Gary Johnson: "Be Libertarian with me, just this one time"


The Libertarian Party presidential nominee makes an arresting new pitch:

Give your grades in the comments.

Reason on Gary Johnson.

NEXT: Do Americans "Need to Know" We've All But Declared War on Iran?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That was actually pretty damned good. He didn't pull any punches, used clear, unambiguous language, and took shots at both TEAMs. Well done, Gary.

    1. It's still an "us vs. them" message, which ignores the elephant in the room that "them" is "us".

      Washington Fat Cats. Taking our liberty! Let's get 'em!


      You know, with NEW guys!


      1. Well, I'm not sure I get your point. It is us vs. them. 'Cause it ain't "us" that's taking away my right to free speech, right to bear arms, right to be free from unreasonable searches and siezures, spending my and my daughter's money, future and prosperity, it's them.

        As RC Dean said so eloquently today, I'm getting the government other people deserve.

        The OLD guys certainly aren't doing anything for us, so yeah, let's try it with NEW guys once. Just once.

        That ad was great.

        1. As RC Dean said so eloquently today, I'm getting the government other people deserve.

          "Other people" is "us", is what I'm saying.

          The vast majority of commenters on this board agree with the ideals that you and RC put forth, the problem is getting "other people" to understand why these are important.

          We just had a "Hope and Change" with a NEW guy.

          I want to see a better message than we need a NEW guy.

          1. Obama wasn't a new guy, and anyone who was paying attention knew that before he was elected. A professional community organizer from Chicage will rule like a technocrat.

            I'd just like the chance to be disappointed with a libertarian president, instead of wondering what it would be like.

            Can I have my five minutes of fantasy?

            1. Not to mention that Obama didn't promise to govern in a new way. Strip away the platitudes and hype and Obama is basically Bush III or Romney MarkI.

              When you have the politics of a libertarian you really can promise something new.

            2. Then the best chance for a libertarian office holder is something like a tea party candidate.

              Which is to say, not a libertarian intellectual but a successful outsider that will have a generally conformist mindset tempered by their own experiences.

            3. No, but that's how he was sold and people believed it.

    2. Be libertarian with me, just this one time

      Episiarch actually used this same pitch with me once. But he didn't say "libertarian."

      1. Isn't it a little late for you to be posting, or did Episiarch wake you up by asking you to get him a drink?

  2. Nicely done!

    1. I was just watching "Fahrenheit 451" on TV in memory of Ray Bradbury. This had some of the same dystopian visions as the TV programs that were broadcast within the movie, but the denizens were supposed to be pleased with what they saw.

  3. I wasn't impressed with the way it started, but the "We can always vote tyranny back into office again" line is a keeper.

    That more than made up for any shortcomings.

    Thumbs up.

    1. I thought the winning line was"

      America is better that this

      He should run with it, juxtaposing that line with images of all the fucked up shit that's been done in the last decade.

    2. I had the exact same reaction Ken.

    3. I will agree with you, the modem connection sounds brought back bad memories, but it improved as you went along.

  4. That ad feels very fringe. It isn't very good because it won't be very effective.

    1. I think it's an appeal to...people on the fringe.

      He's appealing to people in the Constitution Party, the Greens, the Tea Party voters.

      1. I actually know, believe it or not, a couple of Greens who love Ron Paul. Even though they still spout leftist garbage all of the time. Weird. I am aware that we are talking about GJ here, but my point is if they like RP, they might vote for Johnson. Also, GJ can get the young voters, they love RP also. He has to go after the young voters and somehow get them motivated to actually go the polls.

        1. I actually scored 2% more in line with the Green Party than the Republican Party when I took that party affiliation test that was posted here the other day. 53% vs 51%

          1. I took that test the other day, and was in line with the Greens 53% compared to Republicans 57%. I was surprised too. (Democrats: 37%.)

        2. I know at least one person who is quite liberal and favors Gary Johnson even though she hates Ron Paul. It may help that she lives in Taos.

