MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Huge News: Rand Paul Endorses Gary Johnson for Senate

The "libertarianish" Republican becomes first major GOP figure to bypass his own party and back the Libertarian challenger to New Mexico's Democratic incumbent.

FreedomFest 2016 ||| Gary Johnson campaignGary Johnson campaignIn a surprising move that could have dramatic impact on third-party politics and Capitol Hill's balance of power, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) today endorsed Libertarian Gary Johnson for the U.S. Senate over Republican nominee Mick Rich.

"Gary Johnson is a true fiscal conservative," Paul said in his endorsement statement. "As Governor, he reduced the size of government while improving services. He cut taxes, and he set what may be a record by vetoing more than 700 unnecessary pieces of legislation.

"His leadership on issues of government overreach, protecting Americans' Fourth Amendment rights against mass surveillance, and common sense foreign policy is sorely needed in the United States Senate, for New Mexico and the nation.

"He will be an important ally and a critical independent voice."

Paul's endorsement is sure to add pressure on Mick Rich to step aside and give Johnson, the two-term former governor of the state, a clear shot at challenging what until now has been considered a safe Democratic seat. In the only poll taken since Johnson officially entered the race two weeks ago, the Libertarian was up on the Republican 21 percent to 11 percent (versus Martin Heinrich's 39), and even held a slight edge among registered Republicans.

Both Johnson and his main political adviser, Ron Nielson, told me this month in interviews that a three-way race would be difficult to win in this heavily Democratic state. So it's no surprise that today's news has the candidate stoked.

The two men haven't always been chummy. In October 2015, when announcing his intention to seek a second presidential nomination from the Libertarian Party, Johnson wrote, "Unfortunately, Rand, in his quest to have one foot in the libertarian camp and the other in the establishment Republican museum, has emerged with a vague mix of positions that is clearly not compelling. There is a price to be paid for selling out—and he is paying it."

Paul, understandably, was not thrilled:

But today's announcement could mark a watershed moment in which the Republican Party's once-ascendant, now-embattled "Liberty Movement" rump breaks ranks to make selective common cause with a competing political party that has "Libertarian" right there in the name. So who will be next to endorse? Watch this space.

UPDATE: According to the Associated Press, today is the final day for candidates to withdraw their names from the ballot. Also, Rich's campaign manager resigned last week.

Photo Credit: CNN

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.

  • Tony||

    "He doesn't sloppy suck Trump dick as much as I would like, but a couple joint trips to Moscow should convince him of the true way."

  • NoVaNick||

    Waiting for the shitterstorm from Trump and his cult

  • Microaggressor||

    What's in Moscow? Pee hookers?

  • Tony||

    And lots of beets. Put that together and now it doesn't seem so innocent huh.

  • Pizzagate Conspirator||

    > What's in Moscow? Pee hookers?

    What more do you need?

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    I'm surprised "the tape" hasn't surfaced by now. Not because I think there's any credibility to it, but because it would be so easy for a Tony with the most basic video production capabilties to cobble something together that at first glance might look genuine to anyone who really wants to believe it is, and bingo, the legions of #ItsMuellerTime #BlueWave #WaPo warriors would be reposting it so quickly that the collective clicks and smirks would cause tectonic shifts and a possibly tear the fabric of space-time.

  • Tony||

    Actually, in contrast to the president and his idiot followers, we fact check.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Unless those facts are on a private server and subsequently destroyed upon receipt of a subpoena for said facts, or said facts may have strayed from the herd and attempted to share themselves with a third party or law enforcement and found themselves with a bullet in the back of their head. No need to check those facts.

  • ||

    Actually, in contrast to the president and his idiot followers, we fact check.

    Right, under indictment.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Of course you do. How else could you dispose of them?

  • Brian||

    Exactly.

    For example: turns out Cohen and Lanny are full of shit.

  • TLBD||

    Even left-wing media are calling out CNN for that disaster.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    How would you know?

  • Fancylad||

    Mainstream gentry-left journalism is about deciding which facts to smother because they reflect badly on the DNC. Need to check/find those facts first before bringing out the pillow.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    You really never watched Fox???

    Left - Right = Zero

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    When the Right goes full on negative, does that mean you get 2xLeft?

  • David Nolan||

    They have the same value, which is why it equals zero
    That's been a libertarian meme for at least 40 years, aas companions to these two.

    Left and right are obsolete.

    The Right wants government out of your wallet and into your bedroom.
    The Left wants government out of your bedroom and into your wallet.
    ONLY libertarians DEFY government intrusion into BOTH economic and personal issues.

