put forth any legislation that would have violated individual rights as a result of said newsletter.

    Also, Ron Paul, and Rand Paul as well, have both done a great deal of pro bono work as doctors, that is that they have both donated their time and medical skills for free. They have both done pro bono medical work for lots of people who could not otherwise afford it, and I know that some of those they have done pro bono medical work for have not been white. If either of them were really racist people they would not do this (now watch Tom and George say that providing pro bono medical services to non-whites is a part of their “cover” as racists).

  197. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    I don’t know whether or not Ron Paul is a racist; that’s hard to know. On that particular front the main thing I cared about is that he lied about it. When it was published, he claimed to have written it. When it was brought up in 1996, he still claimed to have written it and to stand by it. When it was brought up in 2007, he denied writing it and said he didn’t agree with it. So he lied at LEAST once, maybe twice, possibly even all three times about it.

    Nonetheless, when I got his first fundraising letter, I elected to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that when he explained why he should be president, he was making his real case. And that case consisted of: I worked to ban abortion, I worked to ban same-sex marriage, and I worked to ban immigration. Elect me president and I’ll keep working on all three of those things.

    If he meant THAT, then he’s not a libertarian. Period.

    If he didn’t mean it, then he’s just back to being a lying sack of shit again.

  198. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 26, 2015

    There is one very important point made by McAfee in the dateline piece. He mentions that he has to keep the public’s attention on himself.

    How do you keep the public’s attention? Run for President. He doesn’t have the cash/support for a new party, so — aha! — he’ll become a Libertarian!

    I agree with Paulie that he’d have to make massive changes and convince us he’s sincere.

    In 2008 I was convinced that Bob Barr was sincere in his changes. He may have been, or he may not have been, but he’s gone back to the dark side.

    In 2012 I was convinced that Gary Johnson was sincere, but all I saw was a badly run campaign (worse that Barr’s internally). Will he run again? Will I be convinced to support him? I’ve no idea at this point.

    But can a majority of the delegates in Orlando be “convinced” by McAfee that he’s ok and that he never really meant the stuff that is still posted on his website. Not very likely. I certainly won’t be.

    Which brings us back to the question of who the heck to run. The comments about Petersen and his “defection” back to the GOP/TP after he worked for the LP are troubling. Some of the comments/positions the other candidates have made are troubling as well.

    Who’s going to step up to the plate? NOTA is still looking pretty good from up here in the cheap seats.

    I agree with the statement above: McAfee has had his 15 minutes of Libertarian fame. Let’s move on to the next candidate…

  199. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    McAffee is not more libertarian than Ron Paul, nor is he a better candidate than Ron Paul, by any standard, and saying otherwise is laughable.

  200. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    @19:19

    That sounds more plausible. But then that is still not somebody I want as the nominee.

  201. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    That’s because it’s really true. Perhaps it is taking one racist to defend another?

  202. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    George Phillies is still repeating the “Ron Paul is a racist” myth. This is getting really old, George.

  203. langa langa December 26, 2015

    langa, you are perpetrating the myth that Ron Paul is anti-immigration, a myth which I have debunked here multiple times.

    No, I’m not. I actually think Ron Paul’s immigration position is pretty good from a libertarian standpoint, although in the past, such as when he ran for the LP in ’88, it was not as good. However, my main point was that immigration is one of McAfee’s best issues, and on that one issue, he might be a little better than Ron Paul, but on many other issues, Ron Paul is better.

    I also agree with you about Ron Paul being much more libertarian than Gary Johnson, so I don’t know what you are arguing with me about. If you want to argue, argue with Knapp. He’s the one who claimed McAfee was more libertarian than Ron Paul. I found that to be absurd, which was the point of my reply to him.

  204. langa langa December 26, 2015

    Just to be clear, I think we should not nominate him either way, so the question of his factual guilt or innocence of the Faull murder doesn’t really affect my opinion of his candidacy.

    Unless he makes huge changes to his platform, and convince me he is sincere about them, I agree.

    The bizarre conspiracy theory he offers as his version of “what really happened”— doesn’t pass the smell test, and doesn’t survive Occam’s razor.

    First, I don’t necessarily buy the alternative theory either. But there are other possibilities. As briefly alluded to in the Dateline piece, there were other people in his “entourage” that could have plausibly acted on their own. For example, one of the dogs that was poisoned apparently belonged to one of his crazy girlfriends (the one with the star tattoos on her chest). Given that she apparently tried to kill McAfee (possibly on multiple occasions) and that she had access to McAfee’s guns, plus the fact that she also fled the country right after the murder, she seems at least as likely a suspect as McAfee himself.

    Second, McAfee does have an alibi. Another one of his crazy ex-girlfriends claims that she was with McAfee at the time of the murder. While she doesn’t seem like the world’s most trustworthy person, I’m not sure what her motivation for protecting him would be.

    Finally, the murder just doesn’t seem like McAfee’s “style” (for lack of a better term). As he pointed out, he would have to be pretty stupid to commit the crime the day after his dogs were poisoned, and then flee the country. While McAfee strikes me as very eccentric and maybe even a little crazy, he certainly doesn’t strike me as dumb.

    Of course, as I said above, it’s certainly possible he did it. I just don’t think it’s all that likely. I think a much more plausible explanation is that some member of his entourage (say, the crazy girl with the star tattoos) did it, McAfee found out about it after the fact, realized he would be likely to be blamed, and proceeded to get himself and the girl out of the country to avoid any chance of legal repercussions. In that case, he might be guilty of obstruction of justice, but that’s a far less serious matter.

  205. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    “Ron Paul is anti-immigration” I still have someplace some of his fundraising letters, unless I through them out. He went on and on about illegal immigrants being a chief threat to our country’s future.

    As for Paul being a racist, I can repost the link to Paul speaking under the flag of treason, claiming the Civil War was not about slavery, a lie rejected by the secessionists, who were quite honest that they (mistakenly) thought Lincoln was coming to take their slaves and to murder them.

  206. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    The gnolls from out the woodwork come…
    Fleeing the rumored Libertarian candidates.

    Where do these characters come from?

  207. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    langa, you are perpetrating the myth that Ron Paul is anti-immigration, a myth which I have debunked here multiple times.

    Ron Paul is more libertarian than John McAfee is by any standard, and he’s a much better candidate for office, and it is not even close.

    I also still maintain that Ron Paul is more libertarian than Gary Johnson, and that he is a better candidate than Johnson as well.

  208. Thane Eichenauer Thane Eichenauer December 26, 2015

    Andy> The FAIR Tax is just as bad, if not worse, than the present income tax system.

    That is a good point that I completely agree with. I continue to wonder where Johnson’s ongoing interest in the Fair Tax stems from.

  209. langa langa December 26, 2015

    Unless his platform changes, he would not be the most libertarian presidential nominee the LP has ever chosen. He’s no Harry Browne. On the other hand, he’s not as far off that standard as Bob Barr or Ron Paul were, either.

    Actually, if he were as libertarian as Ron Paul, I would strongly consider supporting him, with or without the baggage. Unfortunately, your delusions notwithstanding, he is nowhere close to as libertarian as Ron Paul (or at least there is zero evidence to indicate that he is). Looking at the issues on his site, there is precisely one area (immigration) where his position might reasonably be described as more libertarian than Ron Paul. On the other hand, there are several issues (foreign policy, war on drugs, taxation, education, economy) where his positions are nowhere close to as libertarian as those of Ron Paul. I might give you that McAfee’s platform (as listed on his website, not the hypothetical, “real” platform that people have been speculating about) is more libertarian than Barr’s, but it’s nowhere close to that of any other LP nominee, even Gary Johnson (and I’m no fan of Johnson).

  210. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I agree with you Tom, at least to an extent. I would not automatically disqualify Gary Johnson or anyone else, for having run for office as a Republican, or under some other party banner, or as an independent. I would disqualify somebody as a candidate who I believe has major flaws on their understanding of, and/or disagreements with, the Libertarian Party platform/philosophy.

    This is why I never supported Barr/Root. I never bought into them being real libertarians. I am frankly surprised that so many people in the LP kept giving them chances to “move in a more libertarian direction” even after they had been in the party for a few years.

    It did not take me that long to understand/agree with the Libertarian platform/philosophy after I heard Harry Browne’s presentation when I found out about the Libertarian Party after stumbling upon the LP National Convention on C-SPAN back in 1996.

    The fact that Gary Johnson still advocates for the FAIR Tax plan after being in the LP for a few years, and after several Libertarians have tried to explain to him why the FAIR Tax plan is a bad idea, tells me that there are some flaws in his understanding of, and/or agreement with, the Libertarian platform/philosophy.

    I am not opposed to taking incremental steps towards liberty, but I do not think that the FAIR Tax plan is an incremental step towards liberty. The FAIR Tax is just as bad, if not worse, than the present income tax system.

  211. Gene Berkman Gene Berkman December 26, 2015

    George Phillies – a person who favors the gold standard is not a “bullion fetishist.” Support for the gold standard is pretty standard among libertarian and free market economists – see “Theory of Money & Credit” by Ludwig von Mises; “What Has Government Done to Our Money” and “The Case for a 100% Gold Dollar” both by Murray Rothbard and “Gold and Economic Freedom” by Alan Greenspan, which explains why we don’t need a Federal Reserve system.

    If you don’t believe in a gold standard, that is your right, but your position on this is far from the mainstream position of libertarian and free market economists.

