As Richard Winger reports at Ballot Access News, a March 22 Public Policy Poll (PPP) shows former New Mexico governor and current Libertarian Party presidential candidate Gary Johnson with 7% in a hypothetical general election matchup with President Barack Obama and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.
A breakdown of Johnson’s support reveals that if he were not in the race, 39% of his supporters would vote for Romney while 18% would back Obama. With Johnson included, Obama receives 46% while Romney garners 39%. Without Johnson, Obama’s lead falls to four points, 48% to 44%.
In a press release about the poll, PPP’s Tom Jensen argues, “I doubt Johnson will really get anywhere close to 7% in the general.” However, if Johnson does, it would be the largest percentage for a third party presidential candidate since businessman Ross Perot won 8.4% in 1996.
The highest percentage ever won by a Libertarian Party presidential nominee was Ed Clark, who received 1.06% in 1980.
In 2008, after winning the Libertarian nomination, former Congressman Bob Barr peaked at 6% in a Rasmussen poll, but finished with only 0.4% in the general election.
How about 900 billion? Because that’s not going to happen either.
See the rest of 93, and see the original message you were responding to when you came up with that number again.
That was the premise of the comment Robert was responding to when he came up with the 500k number.
There’s the “little” matter of government religious discrimination.
Yep.
@108,
“the police state is closer than you know. Dangerous times lie ahead for freedom lovers ! Drones to police American soil beginning in ’15.”
The US has been a police state — or at least a banana republic with rampant police abuse and corruption — for years now. And drones are already in use on US soil.
@107 one of your best posts RC.
Phillies running for Treasurer ? Well I must be in the minority which would actually like to see the LP Tres. to oversee some real money. Then again real money would certainly draw the worst out of some as it usually does. The Party would have to start “guarding” the reserves, if we had reserves to guard.
Twenty years ago I would have opposed matching funds. As I get closer to the boneyard I say no more as I now wish to recoup some of my past taxes to be used by the LP to help move policy in our direction before it is too late. Does anyone protest when the Ds, Rs and even GP accept matching funds? No one but a few Ls and Cs. We must use what we can to reach our goals or forever be a non-entity, non-player in the political world.
Some don’t believe, however I assure you the police state is closer than you know. Dangerous times lie ahead for freedom lovers ! Drones to police American soil beginning in ’15. Honestly can you believe that happening in America in your lifetime? Time to stand now or forever live and/or die on your knees in chains.
The movie “V for Vendetta” played on AMC this week. Everyone needs to view it again or for the first time. The slow march to totalitarianism has sped up since 9-11-’01. The movie can help to open some eyes and the more eyes open the better!
Vote Different – Vote Libertarian – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxO6i0khqhk&feature=player_embedded
“Eighty percent of Americans think the country is on the wrong track, and a majority think Obama is doing a bad job. This is scarcely surprising since 30 million Americans are without work or work part-time.” – Alexander Cockburn
https://www.lp.org/contribute
[email protected].
Become a Delegate – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/become-a-delegate
Overstatement and overreaction generally point away from truth…
GP @ 99 – expelling Neopagans from the military is not a pogrom. Pogroms were violent attacks on Jews in Russia and East Europe.
By extension, a pogrom can refer to violent attacks on other people, in other places. But applying the term to a policy of not allowing Neopagans in the military cheapens the language, and reflects on the person who uses language in such a tendentious manner.
104 gp: Unfortunately, few people have ever lost money betting against the intelligence of the American people.
me: Is this to be your slogan in your campaign for LP Treasurer?
Our tyrannosaurus writes “One DREAM worth comtemplating is – what would the LP do with $90 million dollars for the ’16 campaign ?”
We heard this nonsense from the 1996 and 2000 Browne campaigns. “Just imagine…” It was total nonsense then, it is total nonsense now, it will harm our party, and only a complete idiot would believe it.
Unfortunately, few people have ever lost money betting against the intelligence of the American people.
@101 Apparently you are misinformed. The army does not hire ministers; it has a Chaplain’s Corps.
The Barr proposal was that all pagans should be ejected from the military. That is a pogrom.
The even more stupid part of this was that the pogrom including evicting the Asatru, people for whom dying in battle is the sure path to Valhalla.
T-Rex @95
“- what would the LP do with $90 million dollars for the ’16 campaign ?!”
First we’d debate ad nauseum about whether we should take the money or not. Then, we’d likely blow most of it on the convention.
Yeah, declining to spend tax dollars hiring pagan ministers is a “pogrom.”
re paulie @ 93. Please add the LP has not reached out to them or failed in many ways to get the word out to the public.
“Bob Barr about his standing among the Wiccan communities. ”
To be precise, I objected that Barr had tried to stage a pogrom against the Neopagans in the military.
93 p: Where are you getting these numbers from?
me: Prez vote totals. I agree there are 10s of millions of Ls out there IF we define L broadly, as I do. If we define it narrowly — NAP absolutists — the number might even be lower. Hard to know, of course, since that’s such a small number…
96 tk, I support that passage in the platform as a practical statement about how to secure maximized liberty within the border of the US.
