Likely Protest Vote

Former two-term governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson is reported to be ready to bolt the GOP and seek the Libertarian Party nomination for president, which would put him on the ballot in all 50 states. Johnson recently declared his support for marriage equality.

Political consultant Roger Stone believes that Johnson could have a bigger impact than many expect, writing that “Americans are about to discover Governor Gary Johnson and his Freedom Agenda. They are going to like what they find.”

If, say, Romney were to lose to Obama by a smaller percentage than Johnson’s vote, might that be a wake-up call to the Republicans?

21 Comments for “Likely Protest Vote”

  1. posted by KipEsquire on

    Was Gore’s loss by less than the Nader vote a wake-up call to them?

    Stated differently, corpses never wake up.

    • posted by another steve on

      Was Gore’s loss by less than the Nader vote a wake-up call to them?

      Well, yes, if not right away. But after Kerry’s defeat, the Democrats did move sharply to the left with Obama and embraced much of the Naderite big government/ redistributionist agenda.

      • posted by Gowhackanoggin on

        “the Democrats moved sharply to the left”

        “big government / redistributionist agenda”

        blah blah blabbety blah

        what planet do you live on? where is the big government? where is the redistribution?

        obama passed a republican health plan. it’s newt gingrich’s and orrin hatch’s plan! bolshevismus redivivus!!!!

        as for the redistribution, where is it???? a payroll tax cut?

        please. so so tired of listening to “conservatives” talk about obama like he was anything other than the world’s biggest freaking milquetoast.

        get real.

        • posted by another steve on

          obama passed a republican health plan

          This is MSNBC nonsense. A trillion dollar plus (over 10 years) plan to subsidize health care is now a GOP plan because, what, it’s not 5, 10, or 20 trillion??? You’re the one living on some other planet

      • posted by Houndentenor on

        Please give three examples of Democrats moving to the left between 2004 and 2008. I can’t think of any.

        • posted by Jorge on

          …..

          Nope. Nancy Pelosi became House minority leader in 2002.

          I’m too lazy to look up the finer points of certain Democratic Senators’ opposition to the Iraq War. It was reactionary by then, in any case.

          Pelsoi became Speaker of the House in 2007. Remember, following the 2006 election it was widely believed that the newly-elected House (and Senate?) Democrats consisted largely of Blue Dog Democrats from the swing states.

          But that has to do with politics rather than the electorate. The fact is, Obama was further to the left than Kerry was. There was a reason behind such a candidate winning the nomination.

          Hmm, possibly, but remember the same electorate was briefly in love with Howard Dean. It could well be it was just because Obama was black, screening the fact that he was that darling loony liberal candidate.

          • posted by Jorge on

            In other words, that was why Obama was more electable than Dean.

        • posted by another steve on

          Please give three examples of Democrats moving to the left between 2004 and 2008. I can’t think of any.

          Not between 2004-08, but the agenda of the Obama administration:

          1) A trillion dollar plus (over 10 years) health care subsidies and regulation bill.

          2) The trillion dollar plus “stimulus” bill that paid back favored Democratic constituencies (most of it went to unionized featherbedding and state/local government hiring).

          3) The massive Dodd-Frank law that hugely increases government regulation (and red tape) for publicly traded companies.

          4) Using the NLRB to put in place quickie union elections that don’t give management sufficient time to mount a counter-campaign.

          5) Massive susidies for inefficient and corrupt “green” energy firms that contribute mightily to Obama and his party.

          and on and on.

          • posted by Jorge on

            Without citations by date, that list is useless. Over half of that off the top of my head comes from the Obama administration.

          • posted by Houndentenor on

            But none of those items are to the left of where the party was in 2004. The health care bill is based on Newt Gingrich’s Republican opposition plan to Hilary Clinton’s health care bill. That’s a move to the right for the party, not the left.

            The party didn’t move much after losing in 2000 and 2004. The country did.

  2. posted by Rob on

    If Ron Paul loses the nomination, how many of his supporters are going to vote for Gary Johnson?

  3. posted by Shadow Chaser on

    As a political junkie, albeit a center/left Democrat, I think Gov. Johnson has the possibility for the role of spoiler, especially in the fourth southern Rocky Mountain states (Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico and Colorado). All four have large Mormon populations (Romney voters, I suspect) as well as large numbers of Hispanic voters (Obama supporters). And all four have libertarian streaks.

