Omega124
Challenging Fate
I noticed that no dedicated thread existed for Gary Johnson, but one existed for Jill Stein. I decided to rectify that, and make the case for who I personally believe is the best candidate for President of the United States.
Firstly, I stress everyone, who has the chance, to go out and watch the CNN town halls with Johnson and Weld, down below. They're long at about an hour a piece, so I'm not going to chastise you if you don't, but I think its best if you hear what Johnson and Weld believe in, in their own mouths.
Link to video.
Link to video.
With that out of the way, I'm going to list the top 5 reasons why I personally support Johnson/Weld, in descending order:
5. Experience with integrity
Johnson and Weld, unlike Trump, have experience in public office, namely being the governors of New Mexico and Massachusetts in the 90s, respectively. Weld was also the Head of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department prior to his governorship, and Johnson was a successful self-made businessman who didn't get a small loan of a million dollars from his dad, nor ever declared bankruptcy.
In both states, Johnson and Weld enjoyed supreme success in working with their state legislatures in making sound legislation to improve the quality of their states. New Mexico under Johnson saw a 10% growth to their economy every year under his first term while even raising the state's education budget, turned New Mexico's decifit into a billion dollar surplus with no tax increases whatsoever, and helped make sure relief efforts for New Mexico during one of the state's worst wildfires reached the right places with as little bureaucratic holdups as possible, saving lives and millions in property damage. By all accounts, Johnson is probably one of the top five governors in American history.
Weld, meanwhile, also helped his state by reducing the deficit while even cutting taxes. While he didn't have the same dramatic successes that Johnson did, he also didn't have as favorable of a state legislature, mainly due to his own party's opposition of Weld trying to work with Democrats for gun control laws.
Which brings me to the second part of the clause: integrity
Johnson and Weld aren't like Clinton, who changes her stance constantly as the winds of the political landscape change. Johnson was pro-legalization of weed/ending the drug war in the 90s (Weld being for medical marijuana in the 90s as well, although not calling for full legalization at that time), Weld was pro gay marriage in the 90s (with Johnson being more pro-civil unions for homosexual and heterosexual couples, thinking the state shouldn't be in the marriage business at all. That being said, he does supports the adoption of gay marriage despite that) both were pro-choice for abortions, etc. They were quite radically socially liberal for Republicans, perhaps even when compared to the Clintonist Democrats that were the face for their party at the time. They didn't hold these opinions just because it was cool, but because they sincerely believed in the principles of whatever issue was at question. And I can respect that a lot.
4. Willing to compromise
Unlike especially the modern GOP wing, Johnson and Weld are firm believers that the best way to get things done in Congress is to work with the other side. Johnson and Weld have firm principles and are willing to stand by them, but they also know how to incorporate their principles into meaningful compromises into making sure government still works.
Take guns, for instance. Johnson and Weld are firm believers in the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms. That will never change. However, they have said in the first town hall that they were open to working with Democrats, if in office, to enact gun control laws, as long as that fundamental principle was respected and the actual provisions were meaningful (not just banning safety features on guns because they look scary)
Again, the fact that Johnson and Weld were multi-term Republican governors in heavily pro-Democratic states shows how effective they were at comprimising with interests from both parities to make sure their overarching principles (cutting bloat from the government while making sure it stays effective and doesn't increase the tax burden) were enacted in both Massachusetts and New Mexico.
3. Non-Interventionalism
Foreign Policy is perhaps one of my personal biggest issues when it comes to whom to support, and Johnson and Weld are completely on point.
Both opposed the Iraq War since the beginning, and while initially supporting Afghanistan under the principle of that we were attacked, they both were against the continued occupation of the country and wanted to withdraw troops as early as six months after the campaign started with Johnson. Both were against Libya, and were also against the proposed intervention in Syria. The common arching thread in the Johnson campaign is that the best thing to do with the Middle East is simply stop wasting American dollars and lives fixing a quagmire that honestly we started in the first place. This involves also cutting off foreign aid to Israel (although maintaining a military alliance with it, abliet only for defensive conflicts), and opening up meaningful trade with Iran.
