Press Release: Third Party Advocate Richard Winger Endorses Governor Gary Johnson for President

Winger endorses Johnson
Meme above was found on Facebook

The notice below was sent to me from the Gary Johnson campaign.

NOTED THIRD PARTY ADVOCATE RICHARD WINGER ENDORSES GOV. GARY JOHNSON FOR PRESIDENT

April 20, 2016, Salt Lake City, UT — Richard Winger, Publisher of Ballot Access News and nationally recognized advocate for more equitable treatment of independent and third party candidates, has endorsed Governor Gary Johnson for President.

One of the nation’s leading authorities on election law and ballot access, Winger is frequently quoted and called upon by the media, legislatures and the courts to share his expertise regarding the obstacles faced by third parties in U.S. elections. Ballot Access News is widely cited for its comprehensive coverage of election law and developments in all 50 states.

Announcing his endorsement of Johnson, Winger stated, “For the first time in decades, the media, commentators and, indeed, voters are taking a serious look at ‘third party’ options. The realities of ballot access and election law make it clear that the Libertarian nominee for President will be the likely ‘third’ option in November.

“That reality makes it more important than ever that voters have a credible and experienced third party candidate on the ballot. A successful two-term Governor, Gary Johnson will be that candidate, and I am pleased to support his candidacy.

“The time has never been better to disrupt the two-party stranglehold, and Gary Johnson has the very real potential to do just that.”


J.V. LaBeaume (@JVLaB)
DC media coordinator, Gary Johnson 2016
(202) 352-8335
@GJ2016press
Media@GaryJohnson2016.com

34 thoughts on “Press Release: Third Party Advocate Richard Winger Endorses Governor Gary Johnson for President

  1. George Whitfield

    Thank you Richard Winger for your expertise and effective work over many years to help the Libertarian Party gain valuable ballot access. I look forward to voting for Gary Johnson in November.

  2. Shivany Lane

    Richard Winger is a well respected member of the Libertarian Party and they are damned lucky to have him.

    I met Richard when I started my research into creating a party. He was gracious, patient and kind. I never asked his political affiliation nor did he offer the information to me as it was not relevant. He has been an excellent friend during the short time we have known each other. Even though he knows that I am solidly in the McAfee camp, this endorsement does not change my deep feelings of warmth and incredible respect for him. That is what makes America so great. We have the freedom to choose and talk about it without fear of retribution.

    I hope that the Johnson campaign show Richard the appreciation and respect he deserves for publicly endorsing him. And I hope that the trolls stay under the bridge in this post because Richard has earned the respect and appreciation that all the “other” parties owe to him and the Libertarian Party for paving the way and clearing the path to Ballot Access through years of hard work, lawsuits, money and boots on the ground.

    BTW That’s a nice picture of him. I would like a copy without all the verbiage.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp

    Winger’s endorsement is a pretty big deal and deserves to be treated as such. I know lots of people who disagree with him on this or that — myself included, and in particular this — but I don’t know anyone who doesn’t respect his work on behalf of ballot parity for third party candidates. That long record of work and support certainly entitles him to respectful attention for his opinion.

  4. Cody Quirk

    Yup, I stand with Richard on this.

    I may not agree with Gary on everything, but I do not think there is any other LP candidate in our primary that can reach or even surpass the 5% threshold in the general, nor is there any other LP presidential candidate with such an amount of political experience that would add serious credibility to the Libertarian campaign for the presidency.

    Gary Johnson will help broaden our appeal to mainstream voters, and especially the closet Libertarians among them.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I do not think there is any other LP candidate in our primary that can reach or even surpass the 5% threshold in the general”

    That’s true.

    But neither can Johnson.

    Absent some cataclysmic events that we have no ability to create or influence, the LP candidate this year will get 500,000 to 1.5 million votes. Probably toward the lower end of that (even more probably if we don’t nominate McAfee).

  6. Thomas L. Knapp

    Another thing to keep in mind on the credibility front is that records cut both ways.

    When I declare myself Norton XIII, by the grace of God emperor of these United States, a few people laugh and nobody else notices.

    When Gary Johnson becomes the first governor of New Mexico ever to be cited for contempt by that state’s Supreme Court — for trying to rule by decree when the legislature won’t give him what he wants — maybe more people are noticing and none of them are laughing.

    When Derrick Michael Reid advocates making 10-year-olds watch public executions, hardly anyone notices and those who do shrug their shoulders and say “well, he’s crazy, what do you expect?”

