You probably don’t give a great deal of thought to Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate. Maybe you should. Mitt Romney certainly is.
Romney’s political cronies in Michigan have gotten Johnson kicked off the November ballot there because he was three minutes late in filing some paperwork. With polls indicating the race for Michigan’s 16 votes is a dead heat, Romney’s camp doesn’t want to take any chances that Johnson, a former Republican who served two terms as governor of New Mexico, will siphon off any of his votes.
Romney, however, might not want to start counting his new Libertarian votes yet. Johnson’s lawyers, arguing that one absurd technicality deserves another, say they’ve found a loophole in Michigan law that will keep the Libertarian Party on the ballot if they can just find some other guy named Gary Johnson to take his place.
“And fortunately, I’ve got a pretty common name,” laughs Johnson.
There are other good reasons you might want to be giving Johnson some thought.
—He’s the only candidate who will be on the ballot in all 50 states and Washington who shows no interest in bombing Iran.
—He’s the only candidate willing to violate the politicians’ version of don’t-ask, don’t-tell and say out loud what they all know, that the war on drugs is a useless waste of money.
—And he’s the only candidate promising to cut the federal budget — actually cut it, not just slow its growth — in his first year in office.
Not symbolically, either. He plans to cut $1.4 trillion in government spending. And it won’t be as hard as you think. Start with the Pentagon, where Johnson has already made a list of cuts that amount to 43 percent of the budget.
“You know how many years that rolls back our defense spending?” Johnson asks. “All the way to 2003. That’s not the end of the world. I think we can live safely within the military security we had in 2003.”
Johnson confounds political reporters because his mix of positions doesn’t correspond to their bipolar worldview, where everybody is either a free-spending, pro-civil-liberties, dovish liberal Democrat or a skinflint, lock-’em-up, hawkish conservative Republican.
(Actually, the real world of politics doesn’t correspond to that view, either — Obama killed more people with drone attacks in his first year in office than George W. Bush did during his entire two terms. And federal spending jumped 83 percent during Bush’s presidency. But let’s put that aside for another day.)
So political reporters label Johnson an unelectable crank from the fringes and ignore him. Did you know he ran for the Republican presidential nomination earlier this year? Probably not. In the early going, he was actually ahead of Rick Santorum and tied with Herman Cain in some polls. But then CNN and other news organizations excluded him from their candidate debates, locked him out of their polls, and generally reduced him to the status of an unperson. Eventually he bolted the GOP for the Libertarians.
But Johnson is actually much closer to the mainstream of American voters than he is to the fringes. Poll after poll show growing numbers of Americans are socially liberal and fiscally conservative. “I don’t think either major party embraces those values,” says Johnson. “I’m running in the same political category as most people in this country.”
They figured that out in New Mexico, where Johnson was governor from 1995 to 2003. Though the state is overwhelmingly Democratic, Johnson won a solid victory with his platform of cutting taxes and reining in spending. And in spite of facing a legislature that was two-thirds Democratic, he delivered, vetoing 750 bills and thousands of line-item expenditures. He easily won reelection, and when he left office the state had a $1 billion budget surplus.
Jobs in New Mexico grew at a faster clip under Johnson than under any other former governor who ran for president this year — five times faster than they did in Massachusetts when Romney was governor. But Johnson quickly corrects any suggestion that he “created” jobs.
“I didn’t create a single job,” he says. “The private sector did that. But I did create an environment where the private sector could flourish. And that’s what I’ll do as president.”
He might, however, create one job. If you live in Michigan and your name is Gary Johnson, send in a resume, quick.
• Garvin is a columnist for the Miami Herald.





Comments (9)
Add commentDebates
We should be demanding that the presidential debates include candidates from the Libertarian and Green parties. Maybe some others as well.
Think how refreshing these debates would be if some of the candidates actually raised fresh ideas that were outside the well-defined corporate box?
As Alaskans we have an opportunity to vote for these fringers. Face it, Alaska is a red state, what with all of the Texans who moved here chasing oil. The state's 3 electoral votes will go to Romney. It won't matter who you vote for on the presidential ballot. So if you're not satisfied with either candidate, you're free to choose the third or fourth option - it won't matter to the result, but it might send a message if enough of us do it. And you can feel a little better that you voted your principles rather than defensively.
Latitude, we should also be
Latitude, we should also be demanding that all candidates get equal time in debates. I watched many of the Republican debates and the overwhelming majority of questions and chances to respond to questions went to Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, and the like. Ron Paul was virtually ignored, and of course Gary Johnson wasn't even allowed in.
I'm actually considering voting for Gary Johnson. Either that or writing Ron Paul in. Of course, if Romney loses (which I predict he will), establishment Republicans and their sheep will blame people like me for "letting Obama win." Guess they should have thought of that before they pre-selected a terrible candidate like Romney, then committed massive fraud and disenfranchised thousands of citizens during the primary process in order to ensure Romney's nomination.
I had always thought that I voted my principles, but in reality, I was settling for what I considered the least worst choice. Well, I'm done with that mindset, and so are a lot of other people.
So, calling for equal
So, calling for equal debates, speaking the truth about silly things like fraud and disenfranchisment, and saying I'm done with the lesser of two evils mindset gets disliked?
How about Nobody 2012? Leadership we can trust.
The Founders set up our
The Founders set up our democratic republic with two political parties. It has worked for 236 years and it's still the best system.
That's exactly why the TEA Party came about - an out of control government. Rather than start a third party they're working to reform the GOP. It's the best way.
And for the renegades throwing a tantrum because your socially liberal, isolationist candidate didn't make it on the ballot, stop it.
Can this country honestly survive four more years of this marxist-in-chief? If nothing else, think of your kids...
@Calypso: Founders and two parties?
Please provide a reference to where the Founding Fathers "Set up our Democratic Republic with two political parties". I do not see any such reference in the Constitution.
John Adams, definitely a Founding Father, was in fact against such a system:
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."
JOHN ADAMS, letter to Jonathan Jackson, Oct. 2, 1789
http://www.notable-quotes.com/p/political_parties_quotes.html
George Washington had no party affiliation, and appears to have abhorred them, based on quotes from the same source.
Thanks, Wilkins.
I was about to go a little apopletic over that particular gem.
Well Calypso, your definition
Well Calypso, your definition and my definition of "working" are different then. I also don't think reforming the GOP is the best way. The cancer has metastasized.
Enough with the renegade shtick. Refusing to lie down and accept the MSM's and GOP's lies, fraud and corruption is not throwing a tantrum. It's integrity.
Great quote!
Nice evidence to refute Calypso's untruth, wilkins