When I said “across the board,” I meant that the LP stands for minimal government interference with all citizens pursuit of happiness in all aspects of their lives, not just economic.
RC@91,
“The LP’s differentiator is the across-the-board nature of our positions…always in favor of maximizing freedom.”
That may have been the case at one time. It certainly isn’t now. The current LP platform contains an explicit endorsement of reducing freedom: “[W]e support control over the entry into our country …”
In 2008 Prof. Phillies among others had major problems with Bob Barr about his standing among the Wiccan communities. There shouldn’t be a problem on this matter in ’12 when Johnson gets the nom. as this link explains.
A DAY WITH GOV GARY JOHNSON – http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/a-day-with-gov-gary-johnson
One DREAM worth comtemplating is – what would the LP do with $90 million dollars for the ’16 campaign ?! Any comments are welcome (not that it will never happen please, but WHAT IF). I say run TV and Radio ads nationally and in the 100 largest media markets. One thing for certain $90 million would finally eclipse Clark/Koch ‘s 1.06% and 928,000+ for once and all, thankfully. Dream on !!!
More so even than most, from what I have seen.
Years of observation of how their campaigns, businesses and other ventures operate. I should say friends and family, but family first.
Where are you getting these numbers from? I’d say the number of unapproached libertarians is easily in the tens of millions. I meet them all the time. Many of them don’t know that they are libertarians, but they sure sound like it. Many of them do know they are libertarians, but don’t vote LP for a variety of reasons:
*They are not allowed to vote due to age, non-citizenship, past felony convictions, lack of ID, etc
*They don’t vote at all out of principle
*They don’t vote at all because the LP has no chance and the big two both suck
*They have never heard of the LP (less common now, but still fairly common)
*They vote for the lesser evil
*They vote for the greater evil so as to make things so bad as to trigger a libertarian revolution
*They have been involved in the LP before and think it is not libertarian enough
*They have been involved in the LP before and think it is too extreme
*They have been involved in the LP before and got sick of not making any progress
*They have been in the LP before and got sick of the internal sniping
*Some combination thereof
Many do vote for the LP from time to time, but not for president. Or, they may have voted LP for president in some elections but not others.
Even many of those who don’t vote in actual government elections (like me since 2003) can still participate in many other ways.
So the 500k number – I don’t think that is correct at all, or even close.
91
Your right, I don’t KNOW what the Paul’s believe in terms of family vs. philosophy. I just meant that like most people, family is VERY important to them, and that can be an influence. But I don’t think it is a deciding factor, like paulie suggests.
84 ab: I agree that the Paul’s are all about family…
me: Just curious…how do you and Paulie know this? I’d think they’d be all about liberty and less concerned about the career of a family member.
85 mm: I firmly believe there is a cohort of real libertarians out there who are already convinced about libertarianism — but they will vote major or stay home if they aren’t approached.
me: Right. It’s about a 500,000, which is nice, but not nice enough to inspire change in the nation’s direction.
The LP’s differentiator is the across-the-board nature of our positions…always in favor of maximizing freedom. The GOP clearly isn’t that. They are becoming more anti-freedom on civil liberties and international relations.
Building a Leninist cadre is unsatisfactory to me.
NO effect? I have to disagree.
I don’t think he’ll endorse Romney unless Rand is actually the VP candidate.
It’s more likely that he would not endorse anyone at all, or that he would endorse alt parties in general rather than one in specific.
It’s also possible he could endorse Johnson, which would not hurt Rand nearly as much as if Ron Paul ran LP himself.
It shouldn’t, but in politics it does.
Senate and presidency are different things.
Republicans are still blaming Perot for Clinton and Democrats are still blaming Nader for W, even though both are wrong on the facts.
I think the most likely scenario is that he will calculate that the message will advance the most in the long run by him not running alt party this year and letting Rand have a better shot at the Republican nomination next time, although I do think it is possible – just not likely – that the scales will tip the other way.
…it would not be libertarian then.
I’m not saying that Ron is definitely going to run third party. I’m just saying that I don’t think Rand’s potential run will have anything effect on Ron’s decision.
And if he doesn’t run third party, I am pretty sure he will endorse whoever the LP or CP nominee is, depending on who it is. There is no way he would ever endorse Romney.
I don’t understand why you so consistently get this wrong.
With five parties (D, R, G, CP, AE), on either all or most state ballots, there will be five parties already scrapping for the alleged “mainstream”. The Republicans already stake out many supposed L positions; and the CP stakes out even more.
It’s not like we have the “lower taxes, less goverment” market to ourselves.
Unless we’re willing to be the party of abolition, we’re going to get lost in the noise.
I firmly believe there is a cohort of real libertarians out there who are already convinced about libertarianism — but they will vote major or stay home if they aren’t approached.
