-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Daniel Larison and Mark Thompson make the case that libertarians — and, presumably, paleoconservatives — would be better off if both Ron Paul and Gary Johnson ran for president in 2012. Larison further argues that “it would largely help to have more competitors in the Republican primary defending civil liberties, arguing against unnecessary wars, and presenting an uncompromising challenge to Republican enabling of government profligacy and debt.”
Purely from the perspective of the message sent in debates, which was clearly a big part of Paul’s influence in 2008, that could be true (if they are both disciplined about focusing on these arguments rather than letting their competitors or the moderators bait them into ideological sideshows). But there is also an electoral impact to consider. If you look at the national polls, Paul is polling roughly where Pat Buchanan was before the 1996 primaries. Buchanan didn’t win the nomination but he did have a breakthrough year. Paul, whose supporters are more organized to build on any successes in the Republican primaries, may be similarly poised.
If Gary Johnson ran and Paul didn’t, he would have to build his support from scratch. And while many of us hoped he would be able to take a broadly Paulian platform a step further based on his record as governor and more mainstream image, very little in what I’ve seen of his public appearances or interviews in the last year bears this out. Johnson would be much easier to reduce to a libertarian cartoon character and, for that reason, I think he’d probably be a step back.
If Paul and Johnson both run, it will spilt the already limited Republican vote for their ideas at a time when Paul’s support might be reaching critical mass. While it may seem to be logical to just look at their combined vote totals when assessing GOP support for anti-statism or non-interventionism, a top three finish by Paul in Iowa or New Hampshire would have more impact than looking at a significant Paul-Johnson combined vote. There’s a Buchanan tie-in here too: Alan Keyes detracted from Buchanan’s presidential bid and probably cost him Iowa in 1996.
Now, Keyes didn’t keep Buchanan from finishing second behind Bob Dole in the race for the Republican nomination. Presumably, the Paul and Johnson campaigns wouldn’t be as antagonistic toward each other as the Buchanan brigades and the Keyesters were. But all other things being equal, it still seems like something worth avoiding.
View all comments (34) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/12/14/ron-paul-vs-gary-johnson
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Public Nuisances
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Elwar | 12.14.10 @ 2:54PM
Well thought out at least without the hyperbole.
I doubt that it would come down to a split in New Hampshire. Johnson and Paul both have the same goal of advancing liberty. If there was a chance for one to take the lead and go on to win, the other would certainly step down and endorse the other.
The participation of both in the debates is crucial.
Matt Collins | 12.14.10 @ 3:07PM
The best thing that can happen is that GJ gets to be in the debates with Ron, but drops out prior to the actual filing deadlines. I don't think the scheduling makes that possible though.
The Gary Johnson factor will be something that is concerning precisely because it can split or at least siphon the liberty vote. Having multiple candidates forcing the entire field to discuss the Constitution and liberty will be good for everyone. Having multiple liberty candidates to vote for will not.
Ryan| 12.14.10 @ 3:29PM
One of them needs to be in the race simply to bring to the forefront the domestic policy failures of establishment Republicans and Democrats.
I'm not a fan of Ron Paul for President - I think that he's generally wrong on foreign policy and he has some issues with the Gold standard - but he brings certain topics of conversation to the table that do need to be discussed.
Frankly, the libertarians need a pretty-faced, well-spoken person who can come across as well-liked and articulate, and lay off the pro-drug arguments. Ron Paul isn't that guy.
jomo2009| 12.14.10 @ 3:51PM
Gary Johnson recently admitted he smoked pot regularly from 2005 to 2008. You can't get more pro-drug than that.
Cpasqua| 12.17.10 @ 11:41AM
Johnson broke his Back and wanted stay away from tue dangers of pharma drugs for his recovery. This was his reasoning for use of cannabis.
C Bowen| 12.14.10 @ 4:34PM
Mr. Antle;
One angle worth considering, though I am in the Paul camp with a longer view, is the value Johnson might be able to offer, after a credible Republican debates showing, as a potential Third Party Candidate, say with, I dunno, Jesse Ventura.
To the extent I have an interest in Johnson, it would be the above-as we keep the Paul brand ready for 2016.