    2. It will scare people. All it needs is a big red eye on top of the Washington monument.

      Also, he did not explicitly mention the OWS folks but he might as well have.

  5. You've got my vote, already had it. I love the ad though, nicely done and very true. Of course the necons, socons, and leftist luddites won't see it, but keep on trying anyway. If we reach only a few of the 'disaffected and disillusioned', then it's worth the effort.

    This ad is much better than the exploding watermelon.

    Maybe if poll numbers start going up, you can even talk about the failed WOD. And watch the congress critters scream 'Bath Salts! Face eating Zombies! Why do you hate the childins Gary Johnson? Dam Libertarians, wanting freedom and individual responsibility. Only we know what is best for the sheeple! Just look how smart we are! Trillion dollar defecits? Where dat?'

    1. Uhhh, I forgot.. 'Look over there, scary terrorists!"

  6. Meh. a) The whole scary low-res/low-budget production style, plus the seemingly random shots of Johnson mouthing words you don't hear (the ad *doesn't even really identify him*) came across to me as kind of silly, and b) "This one time?" The phrase smacks of desperation (like a guy asking his girlfriend to forgive his infidelity *just this once*, and he PROMISES... etc), like admitting its a long shot in the first place. Shit, I'll vote for J whatever, probably, but my inner media-critic is No Impress.

    1. ^^this
      I love Gary Johnson, but come on.
      Gary didn't produce this video, whoever did was a hack.

      1. It would have been better if they had wistful piano music with shots of Gary with his wife and his kids, with the voiceover of some other guy talking about GJ in the third person, "Gary will take on special interests in Washington..."

        Those are my favorite kinds of ads. Why don't we see more of those?

    2. I think that the "This one time" makes an important point. The standard progressive retort to "we need smaller government" is "we've had it for 30 years and look what it brought us". That phrase takes that nonsense on directly.

  7. Seriously? That's one fucking awesome ad. That's the Gary Johnson who should have been on display for the last six or seven months. It also makes for excellent, hard-to-turn-away-from TV.

  8. Very good ad. This is going to catch a bunch of attention if Gary has the funds to broadcast it repeatedly.

  9. Am I the first to notice that "libertarian" is misspelled in the headline and the URL...?

    1. That's our new spelling. We're trying it out in a few target markets. If it goes as well as we expect, we'll be rolling it out in late October.

      1. I like it, put me down for two!

        1. The extra "A" is because we're extra-awesome!

          1. I thought it was because we were liberatarians. As in, "America, we're here to liberate your ass."


    2. I seriously misspell that word more than just about any other. Thanks.

      1. Well you misspelled "independence" a lot.

        1. You mean as in Declaration of Indepedents?

          I'm starting to prefer that spelling.

    3. Is it supposed to be: Liberty-Aryan??

  10. Damn close to a winner. Try once again, Gary. Keep it up.

  11. Good campaign ad.

    Long time Reason subscriber here
    and, in a few weeks, will be a newly minted American.

    This November I will be voting for Gary Johnson.

    1. Congratulations.

      Nothing will turn you libertarian faster than going through the citizenship process.

      Oh, I liked the ad.

      1. Thanks and aint that the truth.

        Why bother reading Kafka when you can actually live it.

      2. Just going through the permanent residence visa process made my wife one. Well, that and going through immigration in Miami a few times, and my non-stop libertarian propaganda.

      3. The process definitely was a major factor when I started calling myself a libertarian.

    2. Congrats, ubik! Sorry about that whole FATCA thing!

    3. Congratulations ubik. This is the first time I have seen you post. Post more often!

      1. Ubik: Congrats!

        Yes, do post. We need to hear more about the World of Kafka here. It's important for people to know that there are places where "socially conscious" laws have been tried out and what was the end result.

  12. Powerful ad, and says what it needs to. The only thing I didn't like was that he was dissing people in Washington and then his face kept flashing up... if people don't know who Gary is, that split imagery could be confusing (or even if they do know who he is).

