My economic and social views align with those of Gary Johnson and the Libertarian point of view. The views are both ideologically and practically sound. Where I get off of the Gary Johnson and Libertarian train is on foreign policy. I agree with the isolationist ideal and in the 1800s it was a practical and realistically achievable policy that severed the country well. But it isn’t practical or realistic in today’s world. Both WW1 and WW2 were the results of countries viewing the world from their own secular interests; both could have been avoided had the world acted as a community. The cold war resulted in millions of deaths but its toll is miniscule compared to the destruction and casualties that would have resulted from WW3 had the US not perused a policy of communist containment. I’ve listened to Gary Johnson’s positions, I’ve observed that he avoids and deflects questions on foreign policy. Those foreign policy positions he has stated are not realistic; such as depending on sanctions to deal with Iran’s nuclear ambitions or disengaging from military intervention in the Middle East. Sanctions don’t work unless you back them up with a credible threat of military force. If we militarily pull out of the Middle East, Israel will end up, with the Saudi’s help, nuking Iran; and the Saudi’s will buy themselves nuclear weapons. China will end up in a war over the south China sea with Japan, Vietnam, India, and South Korea. Pakistan and North Korea will come in on China's side. The Russians will jump in to protect India and countries such as the Ukraine, Georgia, and Chechnya will see this as an opportunity to fight back against Russia. WW3 will be well on its way. I see US world leadership and intervention as a burden on our country and will be the first to support a better approach but disengagement (isolationism) is a path to disaster.