November 10, 2026
Your Premier Source on Third Parties and Independent Candidates Since 2008
From the Jason Stapleton Program, June 24th, 2016 (H/T Andy Jacobs) – video length: 55 minutes. Jason Stapleton analyzes Gary Johnson’s performance in CNN’s first ever Libertarian presidential town hall, held on June 23rd, 2016:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuFbPYnigQ8
I've been a contributor for IPR since January 2013. I consider myself to be a paleoconservative. I'm also the founder of American Third Party Report. Email me at [email protected].
Comments are closed.
The presentation could have been better, as I posted earlier.
My personal opinion is that Johnson is attempting to feel his way through answering questions in a libertarian manner that doesn’t frighten away the voters, as Mr. Dance alluded to. I think, for example, that this is what he was attempting to do with the answer on the drug question: philosophically, he’s said before that he thinks it would be a better world if all drugs were legalized. The question ends up being…how does a Libertarian president get that done in a policy sense, in a way that’s not going to sink his chances of getting into office and getting anything accomplished in the first place? So far, I think he has not done that as well as he could.
On the other hand, his message can be tweaked. No one else would have even gotten the chance to deliver the message, and certainly not on CNN.
We got the hard part done: we nominated someone the libertarian quadrant of the Nolan chart that is more than qualified for the position. The easy part is getting him to tweak his message.
Well stated, Mr. Dance.
I had lunch yesterday with a group of friends, all retired and appreciably older than I am (68) and all Clinton Democrats or thereabouts. They all watched the Town Hall, and were seriously not impressed.
The presentation was seen as unenergetic and rambling.
This is a focus group, of a specific population, but what they said was interesting. We have talked politics before, so they have heard something of my Libertarian positions. I am a centrist, not a radical.
“Johnson…does not appear to have a program.”
While some of them disagree with our position on the topic, they still said ‘aren’t libertarians in favor of expanding firearms rights’? The answer on the drug issue, which was recognized to be a setup, was viewed as weak. Johnson and Weld were seen as contradicting each other repeatedly.
George Phillies: “Let us say that I listened to the Johnson/Weld Town Hall, and seem to have heard a different event than the one George Dance describes.”
A very perceptive comment. The only error in it is really my fault, as I did not make it clear in my earlier post: The description I quoted, which ran on my blog, was not my description at all but was a longish quote from the UPI story on the Town Hall.
Which makes Mr. Phillies’ point even more significant. For, indeed, longtime Libertarians like him are going to see events like the Town Hall differently from newcomers to libertarian ideas.
When those in the Libertarian bubble hear questions like those in the Town Hall, they also be thinking of the best Libertarian answers they’ve heard, or thought of themselves, over the years, and judging Johnson/Weld’s answers by that light. So they’ll be noticing lost opportunities, and might-have-beens, that simply aren’t noticeable to anyone else.
Notice that Libertarians who opposed Johnson & Weld for the nomination are the most vocal critics of the Town Hall. I suspect, though, that opposition only makes them more willing to openly criticize the event; supporters of the ticket probably saw the same shortcomings, but are simply less willing to criticize.
Meanwhile, though, those outside the bubble didn’t notice those shortcomings at all. They saw and heard two new faces giving a slew of new, hitherto unarticuated ideas and policy approaches. Some of those will turn off some people — for instance, the Mexicans-and-Muslims-are-rapists crowd would stop listening as soon as the candidate said a good word about immigration — but others no doubt will be attracted.
It’s that latter group, those outside the bubble, that the campaign is being targeted to, and it’s their reactions that are important. I really don’t know what those are (Andy’s story of being besieged by people in the street refusing to sign his LP petition because of the Town Hall may be typical), but I do think they can be judged only by judging their reactions, not those of movement wonks or geeks like Jason Stapleton or Justin Raimondo.
TFLL,
Well said. In the US we have prosecutors that gather evidence and then present the evidence to a Grand Jury who then decides if to bring an indictment. If there is an indictment then it goes to a court with a jury to decide the merits of the case. If the jury convicts, then the judge passes the sentences.
