Gary Johnson Names His Choice for Vice-President

William Weld

May 18, 2016

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Seizing new fuel for his appeal to Donald Trump’s critics, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson has joined forces with another former Republican governor to strengthen his Libertarian presidential bid.

William Weld, who served two terms as the Republican governor of Massachusetts in the 1990s, will announce plans Thursday to seek the Libertarian Party’s vice presidential nomination, Johnson confirmed in a Wednesday interview with the Associated Press. The pair met privately in Las Vegas over the weekend when Weld agreed to run as Johnson’s running mate in the party’s upcoming nominating convention and into the general election.

“We got together and shook hands on it,” Johnson told the AP in an interview in Salt Lake City, where his underdog presidential campaign is based. “It brings an enormous amount of credibility to what it is I’m doing. I’m unbelievably flattered by this and humbled.”

Johnson is casting himself as the best — and perhaps only — alternative to Trump, as the New York billionaire’s Republican critics struggle to identify another third-party candidate.

Johnson earned just 1 percent of the national vote during his 2012 presidential run, but reminds reluctant conservatives that he’ll likely be the only third-party candidate on the ballot in 50 states this fall.

Weld, a well-respected former governor in the Northeast, offers Johnson some credibility and badly needed fundraising prowess. The 70-year-old will announce his vice presidential bid in New York on Thursday, Johnson said.

Finish the article here

313 thoughts on “Gary Johnson Names His Choice for Vice-President

  1. Andy

    So Johnson picks a running mate who will be brand new to the party and who is not a libertarian. Great (sarcasm).

  2. Andy

    I sure am glad that I joined the LP back in the days when we had actual hardcore Libertarians on our presidential ticket.

  3. DJH2036

    It’s clear Johnson wanted to run with a Republican to shore-up the Never Trump movement. But of all the Republican politicians Johnson could choose from- he chooses the one who hasn’t been in any sort of public office in years and who has no Libertarianism in him whatsoever…
    Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz- all could’ve united the Never Trump movement without going full-blown Centrist Republican and who could fit the Libertarian Party’s platform to a point. (Amash especially- as he hates the two-party system)
    This is a MAJOR mistake on his part.

  4. Austin Battenberg

    According to Wikipedia, Weld “ran as both a Libertarian and Republican candidate to be elected Governor of New York in 2006. He was nominated by the Libertarian Party of New York but was defeated for the Republican nomination, and subsequently withdrew from the race.”

    So despite Johnson’s critics claims that he is yet another interloper to the LP, it appears he has been a member longer then GJ.

  5. Jay Wildwood

    The research I found is that Gary Johnson has been a Libertarian Party member since 1993, so they are both long time party members. However, Weld should be at the top of the ticket!

  6. Joe Wendt

    If the LP nominates a Johnson-Weld ticket, it will no longer be the “Party of Principle,” and will become the “Party of Eastern Establishment Republican Elitists “

  7. Thomas L. Knapp

    Austin,

    Weld fucked the New York LP over with his gubernatorial run. He SAID that if the LP nominated him he would run through the general election whether he got the GOP nomination or not. Then as soon as he didn’t, he dropped out and left the LPNY in the lurch.

    What happens if the LP nominates him for vice-president and then Trump picks a running mate he likes? Will he screw us again? We shouldn’t give him the chance, even if we make the mistake of picking Johnson for the top slot again. And we shouldn’t do that, either.

  8. Andy

    A ticket with milquetoast candidates does not necessarily mean that they will be relevant.

  9. Stewart Flood

    We get this a week out? Ok, technically ten days from the vote. And they expect this to be rubber stamped?

  10. Andy

    Yeah, we are so “small minded” that we prefer to have actual libertarians on our ticket.

    I really do not see how Weld brings much to the table. He has been out of office for a long time and he does not have a big following. I bet a lot of people do not even know who he is.

  11. Scott Lieberman

    I think Governor Johnson has jumped the shark by picking former Governor William Weld as a potential running mate.

  12. Paul

    I think this is about getting $$$ and endorsements from the Never Trump crowd in an effort to create buzz, be included in the polls and get into the debates.

    They’re both libertarian-ish, rather than LIBERTARIAN. But from a tactical politics standpoint, this is pretty smart.

  13. Thomas Knapp

    mARS,

    Yes, the Libertarian ticket might be relevant — if we nominate, for example, Darryl Perry and Will Coley.

    Nominating a couple of retread Republican con artists? Not so relevant.

  14. George Dance

    Andy: “Yeah, we are so ‘small minded’ that we prefer to have actual libertarians on our ticket.”

    Who’s “we”, Andy, and who’s your candidate? If there are enough “we’s”, you can nominate him or her instead. But who, of the 17 or so, can the anti-GJ crowd agree on?

    As Memorial Day comes closer, this becomes less of an academic question daily.

  15. George Dance

    “The research I found is that Gary Johnson has been a Libertarian Party member since 1993”.

    Jay, Jay, Jay … the internet story is that Johnson joined the LP in 2012 when his Republican candidacy for president collapsed: and Austin Petersen (who joined in 2008) is the “long-time” Libertarian.

    Why let facts get in the way of such a good story?

  16. Andy

    We as in those of us here who are complaining about it.

    I lost faith in LP delegates in 2008, and i have been pretty disappointed with the outcome of every national convention since then, so I would not be surprised if Johnson / Weld becomes the ticket.

  17. itdoesntmattermuch

    Everyone here should remember what happened with Weld in 2006. I recognize most of the names from the 3-4 predecessors to this blog going back to 2004 or so.

  18. itdoesntmattermuch

    FWIW, I’d never heard of Austin Peterson until this election cycle, and the first several times I confused his name for one of the guys who used to blog and/or the guy who owned one of the previous blogs (that someone bought for Bob Barr, or something like that). I didn’t even know what his “famous” clickbait website was until I Googled it yesterday. I know GJ was at least being pushed by libertarians as a “libertarian” long before he ran for POTUS. I don’t remember if it was the LP newsletter, or Reason, or the Advocates, but he always popped up on those lists of “famous libertarians” and LP candidate wishlists back well before the Bob Barr/Ron Paul (of recent times) eras.

  19. Trent Hill

    Tom, by what measure could you call Perry/Coley a relevant ticket to the average American voter? I’d love to see you spin that web. Two men who have never held office, whom virtually no one knows even in libertarian circles, and whom probably don’t have $10,000 to spare between them.

  20. Jay Wildwood

    “Jay, Jay, Jay … the internet story is that Johnson joined the LP in 2012 when his Republican candidacy for president collapsed: and Austin Petersen (who joined in 2008) is the “long-time” Libertarian.”

    I don’t have my source in front of me. It said that Johnson joined in 1993, never revoked his free membership, was elected as a Republican in 1994 and served as one 1995-2003, ran for the 2012 Republican nomination, switched to Libertarian in late 2011 and has been a dues paying member again since then. Petersen worked on Republican campaigns in 2008, switched to working as a Libertarian Party staffer later that same year, and has been a free member since that time, but was not a dues paying member in between then and a few months ago when he became one again to run for the Libertarian nomination, in the years in between having identified primarily as a Republican.

    McAfee also identified himself as a Republican not very long ago, and just last year tried to start a new third party. Marc Feldman says he never voted until he was 50 and considers that to be a good thing. Darryl Perry has been involved with various tiny parties that are libertarian-leaning and which I only learned about a few days ago while reading up on these candidates. A few years before that he was supporting far right racist and theocratic candidates.

    So, the bottom line is that none of them have been long term exclusively Libertarian Party activists. Perhaps they should all stop pointing fingers at each other and accept that we all came from somewhere, and most of us have had divided loyalties, and many have gone back and forth? Alternatively, one of you holier than thou know it alls on the comment section here who has been a loyal dues paying Libertarian continuously since the 1970s and have never supported any other party should step forward and see about getting your own name placed in nomination at your upcoming convention.

  21. Andy

    “itdoesntmattermuch
    May 18, 2016 at 20:09
    FWIW, I’d never heard of Austin Peterson until this election cycle, and the first several times I confused his name for one of the guys who used to blog and/or the guy who owned one of the previous blogs (that someone bought for Bob Barr, or something like that).”

    You are probably thinking about the old Third Party Watch. Some of the long time posters here used to post on Third Party Watch before Independent Political Report came along. Before Third Party Watch some of the long time posters posted at Last Free Voice, and before that the old Hammer of Truth.

    Third Party Watch was purchased by a Bob Barr supporter and they started censoring posts that were critical of Bob Barr. That was when most of the posters left Third Party Watch and Independent Political Report was formed as a response.

    I do not recall Austin Petersen ever posting at the old Hammer of Truth, Last Free Voice, Third Party Watch, or here.

    I do recall him working at the LP national office back around 2007 to 2008 or 2009. I never met him or spoke to him though.

    “I know GJ was at least being pushed by libertarians as a ‘libertarian’ long before he ran for POTUS. I don’t remember if it was the LP newsletter, or Reason, or the Advocates, but he always popped up on those lists of ‘famous libertarians’ and LP candidate wishlists back well before the Bob Barr/Ron Paul (of recent times) eras.”

    Gary Johnson made some headlines as Governor of New Mexico by publicly stating that marijuana should be legalized back in 2001 (although he did not pardon non-violent marijuana “offenders”). He even spoke at some libertarian events (including the Libertarian Party of Massachusetts State Convention in 2002) while he was still Governor, and I know that there were people in the Libertarian Party who tried to recruit him to run for President on the LP ticket for the 2004 election.

    It came out that Gary Johnson had been a Libertarian Party member for one year back in the early 1990’s prior to him running for Governor of New Mexico as a Republican (I know who the person was who “outed” Gary Johnson as having been a dues paying LP member for one year in the early 1990’s after finding his name on a data dump of Libertarians in New Mexico). I’ve also heard that Gary Johnson was a dues paying LP member for one year back in the 1980’s.

    Yes, Gary Johnson was on a “wish list” of potential libertarians to run for President after he came out in favor of marijuana legalization in 2001, but Ron Paul was on those “wish lists” as well.

  22. Andy

    “Trent Hill
    May 18, 2016 at 20:23
    Tom, by what measure could you call Perry/Coley a relevant ticket to the average American voter? I’d love to see you spin that web. Two men who have never held office, whom virtually no one knows even in libertarian circles, and whom probably don’t have $10,000 to spare between them.”

    The average American voter is not a libertarian and nobody that the libertarian party runs is really going to appeal to the average American voter.

    I could see Darryl Perry appealing to a lot of small “l” libertarians and people who are libertarians but do not realize it yet, IF they knew who Darryl Perry was. I’m not so sure about Coley.

    I don’t see Weld having much appeal with libertarians.

  23. Andy

    Jay said: ” It said that Johnson joined in 1993, never revoked his free membership, ”

    Johnson’s membership expired after one year. He did not pay for a Life Membership.

    The only way you could say that he was still a member after that would be if you use the standard of claiming that anyone who has ever joined the party is still a member if they do not renew their membership, but do not revoke their membership.

  24. Andy

    Bill Weld on Gun Control

    Former Republican Governor; former Senate candidate (MA)

    http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Bill_Weld_Gun_Control.htm

    “Supports gun control

    Does the strange combination of thorough economic conservatism and social liberalism make Weld a libertarian? Not unless libertarians also support expansive environmental regulations, gun control, and affirmative action.”

  25. George Dance

    “We as in those of us here who are complaining about it.” That’s a pretty big group; since its founding in 2008, the letters columns of IPR have been a focal point of grumbling and grousing about the LP candidates. Problem is, that’s all it’s ever been.

    “I lost faith in LP delegates in 2008, and i have been pretty disappointed with the outcome of every national convention since ” If this is the serious problem so many seem to think it is, then one would think they’d have done something about it. It will take more than “faith” to stop the LP conventions from continuing to nominate more-or-less libertarianish Republicans. At a minimum, it will mean giving those delegates a more viable choice. 3 election cycles later, I still don’t see one; nor do I see a sign of one for 2020.

  26. Andy

    George Dance said: “If this is the serious problem so many seem to think it is, then one would think they’d have done something about it. It will take more than ‘faith’ to stop the LP conventions from continuing to nominate more-or-less libertarianish Republicans. At a minimum, it will mean giving those delegates a more viable choice. 3 election cycles later, I still don’t see one; nor do I see a sign of one for 2020.”

    I’ve been doing what I can to change things but I’m just one person, and it is not as though I am independently wealthy.

  27. Thomas Knapp

    Trent,

    You seem to be confusing “relevant” with “popular” or “well-known.” Its actual definition in this context is “Bearing upon, or properly applying to, the case in hand; pertinent; applicable.”

  28. Jay Wildwood

    “Tom, by what measure could you call Perry/Coley a relevant ticket to the average American voter? I’d love to see you spin that web. Two men who have never held office, whom virtually no one knows even in libertarian circles, and whom probably don’t have $10,000 to spare between them.”

    Candidates don’t come any more perfect than that for someone like Andy!

    “The only way you could say that he was still a member after that would be if you use the standard of claiming that anyone who has ever joined the party is still a member if they do not renew their membership, but do not revoke their membership.”

    Yes, that’s exactly what free membership means. Once you sign your blood oath to the anarchist earth goddess, or whatever, you remain a free member of the party unless and until you write them to revoke your signature. Whereupon the party priests come and carve the tattoo off tour back, curse your name to the pits of hell and send you out into the darkness to never have your name mentioned again under penalty of thousands of lashes with a wet noodle. This is the same definition by which Austin Petersen has been a member continuously since 2008, and the only one. You may have forgotten such club membership trivia since you haven’t had to deal with it since 1980, or whenever it was, but it’s fairly fresh in my mind since I just looked it up last week.

    “Does the strange combination of thorough economic conservatism and social liberalism make Weld a libertarian? Not unless libertarians also support expansive environmental regulations, gun control, and affirmative action.”

    Congratulations, you just picked out the very few issues he is not libertarian leaning on, ignoring dozens where he is. The cup is 1% empty!

  29. robert capozzi

    tk: What happens if the LP nominates him for vice-president and then Trump picks a running mate he likes? Will he screw us again?

    me: WW had the backing of the NY GOP chair, and thought the L line might counter the hate he was getting from the Conservative Party. It didn’t work out.

    DWP could get the nomination but then later drop out. Shit happens.

  30. robert capozzi

    Well, if we all have one, it should be easier to forgive, then, yes?

  31. Thomas L. Knapp

    I never really thought that who the LP chose for VICE-president would have a big effect on whether or not I could support the ticket. Hell, when my own wife ran for VP and lost, we worked hard for the ticket and she even marched in a parade with the guy who beat her out for it.

    But I think Weld just might be a bridge too far. Were George Zimmerman, Roger Stone and the corpse of Gus Hall all unavailable or something?

  32. Andy

    Jay Wildwood
    May 18, 2016 at 20:51
    ‘Tom, by what measure could you call Perry/Coley a relevant ticket to the average American voter? I’d love to see you spin that web. Two men who have never held office, whom virtually no one knows even in libertarian circles, and whom probably don’t have $10,000 to spare between them.’

    Candidates don’t come any more perfect than that for someone like Andy!”

    I like Perry but he’s not my ideal candidate.

    I am less supportive of Coley as compared to Perry (nothing personal against him, I’m just not really sold on him as a candidate).

  33. Jay Wildwood

    “It’s clear Johnson wanted to run with a Republican to shore-up the Never Trump movement. But of all the Republican politicians Johnson could choose from- he chooses the one who hasn’t been in any sort of public office in years and who has no Libertarianism in him whatsoever…”

    Oddly enough, lots of people think otherwise, based on a cursory internet search, and even one of the websites Andy links charts Gov. Weld as a borderline libertarian. For that matter, regardless of the fact that he changed his mind, he was willing to pursue a Libertarian Party nomination in 2006 and they were willing to give it to him, so both he and others thought he had some Libertarianism in him even then.

    “Justin Amash, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz- all could’ve united the Never Trump movement without going full-blown Centrist Republican and who could fit the Libertarian Party’s platform to a point. (Amash especially- as he hates the two-party system)
    This is a MAJOR mistake on his part.”

    For one thing, none of these people have indicated a willingness to run as Libertarians. For another, all of them are more socially conservative than Bill Weld, and Cruz is also a lot more interventionist on foreign policy. Weld fits the broadest definition of libertarian, fiscally conservative and socially liberal, far better than anyone you named. Perhaps you confused libertarian with TEA Party and far right social conservatives?

  34. robert capozzi

    aj, odds are very high that WW did not know of JK’s OH activities vs the LP. Way inside baseball stuff.

    Completely understandable move to endorse Kasich, especially when Block’s candidate was on a roll. President Kasich, President Trump or President Clinton…that’s easy.

  35. Anthony

    Mr. Knapp,

    “I never really thought that who the LP chose for VICE-president would have a big effect on whether or not I could support the ticket.”

    Mathematically speaking, you don’t count. Neither do I, or anyone else posting at this site. We’re so far at the front end of the bell curve, we are NEVER going to count.

    I’m not concerned how any of our candidates look to a motley crew of malcontents and associated nitwits that forms the core of the Libertarian party.

    I am concerned how they look to the voters.

    You know, because that is really the whole point of a political party.

  36. Greg Jones

    “I am concerned how they look to the voters.

    You know, because that is really the whole point of a political party.”

    I would have thought so too, but then I found out, it depends on *which* political party.