    Thanks for asking.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    pee hookers are pretty much available anywhere, probably just down on the corner from your house. I think hookers love humiliation games.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    so what you're really saying is "He doesn't agree with me so obviously he is an homosexual". Niiiiiice, name calling and homophobia in one sentence.

  • Rich||

    So who will be next to endorse?

    John McAfee?

  • NoVaNick||

    Bill Weld, of course. Oh wait, he will probably endorse the dem, like he did with Hillary...

  • David Nolan||

    Nobody endorsed Hillary, you fucking disgrace for a human being.

  • SIV||

    PJ O'Rourke, Matt Welch, Will Wilkinson, Bill Weld...

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    No wonder she lost.

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    lol

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    He lied.

  • David Nolan||

    (yawn)

  • Just Say'n||

    Are you retarded or just enjoy denying reality?

  • Rock Lobster||

    It's one of Hihn's socks. Like the original, he's mentally ill.

  • David Nolan||

    I note the lack of proof.
    And sneer.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Ironically, Hihn, your mental illness is the only thing for which your extensive posts have ever provided any evidence worthy of the name.

    The rest of your self-referential proof (PROOF!) is like the diatribe of a deranged homeless guy yelling at a dumpster.

  • Calidissident||

    Is Johnson going to promise to legalize whale fucking to win him over?

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    He might as well. It would be an empty gesture in New Mexico.

  • perlchpr||

    Sadly, I can assure you that we have no shortage of whales here in the Land of Entrapment.

    John would be happy, tho. :D

  • FlameCCT||

    According to the Obama EPA those damn arroyos have more than enough water for WOTUS.

  • JFree||

    Not sure how much that endorsement will really help but every little bit is a little bit.

    The challenge is going to be to get independents and undecideds interested in the race. That's the margin of difference. And I have no idea what drives those folks in New Mexico

  • NoVaNick||

    I think he has a chance, independents tend to do better in smaller states, and New Mexicans already elected him twice. If it looks like he could win, you can bet the dem machine will come into NM like a swarm of angry hornets.

  • Calidissident||

    I like Gary more than most here, but I don't think he has a shot against a Dem incumbent in this national environment. The combination of a the blue tilt of the state, incumbency, and a good national environment for the Dems will be hard to overcome.

  • Libertymike||

    What's this good national environment for the Dems of which you write?

  • Calidissident||

    The party that doesn't hold the presidency almost always gains seats in the midterms, and that appears likely to be the case this year again. It's not nearly as certain that they'll win back the House as some Democratic partisans seem to think, but it's very unlikely they don't make up some ground, which is a much better environment than 2014 or 2010 to take the last two midterms (under a Democratic president) as a comparison.

  • creech||

    Agreed. If Trump expects to pass any of his favorite legislation, he's going to have to do it before the new Congress takes its seats. 2019-2020 will be legislative gridlock.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Not this time. Trump is super popular and the Democrats are super unpopular.

  • Myshkin78||

    Trump is not popular and he has invigorated the Democrat voters bigly. I've never voted for anyone besides Republicans and Libertarians, in that order. In November I'm voting Democrat because the Trump administration requires gridlock. He's a disgrace and dangerous to the wellbeing of the nation.

  • TLBD||

    Look at the primary numbers coming out. Republicans are punching above their weight in turnout everywhere.

    Blue Wave my ass. Don't trust the pollsters.

  • FlameCCT||

    @TLBD

    I don't trust the pollsters because the Progressives have become oppressive and violent so most moderates claim to support the Democrat publicly while voting for the Republican in private.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Democrats have a near-record high in the Generic Balt (which party do you prefer?

    Trump's approval is 47%. Mueller's is 59%. Fox News poll.

    Only 29% of voters think Sessions should be replaced. Rasmusson Polling (a GOP pollster)

    A majority of voters think Mueller should complete his probe. And a plurality of Republicans.

    Congressional Republicans will dump Trump after the mid-terms, either way.
    -- If they hold the House, they don't need him, have two years to resolve any issues with the GOP base -- and get a better candidate for President.
    -- If they lose the House, they can blame him, and have two years to .... same thing.

    Trump will be prosecuted for money laundering for Russia. Don Junior has already proven that he knowingly conspired with the Russian government, in Trump Tower, to help his father's campaign. The President lied about that meeting, to hide its purpose, which makes him a co-conspirator.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Correcting typo

    Democrats have a near-record high in the Generic Baltot.

  • Calidissident||

    The Dems have outperformed in most of the special elections this year, and I don't think your claim about primary turnout everywhere is accurate.

