Libertarian Candidate John McAfee

Not meant to bash libertarians. Just a comment on the libertarian candidate for president, John McAfee.

I dislike Glenn Beck a lot. But I was in the boonies today and the ONLY radio station I could get for a while was playing the Beck show. Beck played parts of an interview he had recently done with John McAfee, the anti-virus software guy, running for president.

The guy is a total nut job. Seriously. Listen and tell me you didn't come to the same conclusion. And he is at least a person of interest in the murder of his neighbor in Belize though he vehemently denies any involvement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiwXel5vOd8

I think the front runner is a guy named Johnson. Ex Governer from New Mexico. McAfee is running but wont win.

Having met John multiple times (both in the early 90s and recently), I can tell you he is a very smart and very passionate. He also plays the part of an eccentric very well - because he is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hound

I think the front runner is a guy named Johnson. Ex Governer from New Mexico. McAfee is running but wont win.

---

Gary Johnson is the only sane person running in the election. While I don't agree with absolutely everything, I agree a lot more with him than anyone else .

Attachment 65513

Like Dems, I think he is off the mark suggesting that ISIS will stop attacking if we just leave them alone. What we know of their indoctrination and training suggests that will never happen. I do agree with him that global interventionism is a problem for the US, however.

My mistake...I thought from the parts I heard McAfee was THE candidate...not A candidate. I guess the L party selects their candidate next week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

My mistake...I thought from the parts I heard McAfee was THE candidate...not A candidate. I guess the L party selects their candidate next week.

---

Correct, and the candidate will be Gary Johnson. The other two John McAfee and Austin Peterson are just also-rans.

Having two ex-govenors on ticket is pretty damn enticing. While I make no illusions about the Libertarians actually winning, it does send a very strong message in the absolute worst case.

In the best case, enough people voting Libertarian prevents any party from getting the majority - in which case the House of Representatives gets to pick the President.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asmo

Gary Johnson is the only sane person running in the election. While I don't agree with absolutely everything, I agree a lot more with him than anyone else .

Attachment 65513

---

This guy seems sane:

http://andy2016.com/proposals/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asmo

Correct, and the candidate will be Gary Johnson. The other two John McAfee and Austin Peterson are just also-rans.

---

This is why I don't believe that Libertarians (large L ... as in the party) ever really want to win anything. They're going to choose Gary Johnson as their candidate but Austin Peterson is the actual serious one of the bunch. I don't think even LP types take McAfee seriously.

If they'd pick Peterson I'd actually believe that they intended to build a party that would someday win instead of just being a bunch of "political hipsters". They like to vote for "a candidate you've never heard of" and getting mainstream success would cause many of them to leave the party because its not cool and elite anymore.

Oh well, I've long held that one of the biggest impediments to the implementation of libertarian ideals is the Libertarian Party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

This is why I don't believe that Libertarians (large L ... as in the party) ever really want to win anything. They're going to choose Gary Johnson as their candidate but Austin Peterson is the actual serious one of the bunch. I don't think even LP types take McAfee seriously.

---

My problem with Austin, whom a good friend of mine is very good friends with, is that he has zero executive leadership experience (his media consulting firm is rather small, consisting of himself solely) - and doesn't have damn near any concept of leading a large public services organization (let alone the entire executive branch). He is an idealist, a good speaker, and makes good twitter/facebook posts, but that does not a presidential candidate make.

My problem with Johnson (who I don't know personally nor know anyone who knows him) is that he comes off as a goofy old stoner. I don't disagree with him on the substance of issues much, but I just don't have any confidence in his ability to actually do the job ... its not like he turned New Mexico into a laissez faire, libertarian free market paradise (and frankly gave them Bill Richards ... bleh).

I suspect he's a real nice guy and a good and decent guy but I just can't take him seriously.

You have a point with Peterson not having executive experience and that would be a reason for serious Libertarians to not support him, but I think he'd be an easier sell to the general public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asmo

In the best case, enough people voting Libertarian prevents any party from getting the majority - in which case the House of Representatives gets to pick the President.