When it comes to ISIS, its a bit nuanced, but he does think that ultimately, the middle east has to solve it mostly themselves, but is not opposed to have America help them solve it if need be (but only through a legal declaration of war, with the full support of Congress).
Ultimately, ending the 30+ year quagmire America got itself since the Iranian Revolution in the Middle East would be absolutely fantastic, and that Johnson has the best, most cohesive plan to safely exit from our Middle East entanglements. I feel Clinton would just escalate it more by pushing for a regime change in Syria like she did as SoS, and Trump is too unpredictable to handle the nuances of international relations.
2. End the Surveillance State
Johnson has said that he would repeal the Patriot Act, abolish the TSA (aka, have airports provide their own security), and that he would consider pardoning Snowden, Manning, and Ross Ulbricht. This separates him greatly from Clinton and Trump, who prefer to continue to erode our civil liberties rather than curbing on the excesses of the Bush administration. As someone who has read 1984 and is extremely worried about the rise of tyranny through the surveillance state, this is a breath of fresh air to me.
1. Protect Social Liberties
I touched upon this at the end of number 5, but it bears repeating again: Johnson and Weld sincerely believe that people should be free to do whatever the hell they want. They aren't Pro-X simply because its convenient, but because they actually believe it. Beyond the typical trio of gay marriage, ending the war on drugs, and pro-choice, here are other positions that they hold that are essential rights of Americans:
No Eminent Domain for Private Corporations: only use Eminent Domain for essential public services.
End the Death Penalty
Lowering the Drinking Age to 18 (old enough to vote, old enough to drink)
Pro-Labor Unions and the right to organize (he has said his only issue with them is that they make bad employees too difficult to fire, but is otherwise completely pro-union rights)
Pro-Encryption rights, and wants to end mass datamining of American citizens without a warrant.
Honorable Mentions: While I don't necessarily agree with Johnson/Weld's entire economic platform (I consider myself a left-wing libertarian and theirs is pretty right wing), they did say they would prosecute Wall Street for the recession and hold those who were financially reckless with the economy responsible. No Golden Parachutes for breaking the law.
Also, he is against adding any federal taxes on online purchases. Great for us who buy games online
Firstly, I stress everyone, who has the chance, to go out and watch the CNN town halls with Johnson and Weld, down below. They're long at about an hour a piece, so I'm not going to chastise you if you don't, but I think its best if you hear what Johnson and Weld believe in, in their own mouths.
Link to video.
Link to video.
With that out of the way, I'm going to list the top 5 reasons why I personally support Johnson/Weld, in descending order:
5. Experience with integrity
Johnson and Weld, unlike Trump, have experience in public office, namely being the governors of New Mexico and Massachusetts in the 90s, respectively. Weld was also the Head of the Criminal Division of the Justice Department prior to his governorship, and Johnson was a successful self-made businessman who didn't get a small loan of a million dollars from his dad, nor ever declared bankruptcy.
In both states, Johnson and Weld enjoyed supreme success in working with their state legislatures in making sound legislation to improve the quality of their states. New Mexico under Johnson saw a 10% growth to their economy every year under his first term while even raising the state's education budget, turned New Mexico's decifit into a billion dollar surplus with no tax increases whatsoever, and helped make sure relief efforts for New Mexico during one of the state's worst wildfires reached the right places with as little bureaucratic holdups as possible, saving lives and millions in property damage. By all accounts, Johnson is probably one of the top five governors in American history.
Weld, meanwhile, also helped his state by reducing the deficit while even cutting taxes. While he didn't have the same dramatic successes that Johnson did, he also didn't have as favorable of a state legislature, mainly due to his own party's opposition of Weld trying to work with Democrats for gun control laws.
Which brings me to the second part of the clause: integrity
Johnson and Weld aren't like Clinton, who changes her stance constantly as the winds of the political landscape change. Johnson was pro-legalization of weed/ending the drug war in the 90s (Weld being for medical marijuana in the 90s as well, although not calling for full legalization at that time), Weld was pro gay marriage in the 90s (with Johnson being more pro-civil unions for homosexual and heterosexual couples, thinking the state shouldn't be in the marriage business at all. That being said, he does supports the adoption of gay marriage despite that) both were pro-choice for abortions, etc. They were quite radically socially liberal for Republicans, perhaps even when compared to the Clintonist Democrats that were the face for their party at the time. They didn't hold these opinions just because it was cool, but because they sincerely believed in the principles of whatever issue was at question. And I can respect that a lot.