  37. Anthony

    All political parties are chartered to win elections, no?

    I thought you do that by garnering the most votes possible,

  38. Greg Jones

    My research so far indicates many Libertarian Party members believe their party should be exempt from this standard.

  39. Thomas L. Knapp

    “All political parties are chartered to win elections, no?”

    Correct. No. Different political parties have different purposes. Some of them include among their purposes winning — or at least attempting to win — elections. The LP is one such party, although its bylaws list other purposes as well.

    To the extent that the LP’s purpose is to win elections, the whole point is to get LIBERTARIANS elected in pursuit of LIBERTARIAN policy goals. Sure, we could rack up some quick votes with a Charles Manson/Squeaky Fromme ticket, but what would be the point?

  40. Jay Wildwood

    Forwarded by a friend; see original for graphics:

    https://www.facebook.com/LibertarianChicks/photos/a.525244170838551.129957.525233824172919/1274658095897151/?type=3

    “Libertarian Chicks
    1 hr ·

    David Nolan envisioned a tent that many people could fit under. That’s why he built the chart on the left, not the one on the right.

    It’s time for the Libertarian Party to decide: shall we invite more people to join us under our political tent or should we just pull a few chairs up to the coffee table and keep talking about what we wish we could do and how perfectly we’d do it if we ever got the chance?

    If we welcome newcomers to the tent, we need to be patient and understand that a variety of views will be discussed here and they won’t all sound perfect. If we don’t welcome anyone new, then we can just keep preaching to the choir.

    Our ‘motto’ says “minimum government, maximum freedom”. Not “no government, no consent”.

    Politically, if we don’t consent to change the things we can change we may never make any difference at all. Don’t most goals require steps to reach them?

    Philosophically, we should never forget our long term goals. Politically, we should get one foot up on the first rung of the ladder and start climbing – we have an unprecedented opportunity to grow this party and achieve the voter confidence we always wanted. Will we grow it or will we blow it?

    ?#?JohnsonWeld2016? “

  41. Anthony

    Johnson and Weld are in the libertarian quadrant of the Nolan chart. Good enough for me.

    I’ll worry about comparing them to other potential candidates for the top ticket when any of them actually win an election so that they have a record to compare to.

    Apples to apples, you know. Not apples to a blank slate that one can write all their libertopia dreams upon.

    The rest of them might as well be promising me a pony. No one has any idea what they would do with a veto pen in their hand. Themselves included.

  42. Andy

    There is s big difference between merely inviting a person into your “big tent” of a party, and putting somebody on your freaking presidential ticket.

  43. Mike B.

    Gary Johnson / William Weld = Republitarian Party or Libertarian-ish Party.

    I’m not sure I can hold my nose and vote for them in November.

  44. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mike B.,

    I’m normally not big on conspiracy theories, but I’m beginning to think the aim of the Johnson (and now Johnson/Weld) trolls is to ensure that as few people as possible vote for the LP ticket this November. It’s an Ockham’s Razor kind of thing.

  45. Anthony

    “There is s big difference between merely inviting a person into your “big tent” of a party, and putting somebody on your freaking presidential ticket.”

    Have you met many purists in your life? They are just as unwelcoming to newbies.

  46. Andy

    If Weld would like to join our party that is great. We could use some more volunteers to collect petition signatures to place Darryl Perry on the ballot for President. If Weld proves himself as a Libertarian over the next couple of years maybe we will nominate him to run for the state legislature in 2018.

  47. Jay Wildwood

    “Johnson and Weld are in the libertarian quadrant of the Nolan chart. Good enough for me.

    I’ll worry about comparing them to other potential candidates for the top ticket when any of them actually win an election so that they have a record to compare to.

    Apples to apples, you know. Not apples to a blank slate that one can write all their libertopia dreams upon.

    The rest of them might as well be promising me a pony. No one has any idea what they would do with a veto pen in their hand. Themselves included.”

    At last, some common sense. Thank you! Perhaps I should join the Libertarians after all, if people like you are involved. I may have gotten an overly dismal picture based on the regular commenters here.

  48. Mark Axinn

    Tom wrote in part:
    >Weld fucked the New York LP over with his gubernatorial run. He SAID that if the LP nominated him he would run through the general election whether he got the GOP nomination or not. Then as soon as he didn’t, he dropped out and left the LPNY in the lurch.

    It’s as if you were there!
    I was.
    In fact, I gave the nominating speech that year for Donald Silberger, now 86 years old, a long-time Libertarian from the libertarian wing of the LP, to run against Weld.
    Donald lost the nomination to Gov. Weld.
    After Weld dropped out of the New York Governor’s race just before we began petitioning, we replaced him with John Clifton and Donald for Lt. Gov. Needless to say, we did not do too well that year (approx. 15,000 votes in total).
    Bill Weld is a senior partner in Mintz Levin, a powerhouse law firm with principal offices in Boston and New York. He ain’t no schlepper (https://www.mintz.com/professionals/detail/name/william-f-weld).

  49. Jay Wildwood

    “Have you met many purists in your life? They are just as unwelcoming to newbies.”

    Indeed, my first reception here was to be called a troll by several people, a nazi by one (she later apologized), and much much more of the same. I pictured getting the same sort of treatment in a physical meeting if I were to ever check one out. Quite off-putting to a long time moderate libertarian who has generally voted Republican for decades but now find myself no longer able to distinguish a lesser evil between the two big ones.

  50. Mark Axinn

    He’s “an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations” according to the Mintz Levin bio.

    ‘Nuff said.

  51. Mike B.

    TK,

    To tell you the truth I’m not passionate about any of the Libertarian presidential candidates.

  52. Andy

    Whoa, the link that Mark Axinn just posted said that William Weld is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

    The CFR is one of the “New World Order” sphere of influence groups, like the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, The Order of Skull and Bones, the Bohemian Grove, etc….

    It sounds to me like this guy should be avoided like the plague.

  53. Jay Wildwood

    “In fact, I gave the nominating speech that year for Donald Silberger, now 86 years old, a long-time Libertarian from the libertarian wing of the LP, to run against Weld.”

    Will you be convincing him to come out of retirement to run against Weld for VP, or failing that, run for VP yourself? Andy could give your nominating speech!

  54. Andy

    Wow, Axinn posted about Weld’s CFR connection 3 seconds before I did. I suppose that great minds really do think alike.:)

  55. Jay Wildwood

    Hey Andy, put this in your conspiracy pipe and smoke it:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Weld#Personal_life

    ” Weld co-chaired the Independent Task Force on North America under the Council on Foreign Relations, which studied the integration of the USA, Canada and Mexico.”

    ZOMG!!! AL3RT ALL AL3xxx JON3z PATREOTS!! TPP ZOG NAU NAFTA GLOBALIST UN AMERO EBOLA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  56. Jay Wildwood

    I wonder how many people here pushing Jones/Rockwell/Block/Trump swill are paid government trolls, and how many are just doing the job for free.

  57. Andy

    Yeah, it sure sounds like Weld is a New World Order stooge.

    This casts more doubt on Johnson for picking this guy as a running mate.

  58. Andy

    I am not pushing Trump. I respect Alex Jones and Walter Block, but I disagree with them for endorsing Trump (note that both have also expressed concerns about Trump though, and they have said that Trump is (according to them) the lesser evil as compared to the other major candidates in the race, and note that Jones endorsed Rand Paul until he dropped out).

    I do not think that Low Rockwell has officially endorsed Trump.

  59. Rebel Alliance

    At a critical time when he needs to invigorate support by Libertarians before the convention, this is a poor decision by Johnson, pushing another recycled Republican as a “Libertarian”.

  60. Jay Wildwood

    “Yeah, it sure sounds like Weld is a New World Order stooge.”

    He’s a grand master, not a stooge!

    From wikipedia:

    William Weld’s ancestor Edmund Weld was among the earliest students (Class of 1650) at Harvard College. He would be followed by eighteen more Welds at Harvard, where two buildings are named for the family. General Stephen Minot Weld Jr. fought with distinction in many major battles of the Civil War.

    William Weld has a sense of humor about his background; when Massachusetts Senate president Billy Bulger publicly teased him about his all-American heritage and wealth, pointing out that his ancestors had come over on the Mayflower, Weld rose on the dais with a correction: “Actually, they weren’t on the Mayflower. They sent the servants over first to get the cottage ready.”

    Weld’s father David (1911–1972) was an investment banker; his mother, Mary Nichols Weld (1913–1986), was a descendant of William Floyd, who was a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His siblings are Dr. Francis “Tim” Weld, David Weld (d. 2005), and Anne (m. Collins).

    Weld was educated at Middlesex School. He graduated with an A.B. Summa Cum Laude from Harvard College in 1966, studied economics at University College, Oxford, and graduated with a J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1970.

    Weld’s first wife, Susan Roosevelt Weld, formerly a professor at Harvard University specializing in ancient Chinese civilization and law and then General Counsel to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, is a great granddaughter of Theodore Roosevelt. They married on June 7, 1975, and had five children (David, Ethel, Mary, Quentin and Frances). They divorced in 2002. His second and present wife, the writer and novelist Leslie Marshall, is a former daughter-in-law of Ben Bradlee of The Washington Post.

    Weld was a principal at Leeds, Weld & Co., which describes itself as the United States’s largest private equity fund focused on investing in the education and training industry.

  61. langa

    https://coveringthecorridor.com/rxonline/amoxicillin-online-viagra/43/ follow site https://thedsd.com/top-application-letter-writing-website-gb/ https://chicagocounseling.org/2639-do-my-english-homework/ can you buy your diploma source url source site https://www.fearlessfutures.org/medmall/can-you-buy-viagra-over-counter-ireland/10/ extenze vs viagra thesis paper cover page format go to link writing a concept paper 200mg de viagra college paper for sale debate write speech library research paper topics go literary term paper topics follow link funny kid homework answers church turing thesis proof master thesis service basic research paper examples source help with fractions homework enter persuasive essay samples order professional argumentative essay on trump go https://www.guidelines.org/blog/electronic-thesis-and-dissertation-of-addis-ababa-university/93/ how to write a research paper for publication get link President Kasich, President Trump or President Clinton…that’s easy.

    You’re right, that is easy — NOTA.

  62. langa

    I find it humorous that people are quoting David Nolan in support of Weld. Nolan is on record as saying that opposition to gun control is an absolute, non-negotiable litmus test for being a libertarian.

  63. Jay Wildwood

    “I respect Alex Jones and Walter Block,”

    That makes one of us.

    “and they have said that Trump is (according to them) the lesser evil as compared to the other major candidates in the race”

    Show you how deluded they are. But yet Weld is not good enough for you…

    “I do not think that Low Rockwell has officially endorsed Trump.”

    You sure could have fooled me. But I’ll take your word for it, as the less time spent digging through the decomposing garbage and foul stench at his site, the better.

    “Should read, “Lew Rockwell…””

    I have, and I don’t recommend it.

  64. Jay Wildwood

    ZOMG!!! MOAR GLOBAL3ST CONSP1RACY1111!!!!!!

    “Weld began his legal career as a counsel with the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate impeachment inquiry, where one of his colleagues was Hillary Rodham.” (wikipedia)

    R3PT1L3AN 4 SUR3 BRO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  65. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    “He’s “an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations” according to the Mintz Levin bio.”

    If this is true, it’s a deal-breaker for me. It should be for most of us.

  66. Andy

    I am not supporting Trump, and yes, I do not want Weld on the LP ticket.

    I respect Jones and Block for all of the good work they have done over the years, but I do not agree with them when it comes to jumping on the Trump bandwagon.

    LewRockwell.com is one of my favorite political sites, and I favor the Mises Institute over the Cato Institute any day.

  67. Andy

    Jill, I just checked the CFR’s website and it is true. William Weld is even listed as being an editor for one of their publications, along with Heidi Cruz (the wife of Ted Cruz).

  68. Jay Wildwood

    “I respect Jones and Block for all of the good work they have done over the years”

    In my view, that would be less than zero.

    “I do not agree with them when it comes to jumping on the Trump bandwagon.”

    It’s only logical, given the rest of their nonsense. But *only* given the rest of their nonsense. Otherwise, not logical at all.

    “LewRockwell.com is one of my favorite political sites, and I favor the Mises Institute over the Cato Institute any day.”

    I couldn’t disagree more. Cato and Reason are vastly superior to Rockwell’s rancid bilge and bile. Long live the “Kochtopus”!

  69. Andy

    Is Gary Johnson a well meaning but naive dupe, or is he actively engaging in a plan to sabotage the Libertarian Party and movement?

  70. Jay Wildwood

    “William Weld is even listed as being an editor for one of their publications, along with Heidi Cruz (the wife of Ted Cruz).”

    ZOMG ZOMG OMG ZOG ZOMG!!!! CONSP1RACY PROOF BRO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! R3PT1L3ANs!!!!

  71. Jay Wildwood

    “Is Gary Johnson a well meaning but naive dupe, or is he actively engaging in a plan to sabotage the Libertarian Party and movement?”

    Clearly the latter. Didn’t you know it was all part of the reptilian zionist plan to terraform the planet with chemtrails, vaccines and GMOs?

  72. Jay Wildwood

    “Jay, I am not surprised you’d favor the beltway lap dogs over at Stato.”

    No less surprised, I’m sure, than I am that you’d favor the fever swamp mad dogs at Crises and the barking loon of Austin. Let me take a wild guess, you’re also a fan of Christopher Cuckwell, Steve from Nebraska Molyneaux, Herr Doktor Professor Hans Strangelove-Straightarmsalute, and other such racist trash in the laughable, white nationalist Anarcho-fascist bowel “movement”?

  73. George Dance

    “If Weld would like to join our party that is great. We could use some more volunteers to collect petition signatures to place Darryl Perry on the ballot for President. If Weld proves himself as a Libertarian over the next couple of years maybe we will nominate him to run for the state legislature in 2018.”

    If the IPR crowd wishes to form a party and run Perry or someone, it wouldn’t be unprecedented – both George Phillies and Tom Knapp ran against Barr / Root in 2008. (Phillies got 500 votes for President that year.) But I doubt Weld will want to join that party.

    If you mean the Libertarian Party, well, we’ve just been through that: the IPR crowd, once again, will not be deciding the nominee; the delegates in Orlando will, and not (once again) because they’re rejecting a superior product the IPR crowd is offering them.

    There’ll be a good chance for a hardcore Libertarian (well, probably a minarchist, so maybe not hard enough for some) to take the nomination and run a great campaign in 2020. But, if the best candidate the core can find is a guy who refuses to take money for his campaign (due to his opposition to the Federal Reserve), well, forget it.

    Even if this campaign gets only 2 million votes, that will still be a great base to build on. I urge the core – IPR crowd, Radical Caucus, et al, to start thinking about that, and how to use it to accomplish something in the future.

    Too bad Harry Browne is dead, and Ron Paul is way too old (but, then, remember how the radicals pilloried them, too?)

  74. Kareem Caliente

    Jay: “Didn’t you know it was all part of the reptilian zionist plan to terraform the planet with chemtrails, vaccines and GMOs?”

    Earth doesn’t need to be terraformed. Mars needs to be terraformed. What is Weld’s position on space exploration?

  75. Dave

    A shame that this came out after the poll was mostly over. I’m curious how well Weld would have done there.

    As for Weld and Johnson, I have trouble imagining it not getting the nomination. The delegates of the LP have shown themselves to be attracted to “big names” in the past, and this ticket doubles down on that.

  76. langa

    At first, I thought Andy was too quick to write off Jay Wildwood as some sort of saboteur. Instead, I thought he was a generally well-meaning guy with some libertarian instincts, who was simply confused by years of absorbing all that GOP propaganda.

    However, after reading his hysterical ranting on this thread, I must say I gave him way too much credit. He may or may not be a “plant” of some sort, but at the very least, he’s someone (like Robert Capozzi) who has no interest in seeing the libertarian philosophy thrive. Whatever his motivation, he’s poison to the LP.

  77. Jay Wildwood

    Anthony,

    Thank you.

    Langa,

    You’ve confused the poison with the antidote. The LP has been poisoned for a long time by Jones nuts and Rockwellian “purists” who, as it turns out, harbor latent Trumpist sympathies.

  78. Andy

    I would not be surprised if Anthony and Jay are both trolls, possibly the same person.

  79. Bondurant

    What’s with all of the GOP apologists as of late posting in IPR comments?

    This is dreadful news. I have faith, though, the delegates in Orlando will not let this happen. Weld isn’t even a liberty oriented Republican. Someone like Justin Amash I could get behind but this gun grabbing statist is a slap in the face to everyone in the LP.

  80. natural born American

    Weld is a gungrabbing globalist scumbag. The delegates in Orlando would have to be retards to vote for this guy. Bentivolio is a much better choice.

  81. Darcy G Richardson

    “This is dreadful news. I have faith, though, the delegates in Orlando will not let this happen. Weld isn’t even a liberty oriented Republican.” — Bondurant

    I hope you’re right, Bondurant. Unless the LP hopes to become the old Rockefeller “establishment” wing of the GOP, Weld’s vice-presidential candidacy doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense. A Johnson-Weld ticket might have some limited appeal to moderate Republicans — the remaining few who actually fall into that category — but it’s certainly not a libertarian ticket by any stretch of the imagination.

    Maybe Johnson isn’t aware that government spending in Massachusetts increased at twice the rate of inflation during Gov. Weld’s tenure.