  212. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    “If a candidate does not have libertarian issues ‘figured out’ this close to the nomination, I think this is good reason to disqualify them from consideration.”

    Interesting assertion. Last time around, “this close to the nomination,” Gary Johnson was still a Republican. And now, after an entire presidential campaign, he still doesn’t seem to have libertarian issues “figured out.”

  213. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    “Dateline has ads to sell and viewers to entice. The truth of it is, They embellished, and omitted details to make John look guilty.”

    Then they didn’t do a very good job of it, because the Dateline piece reads like a defense attorney’s dream case.

  214. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 26, 2015

    I’d say that pretty much any candidate should be “considered” for the nomination. Few are due much, serious consideration, but pretty much all are due some.

    We’ve given McAfee a fair amount on this thread. Unless some significant new facts come to light, or he makes some big changes, I think he’s been given his due.

    Again, I hope that he, and all candidates, earn further consideration.

  215. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    See above, Shivany Lane at 0930.

  216. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    It is too late to make the necessary changes in my opinion. A candidate who joins a party 5 months before its nominating convention who does not understand and/or agree with multiple platform planks of said party, should not be considered for the nomination.

  217. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    Not automatically. But it doesn’t immediately disqualify him. Let’s just say that he should be met with an appropriate level of skepticism and expected to do a lot of hard work if he is serious about seeking the nomination…and that would include a lot of changes on the economic side of his platform and a lot of personal appearances, like it or not.

  218. Mark Axinn Mark Axinn December 26, 2015

    All of which begs the question, why oh why are we yet-again considering non-Libertarians who may be famous (even though they really aren’t)?

    I don’t know much about McAfee, but I don’t have a lot of respect for a guy who blew 96% of a $100,000,000 payoff for brilliant work earlier in his career. His economic know-how is not quite Bernie Sanders, but certainly not free-market. His positions on personal liberty are excellent and the snafu down in Belize is actually kinda cool.

    But that does not qualify him as standard-bearer for our Party, right?

  219. ATBAFT ATBAFT December 26, 2015

    Ah, Russell Means, R.I.P. I had some face time with him in 1987 when he was seeking the LP nomination. After a few beers, he revealed that he planned to campaign in full Sioux regalia if he was the nominee. Wouldn’t have hurt.

  220. Mark Axinn Mark Axinn December 26, 2015

    >He’s not insanely famous, just more famous than anyone who’s ever sought or received the LP’s presidential nomination before.

    As noted by many above, that is clearly not accurate. The LP ran two Congressmen (Paul ’88 and Barr ’08) and a Governor (Johnson ’12), each of whom has better name recognition than John McAfee. Frankly, I don’t think any of them are that well-known outside our circles and would instead place my bet on Russell Means, the last of the Mohicans.

    But all of them are more famous than John McAfee who is not well-known at all. An early anti-virus program bearing his name was pretty ubiquitous for a while, but not the man himself. Would you put him on the same level as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs? Of course not.

  221. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 26, 2015

    ==He still had guns and laptops, so he wasn’t completely broke, but I’m not sure if he is a millionaire at all anymore. Johnson is. Kerbel and Feldman may be.==

    I believe Kerbel is.

  222. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    Interesting. I wouldn’t have guessed that LP-Alaska was doing that well so early. ’76 would have been the first year a Libertarian candidate for President was even on the ballot there.

  223. Richard Winger Richard Winger December 26, 2015

    Gary Johnson’s 3.55% share of the 2012 presidential vote in New Mexico was the third best LP percentage ever for President. Second was Roger MacBride’s 5.54% in Alaska in 1976. Best, as noted above in Alaska in 1980, was 11.73%.

  224. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    If a candidate does not have libertarian issues “figured out” this close to the nomination, I think this is good reason to disqualify them from consideration

  225. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    I agree with Stewart in that McAffee’s non-libertarian stances on several issues ought to be enough to disqualify him from winning the nomination.

    If he doesn’t change them, yeah. We’ll see if he makes the necessary adjustments on that score. I’m willing to help with that if he wants to talk to me about it. 205-534-1622. I believe someone above mentioned that some of it was done by people helping his campaign rather than being his actual personal views. So maybe there is room to make it a lot better.

    The loose cannon stuff/attention getting stuff can be a plus or minus, depending on what exactly happens with that in the next few months.

    Financially, it’s not clear that he is rich at all anymore. The 4 million was before Belize, as noted above. In the dateline video he can be seen living in a small apartment with a not-so-top-of-the-line ex-hooker girlfriend (I’m not being disparaging here. She may be a great person and maybe she has a personality or skills that made her more valuable in that marketplace than looks alone would indicate, and she’s decent looking, just not conventionally extraordinarily so; I’ve dated ex and not so ex hookers myself and don’t consider it anything bad). He still had guns and laptops, so he wasn’t completely broke, but I’m not sure if he is a millionaire at all anymore. Johnson is. Kerbel and Feldman may be.

    “No personal appearances” would kill it for him. Sorry, if he wants the nomination, he’ll need to go around to the states and ask for it like everyone else. Maybe that is code for “can no longer afford the travel and too embarrassed to admit it”?

    He’s not famous enough for that to matter. McAfee the product is, but not necessarily immediately identifiable with John McAfee the person. He would need to work to make the association and even then work a lot harder to translate that into “you should vote for me,” even for the nomination, much less in the general election. The product’s name ID, while high, is not all positive either, as he himself alludes to in his humorous video above.

    At this point I would say Johnson’s general public name ID is higher. Still nowhere near Clinton, Trump or even Jeb!?, but possibly maybe above single digits. 20% was mentioned above, but I think that includes a lot of false positives of the sort you would get for literally any name you would give people. Still, I would guess it’s an order of magnitude more than John McAfee’s right now. Johnson can get on plenty of cable news shows pretty much for the asking. McAfee may or may not be able to – maybe he can, maybe not, and maybe he just hasn’t made the effort to yet. Will he? We shall see.

    In any case, he’ll make the campaign more interesting, and may be amenable to make the changes to make himself acceptable to a decent number of likely delegates…or not. It depends on what he does between now and May. The big ego may get in the way of realizing he would have to make such changes and lower himself to making personal appearances, or not. Remains to be seen.

  226. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    A lot of that came after, but Dick Randolph had been first elected in 1978. He was the one who spearheaded the income tax repeal. That happened in 1980 (passed by the legislature under Randolph’s threat/promise to fund putting it on the ballot). He then went on to get 15% for Governor in 1982.

    The LP has always done well in Alaska, and had some influence. But 1980 would have been right at the start of their peak. I assume David Koch also put some money into advertising, which could have been done pretty cheap in Alaska c. 1980, I’d think.

  227. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I agree with Stewart in that McAffee’s non-libertarian stances on several issues ought to be enough to disqualify him from winning the nomination.

  228. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I knew that Ed Clark had done well in Alaska, but I did not recall it having been that well. 11% in a state for an LP candidate for President is impressive.

    I think that this happened during one of the times that the LP had elected four state legislators in Alaska, and when the LP of Alaska played a big role in getting the Alaska State Income Tax repealed (which I think happened via ballot initiative).

  229. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    I see paulie already beat me to it on Clark 1980 in Alaska. 😉

  230. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    @13:23

    Correct. Difference between being a former Gov. and a former member of the House. Even in their own states, there are dozens or hundreds of living former Congressmen, and most people are hard-pressed to name their own incumbent, much less the guy who lost his seat on the other side of the state years prior. Whereas a decent chunk of voters can name the last 3 or 4 governors of their state, or at least recognize their names. Governors tend to have the highest name-IDs in politics, outside of presidents, presidential candidates, and maybe high-profile party leaders in the House/Senate. In their own state they tend to be better-known than even the state’s two Senators, who are nominally in higher-ranking office.

    But, one point of correction: NM 2012 wasn’t the best single-state showing. Ed Clark placed 3rd in Alaska with 11.6% in 1980. I don’t know if he did better than 3.5% in any other state, but if not then NM 2012 would probably be second-best.

  231. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    Per wikipedia:

    Clark received 921,128 votes (1.06% of the total nationwide);[11] the highest number and percentage of popular votes a Libertarian Party candidate had ever received in a presidential race up to that point. His strongest support was in Alaska, where he came in third place with 11.66% of the vote, finishing ahead of independent candidate John Anderson and receiving almost half as many votes as Jimmy Carter.[12] Clark’s record for most votes won by a Libertarian presidential candidate stood for 32 years until it was broken by Gary Johnson in 2012. His Libertarian percentage record of 1.06% still stands, ranking ahead of Johnson’s 0.99%.[13][14]

  232. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 26, 2015

    Attention from the media aside, the only thing that a McAfee campaign could do is hurt both the party and the movement. If you read his platform, he shows himself to only be in agreement with libertarian/freedom ideals in a few areas. He’s not for drug legalization, indicating that he only wants to lower the level of the “crime” and let states make their own decision on adding additional laws.

    He’s for funding education, welfare (although he wants to “fix” it) and other socialist programs. He doesn’t say anything about taxation other than that he wants to simplify the rules and that he’ll have a plan.

    I’m not voting for him, and I’d doubt that anyone else in my state’s delegation would.

  233. paulie paulie December 26, 2015

    Gary Johnson received 3.5% of the vote in New Mexico, which I think is a record for Libertarian Party candidates for President in any state.

    Nope. Ed Clark got over 11% in Alaska.