Here in the US we don’t skip those steps, and we have a presumption of innocence until these steps are completed.
Those of you who wish to jump from accusation to punishment while skipping the steps between are preaching for a totalitarian system.
Please re-think what should happen.
Thirty years should take her to age 100. Think of it as olive branch to the Clinton Crime Family, like a truth & Reconciliation Commission.
natural born American “Hillary should be in prison. A 30-year-prison sentence with no parole might be appropriate for her crimes against America, if a little light.”
Life would be more appropriate.
Hillary doesn’t belong in jail. Jail is where you go when you’re arrested and are awaiting a court appearnce.
Hillary should be in prison. A 30-year-prison sentence with no parole might be appropriate for her crimes against America, if a little light.
American Conservative eviscerates the Town Hall debate, with a chain saw.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/a-missed-opportunity-for-libertarians/
Could it be that Gov. Weld, who actually knows Hillary personally and has for many years, doesn’t want to pander to people like you and say how terrible he is when he doesn’t actually think that.
I don’t think Hillary should be “in jail.”
I don’t think Hillary “murdered” the Ambassador in Benghazi (one of her personal friends)
I don’t think Hillary “hates America”
I don’t think Hillary “wants to take your guns away.”
and the list goes on.
I just don’t really want to vote for her. I know my sentiment is not alone. I would have been turned OFF if Weld and Johnson played that lame game. Independent voters HATE the vitriol of politics. They want to hear ideas, not venom. Maybe some will like libertarian ideas and maybe some won’t, but most will appreciate that the LP is not playing that game.
Trump, by the way, is a whole different ballgame.
People who think that Hillary Clinton is a “great gal” and a “fine public servant,” as stated by Johnson and Weld, are people who are not likely to vote Libertarian regardless of what we do, so pandering to them is not going to win us any supporters, and if anything it repels people who might vote for us otherwise.
I have no joy in Libertarians getting coverage that sucked as badly as that CNN Town Hall did.
I think they are growing your brand. Tell me how it was growing in the previous 40 years?
Yes, there are people who don’t actually DESPISE Hillary Clinton but don’t want to vote for her. There are people who don’t think she is a criminal and untrustworthy but who just don’t find anything inspiring about her.
There are people who don’t drink the right wing Kool-Ade about her but who want to find a different candidate. You don’t have to despise every other candidate but your own (thought I’ve pretty much cut off any friendship with Trump supporters).
I am one of those people and almost my entire circle of friends (most of whom are democrats) feel similarly. I sent a link to the new Johnson / Weld video from yesterday to many of them and received positive feedback. Will they vote for him? Probably not, but not for the reasons you think.
You say “the issue is not perfection . . . ” but the vast majority of your posts belie that. You (and most other purists) will knock constantly any LP candidate who is not 100& orthodoxy. You sound like the ultra conservatives who whine about moderate R’s who get the nomination every 4 years (not including this year – Trump is not a republican). When you pander to the extremes of your party – the party loses. Regardless of the Party. (See 1964 – Goldwater 1972 McGovern etc.)
Can you show just the slightest bit of joy that the LP is getting an incredible amount of coverage?
Shut down as much of the federal government as possible.
I do not think that anyone here is demanding perfection from our candidates (and we may all define perfection in a candidate in different ways). This issue here is not perfection, but rather having uninspiring, boring candidates who take multiple watered down, and in some cases, non-libertarian, issue stances, and who are too cozy with the ruling political establishment, damaging our brand.
Does anyone here think that Hillary Clinton is a “great gal” and a. “fine public servant,” as Weld and Johnson do? Do you think that these statements are going to win us a lot of “points” with people who would be likely to vote Libertarian.
Yeah….SHUT IT DOWN!!! WHOOO!!! That’ll get us millions of followers. I like what an earlier poster said. Some on the extreme end of the LP live in “Rainbow Land.”
btw – Johnson / Weld are doing quite well in some recent swing state polls. Baby Steps.
Anthony, thank you for reminding us that Johnson mouthpieces are perfectly happy to slander libertarians (“their fellow libertarians” has a technical challenge) in order to defend their campaign.