    1. I thought the same thing. The images and narrative didn't tie together 100% of the time.

  13. Fuck yeah!

  14. "November 6th, 2012... a date... which will live... in infamy."

    1. Glad to see I'm not the only one who felt that way. That commercial gave me a major freedom rager.

  15. What does it say on the screen when the lighting strikes at the end? I can see 1776 and I think 1984.

    1. What LA said below. I had to keep pausing the video to see it. It's a great line, I don't know why they made it practically unreadable.

  16. I like the lightning strike message at the 2:02 mark, "1776 KICKS 1984's ASS".

  17. The key for Gary is to get the funding somehow. My friend says he needs to pull no punches and go after the Kochs, Bloomberg, Trump... all of these rich billionaires. A libertarian may not feel the need to repay campaign debts with corporate welfare (in fact, he better damn well not), but you have to think the billionaires kind of suspect they won't get tit-for-tat as well. But hey, more power to him if he can start pulling in the money.

    1. Kochs, Bloomberg, Trump...

      Yeah, all those billionaires have pretty much the same ideology: libertarinannycorporatism. WHAAAAAAAAAAAAT?

    2. My friend says he needs to pull no punches and go after the Kochs, Bloomberg, Trump... all of these rich billionaires.

      While he's at it, he could go after Soros, Buffett and the richest motherfucker in the world, Santa Claus. They're all about equally likely to chip in.

      1. That's basically what I tell him. He's usually pretty knowledgeable when it comes to politics and what's going on, but I think he's way off base here.

        To his credit though, he has said that one of Ron Paul's advisors (adviser?) needs to break rank with the mailing lists and defect to Gary Johnson's campaign. Not too sure how likely that is, but if it happens it could be very good for GJ.

        1. It's already happened: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs.....54878.html

          Beggars can't be choosers. Whether it's playing to their anti-Obama sentiment, "take more votes from Obama than Romney." Or libertarian leanings (Koch Brothers). He has to get that money.

    3. I think someone like Peter Theil might be a better choice. You'll find a lot more libertarian mindedness in tech billionaires and the only quid pro quo they're gonna expect is for the government to leave them the hell alone so they can go do what they love and create cool shit.

  18. I thought it was a terrific ad. "We will never agree on the small things" That's the honest truth. It certainly ends strong, "We can always vote tyranny back into office." Well done!

  19. I feel like I need to go take one of those Lifetime network showers after seeing this.

    1. That was an endorsement? WTF?

    2. Yeah, that's a disappointment. I wonder if he talked to his dad before making the endorsement. I hope he did.

      1. I'm sure he got his dad's blessing for it. I'm making myself believe he got enough major promises out of it to be worth it. Hopefully Romney will uphold whatever his end of the deal was. I just wish he hadn't done But on fucking Hannity.

    3. That was an endorsement? WTF?

      1. Double post, damnit

      2. On Hannity he said something like his first pick was his dad, but now that the nominating process is over he happily endorses Governor Romney.

        1. Yeah, I saw it, I feel ill. Rand was one of only a few Libertarians in Congress, and his dad is retiring. No self respecting Libertarian endorses fucking Mittens. Ugh, I really fell ill...

          1. I expect Ron Paul will give Mittens some sort of endorsement before it's all over.

            1. I hope not

          2. No self respecting Libertarian endorses fucking Mittens

            Are you implying that Tulpa has no self respect?


          3. Rand Paul still faces the reality of being a TEAM RED legislator. He has limited goodwill and has to choose where and what to fight. Here he could endorse Johnson (or conspicuously withhold his endorsement), but what would that do for him or the cause?

            Would you rather have him endorse Gary Johnson or make the votes and speeches he has been?

        2. Maybe he's just pretending to be corrupted to gain access to the Circle of the Black Thorn?

    4. God dammit. I get the whole "playing the game" thing, but this goes just too damn far.

      1. My thoughts exactly. I understand the appeal of introducing oneself at the national convention, but there are plenty of other "prominent" Republicans who probably won't make any endorsement. I would've rather he been one of them.