    When Gary Johnson asks New Mexico’s legislature to let him execute 13-year-olds, more people notice. And they think he’s as crazy as Derrick Michael Reid.

    And so on and so forth.

  7. George Phillies

    Cody:

    ” 5% threshold in the general,”

    As there are several of these thresholds wandering around, to which of the alleged 5% thresholds (some are real, some not so much) are you referring?

    George

  8. Freudian slip

    Don’t ask Space Cadet Captain Coty Banks Quirk for details because he is incapable of providing them. He’ll probably just try to insult your mother as he did to someone named rj on a previous post.

  9. Cody Quirk

    Says then man that doesn’t even know what ‘maroon’ means.

    Why don’t you hook up with your buddy Grundmann? He’s looking for a man to be in his life 😉

  10. Cody Quirk

    “But neither can Johnson.
    Absent some cataclysmic events that we have no ability to create or influence, the LP candidate this year will get 500,000 to 1.5 million votes. Probably toward the lower end of that (even more probably if we don’t nominate McAfee).”

    Is that what your crystal ball told you?

  11. Cody Quirk

    I wonder if Austin is going to throw out a couple of gay slurs or homophobic rants over Richard’s endorsement of Gary?

  12. robert capozzi

    tk: Absent some cataclysmic events that we have no ability to create or influence, the LP candidate this year will get 500,000 to 1.5 million votes.

    me: Why do you think that’s the range? Perot did far better than that range, and there were no cataclysmic events in 92, at least none that I recall.

    Assuming Trump v Clinton, I do see this one as substantially different than other prez cycles. Both are very unpopular, obviously deeply flawed candidates. This makes protest voting more viable, I suspect.

    A case can be made to vote GJ in safe states: Why vote Trump in CA or Clinton in TX when you can vote for a former guv who’s the sanest man in politics? (Granted, that’s a fat-man’s race, but still!)

  13. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Why do you think that’s the range?”

    Because that’s BEEN the range, and there haven’t been any material changes to magically make it change.

    “Perot did far better than that range”

    By being far more famous than anyone who has ever sought or achieved the LP’s presidential nomination, including Johnson, and by spending on par with the major party candidates, which none of this year’s candidates, including Johnson, are in a position to do.

  14. Freudian slip

    Agent Coty Banks uses the term “maroon” and doesn’t understand why everyone thinks he is misspelling “moron”. Sorry but we are not 11 years old like you. We are not familiar with terms from the cartoons you watch all day long.

  15. robert capozzi

    tk: there haven’t been any material changes to magically make it change.

    me: We’re watching a very different movie, then. When was the last time there was anything like a “NeverTrump” campaign? When was the last time a front-runner was being investigated by the FBI for national-security breaches? When were the front-runners THIS unpopular?

    I’d say never, at least in the modern era.

    I don’t know HOW famous Perot was prior to 1990. My recollection was not 1/8th as famous as Trump in 2014. More famous than GJ. I’d say Nader was more famous than Perot.

    There are many Rs who’ve said they will not vote for Trump. Now, my sense is half of those are neocons, so they won’t vote GJ. The other half think Trump is frightening, possibly a Mussolini or a Mondale.

    On it’s face, there’s a case that GJ could break out of the historical band. It will require skillful execution and a lot of luck.

  16. Cody Quirk

    So was your childhood spent riding the short bus all day, and/or were you that stupid to be unable to watch cartoons back then because those ‘big words’ the characters say hurts your head?

    Makes sense with you.

  17. Thomas L. Knapp

    “When was the last time there was anything like a ‘NeverTrump’ campaign?”

    The times that come to mind are the Dixiecrat rebellion v. Truman, Theodore Roosevelt’s Bull Moose v. Taft, and the southern Democratic Party v. Douglass in 1860. But there might be others.

    “I don’t know HOW famous Perot was prior to 1990. My recollection was not 1/8th as famous as Trump in 2014.”

    I don’t know if he was as famous then as Trump is now. I’m damn sure he was more than 1/8th as famous — and for things besides going bankrupt and yelling “you’re fired” to boot. When’s the last time Trump personally flew a plane full of Christmas presents into Hanoi for American POWs, or sent privately hired commandos to rescue his employees from revolutionary Iran?

    “There are many Rs who’ve said they will not vote for Trump.”

    Yep. And there were many Rs who said they wouldn’t vote for Romney. And there were many Rs who said they would not vote for McCain. And when I was a kid, the fundamentalist churches in the midwest spread the word not to vote for old man Bush because he might be the Antichrist, vote for that nice Reagan fellow instead. Talk is cheap.