    With the likelihood that the Trump University scandal will erupt into a major issue this autumn, it’s also kind of odd that Johnson would name a vice-presidential running mate who experienced his own problems with a for-profit college a decade ago — an issue, as Mark Axinn and other New Yorkers might recall, that partially derailed Weld’s gubernatorial bid in 2006.

    As Alice famously cried, things are definitely getting “curiouser and curiouser!”

  82. Cody Quirk

    “If you mean the Libertarian Party, well, we’ve just been through that: the IPR crowd, once again, will not be deciding the nominee; the delegates in Orlando will, and not (once again) because they’re rejecting a superior product the IPR crowd is offering them.”

    Though I’m part of the IPR crowd, I do have to agree :/

    “There’ll be a good chance for a hardcore Libertarian (well, probably a minarchist, so maybe not hard enough for some) to take the nomination and run a great campaign in 2020. But, if the best candidate the core can find is a guy who refuses to take money for his campaign (due to his opposition to the Federal Reserve), well, forget it.”

    If he tones down his online ad homenims, sticks with the LP in the long term, and mends the animosity between him and various LP activists- I am open to supporting and voting for Austin Petersen in 2020.

  83. AMccarrick

    Andy, Thomas… do you really not understand in order for the public to be with us to go from A – Z we have take incremental steps of A to B to C to D all the way to Z? Perry and the like intend to try to take us from A to Z immediately. That’s appealing to about .00001% of the populace.

    You have to take incremental steps or we’re still going to be sitting here in 25 years bitching about who is more libertarian and watch the country continue to collapse. Get off you fucking high horses, grow a brain, and start thinking strategically for a change. Die-hard purists like you two are perfect examples of why this party (and ideology as a whole for that matter) never goes anywhere and continually spins it wheels. You’d do more good if you just shut the fuck up.

  84. robert capozzi

    langa: You’re right, that is easy — NOTA.

    me: Yes, personally, I would not vote for Kasich, either. I was rooting for him as the least bad option and as someone who is not completely embarrassing. NOTA is surely not going to take the oath of office.

    langa: He may or may not be a “plant” of some sort, but at the very least, he’s someone (like Robert Capozzi) who has no interest in seeing the libertarian philosophy thrive.

    me: Dagger through the heart! 😉 And so obviously untrue. I consider myself L. I just don’t get there via a simplistic, single, unworkable-yet-nice-sentiment principle.

    A few of these new commenters do seem to have great insight and wise political instincts.

  85. Thomas L. Knapp

    Mark,

    I’m sorry Weld did that to y’all.

    People who knowingly, and perhaps even premeditatedly, screw over the LP shouldn’t get much consideration for the top slot the LP has to offer. They and the people they promote should be treated skeptically/discounted.

    Not to pick on LPNY, but three come to mind immediately: William Weld. Howard Stern. Roger Stone.

  86. Thomas Knapp

    AMcCarrick,

    You write:

    “do you really not understand in order for the public to be with us to go from A – Z we have take incremental steps of A to B to C to D all the way to Z?”

    Actually, no I don’t — large-scale, sweeping political changes tend to happen in giant fell swoops, not increments — but that’s kind of irrelevant since Johnson and Weld want to take us in the opposite direction in significant areas rather than in the right direction, “incrementally” or otherwise.

    For example, Johnson’s tax plan entails putting every man, woman and child in the US on a cradle-to-grave monthly federal welfare check. That’s not “a step in the right direction,” it’s a step in the wrong direction.

    Similarly, Weld’s position on victim disarmament (“gun control”) is more statist than the current federal situation.

    I can understand a tendency toward moderation and incrementalism (in fact, I am generally an incrementalist myself with respect to policy), but if the LP can’t even bring itself to nominate candidates who want to go in the right direction rather than the wrong direction, it should quit pretending to be a libertarian political party and disband.

    And just for the record, I wouldn’t piss on e.g. Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell if they were on fire. It’s not just “conspiracy theorists” who notice that William Weld is a shambling, human-shaped stack of shit.

  87. robert capozzi

    dgr: Unless the LP hopes to become the old Rockefeller “establishment” wing of the GOP, Weld’s vice-presidential candidacy doesn’t seem to make a whole lot of sense.

    me: That’s not the play. The play is for independents, suburban Rs and Ds, and sane centrists. It’s a play for the 20% L-ish who are fiscal conservatives and socially liberal. The play is for fundraising, with Weld working the phones using his massive list of contacts.

    This ticket cannot be discounted, particularly vs the very weak Trump and Clinton.

    I’m also hopeful that WW can give GJ some presentation coaching. Jimmy Stewart reportedly never took an acting lesson, but GJ could use some pointers.

    My guess is they knew each other from back in the day, when they served as guvs.

    It’s a bold move. But this could also be a perfect storm, even a realigning event.

  88. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    You write:

    “this could also be a perfect storm, even a realigning event”

    True, although I think we’re defining the scope differently.

    A Johnson/Weld ticket would presumably complete the INTERNAL realignment of the Libertarian Party away from being a specifically libertarian party and toward adoption the failed, rudderless Reform Party / Americans Elect “let’s see if we can find someone famous and who gives a rat’s ass what he stands for” model.

    That ticket’s impact on the general election would be negligible. The only really positive possible outcome of such a ticket for the party would be the likelihood that the Greens would whip our asses for third place this November (and, as a follow-on effect, maybe, just barely possibly, shock some sense into us and get us to stop fucking around like this).

  89. robert capozzi

    tk, care to place a bet?

    Assuming it’s Trump, Clinton, Johnson, Stein, and Sanders does not bolt to support the Greens, I put $100 bucks that GJ gets more votes than Stein.

    Another $100 if Johnson or Stein gets 3x more votes than the other.

  90. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    Let me think about that one. If I place any more bets on this year’s election, it likely won’t be until after the major party conventions (I won a few on the primaries, but then came to grief betting on Sanders to spike in New York before losing the primary there — bought in low at PredictIt expecting it to go up and it never did).

  91. robert capozzi

    This just hit me:

    Johnson/Weld teams the sanest man in politics with the smartest man in politics.

  92. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Johnson/Weld teams the sanest man in politics with the smartest man in politics.”

    Dear God. You’ve finally gone completely over sanity’s edge, haven’t you? They’re the Terry and Charley of politics, if Terry and Charley were both Terry.

  93. langa

    I consider myself L.

    I don’t doubt that you do. The thing is that you define “L” as “any set of positions that any self-proclaimed ‘libertarian’ might ever conceivably hold.”

    Based on the definition of “libertarian” that most LP members (not including these new “Never Trump” types) would use, you are not even remotely in the libertarian ballpark. In fact, to paraphrase Jules Winfield, you aren’t in the same league, or even the same fucking sport.

  94. robert capozzi

    L, yes, one person’s opinion.

    I wonder whether you are correct. I wonder if “most LP members” are NAPsters.

    Any empirical evidence to share?

    It does seem highly likely that the prez nominee won’t be a NAPster, btw, so there is counter evidence.

  95. robert capozzi

    tk,

    GQ called GJ the sanest.

    Read up on WW and I do believe that the fair minded will recognize the man has an extraordinary intellect. I don’t believe it’s a stretch to suggest he’s the smartest guy in the room wherever he goes.

  96. JamesT

    Welp I home the delegates deny this. I’m 100% for McAfee now. Seriously Johnson has gotten more status since 2012 not less.

  97. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I don’t believe it’s a stretch to suggest [Weld]’s the smartest guy in the room wherever he goes.”

    You may be right.

    Of course, the same could probably have been said about Bernie Madoff.

  98. robert capozzi

    Oh, you might have meant Enron’s Jeff Skilling, tk.

    Certainly intellect is only part of the equation. Wisdom is more important, from where I sit.

  99. Jay Wildwood

    “I would not be surprised if Anthony and Jay are both trolls, possibly the same person.”

    Of course we are. We’re also your shadow, so be careful and wear a hat.

  100. Jay Wildwood

    “What’s with all of the GOP apologists as of late posting in IPR comments?”

    With Walter Block, Alex Jones and Lew Rockwell backing Donald Trump, the anarcho-nationalist/anarcho-fascist cult members are experiencing extreme cognitive dissonance. There’s talk of bringing out the confederate flags and kool-aid.

    “Weld isn’t even a liberty oriented Republican. Someone like Justin Amash I could get behind”

    Amash has not indicated willingness to run, so there’s no real comparison unless and until he does. As for who is more liberty oriented, ontheissues.org scores Weld as a borderline libertarian and Amash in the conservative zone, albeit fairly close to libertarian and moderate. Amash wants government crackdowns on abortion and immigration, has a mixed record on trade issues, opposed gay rights until recently (supported DOMA) and then switched to the “states rights” position on the issue, and “strongly favors” keeping God in the public (presumably, government) sphere, so not very keen on separation of church and state. Overall, I would say Weld is more liberty oriented than Amash, although I would be happy if Amash made himself available, and could support a ticket with either of them on it, or both.

  101. Jay Wildwood

    “Weld is a gungrabbing globalist scumbag. ”

    You forgot zionist, secret Jew/Muslim, foreign born, suspected transgender, and reptilian from outer space. At a time like this, you can only oil your guns, read the Bible and pray.

  102. Jay Wildwood

    I’ve been forwarded a statement from one of the other candidates seeking the VP nomination:

    “”Hi everyone. Bill Weld is going to announce his run tomorrow morning on CNN.

    I spent today with Gary and his campaign. They have been very gracious and seek our support in his choice.

    Gov. Weld promises game changing amounts of money. He is a capable fundraiser and seems sincere in his willingness to do this hard work. For example, the Kochs have not donated to Libertarians in a really long time because of an old fight. Now they are discussing providing money. The same can be said of Steve Wynn and many others.

    Like many of you, I’m concerned about whether he really is a Libertarian. We have all worked hard in this movement and need to protect it. (On the other hand, Republicans have torn us down so many times that I like the idea of taking their money and getting our ballot access back as a sort of restitution.)

    Anyway, we all deserve the chance to vet him and have our questions answered. He has to earn our votes. I’ve explained this to the Johnson campaign.

    If he’s committed to libertarians and he can come through with fundraising, then I have to consider whether opposing him is in the best interests of the party and the liberty movement.

    I want you all to know that I deeply appreciate your support and am deeply committed to liberty. Liberty is greater than any one person. I will keep you informed on my thinking and appreciate your input on whether Weld is a worthy candidate.

    I’m still in the race for now.”

  103. Thomas L. Knapp

    Russ Verney promised “game changing amounts of money” in 2008, too — a prominent Republican direct mail fundraiser was supposedly on board, and “we’re going to raise $40 million and win the election.”

    Much of the problem with the Libertarian Party isn’t ideological, “purism” or “purism-averse,” but rather that we have a very high percentage of activists whose heads jerk upward whenever anyone tells them that the word “gullible” is written on the ceiling.

  104. Jay Wildwood

    “Andy, Thomas… do you really not understand in order for the public to be with us to go from A – Z we have take incremental steps of A to B to C to D all the way to Z? Perry and the like intend to try to take us from A to Z immediately. That’s appealing to about .00001% of the populace.

    You have to take incremental steps or we’re still going to be sitting here in 25 years bitching about who is more libertarian and watch the country continue to collapse. Get off you fucking high horses, grow a brain, and start thinking strategically for a change.”

    Well said!

  105. Jay Wildwood

    “And just for the record, I wouldn’t piss on e.g. Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell if they were on fire. ”

    While there are some matters on which we clearly disagree, I’m glad we agree at least on that much!

  106. Robert capozzi

    Tk,

    A. Has a specific number been promised?

    B. Do you believe that this cycle has the possibility of being different than 08, that the calls for a 3rd choice are at their highest in decades?

  107. NewFederalist

    Well, well, well… IF this really happens it could provide a big boost to both Darrell Castle and Jill Stein depending on what issues are most important to the usually Libertarian voter.

  108. George Phillies

    Wildwood, competing with Andy for the most vigorous posting prize.

  109. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    I haven’t heard a specific number promised. Of course, no specific number was brought up until the actual convention in 2008. Numbers other than financial have been bandied about (5%, 15%, etc.), but not financial ones.

    Yes, the calls for a third choice are pretty loud this year. Noticeably louder than usual. But only DRASTICALLY louder than usual where coming from the quarter that always ends up holding its nose and going back to the GOP. So I’m not inclined to consider that an in-the-bank calculation or a good reason to go Cargo Cult.

  110. Tony From Long Island

    Nominating Johnson / Weld would be the best thing the LP has done. Again I read about “gun control….” As always, I stress the words “well regulated” in the 2nd Amendment….remember….the constitution? That thing LP members love (unless it comes to regulating weapons made for the sole purpose of killing people).

    Johnson is not Bob Barr. That guy was a republican through and through. I never supported his nomination for a minute. Gary Johnson and Bill Weld believe in the general principles of libertariainism. I’m sorry they don’t pass the 100% purity test of the anarchist. Go ahead….stay a .025% of the vote party.

  111. Thomas L. Knapp

    Tony,

    Vis a vis “gun control” you might want to look at both the precedence and meaning of the term “well regulated.”

    You can keep crying “purity test” all you want, but most of us who prefer to run a libertarian candidate instead of a couple of Republican carpetbaggers have reasons other than “purity.” Among other things, a major consideration is branding differentiation. “We’re just like those other guys only we don’t actually win elections” just doesn’t seem like a great sales pitch to me.

  112. Trent Hill

    Tom,

    I’m aware of the definition of “relevant”. In this context, it means relevant to the average US voter, not relevant to the anarcho-capitalists of the libertarian party.

    But for the record, he’s more relevant to both than Trump, Hillary, Stein, Castle, or any of the other options on the ballot. Weld isn’t perfect. He’s also not the standard bearer or the one who’s actually going to make policy. He’s a guy the LP is going to put out there to raise money and talk about libertarianism. That’s all. Will he be perfect? Of course not. Will he blow previous results out of the water? That seems like a prediction without evidence. But, do you really think Dearn or Coley will grab more votes, raise more money, create more activists? If you do, you live in a dream-world.

  113. Andy

    Weld is not qualified to be a salesman for libertarianism, because he is not a libertarian.

    Remember Bob Barr and Wayne Root? We heard the same kind of hype about them, yet they did not grow the party. I still have not met anyone who has said that they came to the Libertarian Party or movement because of Bob Barr or Wayne Root.

  114. Thomas L. Knapp

    Trent,

    No matter how many times you try to make this into some kind of “purist” versus “pragmatist” fight, it’s just not going to work.

    Do I have policy problems with Johnson and Weld? Sure.

    But my BIG problem with the two of them is that they’re lying, untrustworthy parasites who have taken the LP to the cleaners in the past, without producing notably positive results (yes, 1% is better than 1/2 of 1%, but both numbers are abysmal; the difference is a slight difference of kind, not a difference of degree), WHILE misrepresenting what we’re about (yes, that last is the purist thing).

    At some point, it might have made sense to tell the purists “hey, you should give the pragmatists a chance.” You’ve had your chances. You didn’t deliver. Time to stop pretending that nominating Republican scam artists is some kind of silver bullet.

  115. Andy

    Trent Hill is living in dream world if he really believes that Weld is going to inspire lots of people to become Libertarian activists.

    What evidence do you base this on? When has Weld done this before? Where are all of the William Weld libertarians?

    Weld screwed over the Libertarian Party of New York in 2006, and i bet he will screw us over nationally if a majority of the delegates in Orlando are gullible enough to vote for him to be on our ticket.

  116. Trent Hill

    I dont think Weld is going to inspire anyone. I think the messaging of the LP and Gary Johnson himself is going to push people in an overall more libertarian direction–and that Weld can help to accomplish that through fundraising and more legitimate media coverage.

  117. Trent Hill

    “But my BIG problem with the two of them is that they’re lying, untrustworthy parasites who have taken the LP to the cleaners in the past, without producing notably positive results (yes, 1% is better than 1/2 of 1%, but both numbers are abysmal; the difference is a slight difference of kind, not a difference of degree), WHILE misrepresenting what we’re about (yes, that last is the purist thing).”

    “without producing notable results”. If Johnson’s are not notable, then no one’s has been in the history of the LP and no one currently being offered as a candidate is. So, that’s irrelevant.

    “lying, untrustworthy parasites”. A bit heavy handed. But okay, I get it. You distrust them.

    And the last thing is a purist thing that I don’t care to address because I’m not an anarchist.

    So, ultimately this comes down to this–you feel you cannot trust Johnson/Weld. Fine. They aren’t babysitting your kids. They’re running a campaign. If it gets more votes, THAT is the essential goal. If it exposes more people to a more libertarian message, THAT’s the goal. If it gets more people talking about non-interventionism, ending the drug war, or free markets, THAT’s the goal. Johnson’s campaign debt has virtually nothing to do with that, nor does Weld’s drop-out from a gubernatorial race 20 years ago.

    Perry/Coley is a presidential/vice presidential team that is mystifying even to me, someone who OWNED and RAN IPR for several years. I’m a libertarian in philosophy who pays close attention to LP politics and even I have only a vague idea of who Perry is and NO idea who Coley is. You think THAT is how you can get more votes, raise more money, and create more libertarians? C’mon, you’re not that foolish. It’s a purist thing. That’s okay, but let’s not pretend it isn’t.