          1. I may have just missed it in the news, but my thoughts are that Chris Christie and Jim DeMint won't endorse him. It doesn't do their careers any good to do so. Sarah Palin also hasn't endorsed him (for whatever that's worth), although she endorsed Gingrich so that's probably worse.

            1. Sarah Palin sorta endorsed Gingrich in one State's primary. Not an overall endorsement.

            2. Um hasn't Christie been campaigning for Romney for months now? And you know that Palin and Demint will for the general. In any case Rand is playing the game. If/when he runs for president I'll decide if he's enough like his father based on his voting record. So far so good.

      2. National Presidential elections are a game, folks. Rand Paul could endorse anyone -- anyone at all -- and it wouldn't matter, since one of the Big Two would end up winning.

        Rand is playing it smart: the real fight is in the legislature and in primaries, and he knows it. Electing libertarians where they can be elected a) proves that libertarianism is a workable political movement and governing ideology, b) moderates the current god-awful trends in government, and c) will mean that in the event of a libertarian President, there will be a core of legislative support waiting for him or her. Who cares which of the two jerk-offs in the running gets the nod for Iron Throne?

        1. Yeah, Varys, Baelish, and whoever happens to be the Hand at any given moment has more real power.

    5. Some good comments in there:


      "After Wisconsin the all important Aqua Buddha endorsement arrives. Laughable. Mitt don't need no less-than-cerebral Paulsie."

      BHO Jonestown on June 7, 2012 at 10:15 PM

    6. And it's important to Rand too, of course, insofar as it means he's a lock to speak at the convention now and can introduce himself to the country in anticipation of a future run.

      THIS, hopefully.

      Remember, it was his primetime speaking slot at the 2004 DNC that "introduced" Obama to the nation, and we all know what happened 4 years later. Maybe Rand can pull the same trick at this year's RNC.

      Also, he does still need to play nice with the TEAM RED establishment if he really wants a political future. He seems to be a bit more "politically astute" than his old man. His dad was able to be a rogue within the GOP and get away with it, but if Rand wants to keep his senate seat, and someday make a serious run for the WH, he'll need to play nice at least for now.

  20. I thought it was a pretty good ad, got right to the point and reasoned with voters on why both parties are screw ups. Johnson is trying to be an ambassador for the LP this time around and increase its vote total.

    I also wish to nominate "I Used to Care" T-Shirt girl as the hottest of the T-shirt girl models that appear in ads on Reason.

    1. She looks like the kind of girl that probably wasn't attractive until high school, so she won't have the princess complex. In fact, other than "Meh" girl and maybe "I Used to Care", none of them look like the conventionally attractive models you see elsewhere. It's an interesting marketing move.

      I've always thought that one reason a lot of guys are disproportionately more interested in Asian girls is because they assume other guys don't think Asian girls are attractive, since you never see them in commercials or in mags like Cosmo. If you think the girls you're interested in are unconventionally attractive and that your tastes fit into a bit of a niche look, you figure you stand a better chance. There was an OK Cupid analysis that said something along those lines. Maybe that's the angle, I don't know.

  21. Rand Paul, you just fucked up big time. WTF?

    1. What did you expect? Sitting Senators are going to endorse the party nominee.
      Well maybe not Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller but you get the idea.

      1. I really did not expect that SIV, and I really hate it. Romney is not even a Republican, he's just another damn east cost Dem.

        1. It was a smart move on Rand's part.

          Libertarians need to fight a long march style campaign like the socialists did in the 20th century instead of looking to die in a blaze of glory.

          1. I understand that. But I still hate it. And we are so far gone towards tyranny now that we can't afford to fight that slowly. We are nearly past the tipping point that only collapse, anarchy, and lots of other ugly shit will occur long before a chance for a total rebuild. If that happens, most of us won't even live to see it.

