Slashdot Mirror

You do realize that there were more choices than Obama or McCain in 2012. I specifically remember seeing a libertarian presidential candidate on the ballot. He did support reigning in the TSA btw. You are the one that sounds dumb to me.

The U.S. party system is divided into two groups: major and minor parties.

Major parties get more than 5% of the vote at the last general election. Minor parties get less than that.

The difference is major parties are eligible for federal matching campaign funds and have easier ballot access. In order to get on the ballot in a State you have to get a certain number of registered voters to sign a petition.

Major parties have a threshold that is frequently fairly low. Minor parties often have much higher requirements, often 3 - 4 times the number of signatures that a major party candidate will need.

That is why Gary Johnson has "Give me 5%" on his homepage. He knows he isn't going to win, but is aiming to get equal ballot access and financing for the Libertarian Party for future elections. The idea is to maybe break the lock the Republicans and Democrats have on the electoral process.

If you want to see the grip of the Big R and Big D loosened, consider voting for Gary Johnson and contribute towards the 5%. If you're in one of the "undisputed" States that are firmly in the grip of Romney or Obama, consider casting your ballot for Johnson (or Jill Stein of the Green Party) even if you'd normally vote Obama or Romney. This way your vote isn't wasted.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

I'm voting Gary Johnson (L) because I'm impressed with his accomplishments and agree with his philosophy.

End the wars, legalize and tax drugs, practice fiscal responsibility.

He's a self-made millionaire businessman who also has an excellent record as a 2-term governor. He was praised by both Republicans and Democrats alike for being able to work with all parties and get the job done.

His bio and record speak for themselves:

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/about

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/record

I'm voting Gary Johnson (L) because I'm impressed with his accomplishments and agree with his philosophy.

End the wars, legalize and tax drugs, practice fiscal responsibility.

He's a self-made millionaire businessman who also has an excellent record as a 2-term governor. He was praised by both Republicans and Democrats alike for being able to work with all parties and get the job done.

His bio and record speak for themselves:

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/about

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/record

Your citation is here: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/coalitions/choice
The fact that you even needed a citation for that doesn't speak well about how much you now about the candidate you are talking about. Remember, the OP said GARY JOHNSON is not a third party. There are some pro-life libertarians. I am not talking about them.

Gary Johnson IS for gay marriage. So are many other libertarian candidates. Marriage is a contract. Government should not be in the business of telling people who they can and cannot enter into a contract with. Your claims that Ron Paul only wants government out of marriage for tax breaks needs a citation. Ron Paul doesn't want ANY income tax, so it seems a bit strange that he'd be pushing a position just to increase someone's tax burden.

Yes Ron Paul is anti-war. You are again distorting both Ron's views, and the libertarian party's views with no citation. The same with your claim that everything is a fiscal issue. Personal liberty is a HUGE part of the libertarian platform, as the other reply to your comment has mentioned.

Vote Gary Johnson for President!

Didn't you hear, Rockefeller, Carnegie, they didn't build that. It was government and everybody who built that but them, it was the consumer who built that but them.

Wait, there was almost no government back in 19th century? Well, then it must have been slave labour.

Wait, industrialisation made hired labour more productive and competitive than slave labour?

Well, it was probably the proletariat that built that, didn't you know? Marx himself.

--

The best kept secret of these coming elections is the record of Gary Johnson as the 29th governor of New Mexico (balanced the budget, turned it to surplus actually, Vetoed more regulations and laws than anybody else ever and more than all other governors combined together, cut taxes 14 times, cut gov't jobs etc,etc.) and his business record, which he grew from just himself to the largest construction company in New Mexico.

He is anti-drug war, pro legalisation of drugs, he reformed education system with voucher programs, he climbed the freaking Mount Everest (literally). He is pro free-market, against illegal foreign invasions, etc.

It's INSANE that this guy (and Ron Paul) are not in the elections. Actually Johnson said that if Ron Paul got the nomination he wouldn't run on the Libertarian ticket.

The game is rigged and it should be ended abruptly and it will be.

Shhh.... don't tell them that people with a big (D) after their name are no better, and in some cases much worse than people with a big (R) after their name on the drug war. Next thing you know they'll be looking into Gary Johnson's candidacy.

Don't talk about pot legalization. It is a gateway drug to all sorts of evil ideas about personal freedom. Stay asleep and choose between your giant douche and turd sandwich.

I have seen no evidence that any of them do

You're not looking very hard. It's easy to find evidence they understand it, though it's indirect and not solid proof. Read what Johnson (my current favorite) says about it:

Government should cease subsidizing or giving favorable treatment to Internet service providers and content-creators. 'Net Neutrality' leads to a government role in the Internet that can only lead to unwanted regulation.

He comes out against NN, but in the very same breath, he also advocates against the things which are causing lack of NN to be such a threat. You don't say things like that, without understanding what NN is and why people want NN in the first place.

Given a premise where the existing ISPs and the creators of the stuff that uses so much video bandwidth, pretty much owe their existence to government programs to put them in business, it makes sense to further dictate what those lucky recipients are allowed to do with their government-granted exclusive rights. Net Neutrality is a logical extension of public policy makers, rather than markets, deciding what the net is for.

If you pull the rug out from under all that, and instead were to have competition, then a lot of the problems that NN is meant to address, go away. NN becomes no-longer logical.