  234. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    2004 LP VP candidate, Richard Campagna, did not claim to be a celebrity, but he did claim to have some big donations lined up if he won the VP nomination. He claimed that if he won the VP nomination, that he had something like $250,000 in donations that were going to come to the campaign.

    He won the nomination, and these donations never materialized, and from what I recall, he ended up being an ineffective candidate, in that he barely did any campaigning.

  235. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 26, 2015

    ac: it doesn’t sound like a bad thing…. because it’s not.

    me: It generally makes sense UNLESS the idea is for the standard bearer’s role is to conduct provocative street theater for the few who see the act. Imagine a L Jimmy McMillan, Vermin Supreme, or — dare I say it — Donald Trump. Sometimes I think that’s what TK wants. The prospect JMc seems like outrageous street theater.

  236. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    Gary Johnson was certainly more well known than any LP candidate in a particular state. I am talking about his adopted home state of New Mexico (I said adopted because he us originally from North Dakota, but he moved to New Mexico as a kid and has spent most of his life there).

    Gary Johnson received 3.5% of the vote in New Mexico, which I think is a record for Libertarian Party candidates for President in any state.

  237. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    @13:16

    Sounds about right to me, but when you put it that way it doesn’t sound like a bad thing…. because it’s not.

  238. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 26, 2015

    Just a guess, but I wonder if “famous” is not the right term, but rather “credible, credentialed, higher-profiled, and presidential” captures the convention’s preferences.

  239. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I worked on the petition drives to put Bob Barr and Gary Johnson on the ballot in Alabama. Both had to use the independent candidate petition to get on the ballot in Alabama, which meant that they did not have the Libertarian Party label, and that the petitions had their names on them.

    Most of the people I encountered in Alabama did not know who either of them were. Out of the few people who did know who they were, much of the name recognition I got for Bob Barr was actually negative. Most of the people who knew who Gary Johnson was had a positive opinion of him.

    I was really surprised at how low Bob Barr’s name recognition was in Alabama being that Barr is from Atlanta, Georgia, which is close to Alabama. I was also surprised by the number of negative reactions I got from Barr, which was the most negative reactions I have ever received over any Libertarian Party candidate. I have received negative reactions about the Libertarian Party in general, but never so much venom directed towards an LP candidate as I received over Bob Barr. Although, the majority of people did not know who he was.

  240. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I was at the 2008 LP National Convention. I would say that a lot of delegates did in fact vote for Barr/Root because they thought that they were famous.

    The same goes with Gary Johnson in 2012 (I was there for that one as well).

  241. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    “”Not even close. In fact, Johnson isn’t as well-known NOW as Barr was circa 2008. And he probably never will be.””

    I think that’s rather silly. Maybe you could make the case that they’re in the same ballpark, but “not even close”? That Barr was far and away obviously better-known? I see no evidence whatsoever that’s true of at the time of their respective nominations, much less today.

    While it’s far from scientific, granted, “Gary Johnson” blows “Bob Barr” away on a Google ranking, as measured by a combination of number of searches plus number of results. Same on Google News, which focuses more recently. Maybe some of that is that Johnson has a more common name, but the same results hold when you add whatever qualifiers you want to narrow it down, like their respective titles. Post-2008, Bob Barr couldn’t even win a GOP primary for House in his home state, for the seat he used to hold. And then there’s the more precise measure of vote totals, on which Barr got basically the same as his post-1980 predecessors, and which Johnson almost tripled. Is there *any* measure by which Barr is better-known?

    But, back to the original point: the idea that those silly convention delegates just always swoon for “fame and fortune” isn’t supported by the actual history. That was your original assertion, and I still don’t see anything to back it up.

  242. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I would love to see Peter Schiff run if he advocates a non-interventionist foreign policy. It would be like he’d be seeking “revenge” against the federal government for murdering his father.

  243. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    I don’t think Means would have been a very good candidate either. The LP seems to have had pretty poor alternatives in 1988.

  244. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    “frankly *none* of our past nominees have been any kind of genuine celebrity.”

    True.

    “Johnson was probably closest at the time of his nomination”

    Not even close. In fact, Johnson isn’t as well-known NOW as Barr was circa 2008. And he probably never will be.

  245. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I think that the main reason Barr/Root got nominated was because a lot of delegates thought that they were famous, and that they were going to raise $35-$40 million,” and that they’d bring in several million votes.

    The same with Gary Johnson, but I think that the 2012 delegates had more realistic expectations than the 2008 delegates had.

  246. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    re: Schiff, I wish I had a source I could offer, but it’s just something I heard through the grapevine. Take it as a rumor with the appropriate grain of salt. I certainly don’t have any inside information on it, so don’t take it as confirmed or anything like that.

  247. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I don’t think that Russell Means would have been as good a candidate as Ron Paul. Ron Paul was a better political speaker and writer, plus I have heard some stories about Russell Means aborted run for Governor of New Mexico that lead me to believe that he’d have been a less effective campaigner than Dr. Paul.

    There were also some allegations about Means smacking his wife around. I do not know if they were true or not, but even if not, those are not the kinds of stories you want popping up during a campaign.

  248. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 26, 2015

    I don’t think “fame” had much to do with any of those nomination decisions. When I look at the roster of past nominees, I just don’t see any such trend or rule for there to be an exception to. Sure, winners of the nomination tend, on average, to be more famous than those they defeat, in the sense that an ant is “taller” than a microbe. But not reliably so, and not I think *because* of their relative fame. There are too many counter-examples, and frankly *none* of our past nominees have been any kind of genuine celebrity. Johnson was probably closest at the time of his nomination, but that’s a matter of name-ID in the teens or twenties instead of dead zero. He’s hardly some A-list celebrity, and neither is McAfee.

    Let’s go down the list:

    -Johnson
    -Barr
    -Badnarik
    -Browne (x2)
    -Marrou
    -Paul
    -Bergland
    -Clark
    -MacBride
    -Hospers

    Which of those would you call an example of the delegates falling over for ” fame/fortune/glitz/glamour”? I’d say none, on the margins maybe a case could be made for one or two. But all of them except 2004? Even a majority of them? I just don’t see it.

  249. Andy Andy December 26, 2015

    I like Peter Schiff, but there are some question marks about where he stands on foreign policy. I have heard him make some comments in the past that sounded like he is at least somewhat of an interventionist, as in I recall him saying something along the lines of being in favor of military intervention in the Middle East.

    I will not support a candidate that is in favor of an interventionist foreign policy.

    If Peter Schiff could show that he does not support an aggressive, militaristic/interventionist foreign policy, then I think that he has the potential to be a very good candidate.

    Also, unlike some candidates who over-state their wealth, Peter Schiff is pretty wealthy. I’ve read that he us worth $70 million. Now that is not anywhere close to Donald Trump money ($4.5 billion), or even Mitt Romney ($250 million), or Al Gore ($300 million), money, but it is still pretty rich.

    $70 million is not enough to win the White House, and I doubt that Peter Schiff is going to liquidate a great deal of his net worth trying, but if he could kick in some seed money out-of-pocket, like say $1 million, or even $500,000, this would give his campaign a big boost.

    Peter Schiff is also a semi-well known person, and I think that he is well respected by people who know who he is, so he could probably raise a lot of money (by LP standards).

  250. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    “Like when they nominated relative-nobody Badnarik over Aaron Russo and Gary Nolan?”

    That was, indeed, the exception. I destroyed Gary Nolan on behalf of Aaron Russo, then Gary Nolan destroyed Aaron Russo to the benefit of Michael Badnarik.

    Libertarians are strange creatures. They considered Ron Paul more “famous” than Russell Means because he was, within the movement bubble. In 2008, the “fame and fortune” types had three choices: “Famous” conservative congresscritter Bob Bar, “famous” liberal congresscritter Mike Gravel, and “famous” Las Vegas scam artist Wayne Allyn Root. Gravel made the mistake of running on his platform instead of on his “fame.”

  251. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 26, 2015

    And what was happening with the economy in 04-06? Booming.

    Easier to say, Yes, I too challenge the CotOS when one is flush.

  252. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    Campagna claimed to be a celebrity, at the level that Badnarik claimed to be an expert in the constitution. Root claimed to be a celebrity. Johnson and Gray claimed to be well known.

    None of this mattered in a significant way. The most reliable indicator that the party is making slight progress is that post-nomination Badnarik raised more money than Browne, and Barr and Johnson appeared to raise as much or more money than Badnarik. Badnarik appears to have had the most efficient campaign apparatus of the four of them.

  253. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    Browne was supposed to be well known among the gold fetishists. He was going to bring in substantial nominations. Badnarik got the nomination, by a small number of votes at the key point, by being radical. Nolan was told by several people exactly what he had to do to get the nomination, and declined to do it. It wasn’t even something having to do with an issues stand.

  254. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 26, 2015

    @1:00

    Just to be clear, I think we should not nominate him either way, so the question of his factual guilt or innocence of the Faull murder doesn’t really affect my opinion of his candidacy. But, the reason I think it’s more likely than not he did it, is that the counter-explanation offered as a defense is so implausible. Somebody killed his complaining neighbor just so they could (unsuccessfully) frame McAfee for the murder? To be blunt about it: why wouldn’t they have just had their hitman shoot McAfee himself? The bizarre conspiracy theory he offers as his version of “what really happened”— doesn’t pass the smell test, and doesn’t survive Occam’s razor.

    Is that enough to convict on? Absolutely not. But it’s plenty enough for me to think it is more likely McAfee killed (or had killed) Faull, than that the Belizean government and drug cartels did it so they could frame McAfee for the murder. If it was some kind of conspiracy, it was a very poorly planned and executed one that didn’t make much sense.