            1. Collapse and anarchy are more likely to lead to tyranny than liberty.

              The real solution is a long incremental one. And yes, it's exhausting to even contemplate let alone execute, but it's the only realistic way forward.

              1. The real solution is a long incremental one.

                Has there ever been a long, slow drive for greater freedom? I mean, like ever in history? It seems to move in only one direction.

                1. From Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights was a pretty incremental process.

                  1. From Magna Carta to the Bill of Rights was a pretty incremental process.

                    Really? You sure there wasn't a major reset in there somewhere? Maybe a new country was founded or something like that?

                2. Sure,

                  From the Virginia colony to the declaration of independence and beyond.

                  1. What was the change from the Virginia colony to the Declaration of Independence? Did they get steadily free-er? The Declaration was more of a reboot.

    2. Yeah, I saw that too. Better to have gone DeMint and endorse no-one.

      1. DeMint abstained from endorsing anyone in the primary. I'd be shocked if he didn't endorse Romney in the general.

        1. Seriously, he isn't endorsing Romney for the primary. That shit is over.

    3. Just taking the temperature of the room, here: so are we all going to be spitting on Ron Paul, if/when he endorses Romney (in order to dislodge the current foul excrescence from the White House) as well?

      I just want to know how drastically the rules are going to be changing (again, If and When), is all.

      Seriously. WTF.

      1. I'm not upset with Rand Paul, in fact I understand the motivation. But that doesn't mean it doesn't make me sick. It's like walking in on your grandparents having sex... you get it, but you can't unsee it and you feel like puking.

      2. Ron Paul's whole gig is to be the libertarian counterpoint to the republican party's socialism-lite; to be the small government ideologue who's principles are above the party politics, as it were.

        If he stands up and pronounces that he'd vote for the worst possible republican over Gary Johnson then what the fuck is he good for?

        That being said, I'd be surprised if Ron Paul endorsed Romney.

  22. Wow.. my balls got a little tingly!!!! Makes me feel my donations to Johnson is not in vain.

  23. Good move trying to consolidate the 3rd party vote into one. Even for a loss, it might scare the two Teams into going after some of it.

    At first I was a bit irritated at Gary going Libertarian, since I thought his political capital would be better spent on a Senate run. But if anyone will attract a third party vote, I think it's him. Besides, I wouldn't wish a career in politics on someone as fine as Gary. There are much more important things in life for people like him.

    1. He's relatively young at 59 and in excellent physical condition, so after this year he could still run for Senate in New Mexico or wherever he's currently a resident. His prestige will definitely rise if he can exceed expectations in the popular vote.

      1. Do you think he's pissed off the GOP? I could see them being annoyed if they perceive him as throwing the state in the general election, though I think most people consider New Mexico blue to begin with. I hope you're right.

        And it couldn't be easy leaving Taos either. Northern New Mexico is the best stretch of the American Rockies.

        1. Do you think he's pissed off the GOP?

          I used to care, but now I just say Fuck the GOP, fuck them all to hell.

    2. Yeah, but we need him in politics and a lot more like him. Anyone brave enough to go into such a den of corruption and speak the truth is a true hero. RP started this, but it's going to take lots of RPs to really start changing things.

    3. Besides, I wouldn't wish a career in politics on someone as fine as Gary.

      Seeing him speak on the teevee I always got the same feeling. One thing he definitely ain't is a polished phony. *cough*Romney*cough*

  24. I liked the ad but I'm already going to vote for GJ.

    For a general audience I thought that it was too long and unfocused, the retro sci-fi feel (or whatever they were going for) will turn off a lot of people. The best parts were talking about building a better country and I loved the line
    "America is better than this" juxtaposed over the war image.

  25. I like it! Way to GO, Gary Johnson!

  26. OK The punchline got me. I was all "This is totally boilerplate Libertarian." then BAM! I know taglines don't win people over, but "We can always vote tyranny back into office again" is bumper worthy.