  118. Thomas L. Knapp

    Trent,

    My original position was in favor of NOTA because in my opinion the LP needs a re-set. We’re chasing utopian moonbeams if we think that running every Republican retread who comes down the pike, especially Republican retreads who scam and defraud us, is going to get us anywhere.

    If I thought NOTA could get 30%, I’d still be supporting NOTA, because “30% of Libertarians would rather run no candidate at all than run Gary Johnson” would get more media attention than “Gary Johnson beats [Candidate X] 70/30 for Libertarian nomination.”

    But I don’t think NOTA can get 30%. And I do think it’s possible that Johnson can be beat this time. My preference is for Perry, but I’d be happy with McAfee and could probably live with Petersen.

    This year I am pretty much an “Anybody But Johnson” candidate. The sole exception I can think of on that — the only candidate I’d prefer Johnson to — is Michael Derrick Reid. I’d support Dr. Marc Allan Feldman before I’d support Johnson. I’d support Shawna Sterling before I’d support Johnson. I’d support that “Birth Loop Economics” weirdo before I’d support Johnson. I’d support the hat rack in the corner before I’d support Johnson. Not over purist concerns, but over practical concerns.

  119. Andy

    The thing with Weld and the LP of New York happened in 2006, which was 10 years ago.

    If Weld had really been serious about the LP, then why did he lie to the LP of New York and screw them over, and why has he done nothing for the LP since then?

  120. Andy

    Lots of people said that Barr and Root were going to bring in lots of money and new members, and that did not happen. We were told they would get lots of media coverage, and they got some, but the media coverage they got failed to grow the party or movement.

  121. robert capozzi

    tk: But my BIG problem with the two of them is that they’re lying, untrustworthy parasites who have taken the LP to the cleaners in the past,

    me: Really? To the cleaners? You make it sound as if they have profited from associating with the LP.

    I’m not seeing it. Both seem very concerned about the country’s future, and both seem willing to suspend their lives to share their concerns with voters, and to give them a vigorous 3rd choice. It’s within bounds for you to claim you don’t like their messages, or you find them inept.

    But taking anyone to the cleaners is out of bounds and not a credible charge, as I see it. I detect a sense of desperation from the charges you are making, and it looks quite transparently off the mark.

  122. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    George Dance: Too bad Harry Browne is dead, and Ron Paul is way too old (but, then, remember how the radicals pilloried them, too?)

    No, I don’t remember that. I’m a radical, and I voted for Ron Paul (by write-in) in both 2008 and 2012. I also supported Harry Browne.

  123. Andy

    If Weld is so concerned about the direction the country is headed, why is he working with the bad guys as a part of the Council on Foreign Relations, and why did he endorse John Kasich for President earlier this year?

  124. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I do wonder if Gary’s vice-presidential pick had anything to do with the disgruntled Trump people in the GOP. Did someone from the Republican Party contact him to discuss strategy?

    I’m not entirely unhappy with the choice. We’ll just have to see what happens at the convention.

  125. NewFederalist

    Perhaps Howard Stern could be announced as Gary’s pick for Secretary of State! 😉

  126. natural born American

    Endorsing Kasich isn’t even the worst of it. Gun-grabbing Bill Weld actually endorsed JEB BUSH last year and only switched to Kasich after Trump had beaten Bush to a bloody pulp and run him out of the race.

  127. natural born American

    Can the statist scumbag jay Wildwood provide any data to back up his claims at 7:08am?

    Or is statist scumbag Jay Wildwood just a dishonest liar with no character?

  128. Jeremy

    As a non-libertarian third-party advocate who wants to see the LP succeed, this election presents a conundrum for me. It seems like there will be a good opportunity this cycle for the LP to bleed off disaffected supporters of the major parties, but if they do so by running non-libertarian candidates, it won’t benefit their brand or their ideas.

    Ideally I’d like to see the LP run a radical candidate with some name recognition, a Russell Means type. However, I’m not impressed with the radical candidates for the presidential race. Perry and Feldman don’t appear ready for prime time, and McAfee, while charismatic and well-known, has serious issues with women voters that will disqualify him in a lot of people’s eyes. (It’s telling that he hasn’t even attempted to explain why it was okay for him to sleep with 17-year-olds in Belize, while he’s been defending himself on the murder charge.) Petersen is a non-starter as he is basically Republican lite. That leaves Johnson as the only plausible candidate in my view, even though I think his general loopiness and comments on Sharia will seriously hurt both him and the LP brand.

    For VP it’s murkier. I don’t think I can support Weld even given his name-recognition boost, as he is in no way a real libertarian. Putting him on the ticket would dilute the brand beyond all recognition. Bentivolio, the other high-name-rec candidate, seems unhinged and would disgrace the ticket. Weiss is a non-starter, given his own issues with women. That leaves Coley and Dearn, and of the two I think Dearn comes off as a bit more serious and professional.

    So I think the LP would be best served with a Johnson/Dearn ticket; but both races are close enough for me that I could change my mind based on what happens at the convention.

    For LP Chair, thankfully, there is an easy choice: Nick Sarwark has done an exemplary job and should be reelected, while the other three candidates are non-starters for various reasons. I would like to see Darryl Perry run for LNC.

  129. robert capozzi

    aj, fair questions. As Earl Ravenal, the Georgetown Foreign Affairs prof who was bested by Bergland for the 84 prez nomination and who WAS a member of the CFR, not all CFR members are “globalists,” as Jones might say. Ravenal was a non-interventionist. It’s more like joining the National Geographic Society.

    I don’t know what Weld’s f.p. views are. My guess is he’s probably less hawkish than most Rs and Ds, more hawkish the RP1. But we shall see.

    Weld is from a long line of Rs. He’s descended from William Floyd (Weld’s middle name), a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He’s an old-money blue blood. He’s been in the mix of R politics his whole life. He was in the Reagan AG’s office. Kasich was probably the most acceptable candidate. Weld has always been a libertarian R, not a bomb-throwing, NAP-reciting, movement L. He’s spoken at Cato functions, was close to the Ls in the Reagan administration, etc.

    I suspect the Trump nomination led him to say: Enough is enough.

    He’s not Murray Rothbard, Ron Paul, or Alex Jones. Nor is he Walter Block.

    There will be candidates standing for nomination that are closer to your vision for liberty. Should they get nominated, I’ll likely sit this one out, all due respect. And, truly, it’s all good, we’re just doing what we can! 😉

  130. English Teacher

    Tony from Long Island …

    You need to learn the historical meaning of words so that your comments are not non sequiturs. The meaning of “well-regulated” in the 2nd amendment at the time it was written is correctly interpreted as “well-trained in shooting, properly drilled, orderly, proficient in the use of weapons and proficient in military tactics.” The “militia” being refered to was local and statewide private military groups. “Regulator” was a brand of clocks.

    So, if you are stressing the words “well-regulated” you are advocating for well-trained, private groups of voluntary military on a local and statewide level to protect America from corrupt leaders and out-of-control government.

  131. Thomas L. Knapp

    “It’s telling that [McAfee] hasn’t even attempted to explain why it was okay for him to sleep with 17-year-olds in Belize”

    Does he need to explain why it’s OK for him to drive 50 in a 55 zone and serve wine to his 22-year-old dinner guests too? The legal age of consent in Belize is 16. Are you some kind of misogynist who objects to women over the legal age of consent deciding who they want to sleep with?

  132. robert capozzi

    Originalism may be a good standard to use for some things, but do keep in mind they didn’t have bazookas and machine guns in the 1780s.

    There’s also a question of what they meant by “bear”…bear anywhere, bear on one’s own property, bear on other’s property?

  133. Be Rational

    Andy, you keep harping on the idea that Barr and Root didn’t bring in any significant amount of money, donors or members to the party, but instead of making use of the resources and interest they did manage to generate along with the usual group of curious individuals who drop by, a bunch of hot-headed purists wasted the time and resources of the party, its members and their own account driving Barr and Root out of the LP. It would have been much better to keep them in the party and use their differences as a teaching opportunity.

    New members and even well-known candidates want to be accepted by the group they’ve chosen to join. They will move toward the logical pure libertarian positions you espouse over time, if you welcome them warmly and sincerely. They will want to be liked by you. But when treated rudely or attacted viciously, they will flee and take their resources with them. If you truly want to build the LP in 2016 and beyond, please stop driving people away. Show them you’re a person worth knowing and listening to. They will want to be with you then, and they will move toward your point of view.

  134. Jeremy

    Tom, I’m speaking to electability here, and to McAfee’s ability to win votes from non-LP members. I’m not the only disaffected major-party voter who finds the idea of a 70-year-old man sleeping with a drugged-out 17-year-old distasteful — especially when Trump’s own behavior toward much-younger women is part of why he’s so suspect to many voters.

  135. Thomas L. Knapp

    Jeremy,

    I haven’t talked with a WHOLE LOT of non-LP-member voters about McAfee, but I’ve talked with some. The next one who mentions who McAfee has slept with will be the first.

  136. Mark Axinn

    Tom wrote:
    >Not to pick on LPNY, but three come to mind immediately: William Weld. Howard Stern. Roger Stone.

    Not in the same category. Weld backed out after saying he would go the distance, but at least he did so before petitioning started and not in the middle like Stern. Stern was a phony from day 1. Weld really wanted the Republican nomination in 2006, and when that did not materialize, he left us. Not the best thing to do, but I don’t think it was guided by malice.

    Stone, of course, is in a class by himself.

    I intend to support the Libertarian Pres. and VP candidates nominated next weekend. It is likely that will be Gary Johnson for President and Bill Weld for VP. We have had ideologically stronger candidates in the past, but also several far less libertarian. We are unlikely to get someone who has scored 100/100 on the Nolan Chart for decades like Tom and I have, even though those are the people most of the IPR-ers would vote for.

    I know I have said this in the past but it bears repeating: At Denver 2008, I voted all six ballots for Mary Ruwart b/c like many on this list, I am personally very hard-core in my beliefs. But she lost and thereafter I did everything I could to get Barr/Root on the ballot in NY, to raise money for the campaign and to convince people to vote for them. It’s what we do in the Party. Our fights are internal, but then we should put on a united face to the outside world.

    If Gary and Bill win in Orlando, they will have my full support. If John, Austin or Darryl Perry surprise me and win the Pres. nomination, the same is true for them too and whoever is the VP nominee.

  137. robert capozzi

    MA, point of information: Wasn’t Stern recruited on-air by some LPers? I was a listener at the time, and that’s my recollection.

  138. Phil

    A former republican governor from Massachusetts?? I guess Mitt Romney wasn’t available 🙂

  139. Jeremy

    Tom, the race hasn’t begun in earnest, and most of the people you’re talking to haven’t read as widely on McAfee as I have. If he wins the nomination, expect a lot more questions of that type, ESPECIALLY if Weiss is the VP nominee.

  140. Andy

    Barr and Root had plenty of time to move in a more libertarian direction and they failed to do so.

    I think that Barr and Root repelled more people from the LP than they brought in, and i bet if Weld gets on the 2016 ticket he will do the same.

  141. Be Rational

    Johnson/Weld would only have to carry one state (although more would be better) to stop both Trump and Clinton from getting to 270 in the EC. A well funded Super PAC could make that possible. Johnson could then win the White House with 26 votes in the House of Representatives, where each state gets one vote to choose the President. The Senate would choose the VP of course.

  142. Andy

    The LP is going to lose a lot of credibility if it nominates CFR member William Weld. This will not go over well at all with a lot of people who may otherwise support us, like the Ron Paul and Alex Jones crowds, etc…

  143. Andy

    Also, what about hardcore gun rights groups like Gun Owners of America? They will lose respect for us if our party nominates Weld.

  144. Tony From Long Island

    Why would the LP want to be associated with Alex Jones? How does being associated with a crazy conspiracy theorist bring CREDIBILITY? Credibility comes with national name recognition which does not elicit a shrug. It comes with candidates who are actually electable. It comes with media coverage. You can feel free to remain on the fringe but I would like the principles of libertarianism to become widely spread. I left the LP because of the insane purists who demanded 100% adherence to their unattainable utopia.

  145. Andy

    Be Rational should change his/her handle to Be Irrational if he/she thinks that Johnson has a snowball’s chance in hell at winning the White House.

  146. Be Rational

    Andy, do you know of anyone who befriended them and encouraged them to become more L, who brought them along into the inner circles in a warm, welcoming manner, who helped Barr raise money to pay his campaign debts? No, a small group of ranting, rabid activists bent on making the LP perfectly pure drove them and thousands of potential supporters away. But the LP can never be perfectly pure until it becomes a party of one. Please stop attacking and start teaching and leading.

  147. Tony From Long Island

    Thomas, I agree with you 100% on Barr / Root. That was another reason I left the party. It’s important to realize that I am a registered Democrat. I was before I was a 20-year dues paying member of the LP and I am again now. Not every libertarian comes from the right. The thought of Barr representing “my party” made me sick. Here’s my voting record for POTUS
    92 Andre Marrou
    96 Ross Perot
    00 Harry Browne (because Gore was ahead by a mile in NY)
    04 Michael Badnarik
    08 Barack Obama
    12 Gary Johnson (because Obama was ahead by a mile in NY)
    16 Gary Johnson

    I consider myself a moderate Democrat, just like I considered myself a moderate Libertarian. Not every member of the LP scores at the top pinnacle of the world’s smallest political quiz. Every party has different wings. If you want the 100 / 100 wing of the LP to control it, then you are destined for a life of no political gains.

  148. Jay Wildwood

    “Why would the LP want to be associated with Alex Jones? How does being associated with a crazy conspiracy theorist bring CREDIBILITY?”

    Exactly.

  149. robert capozzi

    BR, I was just wondering about that. I just re-read the section in the Constitution.

    I think it’s quite far-fetched to think that the next Congress would pick GJ in that scenario. More likely would be that the party that won more state delegations to the House would pick their standard-bearer. I suspect the Rs would win more state delegations because they tend to do better in low-pop states. Even split states might be really interesting.

    Surely most of them have reservations about Trump, but they would probably have even MORE reservations about GJ. And then there’s party loyalty.

    But, even then, would that not be just the coolest thing? Make the bastards sweat that out as a strong signal of just how dysfunctional the Rs and Ds are?

    I think this happened only once…for John Quincy Adams in the 1824 election.

  150. Be Rational

    Johnson/Weld can do it Andy by carrying any one or more states. There is a very strong likelyhood of a very large amount of Super PAC money coming their way. If Hillary fails to get to 270 there’s no way she can win in the House. A well targeted campaign could carry several Red and Blue states. Then, the D controlled states would have every incentive to switch to Johnson in the House to stop Trump. It would then only take a handful of R states to back Johnson to reach 26 votes, which could be obtained by the Stop Trump Rs, rational Rs and states with mixed delegations in the House.

    If Johnson/Weld are nominated, this eventual outcome is quite plausable.

  151. Bondurant

    People don’t expect LP members to agree on everything. If they agreed on everything there would be no need to have a convention to elect a nominee for president. One thing for sure, though, is that if you support gun control you are not a libertarian.

    It is not the job of Libertarians to sacrifice our principles for the benefit of Democrats and Republicans. They seek the LP when they realize their worldview is wrong as is their love of a powerful centralized government.

    Fine thoughts on the Second Amendment:

  152. Andy

    Alex Jones had a huge following. He has one of the top alternative media websites, and is probably the top alternative media talk radio host. His videos get millions of hits on YouTube. Alex Jones has a proven ability to fundraise, and he was a major driving force behind the success of the Ron Paul money bombs.

  153. Tony From Long Island

    Robert is correct. Each STATE delegation gets one vote in the house among the top 3 in the electoral college. And Adams is, I believe, the only President elected that way.

    Then, Trump would likely win because of Slimy republican Gerrymandering. The dems regularly receive more national votes for the house but local state Republicans outsmarted them after the last census.

  154. Jay Wildwood

    “The LP is going to lose a lot of credibility if it nominates CFR member William Weld. This will not go over well at all with a lot of people who may otherwise support us, like the Ron Paul and Alex Jones crowds, etc…”

    It would be great to have those folks go support Trump, which they are mostly already doing, and stop plaguing the Libertarians so actual libertarians can be allowed to come into the party for a change. If it happens I’ll be happy to be a big L Libertarian and will say good riddance to bad rubbish. In short, losing credibility with those people is the best thing the Libertarians can do to gain credibility with virtually everyone else.

  155. Be Rational

    Many of those small states have only one seat in the house, perhaps one Republican who doesn’t want the Trump negatives to hurt them for the next 4 years. Avoid Hillary and let Johnson take the heat while rebuilding the Republican party. Better to be able to attack and blame Johnson when they don’t like what he does and work with him when they do. It would only take a few to see the benefits and dump Trump.

  156. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    This is a sincere question:

    Does thinking that being a member of the Council of Foreign Relations is a bad thing make me a conspiracy theorist? I thought this was a mainstream belief.

  157. robert capozzi

    jp, no, not per se. CTers are the only ones I know of who are concerned about the CFR, though. As indicated, there are non-interventionists who have been members of the CFR.

  158. Tony From Long Island

    One does not have to spout a conspiracy theory with EVERY WORD spoken to be considered a conspiracy theorist. I said that Alex Jones is a conspiracy theorist – not Jill Pyeatt (thought, who knows, maybe you are too….). And once anyone spouts 9/11 “truther” garbage, they are automatically labeled a conspiracy theorist and have ZERO – ZERO – ZERO credibility.

