Johnson Libertarian Town Hall on CNN - Wed - Aug 3

[flacaltenn]

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

CNN doing it again. The right thing.

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

 

[tinydancer]

OK I dont get his open borders.

 

[tinydancer]

I thought first off you owe it to your fellow countrymen to make sure they were ok and then you can open the doors.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

CNN doing it again. The right thing.

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

Wait, August 1 has passed... and it wasn't a Wednesday... I'm so confused.

 

[flacaltenn]

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

CNN doing it again. The right thing.

CNN Libertarian Town Hall - CNN Video

Wait, August 1 has passed... and it wasn't a Wednesday... I'm so confused.

Good point. One alert I got had it wrong. It's TOMORROW -- the 3rd.

THANKS..

 

[flacaltenn]

I thought first off you owe it to your fellow countrymen to make sure they were ok and then you can open the doors.

You're correct. And EVERYTHING the LP stands for is literally in the Constitution. So the Feds have a primary duty to control borders and immigration. Rather than doing this here. I'm gonna move in a thread I put in politics about a month ago -- before these Candidate's forum were created.

Come back later and look for it..

 

[tinydancer]

I thought first off you owe it to your fellow countrymen to make sure they were ok and then you can open the doors.

You're correct. And EVERYTHING the LP stands for is literally in the Constitution. So the Feds have a primary duty to control borders and immigration. Rather than doing this here. I'm gonna move in a thread I put in politics about a month ago -- before these Candidate's forum were created.

Come back later and look for it..

I shall. And good show flacaltenn. Boy oh boy I have to tell you guys, thank you. This has got to be moderator hell these days.

Hang in there!

 

[flacaltenn]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

 

[Montrovant]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

While I agree that Libertarians are not just moderate middle people, do you think it might actually be a good thing for Johnson and Weld to come off as not strictly Libertarian? I feel that it might widen their appeal that they vary here and there from the usual Libertarian ideas. While I think I lean more toward Libertarian than Dem or Repub, I certainly deviate from some of the policy or ideology I've seen espoused by Libertarians. Considering no Libertarian candidate has every come even vaguely close to the presidency, perhaps it is a positive to have a LP ticket that doesn't follow all of the usual Libertarian ideas.

 

[flacaltenn]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

While I agree that Libertarians are not just moderate middle people, do you think it might actually be a good thing for Johnson and Weld to come off as not strictly Libertarian? I feel that it might widen their appeal that they vary here and there from the usual Libertarian ideas. While I think I lean more toward Libertarian than Dem or Repub, I certainly deviate from some of the policy or ideology I've seen espoused by Libertarians. Considering no Libertarian candidate has every come even vaguely close to the presidency, perhaps it is a positive to have a LP ticket that doesn't follow all of the usual Libertarian ideas.

You're correct in that "lecturing" America about pure philosophical ideas would be foolish. Even if Bernie did it or the Repubs could produce Bill Buckley , Obiwan Kenobe style in a hologram. Not what people want during this kind of sewer level contest.

But it's also a negative to "give the impression" that Libertarians are just bi-partisan squishy middle people. That's just as deadly and not true. What I'd LIKE -- is for both these dudes to get some Cato and IJ and other Libertarian think tank folks on their staff STAT...

Because HAVING a guiding set of principles that are very different from the typical Left/Right nonsense HELPS you focus on explaining what you REALLY are (or should be).. And of course, I will cut them some slack as long as they don't embarrass the party and the members. They got the important stuff right. Hope they find confidence in actually BEING Libertarian.

 

[Montrovant]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

While I agree that Libertarians are not just moderate middle people, do you think it might actually be a good thing for Johnson and Weld to come off as not strictly Libertarian? I feel that it might widen their appeal that they vary here and there from the usual Libertarian ideas. While I think I lean more toward Libertarian than Dem or Repub, I certainly deviate from some of the policy or ideology I've seen espoused by Libertarians. Considering no Libertarian candidate has every come even vaguely close to the presidency, perhaps it is a positive to have a LP ticket that doesn't follow all of the usual Libertarian ideas.

You're correct in that "lecturing" America about pure philosophical ideas would be foolish. Even if Bernie did or the Repubs could put produce Bill Buckley , Obiwan Kenobe style in a hologram. Not what people want during this kind of sewer level contest.