  255. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 26, 2015

    “”the fame/fortune/glitz/glamour metrics that LP convention delegates seem to care about so much.””

    Like when they nominated relative-nobody Badnarik over Aaron Russo and Gary Nolan? Or when they nominated the (then-) less-famous Paul over the more-famous Means? Or when the big-name party-switching Senator came in 4th place? As for fortune- only one of our (VP) candidates has had that, and the delegates managed to reject his choice and effectively drive him out of the party at the next convention.

    The delegates might on occasion pick a candidate *you wouldn’t have*— but I see no evidence to support the proposition that delegates routinely get bamboozled by fame and fortune. And nobody we’ve ever nominated for President has had “glitz” or “glamour”.

    If you want to say “well they nominated Bob Barr”— say that. But there is no broader trend that you refer to.

  256. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    McAfee appear to bring nothing to the table, mindful that obscure celebrity is approximately nothing.

  257. georgephillies georgephillies December 26, 2015

    George:

    Merry Christmas.

    Why Peter Schiff? People who remember his dad, may he rest in peace.
    People who think he is his dad.
    Bullion fetishists and advocates of gold buggery…I did not say that Schiff fits the description, but the advocates of metal coinage who I have met seem very enthused for Schiff.
    George

  258. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 26, 2015

    @httpThomas Knapp

    Dateline has ads to sell and viewers to entice. The truth of it is, They embellished, and omitted details to make John look guilty.

    Gregory Faull was shot at a distance, meaning not up close, with a 9mm gun. John favors a good old fashioned Smith and Wesson Revolver.

    9mm is the most common gun type in the world, favored by law enforcement. The entire crime scene was corrupted by people moving in and out of the house. They wrapped Greg Faull in a sheet and stuck his body in a sheet. They then threw, maybe tossed, the bundle into the bed of a oick-up truck.The Belize Government refused to respond or offer assistance to the Faull family and they had him cremated. To this day, despite the police raiding the McAfee house dozens of time, Faulls phone and laptop have never been found.

    He was shot execution style. John was the only person who put up a reward for information leading to the capture of the real killer. John likes guns, this does not make him a killer.

    On a side note. The Belize govt. can hold you in prison for 30 days just for questioning. During those 30 days, John would have wound up mysteriously dead. This is just the way they operate.

  259. Shivany Lane Shivany Lane December 26, 2015

    I am new to the Libertarian Party.

    Your platform seems to consist of mainly these things: (details omitted)
    1. Personal Liberty
    2. Economic Liberty
    3. Securing Liberty

    John may not have stated this as well in his platform on his website. He had a camping manager and a few other people writing these for him.

    At Johns core he believes in invoking Article 6 and rebooting a corrupt and dysfunctional government. He believes in Personal Liberty, Economic Liberty and Securing Liberty for all..
    He has never faltered from his beliefs. Basically put, he thinks our government is off the rails and heeded for the abyss. They no longer are for the people, by the people. He has gotten to the point where he decided to run for President so that he could force the issues with other candidates. While they are bickering over whether or not Hillary uses the loo (bathroom), he is more interested in in being prepared for the onslaught of Cyber Terrorism.

    Do You realize how terrifying it is that the republican front runner is PROUD that he has never sent an email? Or that the Democrat’s front runner stored hers on a person at server at her home. If this does not frighten you, it should.

    How on earth are we has a country going to survive in the 21st century when we keep electing non tech savvy individuals. We are losing the Cyber War.

    I admit John can be a merry prankster at times, however, his serious side knows what’s at stake for this country. He loves his country. If anyone would like any information about his “baggage” that you heard about on dateline (they lied so much), or in the news (ditto with the lying), feel free to ask me. I am incapable of lying. John has done some crazy things. Not nearly as many or as severe as you may think.

    Thank you for your time.

  260. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 26, 2015

    Quoth Matt:

    “I just don’t see where he brings much to the table.”

    He doesn’t really bring that much to the table.

    Just more than any previous LP candidate has on the fame/fortune/glitz/glamour metrics that LP convention delegates seem to care about so much.

    He’s not insanely famous, just more famous than anyone who’s ever sought or received the LP’s presidential nomination before.

    He’s not insanely rich. But then, neither were any of the past nominees. Ed Clark’s running mate brought money to the ticket, but that’s about it.

    Unless his platform changes, he would not be the most libertarian presidential nominee the LP has ever chosen. He’s no Harry Browne. On the other hand, he’s not as far off that standard as Bob Barr or Ron Paul were, either.

  261. George Whitfield George Whitfield December 26, 2015

    What is the basis of the Peter Schiff rumor? I think he would be an excellent Libertarian Party candidate for President.

  262. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 26, 2015

    Really, after re-reading his issues page, the only really good position I see is that of eliminating the FDA. Other than that, I see a handful of good sentences, usually followed by two or three bad ones. He needs to hang around the LP for a few years and grow his libertarianism. Maybe in 2020 he’ll be ready.

  263. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 26, 2015

    I just don’t see where he brings much to the table. His platform ain’t much good. His name sounds familiar, in that people have used a product with his last name on it, but nobody knows who he is. He may have a few dollars more than most of us, but it does not appear that he is in a position to spend big money on a POTUS campaign. His mental/emotional stability appears questionable.

    Based on what I know now, I can’t see myself supporting him. I hope he does something to change my mind, just as I hope of all candidates.

  264. langa langa December 26, 2015

    Having watched the Dateline piece, I would say that the evidence against him is not only entirely circumstantial, but rather flimsy, even for circumstantial evidence. Of course, it’s conceivably possible that he killed his neighbor, but I see no reason to conclude that it’s particularly likely that he did.

    On the other hand, the same video revealed quite a bit about McAfee’s judgment. By his own account, much of his behavior in Belize was erratic, at best, and would make me worry about his “loose cannon” style coming back to haunt the LP. There is a difference between being charismatic and being reckless.

    Still, my biggest concern remains his platform. Having read over the issues on his website, there are a few areas where he’s pretty good, but on far too many issues, he seems to be eager to have the government “fix” problems. Obviously, that’s pretty much the opposite of what I would prefer an LP candidate advocate.

  265. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Page up in the comments to the video link titled something along the lines of McAfee’s Murder Mystery. It’s a Dateline story on McAfee, the “murder mystery,” etc.

  266. langa langa December 25, 2015

    Why would he need to provide a “compelling defense” for something he’s never been formally accused of and for which the entirety of the evidence is “well, he lived next door to the guy and disappeared when he learned his neighbor had been murdered, probably by the same state gangster who had had McAfee’s home raided and his dog killed soon before because he didn’t get the bribe he wanted?”

    “Defense” might be the wrong word; perhaps “explanation” would be more appropriate. As for the stuff about politicians, bribes, raids, and so on, I hadn’t heard any of that stuff before you mentioned it, so, presumably, all that would be included in the explanation that I was seeking.

    Now, it may be that McAfee has already provided this explanation, and I simply haven’t heard it. But, regardless, it would be nice if he would directly address the matter to the LP before asking for its presidential nomination.

  267. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    WTF,

    You might want to do some more reading.

    At the time McAfee was killed, he was throwing a public fit about the previous raid on his other home. His version of that story:

    A politician demanded a bribe.
    McAfee refused.
    The politician had the police raid his inland home, shoot his dog, hold him in handcuffs for several hours, and “search for drugs,” which they did not find.

    After which, McAfee went to his island home and started making noise about this.

    Then, one night, two of his dogs were poisoned.

    And the next night his neighbor was executed.

    The “circumstantial evidence” points to the same person who demanded the bribe and had McAfee raided, not to the neighbor, who no, didn’t complain about gunfire (he complained about the dogs).

    They picked on the wrong guy. And at the point where it became obvious that he was going to be far more bad publicity than it was worth to keep fucking with, they suddenly admitted “oh, no, we don’t have any EVIDENCE, we just wanted to TALK to him … but not badly enough to request that he be extradited from Guatemala. No biggie, move along.”

  268. Wang Tang-Fu Wang Tang-Fu December 25, 2015

    Motive: Gregory Faull was complaining about McAfee to the “authorities”

    Means: McAfee is and was a gun collector and known for shooting off his guns, which was one of the reasons for the complaints from neighbors

    Opportunity: No alibi, and he fled

    So, the evidence is circumstantial, but it’s not exactly “no evidence.”

    I’d vote to acquit in a criminal trial, but could well vote to award damages in a civil wrongful death lawsuit, based on the evidence as it currently stands.

  269. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Why would he need to provide a “compelling defense” for something he’s never been formally accused of and for which the entirety of the evidence is “well, he lived next door to the guy and disappeared when he learned his neighbor had been murdered, probably by the same state gangster who had had McAfee’s home raided and his dog killed soon before because he didn’t get the bribe he wanted?”

  270. langa langa December 25, 2015

    With regard to the murder thing, I know nothing about it other than what I’ve read here on IPR, so I just don’t have enough info to judge one way or the other. At the very least, before I could even consider supporting McAfee, I would like to hear him address the matter, and provide us with a compelling defense.

    Assuming he did that, there would still be the matter of whether he’s libertarian enough for my tastes, which seems very unlikely at this point. I am particularly troubled by his support for the “public works” idea, as this is one of those things, like minimum wage laws, that one should be able to see through without the benefit of any formal economic knowledge. All that you really need is a modicum of good, old-fashioned common sense. If he lacks even that, then the plan to “convert” him into a real libertarian is probably hopeless.