  159. robert capozzi

    BR, it’s fun to speculate about such things, but consider the possibility that you are getting way ahead of yourself. First, GJ needs to get the nomination, which we have the assume that the NAPsters will try to block with full force. WW makes sense on paper, but for the NAPsters, this move probably has neck-veins bulging and frantic re-reading of Rothbard’s strategy memo.

    Next, assuming that hurdle can be lept, they need to raise a boatload of cash…unprecedented amounts.

    GJ still needs lots and lots of coaching for media.

    Winning one or a few states could be done, I suppose, but Wallace did it regionally and with a built-in constituency of haters and massive voter suppression efforts. There’s no regional play for GJ/WW of that sort. Some SuperPAC smarty might come up with some strategy, but it will be far-fetched almost certainly. (DK needs to be careful here, btw. Part of the reason Bergland won in 83 was DK made a speech where he implied he was trying to buy Ravenal’s nomination. It didn’t sit well with many.)

    If that all lines up, then maybe it’s worth more serious consideration.

    Until then, one step at a time….

  160. Darcy G Richardson

    “Johnson/Weld can do it Andy by carrying any one or more states. There is a very strong likelyhood of a very large amount of Super PAC money coming their way. If Hillary fails to get to 270 there’s no way she can win in the House. A well targeted campaign could carry several Red and Blue states. Then, the D controlled states would have every incentive to switch to Johnson in the House to stop Trump. It would then only take a handful of R states to back Johnson to reach 26 votes, which could be obtained by the Stop Trump Rs, rational Rs and states with mixed delegations in the House.

    If Johnson/Weld are nominated, this eventual outcome is quite plausable.” — Be Rational

    It’s this sort of grandiose and delusional pie-in-the-sky nonsense that makes it so difficult to take Gary Johnson and his supporters seriously.

  161. Be Rational

    Weld hasn’t run for office for some time, so he has the option to reset some of his views to be more in line with the LP and he can make a plausible case for the changes if he chooses to do so. He will probably need to make some pivots to secure the LP nod for VP. He would have good reason to do so as a Johnson / Weld ticket is the only good option to stop Trump and Hillary.

    At this point in history, we have a duty to try to prevent either Trump or Clinton from taking the White House as both are too dangerous to the US and the world to be allowed to become President.

    A long-shot is better than no hope.

  162. Andy

    Jill, being concerned about a candidate being a member of the CFR means that you are an informed, rational, and decent person.

  163. Andy

    Jill has already questioned the official 9/11 story, so according to Tony From Long Island she has no credibility (although to me it increases her credibility).

  164. Be Rational

    Yes, RC, having any pledge from DK would not help at the LP convention. But we’re looking at Super Pac type spending of hundreds of millions of dollars that DK could raise and Super PACs are required to be independent from the campaign in any case. There are plenty of others equally anti-Trump to join in such an effort. So, there’s no way DK should show up at the convention. Johnson made the right call by denying the rumor – true or not.

  165. George Phillies

    “by carrying any one or more states.” Well, no.

    When McAfee/Weiss carries New Hampshire, four electoral votes, and neither Turmp nor Clinton has a majority (unreal, but the hypothesis) it is a good bet that five Republican electors in Texas will switch their votes from Trump to favorite son Ted Cruz, giving the House a choice of Trump, Cruz, or Clinton. Trump wins.

  166. Andy

    Weld resetting some of his views could also mean telling Libertarians what they want to hear so they nominate him, also known as lying.

  167. Darcy G Richardson

    “(DK needs to be careful here, btw. Part of the reason Bergland won in 83 was DK made a speech where he implied he was trying to buy Ravenal’s nomination. It didn’t sit well with many.)” — Robert Capozzi

    That’s a great observation, Bob — and you’re absolutely correct. Most IPR readers, particularly younger ones, probably aren’t aware of that.

  168. Be Rational

    Andy, you’re entitled to hold your nutty views about the 911 attack – I won’t try to run you out of the LP because of them. However, as a professional engineer, I can tell you that the twin towers fell exactly as one would expect from an airplane strike of the type we saw, they would have fallen even without the fires that weakened the structure and it would have been impossible to use explosives to do what we saw happen. The twin towers were never built to withstand the strike by a commercial airplane of the size that struck them – in fact no such calculations were made nor were they even possible – that was a PR claim to assuage the concerns of the public. They were built in the slide rule era with a design that wasn’t as structurally sound as was claimed – and there is your conspiracy, but you’ll have to go back to the early 70s for that one…

  169. robert capozzi

    gp, it’s the five highest electoral votes, so in your hypo, it’d be a choice of 4, as I read the relevant passage.

    Lord knows what happens in states with evenly split delegations. Maybe the Knappster’s NOTA dream might come true, in a sense.

    I’d not seen this before: Are you supporting JMc?

  170. Andy

    That’s funny, because there is an organization called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth that differs with your view on the collapse of the WTC buildings, and it is rather telling that you do not have the intellectual courage to post under your real name.

    I have attempted to organize a 9/11 Truth debate (to be recorded and put on YouTube) at every LP national convention since 2008, including this one, and every time the other side chickens out.

  171. robert capozzi

    dgr: That’s a great observation, Bob — and you’re absolutely correct.

    me: Thanks. If the reports are true, I’m guessing DK is thinking about a SuperPAC. The rules were different in the 80s. DK’s many times richer now than he was, so that’s a positive, from my perspective.

    Were you there in 83?

  172. Be Rational

    A McAfee/Weiss ticket would come in at about 1% of the vote at best and carry nothing.

    However, with Johnson/Weld carrying a handful of states, it is quite plausable that some R electors might switch to another R – such as Cruz – giving them an alternate choice in the House instead of Johnson. However, the D states wouldn’t vote for Cruz, so the R’s could then end up with Trump anyway – and they don’t want Trump.

    It is also plausable that none of the Trump electors would switch as they would be hoping to flip the Johnson electors so they could get to 270. The EC only gets one vote, so they don’t have the opportunity to see the lay of the land and bargain on multiple ballots in the EC.

    For the LP, this is a make or break year. The LP has few reasonable, sensible, adult choices. Perhaps Jessie Ventura will show up in Orlando to give us even more options and attention and a real circus. But the LP cannot survive another Bergland type disaster.

  173. Darcy G Richardson

    No, I wasn’t there, but I followed the ’84 campaign closely and later wrote about it extensively in one of my forthcoming volumes in my OTHERS series. I was involved with the Consumer Party during that period, which actively supported Sonia Johnson, the Citizens Party nominee, that year.

  174. Dave

    I favor a Johnson/Weld ticket, but I think any talk of them winning even a single state is pie in the sky. Even getting into the debates is probably a longshot, especially if the threshold remains at 15%. I do think the ticket would get more coverage though, and be included in more polling, largely because of the NeverTrump narrative. As long as the media can say ‘Johnson attracts 12% of Republicans in a head to head matchup!’ the ticket serves its purpose in keeping the horse race dynamic alive and well. And who knows, it may become a self fulfilling prophecy.

  175. Darcy G Richardson

    By the way, the only LP convention that I’ve ever attended was the 2004 national convention in Atlanta.

  176. Be Rational

    Andy, there are almost no actual structural engineers on that list. It’s mostly architects, landscapers and handful of non-structural engineers who have no education, training or experience to even form an opinion. References made to that list is a lie.

    Further, it was quite reasonable to sign such a list as it only called for an investigation and the signers never agreed to support what the 911 truthers were claiming.

    Finally, there is no point in debating people who know nothing about structural engineering regarding a structural engineering matter. The truthers claims are like saying the moon is made of green cheese.

    But, you can believe what you want, be totally wrong on this issue and still be a good Libertarian. Just stop driving other good Ls out of the party.

  177. robert capozzi

    br, all due respect, but odds are high that there will be 10K of folk who want to challenge the cult of the omnipotent state and are willing to pay $25/year to do so for decades to come.

    In a sense, I’d like to see the LP disband and be reconstituted as a broader lessarchist party (The Liberty Party?) without the crazy-talk baggage imposed on it by 89 20-somethings 4 decades ago. Even that would be expensive and procedurally time-consuming, though.

  178. Be Rational

    In ’83 there was no reason to go with Earl Ravenal except that he was backed by the Crane machine and Koch money. It was close, but the party in rabid anti-Crane fervor chose Bergland. Bergland was a disaster and Koch and Crane missed their best opportunity. They should have switched to Larry Smiley. He could have won the nomination and would have accepted the help of the Crane machine without alienating the rest of the party.

    With Bergland for Pres and Honey in the national office, the LP was doomed. Only the efforts of Jim Turney a couple of years later rescued the party. Without him it would have died, a shoebox of paper and a handful of names, in a closet in Honey’s spare bedroom.

  179. Be Rational

    Yes, RC, the LP could choose the worst of the bunch this year and survive along the lines of the Prohibition Party, if you call that surviving. But the LP nearly died after Bergland and it could face that prospect again.

  180. robert capozzi

    br, well, yes, Earl the Pearl was a member of the CFR, which got the crypto-Birchers’ knickers in a twist.

    Plus, a young Mary Ruwart threw her support to Bergland, putting his Max Headroom approach at the top of the ticket.

    Such a nightmare. Still, I feel blessed that I saw the speech of the ages delivered by James “Piggy” Norwood. It still triggers belly laughs for me, to this day. A top 10 life event, I dare say. 😉

  181. Mark Axinn

    Robert inquired:
    >MA, point of information: Wasn’t Stern recruited on-air by some LPers? I was a listener at the time, and that’s my recollection.

    You are correct. We had some jackasses in the LPNY back 1994 and may have a few more in the future.

    Once again, I gave a nominating speech against the Republican who tried to get our nomination, and my candidate lost. (Don’t bet with me!) Her name is Norma Segal and my speech ended with this slogan: “Make it legal; vote for Segal!”

  182. Mark Axinn

    Tom…
    >won a few on the primaries, but then came to grief betting on Sanders to spike in New York before losing the primary there

    The Clintonista corner in my law firm is joyous. They are all raising money for her like crazy, saying things like, “Bernie is great! I love Bernie but America isn’t ready for him yet so go with the proven and true and give $$ for Hillary.”

    It’s enough to make you puke.

  183. Mark Axinn

    >But the LP cannot survive another Bergland type disaster.

    Are you referring to my first LP vote knowing that my candidates usually don’t win? 🙂

    I shoulda voted for Crane/Koch in ’80, but John Anderson was the candidate of choice that year for independents.

  184. Trent Hill

    “but I’d be happy with McAfee”

    So, you distrust Johnson because he’s a liar, but the guy that is suspected of murder is someone you’d be happy with? I mean seriously, I couldn’t make this stuff up.

    Andy’s over here yapping about how we wouldn’t want to offend the Alex Jones crowd, lest they take their tin-foil hats and theories about 9/11 truth or chemtrails elsewhere. Good riddance.

  185. Mark Axinn

    If David Koch contributes say $10,000,000, that should assauge George’s concerns about Gary’s ability to pay his bills. 🙂

  186. NewFederalist

    Trent- Stop it! You are just making too much sense! That is NOT wanted here! 😉

  187. Andy

    Alex Jones has a huge following. I’d much rather have the Alex Jones crowd on my side than the Trent Hill crowd.

    Weld will not appeal to Ron Paul supporters, and there is a lot of crossover between Ron Paul supporters and Alex Jones fans.

    Nominating Weld would offend lots of other people, including lots of small “l” libertarians who are sitting on the sidelines, waiting to see what the LP does.

    Putting Weld on the ticket will alienate a lot of the libertarian base, much like Bob Barr and Wayne Root did.

  188. NewFederalist

    Andy- I know I am just a terrible person who “hides” behind a pseudonym but really can’t you let the conspiracy stuff go just a little? You have a LOT of really good ideas but all this conspiracy theory stuff just makes you look like an idiot.

  189. Thomas L. Knapp

    Jeremy,

    I agree there will be lots of questions for McAfee. That’s one reason I like him — he usually has good answers and I think we’d get a bigger net vote bump from his good answers than we would from Johnson’s name recognition minus Johnson’s piss-poor communications skills. Probably not a long-term gain in credibility and activism like we’d get from Perry or even Petersen — and those are the things I’m interested in, but at least not an overall negative experience.

    Yes, the questions Weiss raises would not be helpful to us at all. I don’t intend to support him for the VP nomination. I hope he’s not guilty of the charges he hung a jury on and then worked out a plea bargain on lesser charges over. Mutual friends tell me there’s no way he is. But hey, he hung a jury and took a plea on some serious aggression claims. That’s not something you follow up on by running for veep.

    Be Rational: Follow your own advice. The Libertarian ticket’s chances of winning the White House are non-zero, I suppose. But they’re so small as to EFFECTIVELY be zero. Putting them at 1/10th of 1% would be an irrational over-valuation. And those “many” states with only one US Representative you mentioned? There are only seven of them and not all of them are red states.

    I agree with whoever it was who was noticing that that lying sack of shit Alex Jones is pure poison. He probably actively prevents at least ten voters away from taking the LP even a little bit seriously for every one he turns on to us.

  190. Thomas L. Knapp

    Trent,

    You write:

    “So, you distrust Johnson because he’s a liar, but the guy that is suspected of murder is someone you’d be happy with?”

    McAfee isn’t “suspected of murder.” At least not by anyone who’s taken 30 seconds to look into the matter. That’s one reason he’s a pretty good candidate. The murder thing grabs attention, but then disintegrates in less time than TV interviews allow for foreplay. And in less time than it takes to wake the viewers up after Johnson puts them to sleep.

  191. William Saturn

    So, it seems likely, the Republican Party will nominate a non-interventionist ticket with a candidate who opposed the Iraq War and endorsed the impeachment of President George W. Bush, whereas the Libertarian Party will nominate a neoconservative ticket with a candidate who endorsed Jeb Bush for president and supports endless war.

    Furthermore, on gun control, the GOP will be pro-Second Amendment while the LP will be pro-gun control.

  192. Thomas L. Knapp

    It isn’t just a handful of “conspiracy theorists” who don’t like the CFR. I was raised as an evangelical Christian and a lot of them find the CFR, among other organizations, suspicious because they think they live in the “end times” and that various internationalist groups — CFR, Trilateral Commission, heck, even the EU — presage the rise of the Antichrist. That seems to have toned down some since I was a kid. And of course the people in question tend not to lean especially libertarian. But anti-globalism isn’t quite the small-time tendency that some seem to assume.

  193. Andy

    Tom shows he does not know what he is talking about in regard to Alex Jones.

    First of all, Alex Jones has never been a member of the Libertarian Party. He has called himself a libertarian, and in the past he has called himself a freedom fighter, a truth seeker, and a constitutionalist.

    Alex Jones has interviewed Libertarian Party candidates, such as Gary Johnson, Michael Badnarik, Harry Browne, and others. He has even endorsed some LP candidates (I know he endorsed Johnson and Badnarik). He really pumped up Ron Paul’s 2008 and 2012 runs in the Republican primaries and he helped Ron Paul raise several million dollars.

    Just going from my own anecdotal experience, which comes from talking to thousands and thousands of people, whenever I run into am Alex Jones fan while gathering petition signatures for the Libertarian Party, they almost always sign the petition, with the main exception being if they are not registered to vote, or not registered in the same jurisdiction as where the petition is being done. Alex Jones fans are far more well informed, and far more open to having Libertarian Party candidates on the ballot, as compared to the general public that gets all of their news from the mainstream media.

  194. Andy

    New Federalist, you are obviously too timid to comprehend this, but I speak the truth and i refuse to stop or alter my message.

  195. Jeremy

    Tom, wow, I guess we disagree a lot more on Petersen than we do on McAfee. I really want to like McAfee, and I think he is a cool and charismatic guy, even as I think he is unfit for the presidency. But Petersen is the second coming of Wayne Allyn Root; he’s not going to build the party brand, because he cares about nobody but himself.

  196. Thomas L. Knapp

    Andy,

    You used a lot of words to say nothing that contradicted anything I said, even though you started by seeming to intend to do so.

    Jeremy,

    I don’t expect Petersen to be the nominee. I don’t support him for the nomination. I have significant disagreements with him.

    But unlike Wayne Allyn Root he has a positive history with the party, a positive history with the movement, a platform that’s well within the libertarian tent (more so than Johnson’s), reasonably good speaking skills and personal presentation (he’s a LITTLE bit more gruff and confrontational than I like — I’ve characterized him as reminding me of Leonardo diCaprio playing J. Edgar Hoover), etc.

    In terms of “who is running a real campaign,” Petersen’s the top of the pile. Unlike Johnson, he can balance a checkbook and spends his money on campaigning instead of on the care and feeding of “consultants.” Unlike Perry, he’s willing to raise cash (I support Perry’s approach but understand its limitations). And he doesn’t seem to have the same problem as McAfee, whatever that problem is (from outside, it’s unclear whether McAfee is unable to raise money or unable or unwilling to accurately report what he’s raised and spent, but it’s one or the other).

    We could do a LOT worse than Petersen. In fact, we’ve done a lot worse than Petersen two presidential cycles in a row now, and my goal is to make sure we don’t do a lot worse than Petersen for a third.

  197. George Dance

    George Dance: “Too bad Harry Browne is dead, and Ron Paul is way too old (but, then, remember how the radicals pilloried them, too?)”