    There might not be a "wave" in the sense that the Dems make huge gains or even take a majority. But it's highly unlikely that they don't gain seats.

    And FlameCCT's claim is baseless. There's seriously some mass of people afraid that if they tell a pollster they're voting Republican antifa is going to show up to their house and attack them?

  • CE||

    It's not a national environment, it's New Mexico. Johnson was a popular governor. Some people remember. And Johnson is pretty blue for an LPer.

  • Calidissident||

    When I say national environment I'm talking about how the overall outlook appears for Democrats. Results across states are highly correlated. If the Democrats are doing well nationally, that means there's probably also relatively high Dem turnout in New Mexico, and that's not good news for someone trying to knock off a Dem incumbent, even if they have decent appeal to Dems for an LPer or former Republican governor.

  • Last of the Shitlords||

    His senate campaign better be a lot better than his presidential campaigns.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    However GayJay won governor last time, he will will the Senate seat this time.

    Enought Democrats like him and enought Republicans like him to get those votes and the independent voters for the win.

    As someone said, the Democrat party hack hornets will swarm NM. Two reasons. Because GJ will win and the democrats know GJ will win.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    1) Libertarians have been fiscally conservative and socially liberal for nearty 50 years.
    2) So you're wildly wrong on both LP and blue.
    3) There has always been left-libertarians (not him)
    4) Right-libertarians come in from the right, support both fiscal and personal issues, but fiscal issues remains their passion
    5) Left-libertarians come in from the left, and personal issues remain their passion.

    Left and right are obsolete, for nearly 50 years, and are now less that 40% of voters, combined.

  • Presskh||

    I don't know AZ politics, Calidissident, but if what you say is true, then Johnson and the Republican nominee will steal votes from each other, assuring a Democrat victory.

  • Presskh||

    Sorry, I meant New Mexico politics.

  • FlameCCT||

    NM politics is "strange". Johnson would pull more votes from the Progressive Dem Heinrich than from the Republican.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Only left-libertarians pull more votes from the left. which is not Gary.

  • Calidissident||

    What I'm saying is that I think Heinrich would win a 2 or 3 way race no matter what in this environment.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Not against GayJay.

  • H. Farnham||

    I dunno, I think this is pretty big for GJ. Any mainstream political endorsements he can get add legitimacy (something that's hard to come by for the LP) to his campaign. Still probably has slightly better than a snowball's chance in the New Mexico desert though.

  • Eddy||

    So you're saying that climate change may help?

  • Restoras||

    Doesn't it help everything?

  • H. Farnham||

    Probably, everyone knows Johnson is a puppet of the Kochtopus network, and the Kochs are what's driving climate change... it all adds up.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Don't laugh. The Kochs are (unpronounceable)-forming the earth, so that the climate will be more amenable to their hideous, multi-tentacled true forms, which they will reveal at the Republican convention at the end of Trump's second term. The world will then watch in horror as the alien shuttles begin descending from the Koch mothership to enslave the human race with free market economics and individual liberty.

  • H. Farnham||

    I knew there had to be another reason behind the Space Force. We've only seen the tip of the iceberg in the Trump-Koch rivalry.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Curse Trump and his damned multi-dimensional chess! He'll ruin everything!

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    No icebergs in a post Koch world. The correct phrase is 'tip of the tentacle'.

  • Inigo Montoya||

    " to enslave the human race with free market economics and individual liberty.

    I knew it! Those libertarians really are secretly plotting to take over and then leave everyone alone!

  • Rock Lobster||

    Homer Simpson, militant libertarian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amWu-idEw-w

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Hehe

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    their hideous, multi-tentacled true forms

    As a boy I dreamed of being a baseball...

  • tlapp||

    It only has a slim chance if the republican drops out. He should other than those that vote R not matter what it doesn't appear he has much support. Johnson has a late start but was very good for the state as Governor.

  • FlameCCT||

    Don't forget that NM is "high" desert so snowballs often have a chance. Hell, we would go skiing in the Sandias in the morning then go golfing in the afternoon.

  • Sometimes a Great Notion||

    I don't see the endorsement in and of itself pushing the scales , but what it can do is get Johnson in the news cycle for something other then Aleppo.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    It will get libertarianish Republicans in NM to vote for GJ. The republicanwont win, sothis is a wayto make the democratlose and GJ might vote with The GOP sometimes.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    the only times new mexicans vote for R is when someone has a lot of personal gravitas, otherwise they always go for the D

  • Just Say'n||

    Maybe selling out more principle will bring more independent voters? Gary's really good at that so I have hope.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    new mexico will generally vote for anyone with a D beside their name, so he's kind of playing it smart here rather than running as an independent.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Paul's endorsement is sure to add pressure on Mick Rich to step aside...