But it's also a negative to "give the impression" that Libertarians are just bi-partisan squishy middle people. That's just as deadly and not true. What I'd LIKE -- is for both these dudes to get some Cato and IJ and other Libertarian think tank folks on their staff STAT...

Because HAVING a guiding set of principles that are very different from the typical Left/Right nonsense HELPS you focus on explaining what you REALLY are (or should be).. And of course, I will cut them some slack as long as they don't embarrass the party and the members. They got the important stuff right. Hope they find confidence in actually BEING Libertarian.

I am happy enough with their stated positions, at least at this point. Confidence, though....I'd like them both to project a little more of that. Or maybe it isn't confidence but charisma. Johnson just seems a bit wishy-washy, which I think hurts no matter what policies he espouses. I haven't seen enough of Weld to say much about him.

As long as they have many of the core Libertarian beliefs, I think a few divergences that appeal to Dems or Repubs is a good thing, at least insofar as trying to get elected. I've seen quite a few people complain that they aren't 'real' Libertarians because of a particular position or two, and I always think, "So what?". They are a lot closer than any other presidential candidates I am aware of.

 

[flacaltenn]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

While I agree that Libertarians are not just moderate middle people, do you think it might actually be a good thing for Johnson and Weld to come off as not strictly Libertarian? I feel that it might widen their appeal that they vary here and there from the usual Libertarian ideas. While I think I lean more toward Libertarian than Dem or Repub, I certainly deviate from some of the policy or ideology I've seen espoused by Libertarians. Considering no Libertarian candidate has every come even vaguely close to the presidency, perhaps it is a positive to have a LP ticket that doesn't follow all of the usual Libertarian ideas.

You're correct in that "lecturing" America about pure philosophical ideas would be foolish. Even if Bernie did or the Repubs could put produce Bill Buckley , Obiwan Kenobe style in a hologram. Not what people want during this kind of sewer level contest.

But it's also a negative to "give the impression" that Libertarians are just bi-partisan squishy middle people. That's just as deadly and not true. What I'd LIKE -- is for both these dudes to get some Cato and IJ and other Libertarian think tank folks on their staff STAT...

Because HAVING a guiding set of principles that are very different from the typical Left/Right nonsense HELPS you focus on explaining what you REALLY are (or should be).. And of course, I will cut them some slack as long as they don't embarrass the party and the members. They got the important stuff right. Hope they find confidence in actually BEING Libertarian.

I am happy enough with their stated positions, at least at this point. Confidence, though....I'd like them both to project a little more of that. Or maybe it isn't confidence but charisma. Johnson just seems a bit wishy-washy, which I think hurts no matter what policies he espouses. I haven't seen enough of Weld to say much about him.

As long as they have many of the core Libertarian beliefs, I think a few divergences that appeal to Dems or Repubs is a good thing, at least insofar as trying to get elected. I've seen quite a few people complain that they aren't 'real' Libertarians because of a particular position or two, and I always think, "So what?". They are a lot closer than any other presidential candidates I am aware of.

You get the feeling that they ASKING to be Prez and not DEMANDING it like they are Entitled to it??

Maybe the humble manner of selling politicians as public servants will make a comeback?

 

[Montrovant]

I was a bit disappointed by the Town Hall. No total gaffs, just a lot of missed opportunities.
What I LIKED -- was the concept of these two experienced folks "sharing" the Presidency. I think that given the intense national partisanship and battling to the bottom -- America needs a "mediation team" to come in and put the parties back on their tracks. To make ISSUE discussion the topic and not hands or wives or nicknames.

Largest problem was -- the impression these 2 left -- was that Libertarians are just "moderate middle" people. This is definitely NOT the case. There are fundamental beliefs that motivate all libertarian policy and actions. And if these 2 would spend some time LEARNING the libertarian philosophies and solutions, they would be much more convincing as candidates.

For instance -- the question by the lady who was wounded in Dallas shooting about BLMatters ---

Johnson gave an EMOTIONAL response -- rather than any policy or libertarian solutions. He SHOULD HAVE relied on libertarian thought and JUMPED on items like the Ferguson report that found that the city was averaging 3 warrants and 1.5 arrests per household per year. That is CLEARLY an indication that the criminal justice system is NOT working in cities like that. From a Libertarian perspective -- it's FAILURE of govt to control crime by using fines and punishments as their PRIMARY tool. Those events disproportionately ruin the lives of the working poor and FORCE them into the system. Especially when a LOT of those warrants are WRONG, overcharged, or just a cascade of previous encounters with the law. Making the "customer service" aspect of govt better --- is the answer.