  27. I liked it, but I don't know how it will play in Peoria.

  28. 1776KICKS1984'sASS

    That is what the lightning said anyway

  29. Loved the message, not big on the visuals. Still, I feel like sending this to everyone I know.

  30. As a libertarian I personally really liked and of course the line was awesome. I do think that at the beginning of it there shouldn't have been images of Gary up when he was talking about the negatives of government. The unsynched talking was a bit weird as it flashed in and out. Overall though it is a good drum to beat, hope he can mobilize support from the spectrum. He has my vote and support.

  31. Gary Johnson cannot change the fact that America is not alone in this world.

    1. And my left nut ain't alone in my pants, but him and righty seem to get along pretty well.

    2. What does that even mean? America's not alone in the world, so we have to bomb everyone else until it is?

      1. We're going to bomb them with exploding mail-in ballots. To... bring them democracy. Take that Egypt!

      2. Gary says he doesn't want to even help build bridges in other countries. Like we can ignore world backwardness and not help them out at all.

        1. A) You know that most foreign aid goes straight to corrupt officials who dump it directly into their retirement funds? That's why poor countries are still poor despite the billions of dollars we've dumped on them over the past five decades.

          B) If those countries want development, they can work toward stabalizing their social institutions to attract foreign investment.

          C) America is one among a dozen or so developed nations. Why are we the only ones who have to feather tinpot dictators' nest eggs while pretending that we're helping people who actually need it?

          1. You make some good points with which I agree with in part if not fully, but we live in a globalized world in which our very livelihood is tied in to. Then there is the internet and video which allows us to more closely follow the events of our fellow man around the world.

            We can't pretend to not have important interests around the world, be it oil or open seas and skies for trade and travel, so on and so forth.

            We can't just ignore the world or our interests that exist the world over.

            Gary Johnson would likely have to kill some people to protect Americans, our allies, and our interests if he was the POTUS. If he is incapable of doing that, he shouldn't be POTUS.

            Rand Paul is right, people must get behind Romney now

            1. I'd like to be behind Romney. About 30 miles behind Romney.

  32. Oh, and I'm a fan of Gary Johnson's, but I'm voting for Romney in November.

    1. So you're voting for Obama in November?

      1. Well, Romney's white so he's got that going for him.


        *to the glorious liberty encrusted days of 2005

        1. Bet he has Piyush Jindal as his running mate to offset the his "whiteness".

          1. He should name Obama as his veep, that way if he died the transition would be seamless.

            1. No, because Obama would just stop Keystone again.

              1. Even if the pipeline were allowed there are a lot of property owners between Canada and the Gulf, it'd take a decade just to buy up all the property to start construction.

                1. I'm not sure that's true, but for argument's sake I'll concede your point.

                  Still doesn't matter. Obama and progressives stand in the way of economic progress and American austerity.

                  I'm not wasting a vote on Johnson so that Obama can have a second go at health care reform or do more stupid progressive shit, like block Keystone or disparage people for trying to turn a buck.

                  1. So I'm assuming you live in NV, CO, OH, VA, FL, NH, or maybe PA/WI. Otherwise you're not in any danger of changing the result with your vote.

                    1. I plan on masking myself as a Democrat and will illegally vote in all of those states. 🙂

                  2. If you want to vote for Romney because you like him that's fine, it's your right, but don't get some over-inflated sense of the magnitude of your vote.

                    If everybody voted for whom they'd actually wanted to be president the two parties wouldn't have such a stranglehold on the American political system. But if you want to get whipped up into a frenzy of TEAM identification and actually believe there is more than an iota of difference between Obama and Romney, fine go for it. But realize this, man, this country is in the shape it's in right now because we have, for generations, been ruled by the lesser of two evils.

                    1. I'd love to vote for a middle of the road third party candidate, but our imperfect system doesn't allow for third parties to make much headway unless they take over from one of the two main parties, and become one of the two parties. Like the Whig party disintegrating into the the Republican Party back in the 1850s.