    Root’s Teeth are Awesom: No, I don’t remember that. I’m a radical, and I voted for Ron Paul (by write-in) in both 2008 and 2012. I also supported Harry Browne.

    Well, I do. For Ron Paul, you’d have to go back to 1988, since that was the year he ran for the nomination. There’s probably nothing on the web (since there wasn’t one in those days), but I remember the same fears about the Republicans taking us over that are still coming out today.

    With Browne, there’s little on the web about that, too, I suppose (still too early); but perhaps, if one googles “Hornberger Browne”, one may find something. Hornberger launched his career and think tank opposing Browne through that whole period.

  198. NewFederalist

    “New Federalist, you are obviously too timid to comprehend this, but I speak the truth and i refuse to stop or alter my message.” – Andy

    OR… your meds no longer work at maximum effectiveness.

  199. Thomas L. Knapp

    George,

    Hornberger launched the Future of Freedom Foundation years before Harry Browne’s first campaign and more than a decade before Browne’s second campaign, which is when he opposed Browne.

    And the opposition to Browne from most quarters wasn’t on “purist” grounds (except when he floated trial balloons on matching funds, flat taxes, etc.), but on campaign corruption.

  200. Avens O'Brien

    “Does he need to explain why it’s OK for him to drive 50 in a 55 zone and serve wine to his 22-year-old dinner guests too? The legal age of consent in Belize is 16. Are you some kind of misogynist who objects to women over the legal age of consent deciding who they want to sleep with?”

    AMEN. Thank you for saying this. Hell, I’m a feminist who doesn’t give a shit about McAfee sleeping with young women. Because young women have agency too.

  201. robert capozzi

    tk: But anti-globalism isn’t quite the small-time tendency that some seem to assume.

    me: I never said “small time.” CT-ism is a fairly significant subset of the pop. Whether it’s about the Mark of the Beast or chemtrails, paranoia is a fairly common affliction.

  202. Jay Wildwood

    “Andy’s over here yapping about how we wouldn’t want to offend the Alex Jones crowd, lest they take their tin-foil hats and theories about 9/11 truth or chemtrails elsewhere. Good riddance.”

    Indeed!

  203. Jay Wildwood

    “Weld will not appeal to Ron Paul supporters, and there is a lot of crossover between Ron Paul supporters and Alex Jones fans.”

    Again showing, as I said, that it’s too bad we can’t have him at the top of the ticket!

  204. Jay Wildwood

    “Andy- I know I am just a terrible person who “hides” behind a pseudonym but really can’t you let the conspiracy stuff go just a little? You have a LOT of really good ideas but all this conspiracy theory stuff just makes you look like an idiot.”

    I’ve missed his good ideas. Where/what are they?

  205. Jay Wildwood

    “We could do a LOT worse than Petersen.”

    Surprisingly, I agree with Mr. Knapp; I too have been impressed with what I have seen from this young man, despite his relative inexperience and lack of executive experience. I believe he has a bright future ahead of him and could easily become a leader, if not this year, certainly in the future. And I wouldn’t rule out this year, given some of the missteps by the older and more accomplished candidates.

  206. NewFederalist

    Jay Wildwood- Andy has posted many excellent really libertarian ideas over the many years he has posted here and despite the fact that he detests the fact that I post under a nome de plume I admire much of what he says. In my opinion he gets a bit carried away with all the conspiracy stuff but that does not take away from his core libertarian beliefs with which I am mostly in agreement. BTW, welcome to this forum.

  207. Gene Berkman

    Just a couple of facts in regard to things that have been mentioned:
    (a) Yes, Alex Jones promoted Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012. After Paul lost the Republican nomination, Jones backed Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party candidate) in 2008 and Gary Johnson in 2012. Jones referred to Bob Barr as the CIA guy – Barr had been in the Central Intelligence Agency at one point.
    This year Alex Jones is enthusiastically backing Donald Trump, although he is now worried about Trump meeting with Henry Kissinger. (Also many Birchers are supporting Donald Trump because he opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and Birchers tend to agree with Trump on illegal immigration. In the past Birchers were big backers of Ron Paul.

    (b) David Bergland beat Earl Ravenal for the nomination in 1983 (for the 1984 election) for several reasons – Ravenal talks like a Professor, not a candidate; Ravenal had a long association with The Cato Institute, but had not been active with The Libertarian Party, other than giving speeches on foreign policy @ LP conventions; Murray Rothbard and associates made the contest into a fight against Ed Crane and his domination of the Libertarian National Committee.

    David Koch did offer to fund the ballot drives if Earl Ravenal were nominated; This got additional votes for Ravenal, and led to a split in the Radical Caucus, with Eric Garris and Justin Raimondo favoring Ravenal to get the ballot status, and Murrary Rothbard and Bill Evers supporting Bergland. In later years Rothbard became a Pat Buchanan supporter, and Bill Evers has been involved in Republican politics in recent years. CFR member that he is, Ravenal supported non-interventionist foreign policy and backed Ron Paul in 1988. (also in the 1980s, Ed Crane, then President of Cato Institute, was invited to join the CFR; he accepted, and quit after a year because it did not give him any new opportunities to promote libertarianism.

    (c) Ron Paul is denouncing Donald Trump as an authoritarian, and urging people to vote for the Libertarians. I have no reason to believe he is hostile to William Weld; Weld was a favorite of The Republican Liberty Caucus in the 1990s, at the time Ron Paul returned to the Republican Party and got elected to Congress.

  208. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Weld was a favorite of The Republican Liberty Caucus in the 1990s”

    The RLC, of course, being the same organization that rated Rick Santorum the most libertarian US Senator. ‘nuf said.

  209. Andy

    Alex Jones originally endorsed Rand Paul for President. He switched to Donald Trump when Rand’s campatn tanked and he dropped out.

    Even though Jones is backing Trump, he has stated multiple times that he has disagreements with Trump, and that he does not fully trust him. He sees Trump as a better alternative to Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as well as the other Republicans who were in the race, except for Rand Paul.

    Alex has expressed support for Gary Johnson and John McAfee (but not for Austin Peterson, whom he made negative comments about (he has not commented on anyone else seeking the LP nomination)), but he knows they have no chance of winning.

    Are Jones and other liberty minded people wrong for backing Donald Trump? Time will probably tell the answer.

    I remain skeptical of Trump myself, which is why I have not jumped on his bandwagon.

  210. Jay Wildwood

    “He sees Trump as a better alternative to Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders as well as the other Republicans who were in the race, except for Rand Paul.”

    Thus showing yet again his colossal stupidity and/or duplicity.

    “Are Jones and other liberty minded people wrong for backing Donald Trump? ”

    This question is built on an inaccurate premise.

    “Ron Paul is denouncing Donald Trump as an authoritarian, and urging people to vote for the Libertarians. ”

    Excellent! I hope he continues to do so. We need all hands on deck.

  211. Jay Wildwood

    “So, it seems likely, the Republican Party will nominate a non-interventionist ticket with a candidate who opposed the Iraq War and endorsed the impeachment of President George W. Bush,”

    Trump is not a non-interventionist. More on that in a minute. And when you say ticket, do you know something we don’t about Trump’s VP pick? I’m not aware of what he said about impeachment, but then he’s bounced around all sorts of parties and ideologies, and donated quite a bit to the Clintons, so it would not surprise me. As for Iraq, he lied about being against it from the beginning. He started out supporting the war, and changed his mind later.

    ” whereas the Libertarian Party will nominate a neoconservative ticket with a candidate who endorsed Jeb Bush for president and supports endless war.”

    It would be a huge stretch to call either Johnson or Weld a neocon. They are more moderate on the issue than some extreme libertarians, but still libertarian leaning vis a vis the mainstream consensus on foreign policy issues. It’s true that Weld did endorse Bush and later Kasich; endorsements are based on many factors. Johnson did not endorse Jeb. I’d say the VP candidate’s past endorsements have been pretty far down my list of concerns when casting votes in the past and that still has not changed.

    “Furthermore, on gun control, the GOP will be pro-Second Amendment while the LP will be pro-gun control.”

    Also untrue. Trump has flopped like a fish on the issue, as he has on so many others, and it would not surprise me if he flips again before the election. We don’t know who his VP pick will be. Johnson has generally supported the 2nd, so even if we take it as a given that Weld still supports gun control, that wouldn’t make it the position of the whole ticket, much less the LP.

  212. Andy

    “Thomas L. Knapp
    May 19, 2016 at 20:50
    ‘Weld was a favorite of The Republican Liberty Caucus in the 1990s’

    The RLC, of course, being the same organization that rated Rick Santorum the most libertarian US Senator. ‘nuf said.”

    I remember first hearing about the Republican Liberty Caucus back in the late 1990’s or early 2000’s. I thought about joining, that is up until I started looking into the records of some of the people who were in it and finding out that several of them were not really that libertarian.

  213. Tim

    I agree with DJH2036. If you’re going to reach outside strict libertarian circles, at lest get a good, solid constitutionalist, not a liberal progressive like Weld. Someone on the order of Rand paul or even Ted Cruz fits that bill. And Amash, who is at least a quasi-libertarian and doesn’t like the two-party system, who was first a Paul supporter and then when Paul dropped out, a Cruz supporter, could help you reach more like-minded people than Weld.

    and he’s from a bigger state and younger.

  214. Greg Jones

    Someone forwarded this to me, I don’t know who wrote it originally but they make a good argument:

    I am watching libertarians debating inconsequentials when it come to Weld. In the real world a VP candidate is, during the campaign, merely a voice for the presidential candidate—he doesn’t go out there taking his own positions and telling people why his co-runner is wrong on things. Disagreements between a VP and presidential candidate ONLY become important when they are actually elected and if the presidential candidate is unable to fulfill his term of office.

    In other words the VP candidate is more honorary and serves other functions. For instance, he/she is used to increase regional support or up support in an important state. They are used to add other factors to the campaign but almost never because of their ideological views. In fact, they are sometimes picked because they are different from their running mate ideologically to get some support from that side. In other words, the VP is picked to help the ticket not to toe some ideological purity line.

    For those reasons Weld is a great VP choice. Now, if Gary and Weld were to be elected (not likely at all) and Gary were to become unable to finish his term of office (also not likely) then, and ONLY then does it become important where Weld differs. Libertarians bitching about this are so far ahead of themselves as to be cutting off their noses to spite their faces. It isn’t a debate worth having—don’t delude yourself and think you are actually going to be attending Gary’s inauguration.

    Here is what you should consider, if you are serious about creating a libertarian political force in elections. You need credible candidates who are broadly pro civil liberties, pro economic freedom. You don’t need candidates who are mirror images of one another. They are candidates not clones. You need people with experience who can attract votes across the political spectrum. You need candidates who can attract financial donations. You need candidates who can move the LP forward as a viable alternative.

    Libertarians think that some anarchist wank off makes things “viable.” Sorry, it doesn’t, it just makes the party irrelevant. If you want to move the debate in American politics you have to show influence not a keen knowledge or arcane facts about Tucker, Spooner or even, dare I say it, Ayn Rand. The arcane facts are not relevant to the way we see shifts in policies.

    Here is the reality. If Gary and Weld do well, what we will see is the other two parties shifting to try to take up as much of that support as necessary. That means Republicans downplaying their religious fanaticism and theocratic tendencies. That means Democrats not so willing to spend, spend, spend and tax, tax, tax to finance the cronyism of public trade unions. That will shift things in the a better direction. No, libertarians won’t get the credit. But, if we want to change American politics we have to push the two extremist parties toward the libertarian center.

  215. Andy

    Here’s a link to the Council On Foreign Relations website that lists William Weld as one of the authors of a CFR task force report entitled “Building a North American Community”:

    http://www.cfr.org/canada/building-north-american-community/p8102

    If anyone here is planning to vote for this guy, please, do us all a favor and skip this convention. Just stay home, or maybe go to the convention, but go hang out at Disney World or Sea World or some place other than the convention hall while the candidate nominations are taking place.

  216. Andy

    Greg Jones said: “For those reasons Weld is a great VP choice. ”

    He might be a great choice if this were the Republican Party, but being that this is the Libertarian Party, and NOT the Republican Party, Weld is a HORRIBLE choice.

  217. Andy

    Here is Dick Cheney at the Council on Foreign Relations, admitting that he’s been a member for a long time, but that he never told the people of Wyoming that during his runs for US House there.

    Dick Cheney at CFR, laughing at the people of WYO!

  218. Andy

    Here is Council on Foreign Relations member, Gary Hart, saying that George W. Bush will be able to use the aftermath of 9/11 to create the “New World Order” that his father had talked about back in 1991. Note that Hart said this on September 12. 2001, the day after 9/11.

    Gary Hart CFR New World Order

  219. Andy

    This is George HW Bush on September 11th of 1991, ten years before the 9/11/01 attack, calling for a New World Order.

    Coincidence?

    George Bush Sr. New World Order Live Speech Sept 11 1991

  220. Jay Wildwood

    “Someone on the order of Rand paul or even Ted Cruz fits that bill. And Amash, who is at least a quasi-libertarian and doesn’t like the two-party system, who was first a Paul supporter and then when Paul dropped out, a Cruz supporter, could help you reach more like-minded people than Weld.”

    Let me know when they are available to run on the Libertarian ticket.

  221. Thane Eichenauer

    Andy,
    Thank you for the link “5 Statist Positions…”. I found it short and useful.

  222. Andy

    You know, I recall Andy Craig posting those videos above mocking Alex Jones on another thread here about his anti-conspiracy theory group.

    Andy Craig is apparently working in some sort of paid capacity for the Gary Johnson campaign, but he never answered what exactly it is he is doing for the Johnson campaign when I asked him on 3 occasions.

    This makes me wonder if “Jay Wildwood” is Andy Craig.

    Regardless of whether it is or not, I do not believe that “Jay Wildwood” is this poster’s real name.

  223. Thane Eichenauer

    Jay Wildwood,
    You are correct as far as Koch rumors are concerned. The bit of information about the relation of William Weld to casino operator Steve Wynn remains.

  224. Jay Wildwood

    Andy something (I presume not Craig),

    Sorry, I’ve never heard of Andy Craig. You seem to be a bit creepy and obsessed with looking me up online, meeting me in real life etc. Why is that? The stalkerish behavior is weird and a bit deranged, to say the least. Even after I already told you no a few times, both politely and not so politely, you can’t seem to take a hint and keep trying to snoop on me and hump my leg at the same time, kind of like a cross between the nosy neighbor and a dog in heat. The only conclusion that I can draw from this oddball behavior of yours is that your ideas are weak and don’t stand up to intellectual scrutiny, that you experience severe cognitive dissonance when you lose these internet arguments, and that you seek to deflect attention from your illogical stances in these comments with these nonsensical games. Please find someone else to harass, or better yet go try Awake Dating if you are not underage.

    Thane Eichenauer,

    Yes, that was and is not in dispute.

  225. Greg Jones

    There’s some truth to Jay’s point that trying to obsessively look people up online and offline can verge on and cross the line into harassment. However, I was curious enough to look up who Andy Craig is, and found the following post on facebook. It seemed like an interesting read…

    “Andy Craig
    36 mins · Milwaukee, WI ·

    A lot of reactions, to say the least, to Johnson/Weld. The outside interest and media coverage is huge, and overwhelmingly positive. A lot of incredibly enthusiastic reactions. I think it’s a safe bet that never before has the announcement of a Libertarian candidate for Vice-President been covered so extensively by all the major news outlets. But of course Libertarians are not necessarily ones to care much for what the outside world thinks.

    Gov. Weld will have to address and satisfy Libertarians on a few issues of concern from his record, for sure. And he will! These objections aren’t all insignificant (though they are in some cases premature, when he hasn’t had the chance to respond yet), and he is fully aware that he will have to provide a satisfactory answer to the delegates in Orlando. In some cases that answer will be “I was wrong, and here’s why I was wrong, and have since changed my mind.” You don’t have a career as impressive as his without making mistakes along the way.

    However, there are also objections that really just don’t matter, or at least they shouldn’t. I don’t care that he agreed to talk with people at a think tank that Alex Jones has made into a mythical boogeyman. Nor does it bother me much that while still involved in two-party politics, he threw his weight behind the lesser-evil candidates as he saw it. There are very few Libertarians who can say they were never a member of any other party, or never supported a non-Libertarian candidate. And there are *no* Libertarians who can’t say their views have evolved and changed, both before they joined the party and since.

    I also think that the objection that it’s “doubling down” on ex-Governors is misplaced… it’s not a *bad thing* to have Vice President who is both qualified for that job, and the job he may have to assume on a moment’s notice. “Ticket-balancing” is a vastly over-stated and over-rated phenomenon, not nearly as important as the quadrennial Veepstakes speculation would make you think. (Besides, by the traditional definition, this is a balanced ticket: Southwest and Northeast). As I’ve talked about before, it’s not illegitimate or wrong that the American people have never wanted to elect a President, or Vice President, without some relevant experience, either government, military, or private-sector.

    Those issues aside, I do think a lot of people of people deep inside the LP’s echo chamber, are also missing the incredible positives Gov. Weld does have to offer, and the opportunity this ticket represents.

    Bill Weld started his career busting political corruption, first for the House Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment, and then going on to take down the notorious machine surrounding Boston’s four-term mayor. When promoted to the Justice Department, he resigned in protest over the Attorney General’s law-breaking, and provided whistle-blower testimony to Congress that caused that A.G. to resign. If you want anti-corruption credentials, it doesn’t come any better than Weld.