I believe they are a very fertile recruitment ground for the LP, but not if we’re trying to appeal to the “lower taxes, less government” people who are being relentlessly pursued by other parties already.
Each individual is his own person. What my friend or family does should not reflect upon me.
Ron Paul endorsed third party in 08, and it didn’t hurt Rand’s candidacy for the Senate in 10.
Four years is a long time in political years. Many people may never EVER like Ron Paul for his posistions or for supposedly hurting the Republican Party, but I think it stops there.
Obviously with votes like sanctions on Iran, the establishment think of Rand as one of them, though we all know he isn’t. Point is, I agree that the Paul’s are all about family, but Ron wants to spread his message as quickly and efficiently as possible, and if he believes him running third party would be more beneficial than Rand’s potential run in the future, then he will do it.
For the Paul’s, it’s less about the Presidency and more about ideas and spreading their message. The importance of freedom at this time in our lives is so important that I don’t think Ron believes waiting four more years is a good idea, considering we are likely to have a dollar collapse by that time.
79 p, right. So if the LP runs nearly or equally “insider” candidates, in theory it could perform at Anderson levels.
If, however, the LP as an institution is perceived as too far from the mainstream, it cancels out the natural attractiveness of the insider candidates it fields.
The Pauls are all about family.
Rightly or wrongly it will be held against him if his dad bucks the duopoly.
Those other conservatives who like him now will not like him anymore if and when that happens.
I know everyone is trying to say that Ron won’t run third party or won’t endorse third party because it might hurt Rand’s prospects.
I’m sorry but I think Ron walks to his own drum beat. Even his son won’t prevent him from doing what he thinks is right and necessary.
Rand is doing his own thing, and many conservatives like him even though they don’t like his father. I am pretty sure that after four years, if Rand were to run, he would garner support from non Ron supporters regardless of what his father does.
Just my two cents.
Mix of both.
Also, Paul’s views on many issues matched up a lot better with Baldwin than they do with Goode, and match up better with Johnson than they did with Barr.
Pique was indeed also a factor, although not the only one.
Paul did support LP candidates for P in 2004 and other years, iirc.
This year we don’t know what he will do. Rand Paul’s likely 2016/2020 and beyond prospects will probably be the biggest factor.
Anderson was an “insider” with lots of free media, much like what Americans Elect and Perot got, and lots of money, again much like AE and Perot. He was perceived to be a centrist, regardless of what you may argue he actually was.
They have different rules. Some of their primary votes are actually binding, not anything like LP convention straw polls. Many of the votes they cast are proxy votes. It will be Stein.
No such high likelihood.
Roseanne herself says it will almost certainly be Jill Stein. And she is correct.
Obama, Romney and Bloomberg – three perfectly oiled weather vanes competing for the wind. Should be fun to watch, especially if Romney has a running mate along the lines of Gingrich/Santorum, which he probably will.
Johnson, Stein and Goode should all be able to capitalize. We’ll see if they can manage to not blow the opportunity.
No. He would have to spend all his time explaining that away. Bad idea from every angle.
Thus hurting Rand in 2016, same as he would if he ran for P.
Not gonna happen. Even if it’s not against the bylaws (and if it isn’t, it should be) I don’t think a majority of LP delegates would try to force Dr. Paul to do anything without his consent.
Not this one.
Yep.
2% for Republican nomination. Different ball game completely. Most libertarians are not going to vote in Republican primaries, especially for a candidate other than Ron Paul when Ron Paul is also running.
Other LP candidates would get around 7% in hypothetical general election polls right now too (and have in past polls).
It translates into about what the LP usually gets in November absent some other game changer.
I would not bet against it 😛
Not necessarily. He could win the presidency, especially with a billionaire running mate.
For years ago things did not come together to make a win plausible. This year the chips are falling in place.
He hasn’t said he will not run for VP to my knowledge, and I doubt any carefully worded denials will be held against him to any meaningful extent if he does decide to run for P.
AE is already getting on the ballot, making a late decision plausible.
Four years of Obama continuing the Bush recession and wars, and of both Republican and Democratic congresses failing spectacularly to solve the nation’s problems, make an alt party run more viable this year. In 2008 Obama represented hope and change; this year he represents Bush III with a tan. In 2008 AE backers were not legally allowed to funnel their money the way they wanted to; this year they can.
The opening is there and Bloomberg may well go for it.
There will be no Johnson/Paul ticket. I trust the LP delegates to not try to force Dr. Paul on to a ticket he does not want to be on. It may even be against LP bylaws and/or at least some state laws. The time I spend on the LP is not in any way shaped by one political cycle, and while I think the LP could get 1% in NV and (less likely) 3% in AR I would still say the odds are against either happening.
69 drs, thanks, I misread your post, I stand corrected.
And, yes, what is centrist, right or legit a subjective matter. Generally, JBA was positioned as a centrist, as was Carter…at the time. But, sure, some may have viewed JBA as a leftist, and probably could fairly be characterized as left-leaning on some issues. He had, of course, been a R MC, and in contrast to Reagan, in the popularly accepted sense, R are not characterized as “leftists” that I can think of. Can you?