    Historically, New Mexico has the closest presidential races in the nation. In 2000, New Mexico, not Florida, had the closest state race with Gore edging Bush by less than 400 votes. Four years later, Bush edged Kerry in what was the closest state contest in the presidential race that year. Should I remind you that New Mexico is Johnson’s home state? (It should be noted that New Mexico Gov. Susanna Martinez has been touted as a potential running mate for Romney)

    Arizona, it should be noted, is the home of the patron saint of libertarians: Barry Goldwater.

    All four states were part of the Sagebrush Rebellion that rocketed the rise of Ronald Reagan in the late 1970s and 1980s.

    Johnson could be a factor in the New England states of New Hampshire and Maine. It should be noted that Gore lost New Hampshire because of Nader’s place on the ballot there.

    Let the political fun and games begin… Ain’t politics fun?

    • posted by Walker on

      Hey, an intelligent comment! More like this, please.

  4. posted by Jorge on

    Well, just about any third party candidate would be an improvement over Donald Trump. But Trump may be right that the time is ripe for a strong third party candidate.

    I don’t understand what the significance of a spoiler Libertarian candidacy would be, either. It would divide the country in a very strange way, center vs. libertarian. To me an Obama victory under those circumstances would tend toward a good result: the Democratic party (and thus, the country as a whole) being more hawkish in order to present a credible alternative to the libertarians (I’m mainly going by Ron Paul’s example).

  5. posted by Lori Heine on

    The only problem, Jorge, is that hawks are not the only ones arrayed against the libertarians in the GOP. They are also besieged by social reactionary loons.

    In Ron Paul, many of them have put their eggs into a single basket. He has problems on a lot of issues. Some libertarian-leaning conservatives (like me) have trouble with his stands on things like the drug war and our conflicts in the Middle East. And as far as his attitudes toward gays are concerned, what ARE we to make of those newsletters?

  6. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    If, say, Romney were to lose to Obama by a smaller percentage than Johnson’s vote, might that be a wake-up call to the Republicans?

    I think that the assumption that the Libertarian candidate will draw votes that would otherwise go to the Republican candidate is misplaced. The Democratic Party and Republican Party platforms each, in their own way, violate core Libertarian principles. I don’t see much data suggesting that those who voted Libertarian in past presidential elections would have voted for the Republican candidate had they been forced into a binary choice.

    Similarly, I would be cautious about making the assumption that a serious candidate outside the Libertarian Party would will siphon off votes from the Republican candidate one-to-one. What modern evidence exists (1948, 1968, 1980, 1992, perhaps 1996 and 2000) doesn’t support the assumption. Third-party candidacies tend to be idiosyncratic, turning out voters motivated by single-issue or cluster-issue concerns, and data suggests that a significant number would not otherwise vote.

  7. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    And as far as his attitudes toward gays are concerned, what ARE we to make of those newsletters?

    Right-Wing News published an interesting statement from Eric Dondero that might shed some light on the issue. As with all such statements, I would be cautious about reading too much into it.

    • posted by Tom Scharbach on

      I didn’t care much for the old newsletters, but a lot of people said very stupid things about gays and lesbians during that time period. Ron Paul seems to be no exception, and given his age, I didn’t think it meant much.

      Now I’m starting to wonder. What in the world is Ron Paul doing handing over his Iowa campaign to Mike Heath, of all people? Heath is poison.

      • posted by Jim on

        I’m from Maine, so I know all about Mike Heath. Google his name and prepare to be astounded at the mischief he got involved with. I find it interesting that he’s now the chairman of AFTAH. Wasn’t Peter Labarbera the head of it? Mikey must have rubbed his hands with glee to take a look at Pete’s famed gay porn collection. Sorry, I just HAD to go there.

  8. posted by TomJefferson on

    1. I am not sure that the Libertarian Party is on ballot in all 50 States. They recently lost a ballot access case in North Dakota, granted not a major Electoral College player, but I did not think that any of the minor parties had automatic ballot access in all states.

    2. Personally, I think libertarianism is the right’s brand of communism. I seen too many folk eagerly drink the cool aid, if you if, for a philosophy that would cause plenty of problems if it was actually tried. I also do not believe that Ron Paul is a libertarian, but it is nice to see a modicum of sanity streak out of the party on gay rights.

    3. Frankly, Fred Karger is a moderate, openly gay man running as a Republican. IF I were going to make a protest vote, why not for him?

  9. posted by Tom Jefferson III on

    Also, on the newsletter issue, wasn’t this pretty much the same issue that came up last time he ran for president. I am not making light of what he said, just wondering why people are treating this like some new story.

    Back when he ran in the GOP primary in 2008 his apparent views on race and gays was made known. Again, Paul tried to squirm out of it with the 1. they do not exist. 2. i did not write them. 3. they were written by ghost. 4. huh?

Comments are closed.