We have our first candidate for Georgia governor in the wide-open 2018 race.
Libertarian Doug Craig said he will run for the state’s highest office, and promised to be the third-party candidate with a “strong message, not a watered down message.”
“We always have a shot,” he said. “But my goal is to run the campaign at a different level than others have – radio ads, TV commercials.”
A veteran of the Gulf War who operated nuclear reactors for the U.S. Navy, Craig runs a sheet-metal fabricator shop in Atlanta’s southside. As former chair of Georgia’s Libertarian Party, he backed the failed candidacies of Andrew Hunt for governor and Amanda Swafford for Senate.
Read the full article here.
He’s actually a professional.
“But in all seriousness, do you think it possible that your extensive exposure to people dressed in suits may have, while inoculating you from being intimidated or impressed by them, also had the effect of subconsciously making you see them as “normal” and “appropriate”, and thus view other styles departing too significantly from that look as “inappropriate”?” – Starchild
Absolutely! You’re not an amateur psychologist are you? 😉
Well NewFederalist, heaven forbid any of us would try to attract attention to ourselves. We all know what a hindrance fame and media attention are to accomplishing anything in politics. 😉
But in all seriousness, do you think it possible that your extensive exposure to people dressed in suits may have, while inoculating you from being intimidated or impressed by them, also had the effect of subconsciously making you see them as “normal” and “appropriate”, and thus view other styles departing too significantly from that look as “inappropriate”?
It can be pretty difficult for even freethinkers to entirely escape, or think outside of, the arbitrary cultural norms and mores in which they are immersed, however unnecessary or illogical they may be.
Nevertheless, if this is one of the few areas where we disagree, you’re doing pretty well in my book! 🙂
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/07/ozy-libertarianism-on-rise/16853919/
Starchild- when I saw Hummel attired as he was (and also in need of a shampoo which I didn’t mention earlier) I was turned off. I wasn’t thinking Jesus Christ or Huck Finn. I was thinking “here is a guy trying to attract attention to himself” and he did. From my perspective it wasn’t positive. Full disclosure: I was a Naval officer for 33 years and also a financial services industry professional as well (“stockbroker” if you will) so I am not intimidated by nor impressed by suits. I do have certain standards that I am comfortable with regarding raucous beach attire and a luxury hotel ballroom just seemed inappropriate. I have seen you at several conventions and I am certain this is one of the few areas where we disagree! 🙂
Paulie – You make valid points about the term “sharing” — I do not recommend it for every usage, and that’s one reason I suggested several other alternate terms. But I do feel it is generally preferable to “selling”. For instance, I consider it a good thing that the libertarian trend of individual entrepreneurship in the form of people renting out rooms in their homes and using their vehicles as taxis is referred to as the “sharing economy” rather than the “selling economy”.
I never said I was surprised at a mainstream reporter (or even, sadly, a Libertarian, though fortunately that was not the case here) referring to people running good campaigns not getting elected as “failed candidacies”. My point was simply that we should seek to avoid such language and urge others to do the same.
Regarding the wearing of nationalist or other objectionable symbols, I should add that my objection generally applies only to wearing them in a manner that venerates them or upholds their status — if such a symbol is being worn in an ironic, postmodernist, or counter-cultural manner, it’s much less problematic, and may even send a very positive message.
Starchild – we’re all in agreement here that the MSM’s horserace approach to covering elections leaves a lot to be desired. It’s just that it’s what they do, so like it or not (and I don’t), we shouldn’t be surprised when they do it.