Bob, pay attention. I did not say Anderson put “his own” money into his run. Google is your friend (click the first resulting link).
And I don’t think there are many people who would agree with you that Anderson was a centrist. He was very left on many issues, further even than Carter in some ways.
64 dru, hmm, what’s your source on Anderson spending $17MM of his own benjies?
He did get a LLM degree at Harvard, but he did undergrad and JD at U of IL.
I’d say, yes, though, that JBA was closer to the center of American political thought.
@65 The Libertarians you have predicting what Paul will do, well, they seem to have forgotten who he endorsed for President in 2008.
Unlike many people, I have enough respect for his belief in his principles to reject claims that Paul endorsed the Constitution Party candidate out of pique. Paul endorsed the Constitution Party Presidential candidate because their beliefs agree.
Steve @61 kudos to the GP for not being blinded by celebrity.
Robert @60 RP attempting to get the LP nomination definitely falls within the realm of possibilities, I just think it unlikely. The full post from the Lew Rockwell blog appears below. Based on the first and third paragraphs, that is one big “if”. I guess we’ll find out by May 1st.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/politicaltheatre/
Newt To Quit on April Fool’s Day?
“Brent Budowsky could be right–Sheldon Adelson is undoubtedly pulling the plug–but BB is off the deep end when he predicts that Ron willl drop out on May Day. Ron has made it clear that he is in it through Tampa.
UPDATE from a Libertarian friend: “If Dr. Paul were to drop out on May 1st, it would only be to attend the LP convention on May 2-6, I hope. Imagine how the GOP would react to a Paul-Johnson ticket!”
UPDATE from another Libertarian: “There us no way that Ron Paul will endorse the welfare-warfare-corporatist Romney. However, and this requires no deal, Rand will speak to the convention to urge all his dad’s supporters to back Mitt.”
Ummm… Because …
… He was an establishment Hahvaad miseducated hack who spent $17 million or more on his race …
… and was given millions of dollars in free media publicity because he was a far-left gun-controlling liberal who ran as a Republican and thus gave the leftist media the very thing they wanted (all socialists all the time)?
No, that couldn’t be it.
62 dru: The most wild-eyed speculation is that which suggests any LP candidates will get in the debates, raise $10 mill, or get 7%.
me: Prolly so. Why is it that John Anderson could get 6.6% in 1980 but an LP candidate cannot?
Stuart Simms @ 56, you’re right, I forgot about the Greens.
Just as there is the “Ooohhh!! Shiny Object!” caucus that votes for supposed celebrity in the LP, there are similar people in the GP, who may well ignore the primary votes when the Greens assemble for their convention (or whatever means by which they make their final selection) and vote to make Barr the Green nominee.
And yes, it is all speculation. That’s what I was trying to point out.
The most wild-eyed speculation is that which suggests any LP candidates will get in the debates, raise $10 mill, or get 7%.
Get real, everyone.
Those mentioning Roseanne Barr as the likely Green Party candidate (I’ve seen this twice on this thread) are completely missing the fact that Jill Stein has won all the GP primaries held to date by significant margins and carries a lot of momentum with her. To me Stein is way more articulate and doesn’t carry the baggage or abrasiveness that Barr has – plus she has a much longer history of strong activism with the GP – and I believe that most of the likely GP delegates would agree with me. So I think if you’re writing up likely ballot appearances – Stein/Mesplay or Stein/Barr is what will probably end up being for the Green Party – http://www.jillstein.org
Rockwell published this on his Political Theatre blog:
UPDATE from a Libertarian friend: “If Dr. Paul were to drop out on May 1st, it would only be to attend the LP convention on May 2-6, I hope. Imagine how the GOP would react to a Paul-Johnson ticket!”
If Rockwell found this idea not possible, I doubt he’d publish it.
It is refreshing to see that Gary Johnson is asking people to check out and join the LP.
JT@57
JT – “I don’t think that he believes that. He does believe that he can do more good for liberty by running as a Republican though.”
Getting Republicans to understand liberty is good for liberty. Using the Republican Party to advance the cause of liberty is good for liberty. Whatever the case may be I still don’t think RP will run 3rd party.
LPP was simply short hand for LP Presidential candidate.
Stuart: “In my opinion, Ron Paul believes that he can do more good for Liberty by trying to get the R’s to see the torch. Good Luck!”
I don’t think that he believes that. He does believe that he can do more good for liberty by running as a Republican though.
Stuart: “It’s quite probable that the LPP candidate will finish 5th or 6th in popular vote total.”
What the hell does “LPP” mean? LP stands for Libertarian Party.
In my opinion, Ron Paul believes that he can do more good for Liberty by trying to get the R’s to see the torch. Good Luck! Furthermore, I believe that Ron Paul won’t run 3rd party, much less as a VP candidate, because it would impact Rand Paul’s future.