Mic | 12.14.10 @ 4:56PM
Gary Johnson is by far the more credible candidate with a real record of getting things done. Not to mention that several of Ron Paul's key staff from 2008 including his fund raising team of Justine Lam and Jonathan Bydlak are now working for Johnson. I would not underestimate the Johnson effort.
HenryIam| 12.14.10 @ 5:01PM
If the money people are going with Johnson ...the race is already over. Johnson beat Paul!
Clint| 12.14.10 @ 9:35PM
Wrong !
Can You Say Moneybombs ?
Sean| 12.14.10 @ 5:19PM
Those people didn't have that big of deal in Paul's fund raising.
Mic| 12.14.10 @ 6:00PM
Really Sean? Justine ran the entire online effort and Jonathan oversaw the large donor program. They were the two main people involved in the Paul fund raising program.
Sean| 12.14.10 @ 8:59PM
You really think Justine had something to do with the millions Paul collected? The campaign itself was considered incompetent at first and the grassroots did all the heavy lifting.
Henry Frank| 12.14.10 @ 4:59PM
Johnson is not as wacky as Paul, and comes off a lot more intelligent than Paul dioes. I think Gary actually understands the issues....where Paul just makes these big statements.
Red Phillips | 12.14.10 @ 5:16PM
Johnson comes off as more intelligent than the Duke Medical School grad? Really?
Occam's Tool| 12.14.10 @ 5:28PM
Sorry, Red, but to this University of Texas Medical School grad, Paul is still pathetic on foreign policy issues. I'm sure he's a fine Ob/Gyn.
Johnson helped destroy Mental Health care in New Mexico, and they are still suffering from a shortage of psychiatrists DIRECTLY attributable to him. Doesn't surprise me, since he was probably high. (I practiced in NM in 2005-2006.)
Red Phillips | 12.14.10 @ 5:58PM
Well this Emory Medical School grad thinks non-interventionism IS THE ONLY authentically conservative position on foreign policy and would be delighted to debate that case starting from first principles with you. We can do it on my blog if you are up to it.
My understanding is that NM authorized psychologist prescribing authority because there was a shortage of psychiatrists. That may have backfired by driving more psychiatrists from the state and may or may not be good policy, but the intentions were to get more services to more people. No one was setting out to destroy mental health care in the state. (BTW, the actual libertarian position would be that all meds should be available over the counter.)
Tim*| 12.14.10 @ 9:31PM
Israel FirsterBoy Tool Job doesn't like Dr.Ron Paul because Republican Congressman Paul doesn't boot lick Tool Job's Israel Firster Agenda.
Henry Frank| 12.14.10 @ 6:11PM
We are not discussing medicine we are discussing politics ...and yes Johnson sounds a lot more credible talking about the issues than does Paul. But, really the big difference between the two is this--- Johnson can talk about his accomplishments in NM where he actually made real change happen, Paul can not. Paul can only talk about what he would like to see happen... the lone vote in Congress. ....Paul can not point to the level of government accomplishments that Johnson can. One is just talking about Utopia the other can show real change.
JFGalt| 12.15.10 @ 8:11AM
Do your homework before you talk nonsense. As far as foreign policy - its simple - stop messing with the rest of the world but if you screw with us then we hit you hard ala 1st Gulf War or worse and we don't rebuild you.
Peter S.| 12.14.10 @ 5:05PM
As a past supporter of Paul. I can say I hope he does not run again. The movement needs to move forward. Ron Paul has helped the movement ---but it is time to pass the mantle. I believe that Gary Johnson is has got what it takes to win in 2012!
Red Phillips | 12.14.10 @ 5:21PM
I hope Johnson steps aside and leaves the field to Paul alone. Johnson is VERY bad on immigration, and he is pro-choice. He can not hold Paul's libertarian/hard right coalition together. Johnson could possibly build a coalition, but it would be different than Paul's coalition. (I could see "reformists" and moderates supporting Johnson.)
Stoopy| 12.14.10 @ 5:51PM
"Johnson is VERY bad on immigration". Well, I think that Johnson has a very rational plan for immigration based on temporary workers required to have documentation. Paul is in the same place as a bunch of the wacko right wingers that spew their racial stuff against Mexicans. Paul's views on immigration are not very libertarian.....but, then i never thought that Paul was a libertarian except when it suited him.