                      The way to go is with how the "Tea Party" has gone which is to put up viable party candidates against the party establishment. It has successfully gotten establishment candidates defeated and/or scared the bejesus out of the party into rethinking what it means to be Republican. I can't think of a similar movement within the modern Democrat party since it is really just the populist, machine party it has always been.

                      A vote for Gary Johnson just won't have the same affect, I think. However, I think those in deep red states can probably just go ahead and vote for Johnson since it won't affect the outcome one way or the other and might remind the Republican Party there, or the Democrat Party, to pay attention to the Libertarian vote

        2. Romney will put top men in charge. That's how he differs from Obama.

      2. Hell no, I want Keystone to happen and I mean the whole shebang.

  33. I know you guys get annoyed by Jon Stewart, but this is funny:


    1. Dude, Obama totally PWND those Wisconsin TRAKTUR PULL attendin' assholes by making them vote for Walker. HA!

  34. If someone watching this didn't know what Gary Johnson looked like, there might be some major misinterpretation going on... It seems like they are identifying him as one of the "problems" like the armored police and whatnot, especially since the words aren't in sync with his lips.

    I love Gary Johnson's message, obviously. But after doing so much hard work for the Paul campaign, I can't bring myself to vote for anybody else. Plus, the Paul camp knows how to make a decent ad every once in a while.

  35. I thought it was awesome! The black and white imagery helps to sell the "We're in really, really bad shape here" and makes clear that the blame falls squarely on the shoulders Dems and Repubs.

    re: no clear shots of GJ, what does he look like?
    I think that that might actually make people a little curious, as in, "Who is this guy?" and maybe people will start YouTubing his interviews and speeches. RP's message grew in exactly that way.

    I knew BHO was "neat and clean" and Romney's just plain a handsome dude. And yet, everyone's disappointed with both of those options. Perhaps people are realizing that if you vote for a guy who looks presidential then that's what you get: a guy who looks presidential.

    I think we agree that it's time to get someone in the White House who acts presidential.

  36. An homage to "They Live!". That was awesome!

    35-55 year old SciFi fans are gonna love that! I hope somebody outside that demographic gets it. "You can always vote tyranny back in"... that's totally awesome! This ad is a winner... unfortunately I don't think many people who aren't already singing in the choir are going to be open to hearing it.

    1. I'm here to vote libertarian and chew bubblegum...and I'm all out of bubblegum.

  37. If Gary Johnson had gotten the GOP nomination I guess there wouldn't be a need for being a libertarian "just this one time"?

    1. Yeah, but then we'd be dealing with all the pigs stuck in the trees and I'd look like the guy from goatse.

      1. About the same chance as screaming on the fringes of politics has to change anything...just as I thought

  38. This is the politics version of "just the tip". Hopefully, voters are naive 17 year olds.

  39. Anyone who has listened to Robert Wenzel interview Johnson knows by now that Gary Johnson is not a libertarian. He can't even annunciate the NAP, nor does he have any understanding of Austrian economics. Is he still better than almost any other high level pol? Yes. Will I be voting for him? Still writing in Ron Paul.

    1. Splitter!

      But seriously, everyone should vote their conscience. Just realize your conscience means shit to the steamroller major political parties. If we're going to change the discussion, some uniting will evntually have to occur.

    2. You do realize that not all libertarians are members of the party or believe in the NAP right?

  40. Sometimes you just have to throw your hands up in the air and shout, Who is your daddy!


    1. I totally do. Sometimes I'll even pose it as a question.

  41. I like the ad for the most part. Of course, the real question is whether anyone outside of libertarian circles will ever see it.

    1. It's not long enough (the ad that is) to circle-jerk to.

  42. 1.) Why is the TV on its side?

    2.) Why the weird sound effects? What value do they add?

    3.) It's the economy, stupid. The only people who watch this ad and agree with most of it are likely to vote for Johnson anyway.

    Overall, if the goal is attracting D's and R's, this ad fails spectacularly.

  43. Who is moved to run for office locally by Gary?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.