Previous mention of how the LP will do with or without GJ as the nominee is, of course, pure speculation but I don’t see any current LP potential nominee (except RP) getting any traction in the media or in November. Imo, GJ has the best, if very slim, chance of getting widespread attention assuming no RP.
DRUs@31 you forgot to mention the high likelihood of Roseanne Barr getting the Green nomination. It’s quite probable that the LPP candidate will finish 5th or 6th in popular vote total.
A Johnson/Paul campaign is doable!
But Paul may not want the LP VP nomination. He might not even want the LP P nomination.
some LP members may be willing to draft him as the VP candidate…
Oh, I see.
You’re suggesting that Johnson and the LP draft Paul against his will. How very libertarian!
Johnson and LP can’t win their own supporters. So they might draft Paul as VP whether Paul wants it or not.
That’s just sleazy enough to appeal to the LNC.
@50 Bloomberg insisted…He also insisted he was a Republican, when that became convenient. And what he said…that was oh, so, five minutes ago.
Besides, he may be running against Governor Etch-A-Sketch, who may not want to emphasize when people last changed their their opinions on topics.
@52 Paul has your money and your time. Now what ? There’s NO Nov. surprise for you, friend.
Ever heard the old saying “never put all your eggs in one basket” ? You Paul people left no options. You are painted out of the picture for 2012. The LP could nominate him one heartbeat away and he could still dingle dangle with the fascist in the R Party thru their convention ! Then he can continue on spreading the message until Nov. with the LP as veep.
If Paul wants the LP P nom he needs to step forward and say so as it won’t be “anointed” upon him. The VP position might could be awarded without his full participation until after the R convention. You guys have lost the R race whether you are sane enough to know it or not ?!?
A Johnson/Paul campaign is doable! A Paul/Johnson campaign would require Paul to come on over to the LP and get the nomination. He only has about six weeks to do so. He would be in the finals in which the real election happens ! So you and others may need to get busy moving him to the LP. He says he will do what the supporters want him to do. If not, some LP members may be willing to draft him as the VP candidate hence Johnson/Paul 2012.
Gary Johnson on Foreign Policy – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnkH2mIb2V0&feature=related
Gary Johnson on the Department of Education – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dfh_dB2tpJs&feature=related
The LP winner ! A Johnson/Paul ticket could get 1% in NV and 3% in AR !!!
On what planet would Paul accept being second banana to Johnson?
If the LP expects Paul to accept its nomination, it’d have to be Paul/whoever.
Paul came in second in New Hampshire. Johnson couldn’t even poll enough to get into some of the GOP debates.
Paul stayed in the race and took his lumps. Johnson dropped out and slunk away because he was being so badly beaten.
Johnson may be a Big Deal to the LP, but this GOP reject is Nobody to the American people.
I seriously doubt this poll. Johnson was polling 2% late last year: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62257.html
How can he now be polling 7%?
I wonder if Paulie has anything to add to this thread….
Petraeus’d lose his darling status at the capital if he’d go AE.
Bloomberg insisted four years ago he’d not run and didn’t. This time around he insists he won’t run and he won’t.
Shane: “About 3.9 million Georgians voted in the 2008 Presidential election, if turnout is similar this year, that means our Libertarian Presidential candidate will have to pull 780,000 votes in the Peach state to deliver the Georgia LP from the clutches of our 1943 “Jim Crow” ballot access laws.”
So the Libertarian candidate in 2012 only has to pull more votes in a single state than any other Libertarian candidate has pulled nationally (except in 1980, when the Libertarian candidate still didn’t hit 1 million)?
Don’t worry about it. It’s in the bag.
The LP winner ! A Johnson/Paul ticket could get 1% in NV and 3% in AR !!!
If you don’t think so, why the hell do you waste your life on LP politics anyway ?!?!?!? Old saying goes fatigue makes cowards of us all. Fatigue has set in with too many Ls….
“The lesser of the two evils is still evil. Vote Libertarian” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=246
Want to change the law? Change the lawmakers. – The Libertarians – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=342
“If you don’t like Republicans and Democrats, You might be a Libertarian.” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=254
“The Libertarian Party LP.org” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=256
Define “anyone” and “seriously.”
NOW you tell me!
20% in Georgia — the Libertarian Party platform plank on recreational pharmaceuticals was not supposed to be interpreted as saying you should try overdosing…on all of them … at the same time.
Having said that, Georgia does have one of our better state Libertarian Parties, a state party that works hard, and it would certainly be nice, if rough on the three dead yaks with which the D R and AE nominees would need to have been involved. (For the historically ignorant, the line is ‘the only way X will lose is if he is caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl’).
I’ve noticed. It’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma.
To his buddies in Utah. Beyond that, the
re is no information.
Oh crap. For what now?
Thanks, but I’m not going to support President Obama, even though he will probably get re-elected with a big margin of victory over the inept Republicans and everyone else (unless Bloomberg sinks serious money into an AE run, and perhaps even then).