    As Governor, he governed on a message of smaller-government fiscal conservatism, privatization, cutting taxes, and balanced budgets, alongside live-and-let-live social liberalism. In other words, a libertarian exactly as the party itself has defined the term for decades when explaining ourselves to voters and the public on the Nolan Chart. He only had enough Rs in the legislature to sustain a veto his first two years, and during that time passed the first year-over-year spending cuts in decades. But even when facing a veto-overriding Democratic supermajority in Massachusetts, he still submitted a balanced budget every year and pushed for privatization of many agencies and departments.

    Within the GOP, he was a consistent and outspoken voice against the theocratic nanny-state of the Religious Right, famously being booed at the Republican National Convention for declaring his support for “a government that stays out of your pocketbook and out of your bedroom.” His nomination to be Ambassador to Mexico was blocked by the infamous Jesse Helms out of pure spite for his support of things like legal equality for gays and lesbians, and legalizing medical marijuana.

    It is plainly true, as David Boaz said today, that Bill Weld is the most libertarian governor within living memory, with the sole exception of Gary Johnson.

    Today was the first time we got to hear from the Weld himself. In his New York Times interview, he blasted the Iraq war and ‘nation-building.’ On Cavuto, he re-affirmed his support for the basic principles of libertarianism: smaller government, free markets, and tolerance, and a government that leaves you alone so long as you aren’t harming others. He’s probably the only major elected officeholder, other than Ron Paul perhaps, to have uttered the words “coercive taxation is theft.”

    He also acknowledged, in terms that made it clear he understands the process, that he does have to earn the nomination in Orlando. That it isn’t just his to take, and he has to agree to serve Libertarians as our voice in the general election and beyond. He is seeking to be our nominee for that office, just like the other candidates seeking to be our nominee for that office.

    For the Libertarian Party, the choice here is stark. Hypothetical perfection isn’t on the table– it never is– and there is a real choice to make between the options we have.

    Johnson/Weld offers a viable, competitive, potentially debate-included, well-funded ticket, that can earn vote totals that will boost the party’s down-ticket candidates as well as the LP’s future growth, including securing ballot access for future elections. It is not outside the realm of possibility, to say that this is a ticket that could compete to win states in November. And if they are included in the debates, it’s not implausible at all to say they’d have a real shot of winning.

    Our other choices, offer putting the Libertarian Party on a death spiral, destined to go defunct within a decade or two at the most. That is not hyperbole: the LP could quite easily follow the path of the Reform Party before it. It’s something of a miracle the LP has lasted this long since its founding in 1971, and its perpetual existence and continued ballot access is not guaranteed. Those interested in effecting real-world change, those involved in the broader movement of libertarianism, could easily take one last look at us before abandoning the LP (as most usually did pre-Johnson), and returning to trying to work within the two-party system as best they can. What’s left might be an organization called the “Libertarian Party,” but it wouldn’t be a political party, and it wouldn’t even be more libertarian.

    Faced with the prospects of a race-baiting demagogue or an influence-peddling felon holding the highest office in the land, it is our obligation to put foward a ticket that will not only help grow the LP, but also offer an alternative to what Gov. Weld aptly called today “late-stage democracy”— a constitutional republic teetering on the edge of collapsing into strongman despotism or lawless oligarchy.

    This is the opportunity the Libertarian Party has been waiting 40 years for—- and if we don’t seize it, the party will probably not be around in another 40 years the next time America is ripe for a challenge to the two-party system. We can nominate the two most libertarian governors in the nation for President and Vice President, or we can nominate a ticket that will get more laughs than votes.

    I know which option I chose.

    ?#?JohnsonWeld2016?”

  226. William Saturn

    Jay,

    It’s important to understand the evolution of Trump’s views right up to the invasion of Iraq. On the Howard Stern Show in September 2002, long before the war started, Stern asked Trump whether the U.S. should invade Iraq, Trump said, “Yeah, I guess so . . . I wish the first time it was done correctly.” By January 2003, he started expressing reservations about the invasion and the uncertainty of an attack. In an interview with Neil Cavuto, he said “[e]ither you attack or you don’t attack.” By March 2003, Trump said he was “depressed” about the war and called it “a mess.” After that, he consistently expressed a negative opinion on the decision to invade Iraq. See http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/

    Trump’s “America First” foreign policy has been described by The Washington Post as noninterventionist. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/21/donald-trump-reveals-foreign-policy-team-in-meeting-with-the-washington-post/ See also http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-clinton-neoconservatives-220151, discussing the neoconservatives in opposition to Trump, “the neocons reserve special scorn for Trump.”

    As for the impeachment of Bush, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/13/in-2008-donald-trump-said-george-w-bush-shouldve-been-impeached/

    On whether or not Weld is neoconservative, we have three pieces of evidence. First, his “active” membership in the globalist CFR. http://mlstrategies.com/professionals/william-weld.htm Second, his public support of neoconservatives like George W. Bush, Barack Obama, http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/10/former_mass_governor_william_w.html and Jeb Bush. https://web.archive.org/web/20150927000449/http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/joe_battenfeld/2015/09/battenfeld_weld_has_come_out_swinging_for_bush Third, his undying love for Mexico at the expense of the United States; advocating the use of $25 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars to “bailout” Mexico; http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Bill_Weld_Foreign_Policy.htm turning his back on the people of Massachusetts by resigning as governor in a failed attempt to become the U.S. ambassador to Mexico; http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1997-07-29/news/1997210072_1_weld-helms-resignation and serving as co-chair of the Independent Task Force on North America, promoting social and economic “integration” of the U.S. and Mexico, in a vein similar to the integration of Europe through the EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Task_Force_on_North_America

    Read more about Weld’s anti-libertarian positions at:
    https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/5-statist-positions-that-should-make-libertarians-run-from-bill-weld
    http://spectator.org/48129_understanding-bill-weld/

  227. Be Rational

    TLK: Your point about there “only” being 7 states with a single state rep actually makes the real point. This means that those 7 individuals can cast 7 of 26 votes required to elect the POTUS in the House. A Republican will have every reason not to take the blame for Trump, and a Democrat, knowing that Hillary can’t win, will have every reason not to vote for a Republican.

    DK has wisely denied that he promised to back Johnson with funds – doesn’t mean that he won’t. Super PACs must be independent, so any such intent has to be made by him and other donors. It’s also wise not to announce in advance of the convention and to wait to see if Weld actually makes the ticket and if the Johnson/Weld LP ticket can get some traction in the media and the polls.

    The polls showed Johnson at 10% prior to all these recent developments and since the medica is already all over this news, it’s likely that the LP can catch the media wave that needs some new excitement this year and vault high enough to make the 15% for the debates. A Johnson/Weld ticket above 15% in the polls is likely to generate Super PAC support in advance of the debates – insuring their inclusion. At this point, properly targeted campaign and Super PAC strategy focusing on the right states can lead to winning some states in November and votes in the EC.

    The only real barrier to all of this is the convention in Orlando, and Johnson and Weld being Libertarian enough in their speeches and promised campaign to overcome the radicals.

    The benefit of this great opportunity to the radicals (including me) is to use it as a teaching moment in history. To do so we must work together to surf the wave of attention that is coming our way.

    (RC: Yes, Piggy Norwood was a hoot. Someone should write a compendium of the craziest candidates through time in and out of the LP.)

  228. robert capozzi

    TK: The RLC, of course, being the same organization that rated Rick Santorum the most libertarian US Senator. ‘nuf said.

    ME: Lemme get this straight: In your view, one datapoint is sufficient to draw a conclusion? I’m curious, could we find ONE thing — perhaps your biggest mistake — you’ve said and then we can all decide something about you?

    btw, no fan of Santorum, but my view of him is largely from his prez runs, where he revealed himself as, on balance, a morearchist. It’s possible that as a Senator he may have been a lessarchist, though. Or maybe the RLC was just using a poor methodology in its ranking system.

    Curious: If it’s to be Johnson/Weld, have you given any thought to your response? BTP 2.0? Write in Roderick Long in November?

  229. robert capozzi

    br: Johnson/Weld ticket above 15% in the polls is likely to generate Super PAC support in advance of the debates – insuring their inclusion.

    me: A serious review of numbers and strategy would be necessary. I note that getting to 15% in the polls is a NATIONAL effort, while targeting winnable states could lead to falling short of the 15%.

    I’d suggest the campaign needs to get to the 15% first, and one way to do that is to make the case to maximize the protest vote. CA, for instance, will almost certainly go D. Make the case to CAans that Trump is a wasted vote if you don’t like HC.

    Or maybe something like:

    DT and HC are the 2 most distrusted prez candidates ever. More and more people just don’t like the choice this year. People are clamoring for a 3rd choice.

    And here it is: Johnson/Weld. 2 two-term guvs, Rs in D states who both got things done. They turned around their states, and they can turn around America.

    Like most Americans, Johnson and Weld believe government spending is out of control, but they also think gay marriage and smoking marijuana is up to the individual. Unlike the Rs and Ds, Johnson/Weld think endless wars in the middle east is the very definition of insanity. Bring our troops home.

    Getting carried away….! This is by far the biggest (potential) canvas Ls have ever gotten.

  230. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    You write:

    “Lemme get this straight”

    And then, as usual, you don’t. I didn’t cite “one data point” as “sufficient to draw a conclusion.”

    I cited one data point as a way of making a point. I’ve followed the RLC closely over the years. Their definition of “libertarian” leaves a lot to be desired, and not just on NAP grounds. The year in which they rated Santorum the “most libertarian” US Senator was the same year in which Santorum very openly and specifically denounced libertarianism and decried its influence in the GOP; that same ratings system portrayed Santorum as “more libertarian” than Ron Paul, who was graded the second “most libertarian” member of the US House. It was either the previous or following year that the “most libertarian” US Senator, according to the RLC, was John McCain.

    All of this is an artifact of the way the RLC constructs its “Liberty Index.” The roll-call votes chosen for grading purposes aren’t chosen for the purpose of deciding which Senators and Representatives are “most libertarian.” They’re chosen for the express purpose of “proving” that Republicans are “more libertarian” than Democrats. So the votes chosen are votes in which the Republican party line is treated “the libertarian position.” Ron Paul lost points any time he defied that line. Democrats only gained points when they voted with Republicans.

    “Curious: If it’s to be Johnson/Weld, have you given any thought to your response? BTP 2.0? Write in Roderick Long in November?”

    Yes, I’ve given thought to my response.

    No, that response will not involve BTP 2.0. As you’ll recall, I founded the BTP two full years before it ran a 2008 presidential ticket and initially opposed it running a presidential ticket. I would have continued to oppose it if Barr hadn’t completely shit the bed as soon as he had the nomination in hand, and I wouldn’t have accepted the BTP’s vice-presidential nomination if the alternative candidates hadn’t been worse choices than myself. Even were I so inclined, and I’m not, it would be insanely difficult to start a new political party, get it organized, have it nominate a presidential slate, and get that presidential slate on ballots at such short notice. Especially without the assistance of Darcy Richardson, who was the moving force in the BTP achieving ballot status (my impression this year is that he’s no longer interested in helping me try to save the LP from itself, at least post-nomination).

    That’s not to say that I would never consider starting a new political party or other political organization again. I might — I love such experiments, find them educational for myself and possibly for others, and have some new ideas I’d like to try out. But if I do that I’ll do it proactively and in my own good time, not in hurried reaction to some development in the LP.

    My likely response to a Johnson/Weld ticket would be to carefully consider whether I could choke back the vomit long enough to cast a vote for that ticket. If not, I would probably just not vote.

    I strongly prefer to be a good party soldier or not be a party soldier at all. As you’ll recall, I ran as a Libertarian for Congress in 2008 as well, and actively promoted Barr/Root in my district and state even though I was a BTP candidate for VP elsewhere.

    This year, I expect that I would likely end my own congressional campaign rather than put it to such use (there might be other factors that militate in that direction, including the disposition of the Florida LP’s ballot line for US Senate). But neither would I actively work in opposition to the LP and its candidates. If the LP still isn’t interested in getting serious, I’ve got better things to waste my time on than the LP, either for or against. Who knows? Maybe the LP will be interested in extracting cranium from rectum in 2018 or 2020.

  231. robert capozzi

    tk, so, it wasn’t ” ‘nuf said.” More needed to be said. Thanks for clarifying.

  232. Be Rational

    RC: I agree that targeting CA (among others) early would help them get to 15% nationwide and it would help them in a strategy to carry at least some states – not that they would carry CA, but they could put CA into play by stripping support from Hillary early. A smart Trump play would follow Johnson into CA and Hillary would be forced to devote time and money there too. Nearly the whole electoral map could be put into play this election. Once everything is up for grabs, targeting for wins can begin, especially in the New England states and New Mexico.

  233. Thomas L. Knapp

    California’s very likely to be in play regardless of who’s on the LP ticket or what the LP campaign does. Trump may not win California, but I wouldn’t put money on it. I expect him to win every state that Romney won in 2012, plus Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. He’s got a decent shot in New York and New Jersey and at least SOME chance in California.

    In 2012, Gary Johnson outpolled Jill Stein in California, but this year that’s unlikely to happen. Not only is a Sanders defeat for the Democratic nomination likely to boost Stein’s numbers, but last time the Peace and Freedom Party ran its own candidate, while this time there’s a very good chance Stein will take both the Green and Peace and Freedom nominations (the combined Green/P&F vote in 2012 was about the same as the LP vote; this year the former will likely be far larger and the latter somewhat smaller).

  234. robert capozzi

    br, yes, 15% has to be the focus.

    Probably the only way I could imagine winning a state is:

    1) Johnson/Weld win nomination
    2) Very significant money by L standards is raised in June/July
    3) J/W continue to creep up in the polls from the current 10%. More polls start including J/W
    4) GJ gets really intensive media training in early June
    5) R and D conventions in July expose just how weak/embarrassing their candidates are
    6) By August, J/W break into the 15-20% range, make the debates
    7) GJ is passable. WW crushes the R and D veeps.
    8) SuperPAC money rushes in; they do the targeting of winnable states. What those states are: No idea. Your regional picks seem based on J/W’s homes, although I’m pretty sure Weld’s back home in NY. I know he has a residence in NY. My guess is coastal states, perhaps CO, perhaps NM, perhaps AK. The SuperPAC director will need to do a lot of research and have a strong gut on the choices, if it comes to this.

    That’s a lot of ifs.

    It’s more likely they poll short of 15%, and get 1-5% of the vote. 10% chance they can get to #7. 2% chance of #8. 0.5% chance of sending the election to the House. 0.01% chance J/W win.

  235. robert capozzi

    tk, otoh, I wonder if TX could be in play for HC. Hispanics are now 38% of the TX pop, for ex. 12% are African American.

  236. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    I suppose it’s possible that Texas could come into play, but I think it’s unlikely. There’s some chance that he will pick Rick Perry as his running mate — and if not, it’s VERY likely that Perry will be announced as either a cabinet pick (Homeland Security?) or sub-cabinet appointee (ICE/CBP?). Even if there are #NeverTrump defections in the state GOPs, I don’t see Texas as a likely center of such activity. Texas Republican leaders, officeholders, etc. will almost certainly back Trump wholeheartedly.

  237. robert capozzi

    tk, sure, the party there will back their nominee. The demographics of the state are breaking blue, big time. I’d just suggest that if NY and CA could be in play, I would say TX could, too.

    Perry would be an unwise vp pick for Trump, but he’s established his lack of wisdom in so many ways. This pre-announced Cabinet notion, otoh, is pretty wise, and Perry is prolly fine for such a role.

  238. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    I’m beginning to think that “wise” is just not an applicable concept where Trump is concerned. Every time someone — me included — thinks he’s messing up, he just gets more popular. And frankly Perry isn’t any more of a lightweight than, say, Dan Quayle.

    So when I make my own prediction as to who Trump will pick for VP, I’m not that confident in it. But here it is:

    Susana Martinez.

    He’s northeast, she’s southwest. He’s a previous non-politician, she’s a sitting governor. With his somewhat misogynistic reputation, it can’t hurt him to have a woman on the ticket. And in the unlikely event that Johnson gets any traction at all, she’s a Republican successor. I haven’t looked into her own record, but I’d expect her to be able to squash Johnson if necessary by the simple expedient of pointing out that he more than doubled New Mexico’s state debt and that he grew state spending faster than inflation, faster than population growth, and faster than Barack Obama has grown federal spending.

  239. George Phillies

    “… then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President….”

    Capozzi gets this wrong above. He says five.

  240. Thomas L. Knapp

    I’m still doubtful that the Libertarian Party’s presidential slate will make it into the top three. As it becomes more and more obvious that Clinton is toast, I expect Stein to become an attractive “we should have nominated Bernie” protest vote among left-leaning Democrats. At the same time, while I expect Republicans to be very energized this year, I expect them to be energized for the Republicans running on the Republican ticket, not for Republicans running on the Libertarian ticket if we go that way for the third time in a row.

  241. Pingback: IPR’s Third 2016 Libertarian Party Presidential Preference Poll | Independent Political Report

  242. Stewart Flood

    This Mike Shannon twerp needs to be bounced and told to pay for an ad if he wants to get our attention.