    Yes, there’s “a case” that GJ could break out of the historical band — if things that we have no power to control happen. And if those things happen, the historical band-breaking probably wouldn’t be dependent on it being GJ in particular. He just doesn’t particularly stand out at all, let alone in a good way, even from the current LP pack. He’s not as charismatic as McAfee, he’s not as principled as Perry, he’s not as pretty as Petersen, and he’s not as financially responsible as any of them. He’s just an aging hipster whose fans go into multiple orgasms when they get to call a Libertarian presidential candidate “Governor.”

  18. George Phillies

    Perot? You may know the phrase “unsung hero”.

    Perot was a “sung hero”. Some popular singer composed a ballad in his honor that was — I think — well known at the time. Also, Perot had done serious good things.

    If each party detests its candidate apparent, each party totally loathes the opponent, and that is more important.

  19. Andy

    Ross Perot also bought prime time major network TV spots to run infomercials for his campaign, and this was back during a time when being on TV during prime time on a major network meant even more than it means today. Perot was also a guest on pretty much all of the big TV talks shows.

    The only candidate since Ross Perot that you could really compare to him is Donald Trump.

  20. George Whitfield

    As I think back to Ross Perot’s campaigns, he was the Donald Trump of his day. He was an outsider and he ran voicing the same concern as Trump: the danger to jobs of free trade deals with Mexico. He was also emphasized the growing US government debt to a greater extent than Trump has and I don’t recall his position on immigration. That was not perceived as much as a problem then as Trump is talking about now. The difference is that Perot ran as an Independent and Trump is running as a Republican but they appeal to many of the same demographic groups. I remember back when Perot was running and many Republicans were attracted to Perot because he was not dependent upon any big donors and he spoke his mind. Also Perot attracted many people who didn’t normally get interested in elections. They both were outspoken and not typical politicians so of course many people didn’t like them for that, too. The effect on the Presidential race for us Libertarians is that having Trump as the Republican opens up the lane us in the race for people who don’t like Trump or Clinton. Whereas when Perot ran as an independent or Reform it crowded our alternative lane and make it more difficult for us Libertarians to get attention in the media and from the public.

  21. Freudian slip

    Coty Einstein, Ph.D: “So was your childhood spent riding the short bus all day, and/or were you that stupid to be unable to watch cartoons back then because those ‘big words’ the characters say hurts your head?”

    The professor makes another profound statement, questioning whether those who don’t continue to watch cartoons into their adulthoods either rode a “short bus” in their youth (not just to go to school but for the entire day) and/or were just too deficient to enjoy the sophisticated bastion of intellectual stimulation, “Merrie Melodies”. What a brilliant hypothesis!

  22. robert capozzi

    Tk: Yes, there’s “a case” that GJ could break out of the historical band — if things that we have no power to control happen.

    Me: Yes, like I said, a breakout performance will require a lot of luck. While I largely agree with your assessment that other L candidates have strengths over GJ, my sense is that GJ maximizes the potential for a breakout, mostly because of his resume. This is not a matter of “orgasm” inducement, but just the way the world works. Candidates for jobs have to have relevant experience for the hiring manager to consider the candidate to be qualified. Would you hire a hair stylist who has read books on anatomy to be a surgeon? Or a truck driver who surfs the web for CEO of an Internet company?

    I also believe that the disdain for Trump is far, far more pronounced than it was for Romney and McCain. I also believe it’s possible that Clinton has not yet met her toughest challenge. While I’m starting to sense the FBI investigation won’t lead to an indictment, there is another personal matter that could completely up-end her candidacy. Just this week, the Morning Joe folks were hinting at it, but for PC reasons, I believe, they didn’t say it: there’s reason to believe that she is, as they say, on the “other team.” (Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but my sense is the country is not ready for a woman on the other team as president.)

    While every election is over-dramatized as the “most important in a generation,” this one feels quite a bit different to me. There’s a long list of overt hate being spewed by Trump, whose temperament and lack of experience should be disqualifying, but are instead the reasons for his success to date. And, again, his and Clinton’s high negatives are, I think, wildly unprecedented.

    For GJ to breakout, though, he still needs a LOT of coaching. He’s tentative, meandering, and still can’t seem to get out a decent soundbite.