Even if Paul is the candidate himself 20% is highly unlikely. Paul raising money for Johnson, 20%?
I’ll bet against it. Seriously.
Dilettantes R Us is exactly correct
Why not?
He would most likely get hundreds of thousands of votes, as will Johnson. The difference would not be that great in all likelihood.
That’s more than just a tall order.
That’s right, the Dude who will WIN the LP nomination in less than 60 days ! Get on board with a WINNER do the $5,000 max !! It would be good for some of you to be a part of a SWEET VICTORY for once in your life, time to PARTY !!!
Libertarians Are The Party People – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=470
“ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. VOTE LIBERTARIAN.” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=5
“Real Liberals Vote Libertarian” – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=252
Show everyone else on the road what you stand for and that you enjoy your right to be able to put a political bumper sticker on your car with our new “PROTECT FREEDOM” bumper sticker.
http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=186
Some Proceeds go to the LP.
Johnson? The dude who use half his January – Libertarian – fundraising to pay off a few of his Republican campaign debts? The fellow who ran up another $30,000 in campaign debt in February?
DRU — You are right!
NV 1% and AR 3% are the type goals in which to aim. Twenty % in GA might be out of the question UNLESS Paul comes in to help rai$e the fund$ needed. (Quality Paid Ads equal more votes)
Negativity runs rampant among some of you. We do need the Paul troops enthusiasm in the LP now and in the future. Name calling and exclusionary additudes have no place in building a political party. A Big Tent approach is the only way to build the LP. Backbiting and squabbling over minor issue is sheer foolishness.
I wish not to argue with any of you. The facts are facts and Gary Johnson will be the 2012 LP P nominee*. Is he the “best” candidate? He’s the best we’ve got at the moment. Vote for who you wish, but when Johnson wins it’s time to get on with the business of rebuilding this Party. Gary Johnson isn’t Bob Barr. In fact Gary Johnson is more libertarian and is much more qualified to be PotUS! Let’s keep the negative vibes to ourselves this year and try to enjoy the ride !
If we can all row together for once, I assure you the Clark numbers will truly finally be history. Gary Johnson was a better Gov. than Romney and a much better Cheif Executive than the failed Obama ! Gary Johnson is going to be the best PROVEN candidate in this race. Getting that message out to independent voters will be the challenge.
For you who just can’t warmup to GJ I say again, run for office yourselves. Give the Libertarian message the way you wish. Helping to build the Party in your area. Don’t like the FAIRTAX then run on a NO-TAX plank! That’s your right. Run on the planks you love. No one says you have to agree with the LP P nominee on all the issues. We just don’t need to tear the Party down, we need to build it up! Myers in TX is a good example. He’s not gungho for GJ, but instead of sitting back he runs for the US Senate on a platform he believes. Run for office in 2012 and make a difference !!! (If the LP doesn’t have ballot access in your state, I say consider getting the AE line and then run a hard core libertarian race!)
*Unless Ron Paul wants it. Whenever I say GJ has it locked I mean only if Ron Paul doesn’t enter. Ventura has waited too late this cycle to beat Johnson for the nom. GJ has attended the state conventions seeking support (and been 67-73% successful!) and Ventura is absent.
Why Pay Taxes? Just Print the Money – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=638
Big Government Is A Big Mistake – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=640
Tweedle Mouse Pad – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=827
What Happens in D.C. Should Stay in D.C. VOTE LIBERTARIAN! – http://www.lpstuff.com/shop/index.php?_a=viewProd&productId=828
DRU @31 – I could not agree more.
@19 you obviously haven’t been around third party politics for any length of time. GJ is not going to get “millions” of votes.
One of the most damaging things Libertarians do every four years (or, for that matter, *every* election year), is lathering themselves up into wishful thinking. Unrealistic expectations result in dashed hopes, and the person who harbors those unrealistic expectations often blames his Libertarian comrades for their ‘failure’ to live up to those expectations.
I have been told time and again, every stinking election, that “only this” candidate can break 1%, or get millions of votes, or raise $10 million.
But then none of it ever happens.
And none of it will ever happen until every dilettante who thinks it will, instead promptly rolls up his sleeves, and starts getting his hands dirty — probably for the first time:
– walking his own precinct – repeatedly
– starting his own county committee
– start making noise at the town, county, or city council meetings
– sign up dozens of members
– circulate candidate petitions to get Libertarians on the ballot
– and other Politics101, basic Party-building WORK.
The same people who generally believe the Pollyanna scenarios are also often the same people who later decide the SOP, platform, or pledge hold us back, and they go to great lengths to get them changed or eliminated.
But even when they succeed at these things, nothing changes, because they still aren’t doing the basic precinct-level, mandatory party-building exercises that will bring growth and eventual victories.
Wer’re going to have a tough fight this year. Americans Elect is going to have a “name” candidate, and the Constitution Party may also. AE was created by political insiders and seems to be well-funded, and the CP is pretty experienced with ballot access chores these days — and often outpolls us by a wide margin in R areas when they do get on the ballot.