Red Phillips | 12.14.10 @ 6:52PM
Stoopy, a compelling libertarian case can be made for immigration restriction and Hoppe has made it. I'll look for a link. (I'm not a libertarian, btw. I am a paleocon.)
Immigration should be THE issue for anyone interested in limited government whether of the libertarian or conservative variety. It will be IMMPOSSIBLE to enact limited government in the future if current demographic trends continue. Current trends will relegate the GOP to perpetual minority status at the national level in a few decades. The Dems/liberals understand this intuitively and celebrate it. Why don't conservatives understand this?
Mike Hackel| 12.14.10 @ 5:56PM
I really like Gary Johnson. I have listened to both candidates and I can certainly say Gary Johnson is a lot more interesting than Ron Paul. I have always found Ron Paul to go on and on and be rather boring. He is also kind of old.
Josh M| 12.19.10 @ 8:12AM
He goes on and on? What, are you a member of the soundbite politics generation? You'd rather have catchy slogans than REAL plans? He goes on and on because he has REAL, SUBSTANTIVE ideas for change. He's not a puppet like every president since Kennedy. And look what happened to him. The fact that Paul is brave enough to stand up that kind of organized, sinister opposition is commendable.
Go back to pre school if it's boring. Leave the politics to the people with attention spans that can last more than a few seconds, and certainly longer than "yes we can."
Sally Wright| 12.14.10 @ 6:37PM
I like both of these guys and I would hate to have them both run. It would be a hard choice.
But, I think that Gary looks and acts more like a leader. He just seems a lot more charismatic than Ron. Gary is also very warm and friendly when you meet him. He is so nice. I met Romney once and that guy is a jerk.
Christine| 12.16.10 @ 4:08PM
Oh yeah, Let's vote for the pretty boy. Does not matter what he is all about, does it? Past history shows that the pretty boys are mere puppets that the special interest groups, lobbyist and banksters hold the strings to. Ron Paul is not a puppet!
The more I read and learn about Johnson and his supporters, the more I see are pretty boy puppet supporters. I want substance.
Bob K.| 12.14.10 @ 7:16PM
Neither of them can win but I guess you have to write about something.
Jeff B.| 12.14.10 @ 11:02PM
Really? Johnson's a "libertarian cartoon character"?
matt butler| 12.15.10 @ 12:29AM
Butch w/o Sundance ain't that cool. Put 'em both up there. That's twice as much firepower. Twice as much education about liberty. Twice as many opportunities to make the rest of the field look like y'day's news....which they absolutely are.
Lucy| 12.15.10 @ 11:12AM
I think anyone who is truly for the causes would stand behind either of the candidates. Even though Gary is less well known I do feel like he is a better option and has a greater mass appeal. He has a record that he can point to in order to show everything he has done. He is young and athletic and just an everyman.
Christine| 12.16.10 @ 4:11PM
Again with the pretty puppet mass appeal attitude.
Young and athletic, you believe that is why we should vote for him? Give me a break!
Christine| 12.16.10 @ 4:00PM
Keep in mind that Johnson is pro-choice.
He also seems to be open to Israel doors.
Is he willing to bend over backwards to AIPAC to get elected?
Will he put U.S. first or Israel?
To very important issues depending on what side you stand on.
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
Sloopy| 2.24.11 @ 5:19PM
Sorry Stoopy, you're name reminded me of a 50s song.
Anyways, I was a bit surprised that Mr. Antle asserts that Johnson looks cartoonish compared to Paul. With a good PR campaign against Johnson, maybe, but look at Paul's appearances. His speaking style jumps around, making decent points come off as gibberish.
Johnson knows how he comes off and how some folks in the media type him, and he kids back with them to so that.
I wouldn't be surprised if Paul's feinting a run just to get his supporters riled up so he can hand them over to Johnson. Just need to find a way to placate the social conservatives and sideline the Neo-Cons. The latter shouldn't be too hard, but the former are starting to pick up steam.
Knock out Huckabee and this is anybody's race.