  271. langa langa December 25, 2015

    Superficial charm and good intelligence
    Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
    Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations
    Unreliability
    Untruthfulness and insincerity
    Lack of remorse and shame
    Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
    Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience
    Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love
    General poverty in major affective reactions
    Specific loss of insight
    Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations
    Fantastic and uninviting behavior with alcohol and sometimes without
    Suicide threats rarely carried out
    Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated
    Failure to follow any life plan

    I meet approximately 75% of these criteria. Does that mean I should run for President? 🙂

  272. langa langa December 25, 2015

    …if you’re going to run for President not having previously done anything significant in the party, you better be bringing something else to the table. You need to be able to do more than recite the platform, you have to be able to answer why *you* in particular should be President. “Because I’m a Libertarian” is not a good reason.

    I agree with all of this except the part about showing why you should be President — because, barring a miracle, you’re not going to be President. Instead, I think the point should be to show why you would be a good spokesperson for the LP (and the libertarian movement as a whole).

  273. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Quote from Austin Petersen:

    “I wanted the Tea Party to win. I believed that a new form of Buckley’s fusionism could emerge between social conservatives and libertarians. Together we could crush the big government conservatives, and a libertarian might be elected. Men like Rand Paul gave me hope, and I was happy to see that true conservatives like Ted Cruz and Mike Lee were also elected.”

    That is not Libertarian Party interests. I understand a lot may agree with that approach, and I wish them well. But it is not Libertarian Party interests.

    Which is fine… people change their minds. But let’s disabuse ourselves of the nonsense that there was Libertarian Party loyalty since 2008.

  274. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Interestingly, re: my earlier comments on Austin Petersen’s lack of LP activism after his employment with the LP ended… there was an article on the Libertarian Republic endorsing him (big surprise) and it detailed a lot of his post-2009 activism. There was quite a bit of it…. for the Tea Party and thus the Republican Party. NOT the Libertarian Party or its interests.

  275. georgephillies georgephillies December 25, 2015

    “Jesse Ventura would make an excellent Libertarian Party candidate for President if not for the holes in his philosophy.” So would almost any non-notorious politician. Of course, in some cases you can sail a large container ship through the holes, sideways.

  276. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    @17:04

    Agreed. I don’t expect *every* candidate to fit that mold, but like I said those who don’t should have something else to bring to the table.

  277. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Paulie,

    ==I’ve never threatened suicide.==

    🙂 Me either.

  278. Jake Porter Jake Porter December 25, 2015

    “Jesse Ventura would make an excellent Libertarian Party candidate for President if not for the holes in his philosophy.”

    And the fact that he talks about it every four years and doesn’t run. You are either running or you are not. You are either starting a business, new job, etc or you are just talking and wasting the time of a lot of people.

  279. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    Jesse Ventura would make an excellent Libertarian Party candidate for President if not for the holes in his philosophy.

  280. Jake Porter Jake Porter December 25, 2015

    My issue with several of the candidates is the lack of involvement in the party before wanting to represent us by running for the highest office. Even before announcing an exploratory campaign for Governor, I had ran for statewide office twice and served on both the LPIA excomm and an Alternate to the LNC. Over a decade of collecting signatures, volunteering for booths, giving speeches, and even changing voter registration in the state.

    I am very thankful for the candidates we have running. It takes a lot of courage to run for office, but we don’t really know how someone will campaign or build the party if they have never ran before. I wouldn’t hand the keys to my Mercedes to a 15 year old who has never driven before. Likewise, I don’t want to nominate a candidate for our highest office that can’t keep up with the demanding schedule, doesn’t understanding marketing, and has never experienced trying to build party membership and voter registration numbers. Not to mention, you get better in your second and third campaigns where campaigning becomes a lot easier and your stress level goes down.

  281. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    jp: I’ve watched several hours of his past interviews and haven’t, at this point, found anything anti-libertarian in what he has said.

    me: Watch the RT interview. 830-900. He says “…roads, schools….all the things that governments should be doing.”

    Clearly NAP violations, IF one defines L as NAP, of course.

    He needs to spend a month in Auburn for re-education.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCePM3FGx-4

  282. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    tk: August[us] > weird demagogic speaking style.

    McAfee > potentially great candidate,

    me: Got it. The subjective theory of value proven once again!

  283. Jake Porter Jake Porter December 25, 2015

    I wouldn’t consider $3 or $4 million rich, but it is still a lot more money than most of the candidates running for the LP Presidential nomination have. For $50,000-$100,000 he could run a real impressive campaign for the nomination although I have no idea if he plans to.

    I’ve watched several hours of his past interviews and haven’t, at this point, found anything anti-libertarian in what he has said. If Johnson wants the nomination, it is time for him to start running and quit talking about it.

  284. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    He isn’t rich, at least not by presidential candidate standards, and perhaps not at all. See Paulie’s comment on it above. He was down to his last three or four million *before* Belize.

  285. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    “Hugh Hefner + Ted Bundy on acid seems more in the neighborhood.”

    Well, except for that part where it’s pretty obvious that he didn’t kill anyone.

    No, he didn’t “press the age of consent.” The age of consent in Belize is 16.

    If August harmonized his positions with the LP platform, I’d still think he was a poor candidate for various reasons, none of which McAfee suffers from, starting with the weird demagogic speaking style.

    McAfee is a potentially great candidate, aside from the defects in his platform. If he corrects them and if he wants to run for real, then I guess the LP faces a gut check: Is “we think he’s rich and famous” enough, even if he runs on a libertarian platform? Or does it HAVE to be “we think he’s rich and famous and cargo cultists are happy with him?”

  286. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    tk, sure, HST + HH might be interesting in a way. Hugh Hefner + Ted Bundy on acid seems more in the neighborhood.

    A man in his 60s having 7 teenaged Belizian girls at once, going on the lamb to escape a murder investigation, and later hooking up with a well-bootied hooker goes way past colorful and charmingly eccentric.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that (although he’s pressing the age of consent) and then there’s questions of murder. Whether that’s presidential timber or someone millions would vote for or seriously even listen to…dunno.

    If Augustus Sol Invictus harmonized his positions with the LP platform and decided to run for prez, would such a candidacy strike your fancy, too?

  287. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    That Dateline piece could be re-purposed as a fantastic short campaign film if it had a good intro/outro. The people who think that having a cross between Hunter S. Thompson and pre-recluse Howard Hughes as a candidate would be a BAD thing are part of the LP’s problem.

  288. paulie paulie December 25, 2015

    Superficial charm and good intelligence
    Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
    Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations
    Unreliability
    Untruthfulness and insincerity
    Lack of remorse and shame
    Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
    Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience
    Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love
    General poverty in major affective reactions
    Specific loss of insight
    Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations
    Fantastic and uninviting behavior with alcohol and sometimes without
    Suicide threats rarely carried out
    Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated
    Failure to follow any life plan

    I’ve never threatened suicide.

  289. paulie paulie December 25, 2015

    Absence of? Absence of those things would seem, to me, to be a sign of mental health.

    The presence of these symptoms would indicate a different psychiatric diagnosis along with the other symptoms named. Their absence along with the other symptoms indicates sociopathy.

  290. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    RTAA, yes, I had to consider those for a moment as well. (It’s not my list.)

    I think the idea is that when someone does something dysfunctional, they act as if it’s normal and not a source of guilt or embarrassment.

    But I’m open to other explanations.

  291. Root's Teeth Are Awesome Root's Teeth Are Awesome December 25, 2015

    Robert Capozzi:

    Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
    Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations

    Absence of? Absence of those things would seem, to me, to be a sign of mental health.

  292. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    ==CAH, Just as Trump voters are showing a preference for sick ideas, I could imagine the JM would attract a different brand of sicko.==

    Perhaps. Again, not a fan, but I think his vaingloriousness will provide a good counter to the other one we currently have.

    I support Steve Kerbel and Darryl Perry. Johnson would be my third choice if I had my druthers. Of course tactics might change orders depending upon if it goes into multiple votes. My absolute last place is anyone who openly repudiates the SoP.

  293. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that….

  294. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Tom,

    ==Harry Browne overhauled his position on matching funds on the debate stage AT the 1996 national convention, and even then only after someone started screaming “SAY IT! SAY IT!” at him from the floor (he overhauled his position against voting and electoral politics by announcing that he was running for president).===

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VjNuxkHVBA

  295. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    CAH, Just as Trump voters are showing a preference for sick ideas, I could imagine the JM would attract a different brand of sicko.

    The clinical signs of Antisocial Personality Disorder below:
    Superficial charm and good intelligence
    Absence of delusions and other signs of irrational thinking
    Absence of nervousness or neurotic manifestations
    Unreliability
    Untruthfulness and insincerity
    Lack of remorse and shame
    Inadequately motivated antisocial behavior
    Poor judgment and failure to learn by experience
    Pathologic egocentricity and incapacity for love
    General poverty in major affective reactions
    Specific loss of insight
    Unresponsiveness in general interpersonal relations
    Fantastic and uninviting behavior with alcohol and sometimes without
    Suicide threats rarely carried out
    Sex life impersonal, trivial, and poorly integrated
    Failure to follow any life plan

  296. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    It is silly hedonistic humour… how is that sociopathic?