    Btw, I don’t believe Trump is “famous for” his bankruptcies. He’s famous for real estate development, and for his attractive, intriguing first wife calling him “The Donald,” and for the Art of the Deal. That put him in the top-tier of business people in America. The Apprentice producers picked him for his relative fame and his showmanship, I presume, and that franchise made him probably the most famous business person/celebrity, probably more than Jobs and Gates.

    Perot was top-tier business person (mostly a government contractor) in the 80s, but not a full-blown celebrity UNTIL he ran for office, in my estimation. Today, Bezos and Hastings are top-tier business people, but not household names, is my sense.

    I wonder what Perot is doing politically these days? It might be worth approaching him for an endorsement, though he’s always seemed more interested in balancing the budget vs shrinking government.

  23. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Perot was top-tier business person (mostly a government contractor) in the 80s, but not a full-blown celebrity UNTIL he ran for office, in my estimation.”

    I’d say having a five part network mini-series made about your Iran rescue operation is full-blown celebrity stuff.

    You’re correct about him being a government contractor, though. My recollection is that his first big coup with EDS was getting a federal contract to do the data processing on Medicare claims.

  24. robert capozzi

    tk: I’d say having a five part network mini-series made about your Iran rescue operation is full-blown celebrity stuff.

    me: I didn’t see it and never heard about it previously, but that was a portrayal of something he did, not featuring Perot himself. Could be my 1/8th was too low. Really no way to say, except maybe name ID polls.

  25. Thomas L. Knapp

    I’m unaware of any name ID polls concerning Perot prior to his presidential run.

    But a 1983 book written by Ken Follett on commission from Perot, about the Iran caper, went to #1 on the best-seller lists and 25 million Americans watched Richard Crenna play Perot in the mini-series based on the book.

    And a 1990 book, Ross Perot: An Unauthorized Biography, made the New York Times best-seller list.

    There was also a book out entirely on his tiff with General Motors prior to his presidential candidacy. I don’t know how well it sold.

    When he announced he was running for president, I went to my local public library the next day to see if I could find out more about him. My recollection is that there were three or four books about him on the shelf there (I read the Unauthorized Biography).

    He was famous. I don’t know if he was more famous or less famous when he ran than Trump is now. But definitely famous. He announced his campaign on the Larry King show … because he was comfortable there, having been a guest a number of times before.

  26. Andy

    I’d say that Ross Perot was less famous than Donald Trump when he launched his campaign, but he made up for this by putting a bunch of his own money in the race and buying prime time slots on big TV networks, and by hitting the TV talk show circuit.

  27. Shawn Levasseur

    I would consider Perot before his run for office as being far less famous than Trump.

    I’d say the nature of what fame he had made the idea of him running for president easier to grasp in the minds of the public. Especially as Perot had the advantage of being a frequent guest on Larry King Live during the zenith of CNN’s influence over the culture. Perot was in a better position to leverage what fame he had into politics.

  28. NewFederalist

    Wow! I find myself agreeing with Bob Capozzi! While I have serious reservations about Gov. Johnson’s financial accountability, his political resume is the most likely one to attract media attention and more votes if a Hillary Rodham Clinton vs. Donald J. Trump election occurs. Since there really is no “lesser of two evils” in that match up, the LP could post a much larger than normal protest vote.

  29. Andy

    Donald Trump will cost the LP votes, in my opinion. Why? Because he is perceived as being anti-establishment, and a lot of people who vote for LP candidates do so because it is an anti-establishment protest vote.

    It will be better for the LP if Trump gets screwed out of the Republican nomination, and especially if the Republicans nominate an establishment hack like John Kasich, or if they pull out Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney or some other establishment shill who was not in the race.

    Ted Cruz as the Republican candidate would be better for the LP at this point as well, but Cruz would not be the best thing fir the LP either because he is perceived as being at least somewhat of a libertarian or constitutionalist, in spite of the fact that he is bad on several issues from those perspectives.

    Hillary Clinton vs John Kasich or some other mainstream Republican establishment lackey would be great for the Libertarian Party.

  30. robert capozzi

    A, interesting. I agree that DT would cost SOME anti-establishment votes, but whether it costs NET votes, I’m skeptical. Trump is highly alienating to so many, a loose cannon, a dangerous man, in fact.

    Kasich v Clinton would probably hurt a GJ’s vote totals, since IMO Kasich is generally a reasonable pol with little baggage, aside from his inside baseball LP-suppressing shenanigans in OH, which few know about and fewer will care about. My guess is many will view him as a lesser of 2 evils. I think he stands a good chance of winning.

Leave a Reply

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