Why I Am Writing In Paul And Not Voting For Johnson

Why I Am Writing In Paul And Not Voting For Johnson.

From ChrisInMaryVille’s Blog

My friend Sherrie posted regarding not voting to send a message. I read numerous replies and felt the need to input some additional thoughts I had after reading comments exalting both Ryan and Johnson. I am sharing this to simply answer a few questions asked regarding my thoughts this past week.

Great post Sherrie, whether I agree as most times or disagree as this time.

Firstly, anyone thinking Ryan is a “conservative” either gains all their information at the receiving end of a TV remote control or does not understand the meaning of the word.

Secondly, anyone thinking that Gary Johnson is a Ron Paul clone has been spoon fed a few selected videos and have not taken the time to do the homework. Johnson would not be controlled by Goldman Sachs as are Obama and Romney, but he would be manipulated by lobbyists despite his perceived adherence to the Constitution. Between Obama, Romney and Johnson there should be no doubt that Johnson would be the lesser of three evils.

Finally, what should us disenfranchised voters do? Write in Dr. Paul, choose Johnson or others running third party or just place a vote of no confidence by not voting? We are disenfranchised because unlike the sheep, we will not allow the wool to be pulled over our eyes. We see reality, and it is ugly! The disenfranchised voters can make a statement by their vote only if we come together in synergy and speak as one voice. Personally my plans are to write in Dr. Paul. Either way, we all have a voice, but unless we speak in harmony, in whatever direction that may be, our individual voices will never be heard. Should we choose to do nothing there will be nothing to hear.

I agree with just about everything Chris is saying here. All of it, in fact. Johnson is the lesser of three evils. I personally am not going to vote for Johnson. For starters, I made my decision to vote for Paul no matter what even before Johnson dropped out of the Republican race. I wouldn’t vote for Romney (or Gingrich or Santorum or Bachmann or Perry or Cain) even if Ron Paul was made his running mate. How much less should I vote for Johnson? I do like Johnson. He seems like a sincere enough guy. But he’s a utilitarian*. In my book, even if they are right on most issues, that doesn’t cut it. My conservative side isn’t all that comfortable with his stance on abortion either. Nor do I think him knowledgeable enough to appoint the right kind of people to his cabinet or the courts. Frankly, I don’t even trust most big-wig Libertarians that he listens to/reads. Boaz? Welch? Gillespie? Sorry, they’re all cut from the same cloth, which just so happens to be polyester.

Johnson has proven his ignorance on several things in many an interview. You don’t have to be a genius to get my vote, but I would like to know you at least know most of the basics. Or maybe he does know the basics. Of mainstream, utilitarian libertarianism, that is. I wish I could provide several links to these interviews, but the USB device I was using to keep track of them was lost. Maybe if I find it or feel up to doing my research all over again, I’ll post some of these links and let you decide for yourselves. It’s not that I mind those who plan on voting Johnson. But I hope they are not doing so for the same reasons Democrats are voting for Obama, to keep Romney out, and Republicans are voting for Obama, to get rid of Obama even if it means putting in his clone. Make your vote one of principle, not expedience. If you are voting for Obama, Romney, Johnson, or Paul because you actually agree with them, you have my respect, even if you don’t have my love. If you are voting for them as a merely defensive maneuver, you have my pity. And not a patronizing pity, but pity in solidarity, because your hand may have been forced.

Having said all this, I endorse anyone but Obama and Romney. Protesting the Two Party monopoly (it would be a duopoly if there was any difference between them and they weren’t tied to the same campaign contributors) is a separate issue from voting for your guy. You may not agree with Mickey Mouse. You may even hate the guy. But if you write him in out of protest, you are doing everyone a favor. Please don’t tell me that I should vote for Johnson because some states won’t recognize a write-in for Paul. If a state doesn’t respect your write-in vote, and you are prepared to do something about it, caving and voting for someone you may not agree with, just because it will “count,” is the very last thing you should do. You are simply playing their game. And don’t tell me that I should vote for Johnson because it will lead to a stronger Libertarian Party in the future, because they will receive matching funds if they receive a certain portion of the popular vote. If the Libertarian Party violates its own stated principles to advance them, where does that leave us? This is the entire history of the Republican Party and Democratic Party. Go along to get along and maybe the state will throw you a bone.

*Some say Ludwig von Mises was as well, but reading some of his work, and taking context and semantics into account, I don’t buy it. Besides, one of his main influences was Immanuel Kant.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Why I Am Writing In Paul And Not Voting For Johnson

  1. Did you vote for Ron Paul in 2008? I ask because it says in one source that I have on my blog that in Montana candidates would have to file in order to be eligible for a write-in vote. If that’s a case I don’t see how it would even be possible for you to write-in Paul in your state…Of course I wouldn’t know for sure.

    And even if you did have the ability to do so, I’m not going to say like those annoying sheep that you’re giving a vote to Obama because that’s absurd, but I do think that your vote literally wouldn’t be counted and damn sure wouldn’t be reported in the msm.