---

That is only if they get enough ELECTORAL votes. That means people not only voting Libertarian but winning states. The much more likely outcome is enough people voting Libertarian ensure Hillary wins.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asmo

My problem with Austin, whom a good friend of mine is very good friends with, is that he has zero executive leadership experience (his media consulting firm is rather small, consisting of himself solely) - and doesn't have damn near any concept of leading a large public services organization (let alone the entire executive branch). He is an idealist, a good speaker, and makes good twitter/facebook posts, but that does not a presidential candidate make.

---

Presidents who have also had zero executive leadership experience prior to assuming office include:

• Abraham Lincoln
• John F. Kennedy
• Lyndon B. Johnson
• Barack H. Obama

Presidents who had executive leadership experience prior to assuming office include:

• Ulysses S. Grant
• Theodore Roosevelt
• Ronald Reagan
• Jimmy Carter

Executive leadership experience is just one factor in the whole person and frankly I consider less important than basic honesty, Constitutional philosophy, and appreciation for our common American heritage and traditions.

I keep hearing Killary yelling how inexperienced Trump is. If experience were critical to be POTUS then the requirements would be natural born citizen, at least 35 years of age, and prior political office held. But it doesn't. It appears to me that the founding fathers knew exactly what they were doing and didn't want to promote career politicians.

I think one could make a better argument that too much previous political experience is actually a detriment.

We need to return to the idea of the "Citizen Legislator" and get away from the "Professional Political Class".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

Only if Bernie runs as an independent. It's a safe bet that moon bats are not going to defect towards a... gasp...libertarian. You might as well try to convince them to vote for pedo-bear. Hillary could win in that circumstance even with only 40-35% of the popular vote - would be quite easy.

---

Actually, quite a bit of polling is showing that ~10% of Democrats *say* they would vote for a Libertarian vs. Hillary. But that aside, Trump isn't going to win a popular election. Hillary is going to be the next President anyway* - so might as well vote your conscience.

* <tinfoilHat=on>The political machine won't let someone they don't control actually win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rucker61

This guy seems sane:

http://andy2016.com/proposals/

---

Wow! Just WOW!

Just 3 of his "proposal" in and it's clear to me that this guy is so far off his rocker as to make most patients in the looney bin look completely sane. He reminds me of this nut job (0:26 seconds in):

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

I think one could make a better argument that too much previous political experience is actually a detriment.


We need to return to the idea of the "Citizen Legislator" and get away from the "Professional Political Class".

---

Amen to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theGinsue

Wow! Just WOW!

Just 3 of his "proposal" in and it's clear to me that this guy is so far off his rocker as to make most patients in the looney bin look completely sane.

---

That guy can't be real ... he comes of as a parody of every kook conspiracy nutter on both left and right all rolled into one ... I smell onion here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rucker61

This guy seems sane:

http://andy2016.com/proposals/

---

Ho Lee Shit....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by asmo

Gary Johnson is the only sane person running in the election. While I don't agree with absolutely everything, I agree a lot more with him than anyone else .

---

Gary Johnson's anti-gun VP pick:

https://www.conservativereview.com/c...from-bill-weld

doesn't sound very libertarian to me....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Ho Lee Shit....

---

OMG!!!! I just read a couple, he's cuckoo for cocoa puffs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DenverGP

Gary Johnson's anti-gun VP pick:

https://www.conservativereview.com/c...from-bill-weld

doesn't sound very libertarian to me....

---

The (L) is trying to get more noses under their tent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DenverGP

Gary Johnson's anti-gun VP pick:

https://www.conservativereview.com/c...from-bill-weld

doesn't sound very libertarian to me....

---

Wow...well, I take back what I said about Johnson a few posts back. That makes this election even crazier than I previously thought. WTF is going on in this country?

There's a reason there are currently only two parties.