    Note: I am not saying a thing about whether that is presidential material- of course it ISN’T (when was it made? really wouldn’t that being promoted all over the place any more than AWP’s “classy” pyramids comment). I am just saying it isn’t sociopathic and about the sexual maturity level of a hair band or rap video.

  297. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    tk: 2) do so in an engaging way that helps bring attention and support to that platform….[McAfee]’s probably the party’s best bet on….

    me: Yup, he might do extremely well with the sociopath vote.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKgf5PaBzyg

  298. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    For the record, P. Schiff pursued and lost in the R primaries for CT Senate seat in ’10.

    Everyone has some baggage, pending suspicions about murder are non-qualifying. It’s surprising to me that this view is somehow controversial, as it seems really obvious. Marrou’s later-revealed baggage and goat sacrifices seem tame by comparison.

    I’ve been told by anarchists that even in a stateless society, murder would be (somehow) illegal. Makes me wonder….

  299. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 25, 2015

    “”Personally I see too much of the reason being one you didn’t mention: Vainglorious attention-mongering.””

    Bingo.

  300. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Tom,

    First let me say it is must something I wondered about… it certainly isn’t a deal-breaker. My two preferred candidates have this “flaw.” I would not be fair though if I didn’t mention it.

    ==

    People head straight for “the top of the LP ticket” for different reasons.

    One of them might be that they think they have something to say that deserves a nationwide hearing, and since the LP doesn’t win those “mid-level” elections anyway, working up the ladder isn’t going to really do anything for them.==

    We don’t win possibly because enough don’t consistently try. We don’t win presidential elections either.

    Personally I see too much of the reason being one you didn’t mention: Vainglorious attention-mongering.

  301. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    Tom, I lean toward not taking matching funds from the government. I just pointed out the other side of the argument, which does have some merit.

  302. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    ==Two of the candidates (Feldman and Ince, the latter under a different name) have been LP nominees for lower statewide exec. office before, and at least that’s something. ==

    Good point about Feldman that I hadn’t considered in his favour. I don’t support him for other reasons, but that is an excellent point in his favour.

  303. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Andy C.,

    “Is that not something I’m allowed to consider when judging his candidacy?”

    Of course you’re allowed to consider anything you like. I wasn’t contesting that. I was just pointing out your poor judgment 😉

    Caryn,

    People head straight for “the top of the LP ticket” for different reasons.

    One of them might be that they think they have something to say that deserves a nationwide hearing, and since the LP doesn’t win those “mid-level” elections anyway, working up the ladder isn’t going to really do anything for them.

    The late Harry Browne, according to the late RW Bradford’s personal account to me, privately told Bradfor he was running for president because his investment newsletter business was winding down and he needed something else to do that would let him knock down $100k a year in e.g. book sales, speaking fees, etc.

    I’m not as worried about candidates’ reasons as I am about whether or not they will 1) represent the Libertarian Party’s platform well; and 2) do so in an engaging way that helps bring attention and support to that platform.

    For obvious reasons, I don’t think McAfee passes that test on point (1) … YET. But he might choose to pass it. And if he does, he’s probably the party’s best bet on (2). So I’m watching with interest.

  304. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 25, 2015

    I’ll refrain from copy-pasting the whole thing, but for anybody who wants a good just-the-facts run-down of what happened with McAfee in Belize, I’d recommend this.

    http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.com/2012/11/did-computer-pioneer-john-mcafee-murder.html

    Excerpt:

    On November 7, 2012, one of McAfee’s neighbors, Gregory Faull, a 52-year-old builder from Florida, filed a formal complaint with the San Pedro mayor’s office. Faull accused his 67-year-old neighbor of recklessly firing off his guns and exhibiting “roguish behavior.” Faull also complained about McAfee’s loud and aggressive attack dogs. […]

    On Sunday morning, November 11, 2012, Gregory Faull’s 39-year-old Belizean housekeeper, Laura Tun, found him on the second floor of his house lying face-up in a pool of blood. Someone had shot him in the back of the head. The police found a 9 mm shell casing on the floor near his body. There was no sign of forced entry and the dead man’s iPhone and laptop computer had been taken. Mr. Faull had been murdered the night before.

    John McAfee immediately emerged as a suspect in his neighbor’s murder. The police went to his house that Sunday to question him. He wasn’t home and no one knew his whereabouts. [He was already on the run- ac]

    //

    But I do encourage people to read the rest, and decide if this is just an innocent misunderstanding nobody will care about, and if the other facts about the story paint him in a positive light even if the murder was some kind of attempted set-up like he claims.

  305. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    “Tom, the issue of whether or not Libertarian Party candidates should accept matching funds is not a core Libertarian issue”

    True, if “not a core Libertarian issue” is code for “not an issue Andy cares that much about.”

    Which, of course, is what most of us mean when we evaluate an issue as “core” or “not core.”

    I personally wouldn’t call it a “core” issue, either, just a red line. If you expect the taxpayers to cover the costs of your campaign, please seek another party’s nomination. Libertarians don’t support tax-extorted government welfare.

  306. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 25, 2015

    @11:23

    Yeah…. unpaid child support is not really on par with homicide. Though, that certainly didn’t help Marrou.

    Unless I’m mistaken, that also didn’t come out until after the convention.

  307. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    While people all of a sudden finding some passion for the LP they didn’t have before troubles me, if they are candid about it, well then it is what it is.

    Padding one’s LP activism resume or not acknowledging years of basically nothing is more problematic.

    Beng forthright is more important.

    All candidates will have some checkered pattern in their past. How they handle it is important.

  308. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 25, 2015

    “”Peter Schiff has “dissed” the Libertarian Party in the past for being ineffective. He said that libertarians should run as Republicans.””

    True. Though if he changed his mind about that he wouldn’t be the first.

    Napolitano has too, but people constantly throw his name out there. All things considered I think the Schiff rumor is more plausible, but who knows.

  309. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 25, 2015

    @TLK

    We’re not a jury and this is not a trial, but the evidence against him isn’t “zero”. It’s just heavily circumstantial.

    Without additional evidence, I’d probably vote to acquit on reasonable doubt, but I still think he did it and that the proffered alternative explanations are not at all very likely. I’ll put it this way: I think it’s more probable John McAfee killed Gregory Faull than not. Is that not something I’m allowed to consider when judging his candidacy?

    Not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt /= factually innocent.

    “”Why do we have so many candidates that just go for the top spot off the bat? Where is the getting some experience (not just political experience in the job… but learning the ins and outs of campaigning) by running for other offices first?””

    Excellent question, and a thought I’ve had about most of the declared field, most of whom I think could better serve the party (and better set themselves up to run for President in the future) by running a strong campaign for a mid-tier office first (House/Sen/Gov) and doing well at it. That’s where the bulk of our “bench” should be. cf. Ed Clark, Andre Marrou. Though, in fairness, it’s not that we don’t have such a bench, it’s that none of them seem interested in challenging Johnson.

    Two of the candidates (Feldman and Ince, the latter under a different name) have been LP nominees for lower statewide exec. office before, and at least that’s something. But if you’re going to run for President not having previously done anything significant in the party, you better be bringing something else to the table. You need to be able to do more than recite the platform, you have to be able to answer why *you* in particular should be President. “Because I’m a Libertarian” is not a good reason.

  310. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    Irwin Schiff not paying taxes was inline with libertarian principles. Whether it was a good strategy or not could be debatable (if a critical mass of the population had taken his lead, it would have been a big victory for our side), but he did not violate any libertarian principles.

    Peter Schiff has “dissed” the Libertarian Party in the past for being ineffective. He said that libertarians should run as Republicans.

  311. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Agreed Andy.

  312. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    Tom, the issue of whether or not Libertarian Party candidates should accept matching funds is not a core Libertarian issue. Richard Winger has pointed out that the funds come from a voluntary check box on income tax forms, and that the government is going to get this money anyway. Also, there is the argument that this money can be used to fight artificial barriers that the state puts in our way, and that it gives us a chance to get some of the money back that the government took from us in taxes to fight the government.

    Now I am not saying that Libertarians should take this money, I am just presenting the other side of the argument.

    I see this more as a political strategy issue where there is room for debate rather than a core libertarian issue.

    This is not in the same ballpark as somebody who thinks that the Social Security program is a good idea, or that government make work programs stimulate the economy.

  313. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    One comment here… and this comment goes against my two preferred candidates as well…. but fair is fair.

    Why do we have so many candidates that just go for the top spot off the bat? Where is the getting some experience (not just political experience in the job… but learning the ins and outs of campaigning) by running for other offices first?

    Johnson has that. Of course, it wasn’t as a Libertarian (the governorship) but he now has LP campaigning experience.

  314. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    “This is the first time anybody with an even remotely comparable (alleged) criminal history has sought the nomination.”

    Try again.

    Marrou had most of his campaign staff resign during the summer of 1992. Many of them sought to have the Libertarian Party strip him of the nomination because he had unpaid child support, had an arrest warrant in Massachusetts for an outstanding contempt of court charge, claimed to have been married twice when it was in fact four times, was being investigated for campaign improprieties from his time in Alaska, that he was running up unpaid credit card bills in a campaign PAC’s name without their approval, and that he was habitually months late in making his house payments. The national committee decided to take no action for fear it could call attention to these issues.

    “But really, the more one looks into the Belize mess, the worse it looks, even if he’s innocent of murder (which I don’t personally think he is– it really doesn’t look good).”

    I’d hate to be a defendant with you on the jury if precisely zero evidence whatsoever constitutes “really doesn’t look good.”