To whoever wins our nomination: good luck.
And to whoever seeks the nomination, remember — this ain’t about YOU; it’s about the LP.
Nor is it about this election — it’s about the NEXT election.
Get those two things right, and act accordingly, and you’ll be in the running for my vote in Las Vegas.
I currently have an open mind about all the candidates. What I want to see from all of them is realism, recruitment, and results.
@29 – I thought you meant nationally in 25. I think 3% in a State is possible IF (keyword of this scenario) the LP nominee raises funds and gets media attention a la Nader 2000 or Perot 1992… otherwise, yes very unlikely, and short of Ron Paul being the LP nominee, I don’t see it happening!
@28 – Yeah, that’s what I thought he meant too. Still, it seems that 3% in any state is unrealistic.
Maybe I was being a bit overly-dramatic when I said that divine intervention would be needed for 3% in Arkansas. Still, I’d bet against it at 20:1 odds.
@25 – I believe Ken @23 means 3% IN ARKANSAS not 3% nationally.
I am so sorry to insult your delicate sensitivities Dr. Phillies, I should of said Lee Wrights will get hundreds of thousands of votes for POTUS.
Thanks for restating your belief that The LP is not a “Big Tent”.
It aint gonna be Petraeus nor Bloomberg for Americans Elect. I think It’ll be Roemer, and his running mate’ll either be Anderson or some other draft candidate who declares prior to the first vote.
@23 – 3% ain’t gonna happen, short of divine intervention. Getting 1% in a state or two seems like it is within the realm of possibility.
@19 Your claim that Wrights as nominee will only get thousands of votes is absurd, insulting, and representative of the thinking of the Republican Carpetbagger wing of the party.
The LP in Arkansas will retain ballot status as a party for all races if its presidential candidate achieves 3% of the vote.
Wanna bet?
There are two?!
@19 I could not agree more !!
As a Radical Libertarian, I would rather see us nominate Lee Wrights and get thousands votes for POTUS than nominate Gary Johnson and get millions of votes. After all, we are The Party of Principle!
Does anyone seriously think it won’t be Virgil Goode?
YMMV as in I am not interested in starting vehement disagreements as to whom the CP will actually in the end run.
YMMV = Your mileage may vary
but is often used in forum talk meaning
that your results will vary.
YMMV- Constitution?
Well, if they listed a full set of third party candidates at the same time.
Jill Stein — Green
YMMV — Constitution
My mileage: Petraeus/Bloomberg — Americans Elect
Now if Gallup, Rasmusssen, CNN, CNBC, CBS and ABC would just acknowledge Gary Johnson exists and include him in the polls.
@5 , Nevada is one of those states , if we get 1% we get to keep ballot access which would be great since we only have 2 congressional candidates and they have to get 5% to retain it
GP – Some of our resources, people, state party funds, things like that, are not really fungible. However, the campaign can choose to spend its funds wherever it want. And, targeted donations can be made to specific projects in specific states.
I know this is unlikely to happen, but I’m just talking on a blog about it 😉
Most of our resources are not fungible and cannot be concentrated.
Greetings All,
Georgia Libertarians would benefit immensely from a super strong showing by this years Libertarian Presidential candidate. Our legendarily bad ballot laws do provide for two mechanisms to elevate the Georgia LP from “Political Body” to “Political Party”. If one of our candidates for Governor can break 20% +1 of the general election vote, we’re a political party will complete access to all state house , state senate and US house of Representatives races without petitioning. The same is true if the Libertarian Presidential candidate polls 20% +1 here in Georgia.
That’s a tall order.
About 3.9 million Georgians voted in the 2008 Presidential election, if turnout is similar this year, that means our Libertarian Presidential candidate will have to pull 780,000 votes in the Peach state to deliver the Georgia LP from the clutches of our 1943 “Jim Crow” ballot access laws. I have heard that Virginia has similar requirements with similar results.
I would like to see our Presidential candidate, whoever that shakes out to be, address ballot access as a state level issue with national implications. While it’s not likely that our guy is gonna be the next POTUS, he might be able able to free up one or two states by concentrating his campaign resources and attention on them.
Or not.
As I attempted years ago to explain, as my pol.sci.prof. taught us those many years ago polls are so much hooey ! Fun to use when they agree with your op I agree. (However) They can be rigged to say whatever the ca$h cow want$ them to $ay! So don’t get carried away with polls please. Unless of course you do the poll yourself.
This seems to me to be setting up the argument that Johnson hurts the RP more than the DP. Which ads to the “dangerous spoiler” vote senario. That with the “wasted” vote is used regularly (as in ANY cycle when needed) by the CFR lackeys to retain power over the masses. As shared before – “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can throw the rascals out at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” – Carroll Quigley from his book Hope and Tragedy-(Bill Clinton said Quigley was his mentor during 1993 Inaugural Address), Quigley is speaking of the (CFR) Globalists’ American political strategy since the early twentieth century. (It’s rigged friends and has been for over a century)
The “fall debates” always mentioned are run by the Ds and Rs. With CFR members in charge. It doesn’t help them to have competition! A Gary Johnson won’t be allowed to speak. New debates must be created to allow/invite each candidate who has ballot access in enough states to win the EC. Satellite/cable stations not controlled by the CFR can be utilized to host these debates to reach millions of independent voters.