To say something positive about Weld and his successors as Republican Governors, they did a fine job of draining dry Republican chances for future success in Massachusetts. The only good Republican politician is a Republican politician who is out of office in retirement.
On the other hand thank you for motivation to ensure that the current campaign gets the same detailed financial analysis that the last one did.
Libertarians should not want to run the federal government, our goal should be to shut it down, or at least to greatly reduce its size.
Trying to appeal to Democrats and Republicans is not a winning strategy for Libertarians. Our biggest potential support bases are independents and non-voters. Mainstream Democrats and mainstream Republicans are the people who are least likely to ever vote Libertarian regardless of what we do.
I ran in to people who were not LP members, and who did not even regularly follow the LP, who were not impressed with the appearance of Johnson and Weld on that CNN Town Hall while gathering LP ballot access petition signatures. I was actually put in the awkward situation a few times by being confronted with some of the unlibertarian, or watered down libertarian, views espoused by Johnson and Weld, and i had to explain that their views are not reflective of the entire party. One person refused to sign the petition because of their weak stance on gun rights. Another person I encountered was also not going to sign due to their weak stance on gun rights, but then I was able to get this person to sign after I pointed out that the petition also contained several other Libertarian Party candidates for offices like US Senate, Attorney General, etc…, and that these candidates took a stronger stance in defense of the right to keep and bear arms than Johnson and Weld. Note that these people specifically brought up the CNN Town Hall.
I’m a little more optimistic and realistic than you about Johnson’s chances to improve.
A) I generally don’t listen to what Libertarians suggest Johnson has to do to improve. That’s because, for most Libertarians, I found that “improve” means, “how can we scare the sh*t out of the voters?”
B) like Tony from Long Island noted, Johnson is not as far off as siome like to hyperventilate about, including Stapleton in this podcast. Some tweaks are all that is necessary.
C) there’s one other benefit of Johnson’s nomination, even if it goes nowhere: it demonstrates to our generally deluded set of presidential candidates that they should go try and win elective office first before trying to argue they have the necessary resume to run a $4 trillion entity with 2.7 million employees.
This is not Johnson’s first go around. He has been at this for several years now. If he was going to get better, there has been more than enough time for that to happen by now. I would not expect much at this point.
For the record, I am a Johnson/Weld supporter who was definitely disappointed in the CNN performance, especially by Johnson.
I’ll just take my chances that Johnson will be able to improve over the next 3-4 months and get out a decently libertarian message.
Wishful thinking? Perhaps. But I think less so than thinking any of our other options would have gotten anywhere near CNN.
With Johnson/Weld, I also am not worried about total disaster; the possibility that the LP gets set back decades by a screwball nominee saying/doing something catastrophic.
There are worse things than the possibility of getting ignored as Stapleton suggests I might happen with Johnson. Pyramid of P*ssy Petersen? All CNN would have to do is show mcafee’s gun to the head pic on screen. Perry? Besides his hotheadedness, 60 seconds with him and no one will consider the LP for decades.
If you want to lament that the LP had no better legitimate options in Orlando with public sector experience, I’ll commiserate with you. If you want to argue that we had another choice, I’m gonna tell you to put down the crack pipe.
Anthony, Mary Ruwart is the long time governor of Rainbowland.
You too can visit this utopia if you first sign the pledge, drop any thoughts that people can do wrong, then fall into a deep, deep, sleep that wisks you away to the magical world of Rainbowland.
I just want to say for the record, that I am not the Poster named ANTHONY. But he does seem to echo a lot of my points. 🙂
Why am I not surprised that Andy has heard from people who won’t vote for Johnson / Weld. If the people in his circles are anything like him then there’s probably nothing the Governors can say to gain their vote.
As I’ve said previously, this was not a STELLAR performance from Johnson (though Weld is a very good public speaker). However, it was not the disaster some make it out to be.
aj: I have heard from multiple people that they thought that Johnson and Weld came off poorly here, and several have said they will not vote for them over this.
me: While I’m sure this is true, recognize that everyone “comes off poorly” to some people, yes? Harry Browne “came off poorly” for some. RP1 “came off poorly” for some. Ditto for HRC and DJT.