  315. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Andy Craig,

    Peter??

  316. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    On second thought, I will say Russell Means. He also had a history of issues with the law, somewhat closer in seriousness to McAfee’s mess. But that was all stuff he owned up to publicly as part of his activism. And of course, he didn’t win the nomination.

  317. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    @TLK

    This is the first time anybody with an even remotely comparable (alleged) criminal history has sought the nomination. He was never convicted, presumption of innocence, etc. etc. But really, the more one looks into the Belize mess, the worse it looks, even if he’s innocent of murder (which I don’t personally think he is– it really doesn’t look good).

    Only thing that comes anywhere close, would maybe be Irwin Schiff and his tax-resistance stuff, but even then that’s not really in the same ballpark.

    Speaking of which, I heard Peter is considering running for the nomination. He wouldn’t be my first choice, but I’d take him over McAfee, and probably over any of the rest of the declared field.

  318. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    I am not getting email subscriptions… trying again

  319. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    tom,

    ==I agree, whether or not McAfee runs a real campaign is a big if.==

    Yes, that is where it will be decided.

  320. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Andy,

    I agree, whether or not McAfee runs a real campaign is a big if.

    On the other hand, I think you overestimate the “baggage” angle in a big way. Once again, look at past LP history. The next time “baggage” matters will be the first time.

  321. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    tom,

    ==Harry Browne overhauled his position on matching funds on the debate stage AT the 1996 national convention, and even then only after someone started screaming “SAY IT! SAY IT!” at him from the floor (he overhauled his position against voting and electoral politics by announcing that he was running for president).===

    I love that story.

  322. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Andy Craig:

    ==he apparently insists he won’t do personal appearances,==

    While I am intrigued by Tom’s points, this is a huge killer for me.

  323. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 25, 2015

    Chuck,

    re: Austin Petersen

    Yes indeed he worked (for pay) at HQ in 2008. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being paid, but that doesn’t necessarily qualify as activism. It certainly qualifies as experience in the LP. Yet after 2008, there is very little–certainly not a steady record of LP advocacy and grassroots activism. General liberty activism? ABSOLUTELY. Then the Libertarian Republic and the Freedom Report starts up. Very little on the LP and certainly no out-in-out activism for it. None. I learned more about how Rand Paul was wonderful and how Cruz might be decent and how Petersen disagrees with libertarians because he personally is more hawkish about war (listen to the early Freedom Reports — take a tequila shot every time there is activism for the Libertarian Party— oh wait… there isn’t any). Those are simply the facts. He had a huge podium to reach people and encourage them into the Libertarian Party and did not. In fact, he didn’t seem particularly interested in the LP until the time he decided to run for President. He wasn’t even a dues paying member at the time he declared. Though he refuses to answer that question–not very transparent. Not even being a member (for who knows how long he wasn’t a member… he won’t answer) doesn’t speak well for being a dedicated party activist during that period of time. Obviously he has done LP work at some point years ago. Then did not do much of note for the LP (though did a lot in general liberty area such as Freedom Works… more Liberty Republicanish).

    Then there was the active campaigning for Rand Paul visibly up through the point of his declaring for the LP and still supporting Rand Paul afterwards.

  324. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    “”If he runs a real campaign for the LP’s presidential nomination””

    Big if. Among other things, he apparently insists he won’t do personal appearances, or really campaign at all. This announcement is the first I’ve really heard from him since he announced the “Cyber Party”– and there still isn’t any press release or anything from his campaign about this, just the USA Today story. His website has not, I think, been updated since it first went live.

    “” he will be the LP’s presidential nominee””

    I think you’re vastly underestimating how much baggage he has with the whole Belize thing, and his general reputation for being an insane drug addict, and also overestimating his modicum of fame for a software company he left over two decades ago.

    I don’t say that liking it, either. If it wasn’t for a lot of that, I think he *could* potentially have made a good candidate. Maybe if he had run in 1996 instead of 2016. I was cautiously optimistic when i first started looking into him, thinking the same thing many of us were, that his Cyber Party isn’t going to get on the ballot (and had a stupid name, I’ll add), but that he might be enticed by our ballot access.

    I don’t have any problem with him seeking the nomination. But under no circumstances should he receive it. Sort of a Mike Gravel or Jesse Ventura situation, as I see it.

  325. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Andy,

    Harry Browne overhauled his position on matching funds on the debate stage AT the 1996 national convention, and even then only after someone started screaming “SAY IT! SAY IT!” at him from the floor (he overhauled his position against voting and electoral politics by announcing that he was running for president).

    Was Harry Browne “sincere?”

    My speculation — and it is ENTIRELY speculation — is that when McAfee decided to run for president, he asked someone to write a campaign platform for him, told that someone where he stood on a few issues, and said “fill in the rest with stuff that seems reasonable but isn’t too specific — we’ll get to those things when we have to.”

    On the issues where he is SPECIFIC, he runs 3 fairly-to-very libertarian (foreign policy, immigration and surveillance state issues) to one distinctly anti-libertarian (“public works” programs to reduce unemployment). On the issues where he’s not specific, the vagueness hole is big enough to drive a truck through. Does that mean he’s insincere, or does it mean that he concentrated on the issues he really cared about, on which he is mostly libertarian, and left the rest undefined until he could bone up on them?

    Here’s the bottom line: If he runs a real campaign for the LP’s presidential nomination, he will be the LP’s presidential nominee. So it would behoove those who want the LP to have a nominee to help him become a good one.

  326. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    If McAfee has to overhaul his platform to make it “libertarian enough” for LP Convention delegates, that woukd strike me as an insincere move, especially this late in the game, with the convention being in May.

  327. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Bob,

    If McAfee starts overhauling his platform right now, he’ll be doing it or be done with it before Gary Johnson even declares. Hardly “last-minute” by recent LP standards.

    And yes, of COURSE it would be opportunism. That word is LP presidential nomination politics in a nutshell. It’s not something McAfee would be introducing to the party.

  328. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    Andy,

    Very strangely, you made my argument for McAfee having huge name recognition due to the software, after saying the opposite.

    Intel paid nearly $8 billion for the company, then kept McAfee’s name on it for three years even as they changed the software completely. That makes it very clear that what they paid the $8 billion for was one word: McAfee. They paid $8 billion for that word because of its huge recognition and instant associate by tens of millions of people with the kind of product they were selling.

    Yes, I know that Browne, Barr and Johnson were MARKETED as “celebrities.” I marketed Russo as a celebrity, too. Even complete unknowns like Wayne Allyn Root convinced substantial portions of the LP convention delegates that they were “celebrities.” None of the aforementioned were or are within an order of magnitude of McAfee vis a vis name recognition.

  329. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    mnr: Right-wing opportunism is self-defeating for ultimate goals in several ways. The major reason for putting forth transition demands is as a way station to ultimate victory; but, by studiously avoiding the raising of ultimate goals or principles, the opportunist, at best, short-circuits the ultimate goal, and betrays it by failing to raise the consciousness of the public in the explicit direction of the final goal. The ultimate goal will not be reached automatically, by itself; it can only be reached if a large group of adherents continues to hold high the banner of that ultimate, radical objective.

    tk: Especially if [McAfee’s] decision to do that is accompanied by an overhaul of his campaign platform to make it more libertarian.

    me: A last-minute change in a campaign platform sounds like “opportunism” to me, although not specifically “right-wing opportunism” in this case.

  330. Robert Capozzi Robert Capozzi December 25, 2015

    tk, my guess is the PRODUCT BRAND “McAfee” has very high recognition. “John McAfee,” though, not so much. As a candidate, he might get some attention for his notoriety, not unlike the blip that Invictus received in October.

    YMMV on whether that sort of attention is positive or not.

    What are Peter Norton’s politics? 😉

  331. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    “”He’s certainly more widely known than anyone the LP has ever run for president.””

    I doubt that. Paul, Barr, and Johnson all had some modicum of name recognition from their prior political careers, and Barr and Johnson were both relatively well-known on the national political scene. Browne had also become modestly well-known with his books in the 1970s.

    McAfee I think is slightly better-known, but closer to the same tier as one of those, than a true A-list celebrity or ‘everybody knows who they are’ type. After all, he announced his candidacy a while back and wasn’t getting much (any, really) traction for it.

    “”Intel paid nearly $8 billion for the company three years before changing the name to something not including “McAfee,” so apparently THEY thought the name had good recognition.””

    That says the exact opposite. The product line had value (though I know a lot of people who’d dispute even that). To the degree the name had recognition, it had become an overwhelmingly negative reputation. When John himself started attacking them over their notoriously crappy and malware-like software (and also when the whole ‘fugitive’ thing happened), that’s when they finally decided to ditch the name.

    The Intel sale was also long after John McAfee had left the company, which he did in 1994.

  332. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 25, 2015

    “John McAfee is not a celebrity; cyber, or otherwise.”

    I guess that depends on how you define “celebrity.”

    Per WordNet: “celebrity, n 1: a widely known person”

    He’s certainly more widely known than anyone the LP has ever run for president.

    Of course, he’s not widely know as a POLITICAL “celebrity” per se.

    On the other hand, to the extent that he’s politically well-known at all, it’s for his libertarian orientation regarding Internet freedom and privacy.

    And to the extent that he’s non-politically well-known, it’s for something that feeds into that — empowering the individual to secure his or her computer against evildoers. I don’t have an easy reference to how many computer users had the name “McAfee” on their desktops, but presumably it ran to tens of millions. Intel paid nearly $8 billion for the company three years before changing the name to something not including “McAfee,” so apparently THEY thought the name had good recognition.