Both extremes are consistent. You only get to the weird inconsistent stuff when you talk to Republicrats, especially the Republican branch, who advocate against NN but still want to subsidize the private parties that NN would provide a check against. "Privatize" it, but use government force to make sure people are only allowed to do business with a tiny handful of unaccountable providers. (Republicans' idea of what "free market" means would be very amusing, if only so many people didn't take them seriously. Democrats are nasty too, but in a more honest way.)

I think what happened to mislead you about the candidates' position, is that TFA left most of the candidates out. They handpicked a couple of the worst, is all. I can lie to you about anything, while appearing to tell the truth, by only telling you about a small fraction of the truth and presenting it as though it were somehow representative of the whole.

Gary Johnson: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/internet-and-technology Jill Stein : Doesn't seem to talk about the issue.

I'm American, and I plan on voting for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate. I'm not a big fan of the party, nor am I a big fan of his (though according to various political "match ups" I agree with him more than any other candidate), but I'm casting my vote to a third person (who I know will not get elected) to make the other two squirm. I believe that just as even competition leads to a better market, it can lead to better politics. If people keep voting for one or the other because of party lines or (worse) because "he's not the other guy", the two majority parties will happily continue sitting across from each other at the table, shaking a fist at each other above it and exchanging handjobs below it.

It's going to take a major incident in both parties at about the same time to make the American public really change their voting habits to the point of electing a third party; however, in the mean time, if we can get people to diversify their voting (especially to the person instead of the party), it will put extra pressure on the Republicrats to actually, you know, represent those who elected them and shape up a little bit.

I believe in this so much that I am going to put a Gary Johnson support sticker on my car (and it will be the only one), but only if I can easily remove it or it's magnetic because I hate bumper stickers in general.

How much longer are we going to put up with the two false alternatives that continue to kick the can down the road and buy votes with money that will be paid back by future generations?

How long until we finally consider a real alternative?

There's a third alternative: Gary Johnson.

Seriously you guys haven't heard of Gary Johnson? Start here: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/internet-and-technology

Nope...first time I've heard the name....

Seriously you guys haven't heard of Gary Johnson? Start here: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/internet-and-technology

Gary Johnson is likely to be the Libertarian candidate this year. I can't say if he meets your criteria or not so here's the address:
http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues

I'm not sure he gets what net neutrality really is, but he's old. So, you know how that is.

Jon Stewart interviewee Jonathan Macey (professor at Yale) said most people should avoid private equity. Good private equity firms require huge investments - more than he can can bring to the table...

As an aside, Mr. Romney is a bad joke of a candidate - he basically represents everything that the occupiers are protesting.

What the U.S. needs is a candidate who people who work for a living can rally around, and that people who steal for a living will fear. Most people would agree that Steve Jobs worked very hard for his billions, and that there are groups on Wall Street who ought to be prosecuted.

I like certain aspects of Ron Paul's candidacy, but I wonder if he can get a message together that could break through Wall Street's blockade.

Fortunately for us there is another candidate who could black-swan the election.

I just donated $50 to Gary Johnson, the Libertarian dude. Unlike all of the other idiots, he actually has some ideas that seem to make sense. I will also be voting in the primary. I'm pretty sure he won't get elected, but if he gets enough support and votes, it might shake things up.

Gary Johnson 2012. Mr. Johnson tried for the republican nomination, but the powers that be decided to exclude him from a bunch of debates, and his republican candidacy didn't get off the ground.

He was governor of New Mexico for... 8 years, and the libertarian party is organized enough to get him on all 50 states' ballots.

I think if he'd pick up some of those "reality sticks" lying around, his campaign would really beat the crap out of Obama and Romney (Wall Street's anointed candidate). I'd have him start with pointing out how our entire money supply is "borrowed from Wall Street". Then he could move on to point out how Wall Street rigs the health care industry to make it as expensive and ineffective as possible (Ex: Lipitor. Business Week had a story about 4 years ago about how no one actually benefits from knee-capping their body's cholesterol-generating mechanism...)

Drug laws are a big one too...

There are more than two sides, and Gary Johnson, running as a Libertarian Party candidate, also opposes it. (He scored better than Obama or Ron Paul on the ACLU's civil liberties report card.) I expect the two people seeking the Green Party nomination aren't in favor of it either, but I don't remember their names.

He seems to have clarified / changed his mind: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/foreign-policy
(Thanks for bringing that up... I didn't know he ever said that.)

Don't overlook Gary Johnson: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

Ron Paul has a lot of interesting things to say, but very few of them make me want him as my president.

Instead, I like Gary Johnson. Fiscally conservative libertarian, but socially quite liberal. He wants both a balanced budget - and promises to submit one in 2013 - and the legalization of online gambling and marijuana.

Former 2-term New Mexico governor, term-limited out of office. Grew a construction company from a 1-man handyman company to the largest construction company in NM. Climbed Mount Everest. Rode his bicycle across New Hampshire as part of his campaigning there.

He's been largely excluded from polls and debates. (If you saw the Florida Republican debate in September, he had the joke about shovel-ready jobs.)

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/

For marijuana, legalize and tax it using the tax funds toward drug rehabilitation and education. Provide prescription access to heroin in ways that have been proven in other countries to cut down on use. For the harder drugs, take them by a case by case basis and approach it in an intelligent, non-kneejerk, manner that addresses the real issues.

There was some talk of him running for president as a Republican in 2012.

Check out:

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/