The LP (already), GP, and CP are on target to reach the 270+ Ballot Access qualification to win along with the Ds , Rs and prob’ the CFR controlled AE. Hence six candidate should be included in any official POTUS debates this cycle. We as TP enthusiasts should accept no less and should shout it from every (housetop)keyboard/forum we access. Expose the FRAUD debates and DEMAND honest debates between ALL who meet the tough BA requirements to reach 270+ EC votes.
As shared before – {Why do} “300 million Americans have {only} 2 choices for president? Can you imagine having 2 colors to pick for your car? Red or Blue. No silver, or black w/ chrome rims. No racing yellow or hunter green. Nope – 2 colors, red or blue. The 2 party system has failed us. Our corrupt corporate propaganda media has failed us. You cannot give 300 million people 2 choices & expect change. They feign fighting on TV while they sleep together at night. We need a 3rd, 4th, 5th choice to fairly represent us” -shwantz2 on youtube
Gladly I think the majority of Americans feel like shwantz2 and would welcome 4 or more choices for P. We must seek the day when any TP who qualifies will be included in ALL PotUS debates. Naturally the Ds and Rs would bow out and not participate but the others (TPs) must continue on and debate two empty chairs (podiums) and give their message to as many voters as possible. There is uneaze in america and many understand finally that these deficits have us looking hyper-inflation (complete disaster) squarely in the face! Now more than ever they are ready to hear alternatives to the failed status quo……
Demand a Romney, Obama, Johnson, Goode, Barr and ?AE debate ! We must settle for no less of a call. However we can promote a Johnson, Goode, and Barr debate to the masses as a legit POTUS debate this cycle !
Imagine President Gary Johnson – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUEa7V3TgGQ&feature=related
Gary Johnson 2012: End the Drug War Now – http://www.youtube.com/user/govgaryjohnson?feature=BF#p/u/16/MBOXUjHhrVM
Apathy may have no check, but $5 a gallon gas can move the masses to listen to an alternative answer……….
Sorry, poor editing.
The state of Maryland is appealing a summary judgement against the new petition validation law. I deleted this information in my post when editing and then referenced the deleted material!
@5 Maryland, my recollection is that the top of ticket candidate achieving 1% gives that minor party ballot status for 2 years.
However, this is bigger than one might think initially. In Maryland the new petition signature law brings the validity rate down to around 30%. And if a minor party is decertified those registered in the minor party are automatically moved to “Unaffiliated”. When a party is “recertified” the county election offices send out a post card informing those that were involuntarily moved to Unafilliated that they can re-register with the minor party by signing and sending back the post card (positive action required rather than informing them that they have been reregistered with the minor party).
The last time the MDLP was decertified was after the election in November 2002 (March 2003) approximatly 40% (6,732 (~0.24%) end of 2002 to 2,685 (~0.08% end of 2004) reregistered when LPMD was recertified.
LPMD has 9914 (~0.28%) registered voters that would potentially be moved to Unaffiliated if the state wins the appeal. Assuming the state loses the appeal, 1% vote total would retain official recognition through 2014 and MDLP should then start a registration drive to get to 1% registered and maintain recognition without petition requirements. 1% of current registration is 35,046 quite difficult but probably worth the effort if the state loses the appeal and the LP nominee does well and far more reachable starting from 10,000 than 0!
Are there any states where 1% of the vote would do something good for the LP ballot access wise?
If so, it seems that trying to hit 1% in those states would be a reasonable goal.
If the campaign continues to act like GJ will get in the debates, or worse, say that he can win the election, the only thing we’re going to accomplish is breaking the hearts of whoever the campaign brings into the LP.
I am not trying to be negative or remove any credit from GJ and his team, but…
1. Gary Johnson will not get in the debates unless a miracle.
2. The national libertarian party had nothing to do with the choice plateau offered by the D n R.
3. Americans are starting to give up on the function of government. (As seen by voter turn out thus far in primaries and the number of candidates in third parties)
4. Protest votes are difficult to count unless done at the moment of the voting.
5. Apathy has no check.
Sometimes minor party and independent candidates do better in the actual election than in the polls. In 1992, Ross Perot was only at 7% in the polls in early October, but he got 18.9% in the actual election. Of course being in the 3 general election debates in October is what boosted him. He did very well in all 3 debates.
Another good example of how top down one-party Communist Party-style election practices of pretty much censoring all other choices can really help an official candidate with the help of the party bosses.
The national Libertarian Party is finally showing some of the results of all their hard work.
How many times have we seen this before? As election day approaches the “wasted vote” argument just destroys alternative candidates.