Skip to comments.Gary Johnson: finally a Libertarian who will actually help a Republican candidate
Posted on 05/01/2012 8:12:11 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
How many times have we seen a Republican lose a close race where a Libertarian candidates votes added to his/her total would have been the margin of victory? Many conservatives moan If only the Libertarian wasnt in the races, wed win.
Thats nonsense of course given that most Libertarians are basically sideways Democrats anyway. When they run their own candidates Libertarians usually take more Democrat votes than Republican votes.
Libertarians are no friends of Republicans, but this year things should be different. Former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnsons presence in this years race has the potential to be a real plus in the battle to unseat Barack Obama.
Some Democrat voters might not like Obama but would have real problems voting for a Republican. Johnson solves their problem.
His positions make him attractive to Democrats but repulsive to all but the most ardent Mitt Romney haters most of whom would likely stay home rather than vote for Johnson whom they will see as Romney-lite.
Since Johnson is pro-choice, highly thought of by the ACLU, wants to make serious cuts in Defense spending, supports Gay marriage, is for legalized marijuana and is quite soft on illegal aliens; disaffected Democrats can feel comfortable voting for him.
In doing so they can avoid voting for either a Republican or Barack Obama. A portion of rank and file Democrats of various voting blocs are not happy about having to vote for Barack Obama.
A small but growing percentage of Jewish Democrats are having second thoughts about voting for a man they have come to recognize as an enemy of Israel.
The 40% of union workers who dont want to vote for Obama, but reflexively reject supporting a Republican can vote for Johnson.
more damage to Barack Obama
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
“Libertarians are no friends of Republicans....”
Unfortunately, these days Republicans are no friends of Libertarians.
In ‘92, a lot of us thought that a guy who was pro-abort, wanted to raise the gasoline tax 50 cents per gallon, and was not exactly interested in decrerasing the scope of government would drain more votes from Clinton than George the Elder.
How wrong we were. SO MUCH of how many voters, especially independents, has to do with the projection of persona and demeanour. Ross Perot, with that General Store voice and military crew cut projected conservatism, even thugh he wasn’t conservative.
Libertarians are not “sideways Democrats.”
As a New Mexican, I actually know Gary Johnson. As in, I’ve met him personally on a number of occassions.
Now, I don’t think I’d ever vote for the man, but I do think it is not quite right to say he is pro-abortion in a federal sort of way.
He opines the classic libertarian position that abortion is a state issue and should be returned to the States — i.e., that Roe v. Wade was wrong, which would be a huge win at the federal level.
Now, when pushed as to what he thinks states should do, he thinks states should legalize abortion, which is obviously bad, but irrelevant when it comes to someone running for federal office who holds libertarians ideas.
Anyway, NOT for Johnson. Just correcting the record a tad.
I do know I won’t vote for Romney, even against Obama. Probably vote Constitution Party.
I lived in New Mexico during both of Gary Johnson’s terms as governor of that state, and I think he did a great job. He left the state with a surplus of I don’t know how many millions of dollars, which the next governor (DEMOCRAT Bill Richardson) promptly pissed away.
His nickname was Governor Veto, since he did a lot of that (the NM statehouse is infested with Democrats, so most of the bills they sent him were irresponsible).
[ He opines the classic libertarian position that abortion is a state issue and should be returned to the States i.e., that Roe v. Wade was wrong, which would be a huge win at the federal level. ]
What would you rather have?
Supreme court stamping all over states rights via Roe v. Wade.
States decide the abortion issue themselves.
I would rather have the 2nd option.
If Republicans would govern towards smaller government, less debt, less spending, and fewer regulations on personal activity, they wouldnt be losing votes to libertarians.
Most libertarians are pretty "letter of the law" when it comes to the Constitution. Roe V Wade needs to go on this aspect alone.
My personal philosophy is that if it's human, killing it is murder. Regardless if it is still in someones uterus. I've brought a couple of quasi-pro-choice libertarians around by logic alone.
As for our military playing Globo-cop and Nation building... Since when has that EVER been their mandate?
End ALL entitlement and revamp welfare... Illegals would stop coming here to scam off the system. Also a very libertarian thing to do.
Meh... Normally Coach gets it right... This time? Not so much.
You are correct... libertarians are farther to the right in the political spectrum than conservatives are... they are more constitutionally based than conservatives are....they understand that more laws are not a good thing.... they believe morality should not be regulated, as it is subjective to whoever is in power at the time.... we see the dangers with the government, as do most of the conservatives.... there is a small fragment that have no problems forcing their view of morality upon everyone else... kinda like a democrat, but from the other side of the political spectrum.....
I could not have said it better myself.
ya know... sometimes I just simply amaze myself.. :)
“I would rather have the 2nd option.”
I concur, but once you get to the state level, he’s pro-abortion.
Ironically, he’s LESS harmful as he goes up in power.
He was a CHEAP dude, which I appreciated.
Coach, or whoever is responsible for this blog, goes far out of his way to trash libertarians.
Agreed. And I’m not sure who “Coach” is, but if his blog is so great, why is he constantly posting on Free Republic?
I have long theorized that many Hollywood types get confused over the Libertarian’s view of legal drugs, not anti-abortion, etc. with LIBERals. The weak minded hollywood people want legal drug and abortions, but don’t realize they should be supporting Libertarians, not people who are really control freak Democrats who label themselves “LIBERals” and “progressives” to confuse and trick people into voting for them.
I like a lot of libertarian ideas, but I am not a libertarian -— or at least not a “purest,” so a pot-smoker like Johnson would normally be on my “no way” list of voting.
Sadly, however, between big government liberal Romney and pot-smoker Johnson, Johnson is by far the more conservative.
“Since Johnson is pro-choice, highly thought of by the ACLU, wants to make serious cuts in Defense spending, supports Gay marriage, is for legalized marijuana and is quite soft on illegal aliens”
Which is the part that doesn’t look like it came from a Democrat?
See post 11.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.