I agree with all of your language criticisms, although on that last one, I do often use “selling” as shorthand for “making the arguments for … more persuasive to more people.” I realize that it does also carry connotations of dishonesty and commercialism, but I generally use it in circumstances where the people I am talking to understand what I mean and are used to thinking in those terms. “Sharing” is an inadequate substitute. You can share ideas all day every day without persuading anyone. Think of the person sitting or standing next to you in a public location who “just feels like sharing” (and sharing and sharing), in the sense of having someone to unload on. Or, if you prefer, think about that guy or gal who wants to “share the good news of Jesus” with you and won’t stop following you. There’s a reason why psychologists and psychiatrists get paid good money to listen to people “sharing” all day long. I realize it’s a bit crass and commercial, but after some point…. if (generic) you insist on continuing to “share” with me… “fuck you, pay me.” 🙂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XGAmPRxV48
New Federalist, in response to your comment posted August 27, 2015 at 7:14 am — I believe you misunderstood the nature of the t-shirt Jeff Hummel was wearing. I’d bet that a “Reach out and fuck someone” shirt was intended as a dig at AT&T as a large corporation, contrasting its feel-good “Reach out and touch someone” slogan with actual corporate behavior.
Surely these sentiments were far more libertarian than wearing an American flag lapel pin, as so many mainstream politicians seem to consider de rigeur, and as I was disappointed to notice a Libertarian candidate for Florida Senate wearing in his photo that accompanied another recent IPR post.
If suits being worn less frequently would decrease the number of nationalist symbols adorning people’s clothing, that alone would be a good reason not to wear them.
As for Hummel wearing ragged, uneven cutoffs and a shirt with holes in it, that brings to mind the literary icons and beloved characters Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer, and the rags Jesus is often depicted wearing when he was allegedly crucified. Suits, on the other hand, make me think of lawyers, bankers, and politicians. With which group would you rather Libertarians be associated?
Mark, don’t sit down too quickly! I think your point about the unfortunate “failed candidacies” wording was very well taken, regardless of who was responsible for that phrase appearing in the article. It’s important not to uncritically accept and use mainstream definitions and terminology that are inaccurate or do not serve our cause.
The whole idea that what matters in a campaign is “winning” in conventional terms (i.e. getting elected), for instance. A “win” in libertarian terms is something that advances the cause of freedom, nothing more and nothing less. If a Libertarian gets elected and proceeds to act in an un-libertarian manner in office, that is not a win. A few other examples:
“third party” – This term implies that there should only be three!
“public” – Using this term as a synonym for “government” just encourages the mistaken notion that only government can properly provide for the public good
“people of color” – Although often used by people with good intentions, this term is inherently racist — it effectively divides the world into two groups — people of European ancestry, and everyone else (although where albinos fall is a bit unclear). In reality, of course, white is just as much a color as black — we are all people of color. It is a measure of how Orwellian society has become in some respects that the term “colored people” is considered an offensive and racist term, while “people of color” is seen as so politically correct that it’s likely someone will take me to task for pointing out that the term is racist. And yet, the only real difference between “colored people” and “people of color” is the order of the noun and the adjective!
“selling freedom/liberty/libertarianism/the LP” – Freedom is not for sale! It is everyone’s birthright. Let’s share our ideas — teach, persuade, inform, etc. — but not use the language of selling what we stand for. Too many people already see libertarians as greedy capitalists who want to commodify everything. Why use language that encourages this perception in situations where it’s unnecessary? Let’s save associating ourselves with the paradigm of selling for arguments where economic and personal freedoms are at stake, such as explaining why people should be allowed to sell their organs, or for when we’re trying to communicate economic truths, such as explaining why destroying ivory stockpiles, instead of selling the tusks to help bring down the market price and disincentivize further poaching of elephants, is a bad idea.
I stand (okay, sit) corrected. Did not catch that it was MSM in the article.
Actually, that’s better because it’s easy to write to ourselves and great if the “real” press picks us up. Now that I see where it is, I also got to enjoy Doug’s responses in the comments section.
Go LPGA!
Amanda and Andrew both ran a great campaign.If Amanda Swafford is knee deep in fighting to change our ballot access laws as we speak.I hope she runs for US Senate again. Andrew did great also but he is new to the movement and he was learning the finer points of Libertarianism but he did great for us and had a great presentation. He was 10x times the candidate at the end than the beginning. The reporter took me talking about running a hard core libertarian message as a slam against our Governor candidate. ..is was not My belief is we need to sell Libertarianism and not hide from it. We are not GOP lite..If I do my job right the right and the left will vote for me…not just unhappy republicans
I disagree with it too for the reasons you state, as I’m sure Doug does, but that’s how MSM reporters often see things.