4. Willing to compromise
Unlike especially the modern GOP wing, Johnson and Weld are firm believers that the best way to get things done in Congress is to work with the other side. Johnson and Weld have firm principles and are willing to stand by them, but they also know how to incorporate their principles into meaningful compromises into making sure government still works.
Take guns, for instance. Johnson and Weld are firm believers in the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms. That will never change. However, they have said in the first town hall that they were open to working with Democrats, if in office, to enact gun control laws, as long as that fundamental principle was respected and the actual provisions were meaningful (not just banning safety features on guns because they look scary)
Again, the fact that Johnson and Weld were multi-term Republican governors in heavily pro-Democratic states shows how effective they were at comprimising with interests from both parities to make sure their overarching principles (cutting bloat from the government while making sure it stays effective and doesn't increase the tax burden) were enacted in both Massachusetts and New Mexico.
3. Non-Interventionalism
Foreign Policy is perhaps one of my personal biggest issues when it comes to whom to support, and Johnson and Weld are completely on point.
Both opposed the Iraq War since the beginning, and while initially supporting Afghanistan under the principle of that we were attacked, they both were against the continued occupation of the country and wanted to withdraw troops as early as six months after the campaign started with Johnson. Both were against Libya, and were also against the proposed intervention in Syria. The common arching thread in the Johnson campaign is that the best thing to do with the Middle East is simply stop wasting American dollars and lives fixing a quagmire that honestly we started in the first place. This involves also cutting off foreign aid to Israel (although maintaining a military alliance with it, abliet only for defensive conflicts), and opening up meaningful trade with Iran.
When it comes to ISIS, its a bit nuanced, but he does think that ultimately, the middle east has to solve it mostly themselves, but is not opposed to have America help them solve it if need be (but only through a legal declaration of war, with the full support of Congress).
Ultimately, ending the 30+ year quagmire America got itself since the Iranian Revolution in the Middle East would be absolutely fantastic, and that Johnson has the best, most cohesive plan to safely exit from our Middle East entanglements. I feel Clinton would just escalate it more by pushing for a regime change in Syria like she did as SoS, and Trump is too unpredictable to handle the nuances of international relations.
2. End the Surveillance State
Johnson has said that he would repeal the Patriot Act, abolish the TSA (aka, have airports provide their own security), and that he would consider pardoning Snowden, Manning, and Ross Ulbricht. This separates him greatly from Clinton and Trump, who prefer to continue to erode our civil liberties rather than curbing on the excesses of the Bush administration. As someone who has read 1984 and is extremely worried about the rise of tyranny through the surveillance state, this is a breath of fresh air to me.
1. Protect Social Liberties
I touched upon this at the end of number 5, but it bears repeating again: Johnson and Weld sincerely believe that people should be free to do whatever the hell they want. They aren't Pro-X simply because its convenient, but because they actually believe it. Beyond the typical trio of gay marriage, ending the war on drugs, and pro-choice, here are other positions that they hold that are essential rights of Americans:
No Eminent Domain for Private Corporations: only use Eminent Domain for essential public services.
End the Death Penalty
Lowering the Drinking Age to 18 (old enough to vote, old enough to drink)
Pro-Labor Unions and the right to organize (he has said his only issue with them is that they make bad employees too difficult to fire, but is otherwise completely pro-union rights)
Pro-Encryption rights, and wants to end mass datamining of American citizens without a warrant.
Honorable Mentions: While I don't necessarily agree with Johnson/Weld's entire economic platform (I consider myself a left-wing libertarian and theirs is pretty right wing), they did say they would prosecute Wall Street for the recession and hold those who were financially reckless with the economy responsible. No Golden Parachutes for breaking the law.
Also, he is against adding any federal taxes on online purchases. Great for us who buy games online