Hater’s gotta hate.
You can’t please everyone…not gonna happen.
You can, however, avoid complete discreditation and utter electorate alientation. Or you can hold high the banner of extremism.
“Who gives a shit if they are not putting out a real libertarian message?”
I do, but I want progress towards a libertarian society and I don’t see the plumb line libertarians making progress. I do see progress being made where libertarians work with others such as in legalization of pot and gay marriage. I see progress when the Libertarian Party gets ballot access and doesn’t have to expend its members wealth on petition drives. I want progress.
5 takeaways from CNN’s Libertarian Party town hall
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/22/politics/gary-johnson-bill-weld-takeaways/
Who gives a shit if they are not putting out a real libertarian message?
Also, polling numbers can be deceiving, and a lot of it is just a protest vote, as lots of the public is getting sick of Democrats and Republicans, and Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are polarizing figures.
I bet you could come up with a poll and replace your name and my name with Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, and we would still pick up a lot of protest support.
Andy, none of these would be polling around 10% and would not have the opportunity to present any message. Take a look at Jill Stein. Polling at 4% and not being given the opportunity. If you can’t get your message out then you lose.
It is possible that none of the other candidates would have gotten that town hall on CNN, but so what? Johnson and Weld had so many cringe worthy moments during that town hall that I think their campaigns, and the Libertarian Party and movement, would be better off if they had not had that cringefest on CNN.
I think any combination of McAfee, Perry, Peterson, or the late Dr. Feldman, with Sharpe, Coley, or Weiss (I am eliminating Dearn over her staged pandering for Weld), would have done a better job representing the Libertarian Party and philosophy, and would have inspired more people.
well yes I heard no changes on gun laws but I did hear a big change on drug laws.
Marijuana legal!
Use the Vancouver B.C. model for dealing with heroin. That is give good quality heroin away for free (and needles) and criminally go after the dealers. Not the Libertarian Ideal but I think a positive step in the right direction. Prove that pot being legal wont break society and then we can talk about the rest of the drugs.
The hope is to win the election and thus you have to put forth proposals that the voters are ready to agree with.
“Which state was Ruwart governor of?”
Setting a local record for totally missing the point of the comment. On one hand, being a governor clearly does not cause you to learn anything about defense policy, as witness the answers the two governors have given. On the other hand, the real libertarians here all know who Mary Ruwart is, and many of us have even read her fundamental book including an actual defense proposal that had far more substantive content than the Johnson-Weld answer.
This particular year, because of Trump, NeverTrump, Clinton/Sanders, etc., the Libertarian Party would have received more publicity for its presidential ticket than ever before if it had gone with a ticket of Electric Toaster and Potted Plant.
That said, are Johnson/Weld getting more publicity than the alternative Libertarian tickets would have? As a going thing, yes, although any other ticket would likely have received more publicity than Johnson/Weld for the first week or so, as the story would have been “Johnson/Weld ticket, which the conventional wisdom assumed was a dumb deal, defeated by [less well-known candidate, unless it was McAfee].”
But then, of course, there’s the quality factor. Sure, McAfee or Perry would probably not have received quite as much publicity as Johnson/Weld on an ongoing basis. But it would have been publicity for a ticket running on behalf of the Libertarian Party and on the Libertarian Party’s platform instead of for a ticket using the Libertarian Party for ballot access while running against its platform. One of those types of publicity is good for the Libertarian Party. The other isn’t.
Which state was Ruwart governor of?
Let us say that I listened to the Johnson/Weld Town Hall, and seem to have heard a different event than the one George Dance describes. I recall ‘we will seek no relaxation in current gun laws’ ‘we want to keep drugs other than marijuana illegal’, and ‘libertarians want an invincible (GP: huge and expensive)national defense’ (For an exactly contrary opinion on how to do national defense read Mary Ruwart’s book.)