    Based on past performance by LP convention delegates, it seems highly unlikely that they will select anyone other than McAfee for the nomination if McAfee seeks the nomination. Especially if his decision to do that is accompanied by an overhaul of his campaign platform to make it more libertarian.

    Of course, I am still with NOTA unless that latter thing happens. But I do find the prospect exciting.

  333. Thane Eichenauer Thane Eichenauer December 25, 2015

    Andy> How about a Libertarian Party candidate for President that is actually a solid libertarian?

    Do you have any personal recommendations?

  334. Andy Andy December 25, 2015

    How about a Libertarian Party candidate for President that is actually a solid libertarian? It has been a long time since we have had one like that.

  335. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 25, 2015

    Interesting. He says he’s a Republican, then immediately follows it up by saying that he likes smaller government, something that Republicans never provide, in any areas.

  336. William Saturn William Saturn December 25, 2015

    Mark Cuban would make a great candidate but his views puts him at odds with the Libertarian Party:

    Not so much libertarian as much as I’d like to be libertarian. When I think libertarian, it’s ‘as small of a government as we can get, right now — you just cut right through it and you make it [smaller] right now.’ That’s not real. There’s got to be a process. There’s got to be a transition. As a country, we make decisions. We make decisions that we’re going to provide healthcare, right? We don’t just let people die on the street. You can go into any hospital and they have to treat you. I’m a Republican in the respect that I like smaller government and I like less intrusion in some areas. But there’s sometimes where I think we have to intrude. I think there’s sometimes when you have to do things…

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-cuban-politics-philosophy-2015-8

  337. Andy Craig Andy Craig December 25, 2015

    “”Did he say he’s likely to win the nomination, or did USA Today? Either way, I wouldn’t be too quick on that call. We’ve had enough candidates with baggage, and this guy sounds like he’s pulling a steamer trunk.””

    Poor wording on USA Today’s part I think. Obviously they were just repeating his own claim on that, but as-written it looks like they were objectively reporting it, in which case it’s obviously wrong. It should have been either a quote from him, or identified as somebody’s opinion.

  338. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 25, 2015

    John McAfee is not a celebrity; cyber, or otherwise.

  339. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 25, 2015

    If we run a cyber celebrity, I strongly prefer Mark Cuban to John McAfee.

  340. trying again trying again December 25, 2015

    McAfee would be a great competent radical candidate for the LP, especially if we can’t get a previously-elected competent radical like Gov. Ventura. Definitely a step up from the all of the other announced incompetent mendicant candidates.

  341. #AP4LP2016 #AP4LP2016 December 25, 2015

    Let’s not forget Austin has a LONG and STORIED history of activism for the LP, unlike many others on this thread.

  342. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 25, 2015

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    Better than Austin Petersen who was actively stumping for Rand Paul within months of seeking the LP nomination. And had a popular website and podcast in which his advocacy for the Libertarian Party was noticeable by its absence.

    I completely agree with you about those Austin Petersen negatives.

    However, Austin does have a record of activism within the LP before he stumped for Rand Paul: he worked at LPHQ.

  343. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 24, 2015

    ==No record of party activism.===

    Better than Austin Petersen who was actively stumping for Rand Paul within months of seeking the LP nomination. And had a popular website and podcast in which his advocacy for the Libertarian Party was noticeable by its absence.

  344. langa langa December 24, 2015

    Charismatic? Yes.

    Libertarian? No.

  345. georgephillies georgephillies December 24, 2015

    I did not sense charisma. Your mileage varied.

  346. georgephillies georgephillies December 24, 2015

    No record of party activism. No sign he understands political campaigning. No record of association with our party.

    The proposal is absurd on its face.

  347. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 24, 2015

    NB: That second question above was from Andy, not Pete. I forgot to type a transition. Sorry.

  348. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp December 24, 2015

    Quoth Pete:

    “Well, Tom Knapp, what makes this guy good for Libertarians? Does he carry legal baggage as the article implies?”

    What makes this guy good for Libertarians is:

    1) The parts of his platform that are libertarian;

    2) His name recognition;

    3) I hate the word, but for lack of a better one “charisma” of a higher order than any LP presidential prospect I can think of with the exception of Doug Stanhope.

    Yes, he carries legal baggage. The murder allegation in Belize seems to have been BS (Belize’s law enforcement could have had him extradited from Guatemala, where he was being held pursuant to that, and chose not to do so and charge him). And IIRC he had an alleged DUI which he claimed was actually a prescription medication reaction.

    What makes him bad for Libertarians is that parts of his platform are either too vague to evaluate as libertarian or not, or else just plain not libertarian. But the last two election cycles demonstrate that’s not an insuperable, or even especially high, barrier to the nomination. And it’s possible that his platform was hacked out by, um, hacks and that if the problems with it are brought to his attention he will be interested in addressing them.

    “Tom, what do you think of McAfee’s deviations from the Libertarian platform?”

    I don’t like them. And barring significant changes to them, I’m likely to stick with NOTA. On the other hand, he comes off as somewhat more libertarian than Barr and about as libertarian as Johnson for the most part. Which is apparently the highest standard that can be expected from LP national convention delegates if the candidate can plausibly claim to be rich and/or famous. He’s reasonably competitive in those two areas.

  349. BPArnold BPArnold December 24, 2015

    So, just out of curiosity, outside of legalization where does he stand on issues of ‘Liberty’?

    I like his obvious credentials, concerning cybersecurity, but what entitles him to branish the Banner of Liberty?

  350. paulie paulie December 24, 2015

    McAfee is not even close to as rich as he used to be. Last I heard was that he was down to his last 3 or 4 million and may not even be that anymore.

  351. Andy Andy December 24, 2015

    It would almost certainly cost a lot more than $3 million for an independent candidate for President to get on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC.

  352. steve m steve m December 24, 2015

    I was estimating the cost of an independent getting on the ballot using the 1 million signatures at say 3 million dollars. The appeal of the Libertarian Party Nomination might be that it would be far less expensive. So I didn’t say ask McAfee to fund the ballot access in its entirety but maybe kick in say 50 grand?

  353. Matt Cholko Matt Cholko December 24, 2015

    Gary Johnson becomes more appealing every day…..

  354. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 24, 2015

    Of course its a carnival sideshow. That’s why I said it would be interesting. It is also quite frightening. As much — or more — than if Ventura were to announce.

    My guess is that he’s had little or no luck raising money or interest in his cyberparty. I’d also guess that he’s not going to be showing up at state conventions and probably won’t be making donations in any large sum. This is just a guess.

    He makes it very clear on his website that he’s not planning on making any personal appearances, which means he’ll need to send surrogates to state conventions to drum up support. That is not likely to work very well.

    But the media attention we will get will be a great opportunity — if serious candidates are also on the ballot and one of them wins the nomination.

  355. steve m steve m December 24, 2015

    Maybe John McAfee would like to make a donation for ballot access petitioning?

  356. Pete Blome Pete Blome December 24, 2015

    Well, I’m not impressed with the video. Libertarians who endorse sophomoric or bizarre candidates like McAfee strictly for shock value do the cause of liberty no good. Real people die, go to jail and lose their livelihoods over what the President does. Neither McAfee, on first impression, and certainly not Invictus, are real candidates, but rather carnival sideshows. If you wanna jerk off with a Presidential candidate, at least do it in private, and don’t involve the rest of the LP.

  357. paulie paulie December 24, 2015

    Orlando is getting more and more interesting….




    Don’t Wait! Register Today!

  358. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 24, 2015

    If this were April, I’d say this was a joke. But he’s really serious about this?

  359. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 24, 2015

    As I said…interesting! And let’s change that from “a lot of people think that he’s bat sh*t crazy” to “almost everyone thinks that he’s bat sh*t crazy”.

  360. Andy Craig Andy Craig Post author | December 24, 2015

    “How many other candidates will have miniseries about them?”

    About the accusation that they committed murder?

    Hopefully just this one.

  361. Andy Andy December 24, 2015

    LOL!!!

  362. Joe Wendt Joe Wendt December 24, 2015

    It’s nice to see a candidate with charisma and the ability to attract media attention seek the LP nomination. How many other candidates will have miniseries about them? He certainly adds a new dynamic and interest in the race.

  363. John K. Fockler Jr. John K. Fockler Jr. December 24, 2015

    Did he say he’s likely to win the nomination, or did USA Today? Either way, I wouldn’t be too quick on that call. We’ve had enough candidates with baggage, and this guy sounds like he’s pulling a steamer trunk.

  364. Stewart Flood Stewart Flood December 24, 2015

    I agree with your assessment. McAfee isn’t 100/100, but he’s on the Libertarian side on a lot of issues. He is certainly not an idiot. The RT interview he did in September was interesting.

    Ok, so a lot of people think that he’s bat sh*t crazy. Has that stopped anyone from running for president before?

    At the least, this will make the race for the nomination interesting.

  365. Andy Andy December 24, 2015

    Tom, what do you think of McAfee’s deviations from the Libertarian platform?

  366. Pete Blome Pete Blome December 24, 2015

    Well, Tom Knapp, what makes this guy good for Libertarians? Does he carry legal baggage as the article implies?

  367. jedziggler jedziggler December 24, 2015

    No thanks.

  368. Caryn Ann Harlos Caryn Ann Harlos December 24, 2015

    commenting to subscribe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

20 + one =