    As far as Johnson is concerned, I don’t see him as a lesser of three evils. Johnson has been my alternate choice since May 2011. He has said for months that if he thought Ron Paul was going to win he would step down and get behind Paul 100% but I think most of us deep down knew there was no chance Ron Paul was going to be allowed to be Puppet..I mean President of the United States. He’s too dangerous and..real!

    I really really hope that your write-in vote counts because the more votes against this two-party dictatorship that we’re up against is great no matter who it is for. Like you said, even Mickey Mouse but I’m just concerned that they literally won’t even count those votes in which case it’s almost no point of showing up..not unless there are other Liberty candidates to vote for at the lower levels of course.

    • I was not old enough to vote in 2008. Ron Paul was actually on the Constitution Party ticket in Louisiana and Montana last time. This time, unless Paul complies with certain write-in laws, writing in his name won’t count in most states, including Montana.

      I don’t think Paul will mount a write-in campaign, because the last thing he wants/needs to do is alienate the Libertarian Party.

      The main reason FOR ME to vote for Paul over Johnson would be because I agree with him more. But the main reason FOR ME to vote for Johnson over Paul would be because it will count more. Even in this relatively small decision (because ONE vote has no real impact and because neither one is going to win), the debate between deontological libertarianism and utilitarian libertarianism is seen. I am firmly in the former category, so writing in Paul, even at a great cost, is the dictate of my conscience. It is just possible to fulfill the ideals of both libertarian categories IF you happen to agree with Johnson more than you do Paul AND realize that a Johnson vote will have more impact, which is exactly why I support, respect, and appreciate those voting for Johnson, even while a small number of Paul supporters may feel that the Paul-turn-Johnson voters are “traitors.”

      I could be wrong, but I bet you agree with Johnson, or at least the things he emphasizes more than I do. Reading some of your tweets and things, I suspect that you are slightly more progressive than I am. And I am slightly more reactionary than you. This does not mean we have fundamental disagreements on policy issues, or even disagreements at all, it just means we put emphasis on different things. Take the issue of gay marriage. I think you support it. As do I. But it is not something I emphasize because I still find certain activities very reprehensible. That does not mean I want the state to condemn them. I fully support the right of any two (or three, or a dozen) individuals to call their relationship whatever they want to call it, so long as the state is taken out of the equation. This is merely freedom of speech and freedom of association. As a fundamentalist Christian (not the real whacky kind) it will never be “marriage” to me, but that is my personal choice, not my political agenda. Anyways, the point I am driving at is that some people, yourself included, have two good reasons to vote for Johnson over Paul, while I only have one.

      It was not my intent (or even Chris’) to say that Johnson was evil, but that just for those of us who prefer Paul no matter what, he is still a mediocre choice. But also that he is lightyears and eons and terabytes better than Romney and Obama.

      I had not heard Johnson say he would step down for Paul. I do believe you, but could you send me a source. It would be worth reading and maybe spreading around.

      Also, I agree, Paul was never going to win. There were times when I had hope. During the Iowa Caucuses, when people were talking about delegate revolts or lawyers for Ron Paul, that sort of thing. But as soon as Santorum and Gingrich dropped out, Romney was pretty much guaranteed to win. We already knew he would get more delegates than the other four, but before Santorum and Gingrich were bought off, he could have been denied the 1144 on the first ballot.

      Say Paul were to win both in August and November. He’d probably be shot in the first year for not doing the puppetmasters’ bidding. Or they would manufacture a scandal. Paul would not step down at the risk of losing all he had gained. He would take the bullet. But if they threatened his family or something along those lines, you know he would resign before committing any vile deeds.

      There are no good liberty candidates to vote for this time around. At least not on the national level. I am pretty sure there aren’t even very many libertarians running for Governor/Senator/Congressman.

      Rick Hill, the Republican who won the primary for Governor is in bed with Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. He is also known for hanging with lobbyists and voting for just about any bill sponsored by Republicans, regardless of its content. He also cheated on his wife (not a rumor). So I will be writing in one of the Republicans who lost to him in the primary. Either Bob Fanning or Ken Miller. They probably won’t count that vote. Frankly, I hope the Democrat, Steve Bullock, wins. Rick Hill even went so far, in a debate I attended, as to name-drop Ron Paul, who he called a “friend” to get applause from the few R3volutionaries in the audience. I don’t think he got any.

      Denny Rehberg, Montana’s lone Congressman, and who is running against Jon Tester for his Senate seat, and who won the Republican primary, is also a scumbag. Not the really sleazy kind. Just the ignorant, go-along to get-along kind. Voted for NDAA, Patriot Act, all sorts of bills increasing the Federal Government’s authority over Federal and state land, the Iraq and Afghanistan war, etc. So I will be writing in the man who lost to him in the primary, Dennis Teske, who I believe is affiliated with the Constitution Party but is currently a Republican. Once again, the Democrat, Jon Tester can win this one. Apart from voting for ObamaCare, his record has been about the same, sometimes worse, sometimes better than Rehberg’s.