  243. Andy

    Everyone needs to remember 2008. We were told that big money and lots of votes would come in if we nominated Bob Barr and Wayne Root. A majority of LP delegates fell for it, and the big money and large vote totals never materialized. The Libertarian Party ended up looking pretty foolish for nominating Barr / Root, as our party looked like a bunch of sell outs. Most LP members today look back on Barr / Root as having been a mistake.

    There were a few Libertarians who warned against Barr / Root prior to them winning the nomination. I was among those who issued the warnings.

    Now here we are in 2012, and we have a similar situation with this William Weld guy.

    WARNING: This guy is not a libertarian, and he had already burned the LP once (see the LP of New York in 2006), and earlier this year he endorsed John Kasich for President, the man who is responsible for the Libertarian Party getting knocked off the ballot in Ohio. DO NOT NOMINATE WELD, IT WILL BE A MISTAKE.

    Will Libertarians make yet another foolish decision in Orlando?

    DO NOT GET FOOLED AGAIN!

  244. Andy

    “Will Libertarians make yet another foolish decision in Orlando?

    DO NOT GET FOOLED AGAIN!”

    This would be a good theme song for the convention. I hope a majority of delegate will not get fooled again.

    The Who – Wont Get Fooled Again

  245. Kareem Caliente

    Lol. Andy still thinks it’s 2012.

    Here’s a better song for the 2016 convention:

  246. Tony From Long Island

    To compare Bob Barr and Gary Johnson is asinine. Bob Barr wasn’t a libertarian in any way shape or form. Gary Johnson just isn’t libertarian enough for your purity test. Consider this: A president can do NOTHING without a cooperative congress. So would you rather have your 100% ivory snow pure Libertarian get nothing done or two governors who have proven to have smaller government principles and were able to work with legislatures comprised of mostly opposing party members? I’ll take the latter any day.

    Go ahead and keep picking out things done by J / W that you feel were not libertarian. That can be done with any candidate from any party at any time. Why not be happy that the word “libertarian” and what it means is actually being mentioned in the media for the general public to consume. When I joined the LP in 1992 at age 18 that would NEVER have happened. Hell, it didn’t even happen when I left the party after the Barr fiasco.

  247. Tony From Long Island

    ” . . . . . .We can nominate the two most libertarian governors in the nation for President and Vice President, or we can nominate a ticket that will get more laughs than votes.

    I know which option I chose. . . . . . ”

    Well said. Very well said.

  248. natural born American

    @rational 1438 — The House only takes three candidates into consideration. So there would have to be more Cruz electors than Johnson electors for such gambit to have a chance.

  249. Andy

    A President can pardons people who have been convicted of crimes. A President could pardon all non-violent drug offenders, gun control offenders, etc…

    Governors also have pardon power, but Gary Johnson did not issue that many pardons as Governor of New Mexico.

  250. George Phillies

    natural born. You are right. The Texas Republicans would count the number of johnson electors, add 2, designate who will vote for favorite son Cruz, and shut Johnson out. Mind you, it the House chose the person who finished a distant third as President, the legitimacy of our current Federal government would take a catastrophic hit, and most Congressmen are quite intelligent enough to figure this out.

  251. Thomas Knapp

    Andy,

    True. And the pardons Johnson DID issue weren’t that meaningful, since they were only issued to people who had already completed their sentences.

  252. Be Rational

    Doubtful that any Trump electors would be unfaithful. In a close race, the Republicans would try to hold all of their electors and flip the Johnson electors to vote for Trump. The EC only votes once, so they’d have to wait until after the EC voted to see if the Johnson electors could be flipped.

    In any case, if Johnson/Weld catch on enough to carry any states, it is probable there will be more than one and with too many EVs for an organized unfaithful elector gambit by the Rs to work.

  253. natural born American

    There is nothing illegitmate about the House electing the third-place electoral-college candifdate. What would be illegitmate and usurporious is installing a natural Cuban and born Canadian in the Presidency. That is treasonous and such perpetrators should be hanged to death after a fair trial.

  254. Thomas Knapp

    “Natural born citizen” is not defined in the Constitution.

    “Treason” is.

    It’s an interesting document. You ought to try reading it some time.

  255. natural born American

    Hey dipshit,

    Here are some other words not defined in the Constitution:

    “arms”
    “America”
    “the”

    Enjoy.

  256. Kareem Caliente

    Andy says on May 20, 2016: “Now here we are in 2012, and we have a similar situation with this William Weld guy”

    Am I the only one around here who sees how fucked up this is?

  257. George Phillies

    “so they’d have to wait until after the EC voted to see if the Johnson electors could be flipped. ”

    Once the Electoral College has voted flipping Johnson Electors is totally impossible. Unless you have a time machine.

    There is actually no likelihood, if the election goes to the house, that anything would happen other than each state delegation voting as its majority decides, with ties as per House rules being abstentions, meaning that the Republicans elect their President.

  258. robert capozzi

    gp, thanks. I was referring to the pre-XII Amendment rules, where there were up to 5 candidates, vs. the 3 you cite.

    IN this election, favorite son mojos like you suggest would not be beyond the realm of possibilities.

    If I’m reading this correctly, it’s the NEXT Congress that selects, so it’s possible that the Ds would control the House in 2017, yes?

    tk,

    I sense a Martinez vp selection as well. But DJT is nothing if not unpredictable.

  259. langa

    “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

    — Mark Twain

    I’m afraid Mr. Twain will be proven right in Orlando.

  260. Thomas L. Knapp

    langa,

    I’m not so sure you’re right.

    Whether or not Johnson had a majority in hand entering this last week is an interesting question, but whatever he had I suspect the Weld thing decreased rather than increased his support.

    He was already hurting. His fundraising took a dive in April — half what he raised the previous month, indicating to me that Libertarian donors are hesitating and re-thinking his candidacy (he still hasn’t hit $350k yet; Jill Stein is coming up fast on half a million).

    He could still win the nomination, but I still think he won’t. Thank God.

  261. langa

    TK, I hope you’re right. This just reminds me of ’08, when I found it inconceivable that the delegates would fall for Barr’s BS. Since then, I have vowed to never underestimate the gullibility of many party members.

  262. Andy

    “langa
    May 20, 2016 at 22:00
    ‘It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.’

    — Mark Twain”

    Reminds me of 9/11.

  263. Darcy G Richardson

    “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”
    — Mark Twain
    I’m afraid Mr. Twain will be proven right in Orlando.” — langa

    I’m afraid you’re probably right, Langa. While the delegates will probably nominate Johnson on the first ballot next weekend, it appears that many of the LP’s donors won’t be as easily convinced.

    According to Johnson’s latest FEC filing, he only raised $69,713 in the month of April — roughly half of what he had raised the previous month. Thanks to George’s recent book and Tom Knapp’s relevant and timely opposition research, it sounds like many potential contributors are growing increasingly leery about giving to Johnson’s 2016 campaign.

    Just to put this in a little perspective, as of April 30th, the Green Party’s Jill Stein had raised $485,145.51 to Johnson’s $348,670.36 — and that’s not including an additional federal matching funds check in the amount of $96,924.35 that the Federal Election Commission authorized earlier today, which Jill’s campaign should be receiving shortly.

    Four years ago, Johnson raised approximately $1.7 million more than his Green Party opponent.

  264. Weld my Johnson

    What a great selection. Johnson will get in the debates now for sure. I’m predicting 30% or more in November, maybe even victory.

  265. Andy

    “Thomas Knapp
    May 20, 2016 at 16:17
    Andy,

    True. And the pardons Johnson DID issue weren’t that meaningful, since they were only issued to people who had already completed their sentences.”

    I looked up Gary Johnson’s pardon record awhile ago. He pardoned something like 124 or 128 people over the 8 years that he was Governor. I’d bet that a whole lot more than that were convicted for victimless crimes or were otherwise falsely convicted while Johnson was Governor of New Mexico.

    I have never heard this information that the only pardons that Johnson issued were to people who had already completed their sentence. If true, that sucks. Where did you get this information?

  266. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I have never heard this information that the only pardons that Johnson issued were to people who had already completed their sentence. If true, that sucks. Where did you get this information?”

    Santa Fe New Mexican, 06/10/2001 (“Drug-conviction pardons increasing”). Here’s a lengthy quote from the piece including the positive part of his record — I don’t want to deny that he did SOME good:

    Gov. Gary Johnson — nationally known for his criticism of laws that make criminals out of drug users — increasingly is using his pardoning power for those with drug convictions.

    The vast majority of people who have drug convictions on their records have not received pardons. And Johnson has pardoned only those who have served all their time for their convictions.

    But of the 86 people the governor has pardoned since the beginning of his administration, 32 are for those with drug convictions. That’s more than a third of the total. And the percentage of drug pardons has gone up since the middle of 1999, when Johnson went public with his opinions on the war against drugs.

  267. George Phillies

    Robert:

    “pre-XII Amendment rules”

    My students would have been astonished to learn that I did not have a hand in crafting the XII amendment, since I am obviously old enough.

    Good point that the new Congress does the voting on electors (Tilden-Hayes) and on choosing the new President. you doubtless recall but some other readers may not that what counts is control of a majority of state delegations, not a majority of Congressmen.

  268. Andy

    Thomas Knapp said: ” I don’t want to deny that he did SOME good:”

    That is still very few pardons for the amount of time he was Governor. Also, while it was nice for these few people who were lucky enough to receive pardons from Governor Johnson, them receiving them only AFTER they had served their sentence meant that they had already gone through the terrible experience of being in prison.

    It would be interesting to see whether or not Gary Johnson’s attitude about not pardoning people who are locked up for a victimless crime would have changed had he ever spent some time being locked up in jail/prison.

  269. Andy

    The content of this article reminds me of a lot of stuff we have seen here at IPR.

    Total War Command Is Given To Government ‘Cyber Warriors’ – Propaganda ‘Troll’ Attacks Go Hypersonic Against Alternative Media

    http://thedailycoin.org/2015/11/05/total-war-command-is-given-to-government-cyber-warriors-propaganda-troll-attacks-go-hypersonic-against-alternative-media/

    From the article (this is about signs of government trolling): “Another important sign is when you see multiple ‘new’ commenters, all attacking the same article at around the same time, using similar talking points. That represents a ‘cyberstalking’ mentality and is indicative of a government entities using multiple accounts to push Washington propaganda and ‘take over’ a comment thread.”

    Doesn’t this sound familiar to things we have seen here at IPR, including on this thread?

  270. Darcy G Richardson

    There are some interesting similarities, Andy, but I would venture to guess that some of the new commenters here at IPR are merely shills for Gary Johnson as part of his campaign’s “grassroots advocacy.” Check out his latest FEC filing and you’ll see a few folks, including a former IPR contributor, who are being paid in that capacity, whatever that might entail.

    While it’s sort of deceitful, not to mention a sign of desperation, it’s relatively mild compared to the kind of massive deception Johnson stooped to on the eve of the party’s 2012 national convention in Las Vegas when he reassured the LP that his campaign debt was a manageable $152,000. It wasn’t until nine months later — three months after the presidential election — that Libertarian activists discovered, based on amended FEC filings, that the real debt at the time of his nomination was a whopping $1,078,000.

    Seriously, who knows what they’re capable of…or how dishonest they might be in pursuit of a second Johnson nomination — a prize unquestionably worth more this year than at any time in the party’s 45-year history.

  271. Thomas L. Knapp

    Darcy,

    I don’t find anything particularly deceitful about paying people to manage messaging on social media, blogs, etc., even if characterizing as “grassroots advocacy” is somewhat silly. To the extent that the nomination battle is won or lost in those venues (and there’s a reasonable case to be made for that), what candidate wouldn’t do that if it required funding and the money was there?

    My impression is that support for McAfee, Petersen and Perry is more genuinely “grassroots.” But I suspect they’d be paying for the same kinds of things if they had the funds. Heck, if they had the funds, they might even pay me to do it 😉

  272. Darcy G Richardson

    I suppose that’s true, Tom. But wouldn’t you use your real name? I think Andy’s point was that some of more recent commenters here — those who have suddenly popped up in the past week or two — are fictitious names and, for all we know, could be the same person.

  273. Andy

    Darcy, this type of weird shit has been going on here at at IPR for a long time, and it should be clearly obvious to all that IPR is being monitored by the government (just like it came out in court that the government was doing to anti-war.com), and that there have been government trolls posting here attempting to disrupt this site and alter discussions here for years.

  274. robert capozzi

    gp: control of a majority of state delegations, not a majority of Congressmen.

    me: Yes. My gut says very difficult for the Ds to gain 25+ delegations. Quick research did not elicit a quick answer, and I’m not that interested in the current congressional delegations numbers, but eyeballing it, it looks likely the Rs have an advantage there with so many flyover Red states. Gaming it out would get tougher with evenly split states in the new Congress.

    I think anything’s possible in the cycle…Clinton could Mondale Trump and win the House and Senate with Trump toxifying the Rs. Or the obverse could happen. Or close elections with divided government.

  275. Thomas L. Knapp

    Party control of House delegations by state:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:114th_US_Congress_House.png

    Kind of hard to count, but I came up with:

    Republicans 30
    Democrats 17
    Tied 3

    Under the right circumstances, I could see some of the tied (New Hampshire, Maine, New Jersey) or nearly tied (Colorado, Arizon, to a lesser degree Michigan, Wisconsin) states flipping to blue, but these really don’t especially look like the right circumstances. That is, I think Trump is going to do a lot better than people expect and that he’s going to have reasonably good coattails. Then again, I never thought he had a chance in hell of getting the nomination, so I could be wrong again.

  276. Robert capozzi

    TK, thanks for the effort. So, barring severe negative coattails for DJT, seems likely the Rs hold the MC delegation advantage. GP’s favorite son insurance policy in the EC seems plausible.

    I am sticking with my handicaps for GJ/WW for now. I will leave it as a guess they will prevail in Orlando, although I expect fireworks, up to and including self immolation in the hallway. 😉

    The media buzz they are getting ALREADY is just too compelling for all lessarchists, aside from with the most ardent NAPSTERS.

  277. Jay Wildwood

    Got busy with some other things and will reply to William Saturn regarding Trump and Weld’s record when time allows.

    In the meantime we have Andy with his conspiracy theories. I guess facts wouldn’t be allowed to intervene, but it would be rather difficult for me to be a “Johnson troll” since I am not necessarily a Johnson supporter. I’d rather see Weld, not Johnson, at the top of the ticket. Johnson is a poor public speaker, often visibly stoned, and rambles frequently. However, both Weld and Johnson have the credentials to be taken seriously by those outside the fringe. Austin Petersen has impressed me the most with his presentation, ideas and stage presence. Although he isn’t yet as experienced and accomplished as Johnson, McAfee and Weld, he’s also much younger, and I expect great things from this young man in the future. If he doesn’t capture the nomination this time, I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if he does in the future, and I wouldn’t rule out this time. If I were a delegate, I’m not sure whether I would pick Johnson or Petersen.

    You only need to re-read my comments above to see that I said this several times already, and did not invent it to address the charge of being a Johnson plant.

    As for Andy’s statement that multiple new commenters are a sign of a government invasion, do you know what else multiple new commenters are a sign of? Increased attention and readership. By multiple accounts, searches for Libertarians online have gone way up in the last few weeks. So have new memberships and donations. Searches for Johnson and other Libertarian candidates are way up. They are getting a lot more major media coverage than previously. If any of you have access to this site’s readership statistics I would predict you would find the same pattern. But, naturally, a paranoid mind like Andy’s (I’m being generous here and assuming he is sincere, as opposed to pointing fingers to deflect attention from his own role as an agent) will always automatically jump to the conclusion of a nefarious conspiracy, even when a much more simple and logical explanation that does not involve subterfuge already exists.

    But then, we can already see that Andy is a 9/11/Alex Jones nut so what else would you expect?

  278. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The media buzz they are getting ALREADY is just too compelling for all lessarchists, aside from with the most ardent NAPSTERS.”

    So far as I can tell, very little of the discontent with Johnson centers around the NAP.

    He lied to and defrauded the LP in 2012. He ran up debt and didn’t repay it.

    His public presentation skills are piss-poor.

    His record as governor of New Mexico was far too Obama-esque in terms of growing government spending and growing government debt, but not Obama-esque enough in commuting the sentences of drug war prisoners, to make the case that he has ever been a “lessarchist” in practice.

    Johnson’s main opponent was once a “person of interest” in a murder investigation. Johnson himself openly and publicly had one man killed and asked the state legislature to let him kill 13-year-olds to boot.

    Now he’s named a pro-Iraq-war, anti-gun politician who knowingly and intentionally lied to and screwed over the New York LP and who has endorsed John Kasich and Jeb Bush in the last eight months, and Mitt Romney and Barack Obama in the last eight years, as his “running mate.”

    That’s not NAP stuff. Those are basic common sense objections.

  279. Pingback: IPR’s Third 2016 Libertarian Party Presidential Preference Poll Results: Johnson & Petersen Tie Amid Voting Anomalies | Saturn's Repository

  280. Amanda Lance

    The Miss America Pageant has 53 contestants (states and territories), and for the President of the United States we are usually told (their are no elections, only selections) that there are only 2 choices.
    So, the two choices they give us this year are both purposely unacceptable, by design, in my opinion. Solution? Put in a third party that has NEVER been allowed to enter the election “process” before. I just feel that this game is STILL rigged, and we’re supposed to think that we’re finally been given a chance. I feel like Charlie Brown being told by Lucy to go ahead and kick the football, she won’t pull it away this time.

Leave a Reply

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