John McAfee Denied Libertarian Party Nomination For President (reason.com)

SonicSpike quotes an article at Reason: In a decisive rout for pragmatism over purity, the Libertarian Party has nominated former New Mexico Republican Governor and 2012 nominee Gary Johnson for president. Johnson came within an eyelash of winning on the first ballot, pulling 49.5 percent of the vote, just short of the required majority. (Libertarian activist Austin Petersen and software magnate John McAfee came in second and third, respectively, with 21.3 percent and 14.1 percent.) With sixth-place finisher Kevin McCormick (and his 0.973 percent of the vote) booted from the second ballot, Johnson sailed through with 55.8 percent.
John Mcafee answered questions here on Slashdot in 2013. Reason's article includes a video of their interview this weekend with the party's official nominee Gary Johnson, who hopes to qualify for the nationally-televised presidential debates by drawing 15% of the support in national opinion polls.

Comments

Why do we need US political topics?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this on Slashdot? McAfee is a nutjob who hasn't mattered in tech for a couple of decades. This is a political story, and they're always US-centric on here. Why not focus on European politics? The Brexit is far more important than anything going on the US.

Re:Why do we need US political topics?

[ShanghaiBill]

Nobody in any other country is corrupt like they are here.

This is true. No other country is corrupt in the way that America is corrupt. In other countries, corruption is illegal. Only in America are our most corrupt practices fully legal and right out in the open. Hillary didn't take under the table bribes from Wall Street bankers. Nope, they donated millions to her super-PAC and paid her over $600k in "speaking fees". This was all above board, and reported to the FEC and IRS.

Re: Why do we need US political topics?

[ArmoredDragon]

Or, you're posting to a US based website, hence it is going to focus more on events in the US, just like any other domestic website in any other country would do.

Lost, not 'denied'

[BitZtream]

He wasn't denied, he just plain lost. Theres a difference.

Denied is a sensationalist headline trying to get clicks.

Lost is the reality of a batshit crazy nut job 'running' for president.

The real story here is that he got any votes at all.

The only question though ... is WHY THE FUCK IS THIS ON SLASHDOT?

Don't care when he shits either, just for reference.

Re:Lost, not 'denied'

[mwvdlee]

LMFTFY

Lost is the reality of a not sufficiently batshit crazy nut job 'running' for president.

Re:Lost, not 'denied'

[bill_mcgonigle]

If there's such a thing as "hive mind" here, John is aligned with it very closely.

Take any of the political issues (Snowden, NDAA, DMCA, TPP, etc.) or any of the technocratic issues (copyrighting API's, backdooring NIST standards, etc.) and McAfee was the Slashdot candidate.

I see no evidence at all that Trump or Clinton are any more sane than McAfee.

I see no evidence that Obama is any more moral than McAfee.

He likes to portray the "bad boy" image, and he seems to have some wild ideas, but show me a man without an ego problem and I'll show you somebody who isn't running for POTUS.

Re:Lost, not 'denied'

[ooloorie]

As Friedman put it, "Government is the delusion in which you put unselfish and ungreedy men in charge of selfish and greedy men."

Nevertheless, even among selfish and greedy men, there are gradations of ruthlessness and incompetence.

Muderer

[110010001000]

Is that like a person being denied life by a murderer? I'm not saying that McAfee is a nutjob murderer who didn't get caught, but if he was it would be just like that.

Ted Cruz isn't libertarian

[PeeAitchPee]

He wants to deprive gays of the right to marry, and wants to make abortion illegal. These two items are massive infringements on civil liberties and about as far from libertarian ideals as one can get. People like Cruz and Santorum cater to the religious crazy wing of the Republican party and are one of the main reasons the GOP is in such disarray.

Re:Denied?

[PopeRatzo]

On the (R) side we have a crony capitalist progressive who wants to "open up libel laws" so that he can sue people he doesn't like, and on the (D) side we have a marxist criminal progressive who wants to shred the second amendment

Neither Trump nor Clinton are progressive, except in the definition you'd find on a drunken Glenn Beck's chalkboard.

Re:Denied?

[gfxguy]

Libertarian is the belief that I'm great, and fuck you. I'm goddamned glad that they have no chance to win, because if anything could be more terrifying than the current one-party system, it's some Randian libertarian seizing the reins and... who knows what they might do? Nothing sensible.

No. Despite the politically sophomoric typical slashdotter's opinion, libertarianism is about personal rights and freedoms. It's NOT objectivism. Libertarians don't believe in slavery, or subjugating people "below" them. The misconception about libertarians here is amazing... I realize a few tea partiers and "what's good for me" republicans have used the party name to misrepresent what they really are - the problem is that because you are "libertarian" on one topic doesn't make you a libertarian.

Re:Denied?

[ooloorie]

To call anybody in a mainstream US political activity marxist is a staggering misunderstanding as to what the term means.

The ignorance there is yours. The feminist and racial ideas promoted by Hillary and Sanders are rooted in a mix of progressivism and critical theory, and critical theory is simply another term for "neo-Marxism". That's not an accusation or an interpretation, that's how the people who developed this theory actually understand themselves.