I too echo all the praise above for Doug as a candidate.
Now here’s my nitpick. I disagree with this line in the article:
>As former chair of Georgia’s Libertarian Party, he backed the failed candidacies of Andrew Hunt for governor and Amanda Swafford for Senate.
They were not failed candidacies. Of course we would like to win elections, but we are working on winning hearts and minds too, and that means running candidates who promote freedom and individual liberty at all levels. The mere fact that statists got more votes than Andrew and Amanda does not render either of their candidacies “failed”.
God forbid anyone running for political office should ever be seen in public in anything other than a suit, even if it was from before they were a candidate. Sheesh.
At least he’s wearing a shirt. On Times Sq. New York the statement is not wearing a shirt. Those folks are upsetting the status quo with deBlasio, Cuomo. Etc. So, this picture is rather tame.
I will kind of recant my statement but only a little bit, Starchild. I remember going to an LP state convention in the early 1980’s in Austin or San Antonio (I forget which) and Jeff Hummel (now the revered Jeffrey Rogers Hummel) was a featured speaker. We were at a very nice hotel and the party was still young and promising. Hummel was wearing cutoffs that were ragged and not even and a tee shirt (with holes in it!) that made a parody of an AT&T commercial of the time that said “Reach out and fuck someone”. That extreme example made a very big negative impression on me. I have no doubt that Doug is far more reasonable than that! I am only speaking to perception here not philosophy. Hummel made a good address as I recall but I just couldn’t hear it. His appearance just drown out his words.
I’ll respectfully disagree with New Federalist — don’t lose the “Freedom” shirt, Doug! Wear a suit and tie and you’ll look like everybody else who’s part of the problem.
Anyway, glad to hear you’re running, I’m sure you’ll use your candidacy to speak truth to power and do the libertarian movement proud!
And asked why he’s getting in the race now, more than three years before the contest, he answered simply:
“Because Libertarians always wait to the last minute.”
Great point!
When Jesse Ventura ran for governor of Minnesota he rarely dressed professionally. Extraordinary circumstance due to his celebrity status, but still.
And, look at this one:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/11/doug-craig-looks-back-on-the-2008-campaign-and-forward-to-tom-knapp-running-in-2012/
Mr Craig is one of my favorite Libertarian to follow. Here are a couple previous articles about him:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/08/doug-craig-is-interviewed-about-the-little-girl-influencing-change-to-georgias-marijuana-law/
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/10/ozy-doug-craig-the-man-in-the-freedom-t-shirt/
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/06/libertarian-party-of-georgia-libertarians-join-rally-for-injured-baby/
==The picture was from an article I did last year..I own a sheet metal shop in Atlanta and a reporter stopped by…wanted to take pictures of me at my shop..I will be radical..but professional. .I will speak pure liberty..I will have fun…and have the greatest time of my life..==
Looking forward to news of your campaign.
That sounds great! Best of luck to you!
The picture was from an article I did last year..I own a sheet metal shop in Atlanta and a reporter stopped by…wanted to take pictures of me at my shop..I will be radical..but professional. .I will speak pure liberty..I will have fun…and have the greatest time of my life..
Doug cleans up fine when he needs to. The picture with the article was taken in his metal fabrication shop.
Many of us dress differently at work than we do when doing politics. I definitely do.
My only comment is he can be as radical as can be but if he really wants votes he will present himself in more acceptable attire. If there is an undercurrent of Ducks Unlimited in Georgia perhaps he can tap into that but otherwise a business suit is a must.
Go for it, Doug!
This is very good news.
This will be a great campaign to follow.
Great news! Good luck, Doug!!
Makes me wish I were in GA.