No wonder towns like Ferguson blow up.. And it's ironic that the folks who have been under the boot of a system that sucks the life out of the town economy, are the SAME FOLKS (in general) who consider BIGGER, more muscular Govt the answer. The answer really is --- That's as good as good as gets right now. Because Govt is NOT all knowing, all compassionate, and all competent. And you need a different kind of "safety net" to keep MINOR offenders from having a chain of warrants and no jobs because of contact with "the system."

While I agree that Libertarians are not just moderate middle people, do you think it might actually be a good thing for Johnson and Weld to come off as not strictly Libertarian? I feel that it might widen their appeal that they vary here and there from the usual Libertarian ideas. While I think I lean more toward Libertarian than Dem or Repub, I certainly deviate from some of the policy or ideology I've seen espoused by Libertarians. Considering no Libertarian candidate has every come even vaguely close to the presidency, perhaps it is a positive to have a LP ticket that doesn't follow all of the usual Libertarian ideas.

You're correct in that "lecturing" America about pure philosophical ideas would be foolish. Even if Bernie did or the Repubs could put produce Bill Buckley , Obiwan Kenobe style in a hologram. Not what people want during this kind of sewer level contest.

But it's also a negative to "give the impression" that Libertarians are just bi-partisan squishy middle people. That's just as deadly and not true. What I'd LIKE -- is for both these dudes to get some Cato and IJ and other Libertarian think tank folks on their staff STAT...

Because HAVING a guiding set of principles that are very different from the typical Left/Right nonsense HELPS you focus on explaining what you REALLY are (or should be).. And of course, I will cut them some slack as long as they don't embarrass the party and the members. They got the important stuff right. Hope they find confidence in actually BEING Libertarian.

I am happy enough with their stated positions, at least at this point. Confidence, though....I'd like them both to project a little more of that. Or maybe it isn't confidence but charisma. Johnson just seems a bit wishy-washy, which I think hurts no matter what policies he espouses. I haven't seen enough of Weld to say much about him.

As long as they have many of the core Libertarian beliefs, I think a few divergences that appeal to Dems or Repubs is a good thing, at least insofar as trying to get elected. I've seen quite a few people complain that they aren't 'real' Libertarians because of a particular position or two, and I always think, "So what?". They are a lot closer than any other presidential candidates I am aware of.

You get the feeling that they ASKING to be Prez and not DEMANDING it like they are Entitled to it??

Maybe the humble manner of selling politicians as public servants will make a comeback?

Hehe, that's not what I mean. Johnson doesn't really project a sense of strength or leadership. He may have good ideas, but personality is still an important factor in a presidential election.

Now, in this particular election, the major party candidates have all kinds of their own problems, including with personality, so maybe the LP can actually get some electoral votes (I'm not going to hold out hope for an actual win, much as I'd like to see it). If they could pull off a George Wallace and keep either of the major candidates from getting enough votes to be elected, leaving it up to the House to decide the president, that would be amazing. That might bring about some real change in US politics. Even just making enough noise might help get people to seriously consider third party candidates in the future.

Of course, I might have thought that would happen with Perot.

I have long been fairly disgusted with the two party lock on US politics. I happen to agree with or at least am willing to accept many Libertarian ideals, so this ticket fits for me.

 

[Montrovant]

I hadn't seen the last town hall on CNN, only the highlights, but now I've watched the entire thing.

I'll reiterate that Johnson just doesn't have a strong enough personality or charisma. Weld, for a good portion of the town hall, seemed like he would make a better presidential candidate. I don't mind Johnson being humble, but he's too quiet and hesitant in his answers. I thought he improved toward the end, though.

They definitely don't seem like 'hard-line' Libertarians. I suppose you might call them Libertarian-light. They both seem more willing to have government, federal government, involved in people's lives than I hear from libertarians. I also thought that Johnson saying they weren't isolationist, they just oppose regime change, is a bit different from many libertarians I've heard from; one of the problems I have with libertarianism is that it often does seem isolationist.

I still think that somewhat moderated ideology on their part is a positive. It might not be great to keep the Libertarian base, but I think it may allow them to appeal to more of the general population.

They seem like fairly reasonable men. They have strong pedigrees for the government jobs they have had. They need to get the 15% needed for the debates to give people more exposure to them as an option other than the crap the two major parties are trying to foist on us.