      Steve Gaines, the man looking to fill Rehberg’s soon to be vacated seat, and who won the primary is a nice enough guy. But he, like Rehberg, and Hill, was perfectly content to sit idly by while our party chairman Will Deschamps broke his promise to give Ron Paul at least enough delegates to reflect his percentage in the primaries. 14.4% translates to at least three delegates. Paul received none. So, I will be writing in his primary challenger, a former Marine, and not more than five years older than yourself, and a self-described Paul supporter, Vincent Melkus. I don’t know who the Democrat is in this race, but if he wins, no skin off my nose.

      And speaking of Democrats winning, I have a conservative Paul-supporting friend who has half jokingly stated he is going to vote for Obama. Not only because he thinks it will just speed up the day of reckoning, but so when they come to indefinitely detain people or confiscate their weapons, he won’t be on their list of “right-wing extremists.” He is probably over-reacting, but I guess that makes some sense.

  2. I can’t bring myself to vote for Johnson either. I agree, he’s the lesser of 3 evils, but I chose to go off to the FEMA camp with a clean conscience. I will be writing in DR. PAUL.

    • What if Gary were to make an offer to Paul? Treasury Secretary, Fed Chairman, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense? Or what if Ron endorsed Johnson and urged his supporters to vote for him? Better yet, what if all these conference calls coming from Alaskans for Ron Paul pay off and Jim Gray resigns in favor of Ron Paul as the LP vice presidential candidate? These things certainly would tempt me, though at this point I’m really not sure. Voting conscience is not the lesser of any amount of evils. It is the greater of all goods in electoral politics.

      • There is supposed to be some kind of announcement tonite on Jay Leno Show. All those things you listed above would make me re-think. I have heard that Gary J. said he would step aside if Dr. Paul wants to run as Libertarian. I hope something happens on this front, and soon!

  3. Pingback: PaulJohnson2012

  4. Pingback: Why I Am Writing In Paul And Not Voting For Johnson | PaulJohnson2012

  5. She should stay in it and vote for the president. Real people know the repubs are being swayed by the racist teabags. Paul has a good idea, but the resultant people elected(repubs) would be a disaster for working folks.The banks would take your houses like in the 1890’s, women and blacks would not be able to vote. And the copper(aka, robber)-barons would be back in charge of owning(stealing)-stuff. And the ignorant south would be worse-off than they are now. There would be no subsidies the blue states are giving them.

    • For Obama? I doubt she would even consider it. If only the Republicans WERE being swayed by the Tea Partiers! All they are doing is using empty rhetoric to get the Tea Party to vote for them. The Republicans were listening to half of what the Tea Party was saying, they would at least have some credibility. But even if they did all of what the Tea Party wanted, it wouldn’t truly be enough in my opinion.

      I take it you are referring to the Long Depression (1873-1896) and the ill effects of the hastily adopted Gold Standard? The Gold Standard actually improved the overall economic situation, and this period was the best, economically that the country had ever known. Unfortunately, the implementation of the Gold Standard after so many years of fiat greenbacks made the situation of debtors even worse. This was unjust. But what bimetallists and silverites won’t tell you is that the same thing would have happened with a silver standard or a gold-silver standard, just to a lesser degree.

      In any case, no Gold Standard (see my post: https://keimh3regpeh2umeg.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/let-us-not-be-crucified-upon-a-cross-of-gold/ ) should be implemented from on high. Not only does this grant a monopoly to those who already have the most gold, but you may see a repeat of some of the goings on in the 1890s. You are correct on that count. That is why I support competition in currencies. Those whose debts are in fiat dollars won’t be forced into harder to pay off debts because they won’t be forced to use a gold standard currency. Commodity backed currencies will eventually beat out fiat currencies, but ideally at a slow enough rate that debtors in the fiat system won’t have their situation worsened. Everyone wins. No one is pitted against somebody else. Debtors, industrialists, lenders, depositors, etc. It is not a zero sum game.

      And the women and blacks statement is absurd. No one jumps all over themselves, disgustingly so, to appease women and blacks more than the Republican party. Real racists and sexists will never have a real voice in the GOP. They can’t afford to be bludgeoned by the Democratic party. Besides, it was historically the Republican party that stood for equal rights for all races and genders, at the same time that they were the party of corporatism and corruption.

      And for your information, the robber barons of today are much worse than the ones around the turn of the last century, and they are already in control. Most of the robber barons were monopolists and thugs, but at the same time, they brought many good things to this country, to all classes, races, and genders. Maybe not as good or as cheap as a more free system would have, but still faster than bureaucrats, populists, proletarian revolutionaries, or simply “nobody” could have.

      The South is full of ignorant people to be sure, but no more so than most other regions. But you are on shaky ground to label an entire region or its entire population ignorant. The patronizing collectivism inherent in your statement is in fact responsible for most of the ignorance you allude to. Do you know why the South needs subsidies? Because it STILL hasn’t recovered from the Civil War. White and black alike are still suffering from Reconstruction, and exploitation from Carpetbagging Yankees. They are both kept on the two-party plantation. They have both been utterly destroyed by the public school system, in both the segregation and integration eras.

Any thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s