Sorry, you’re nuts if you think any of our other potential candidates would have got an hour of air time on CNN.
But you’re right, it can be better to not get coverage than to get coverage and come off poorly. As disappointed as I was in the Johnson/Weld performance in the Town Hall, they can get better, and I’ve seen Johnson do better.
On the other hand, any of our other candidates, if by some miracle they were put on CNN, would have set the party back 40 years. With the possible exception of Dr. Feldman, R.I.P.
First off, we do not know for sure what coverage any other option at the convention would or would have gotten.
Second of all, it can actually be better to not get coverage than to get coverage and come off poorly in the coverage. I have heard from multiple people that they thought that Johnson and Weld came off poorly here, and several have said they will not vote for them over this.
Finally, big government has been in bed with big media for a long time in this country, and it is quite possible that a primary reason for CNN to give Johnson and Weld this coverage is because they knew they would come off poorly, and not represent true libertarian views.
Did Gary perform well at the Town Hall? No.
Did we have another option at the convention that would have gotten on CNN? Absolutely not.
It’s interesting to contrast the punditry on the event (such as this, or Raimondo’s), with the reporting on same:
“Both men described themselves as fiscally conservative but accepting of social differences. They are pro-gay marriage and support protecting a woman’s right to abortion, but have proposed across-the-board spending cuts of 10 to 20 percent in the federal government….
“On gun control: Johnson said he is opposed to banning individuals on the no-fly list and the terror watch list from buying guns outright because some of the names on there are in error. He is in favor of prohibiting individuals with diagnosed mental illnesses from buying them, but expressed skepticism about increasing government involvement in determining who is and is not mentally fit to own firearms. He opposed a ban on semi-automatic assault rifles….
“On immigration: Both men oppose Trump’s proposal to deport an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants and build a wall on the Mexican border…. Johnson said ‘We should make it as easy as possible for somebody who wants to come into this country to work to get a work visa. They are not taking jobs U.S. citizens want’… Weld went further, repeating his statement likening Trump’s immigration policy to those of the Nazis, particularly for the ‘fear’ that would be created as federal agents attempted to round up millions of undocumented people for deportation.
“On legalizing drugs: Johnson supports legalizing marijuana completely, but said he opposes legalizing narcotics like heroin. He did express support for some foreign programs where heroin addicts can have their drugs tested for potentially lethal additives, and ingest the drugs under observation to prevent overdosing…. Weld said … ‘Society is coming to view people who have serious issues with either narcotics or alcohol, that that is a public health emergency and that is not a status crime’….
“On the use of military force: Johnson said he opposes ‘interventionism’ in U.S. foreign policy, but agrees the military needs to be funded to deter attacks and respond to them…. He called for a return to congressional authority over military action….
“On free trade: Both men support free trade agreements, saying they will help create jobs in America. ‘I think, unfairly, free trade has come under criticism as crony capitalism,’ Johnson said. ‘Government can level the playing field for everyone. That level playing field really is free trade.’ Weld agreed. ‘In the purest sense, free trade is always going to benefit the United States because we have the highest rate of productivity and we are the most technologically advanced country in the world’…
“On taxes: Both men touted their records of cutting taxes as governors. Johnson said that, ideally, … ‘I would eliminate income tax, I would eliminate corporate tax, I would abolish the IRS and I would replace it all with one federal consumption tax’…. Weld did not go as far as saying he would abolish the IRS, but did call for across-the-board spending cuts of 10 percent to 20 percent, which he said would force federal agencies to eliminate wasteful spending.”
http://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.ca/2016/06/libertarians-positioned-as-moderates.html
As in: not first time you were asked the question.
At least Jason skipped the exchanges right at the end, where Johnson and Weld answered the same question seriatim.
With respect to the defense question, that was somewhat like the question i asked in Orlando, except I asked a question that gave some hints: What force structure do you anticipate: carrier groups, divisions, air wings,…?
LOL!
Hi, I’m Jason Stapleton, and this is my shredder. Your wimpy shredder only does boxes. Mine does mountain ranges. And that was no mountain range.