    NO SPOILERS

  • Aloysious||

    One of my tomatoes just spoiled. I am not happy.

  • jcw||

    I'm not exactly sure that this is "Huge News," but, ya know, whatever floats your boat

  • CE||

    A sitting Republican US Senator endorses a Libertarian gubernatorial candidate? When was the last time that happened? I'd say if it's entirely new, it's "news".

  • Cloudbuster||

    "Huge news" ... "Nobody outside of Reason notices or cares."

  • Pizzagate Conspirator||

    Libertarian moment.

  • BYODB||

    Well, one might think that New Mexicans might notice. And, in particular, they are the only one's who actually matter in this race. Presumably, he has a lot of name recognition in the state which frankly is probably about all the electorate really know or care about. That said, they might scratch their heads at the lack of a (D) and judge based on that instead.

  • DRM||

    Well, they voted for Johnson-with-an(R) twice for governor, and NM currently has an (R) governor; it's hardly a lockstep blue state.

    And it's the state where Johnson-with-an-(L) got the largest percentage of the vote for President in both 2012 (3.55%) and 2016 (9.34%).

  • SIV||

    That's pretty piss poor for a "favorite son" .

  • Myshkin78||

    Well, NM fell for the Trump BS. Several states did. But NM does trust Johnson.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    Lies, Clinton won in NM in the prez race.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    gotta start somewhere.

  • LynchPin1477||

    Republicans would be better off with Johnson in a two way race against the Democrat. That makes it more likely that the seat won't go to the Democrats than if the the Republican stays in the race. And Johnson will side with Republicans more often than the Democrat will.

  • LynchPin1477||

    In other words, the seat is already lost to Republicans. The only question is whether they are willing to hand it to Democrats for the sake of the duopoly or if they would rather give a potentially friendly third party candidate a chance.

    Their decision will say a lot about what they truly value - especially in an election year as close and important as this one.

  • Libertymike||

    Don't count on the likes of the widow McCain or her late evildoing husband's scrotum sucker, lay down Lindsay supporting Gay Jay.

  • H. Farnham||

    "The only question is whether they are willing to hand it to Democrats for the sake of the duopoly"

    Yes. In the long run, the Republicans probably have a lot more to lose than the Democrats do if the LP gains legitimacy and momentum.

  • FlameCCT||

    I would suggest that the Dems have a lot more to lose than the Reps do if the LP gains legitimacy. Progressives have suppressed the Liberals within the Democratic Party so all the previous Liberal and moderate Dems would be more apt to move to the Libertarians whereas the GOP Progressives have attempted to suppress the Conservatives but it hasn't worked as well for them as their Dem tovarisch.

    IMO there is little difference between Progressive Dems and Progressive Reps; both want government controlled Progressive Plantations (Marxist Utopias). I would suggest the Libertarian Party take care as they are already seeing the movement Progressives trying to do the same to them.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    We draw equally from both sides --- overall. Different candidates draw from different sides, because we are neither right nor left.

    Libertarian Party take care as they are already seeing the movement Progressives trying to do the same to them.

    The extreme so-cons have been far more effective at perverting our values. The Ron Paul block, which brings the alt-right..

  • Rock Lobster||

    I can almost see Mitch McConnell as he rubs his hands together, smiles his toothless turtle smile, and chortles softly to himself as he plots GJ's demise.

  • Horny Lizard||

    Gross

  • Rock Lobster||

    Now that you mention it, yes. It is.

  • Sometimes a Great Notion||

    Also from a Republican Party point of view if the race gets close the Dems will be forced to spend in a race that a month ago they felt they had in the bag which diverts capital from other priorities (like protecting their own servers).

  • Hank Phillips||

    God's Own Prohibitionists truly value another Force Amendment to overturn the 1973 Supreme Court decision based on the 1972 Libertarian Party population plank enforcing the individual rights of women. Republicans have whined over that in their platform for 40 years, even after the Prohibition Party gave it up. Reality and Republicans don't mix.

  • Libertymike||

    One undeniably good thing about Rand's endorsement is that it constitutes a fork in the eye of the deceased evil one, the "war hero" who killed untold numbers of Vietnamese and who never met an intervention he didn't like.

  • BYODB||

    I guess you didn't get the memo. Now that McCain is dead, the left has turned up the love-dial to 11 on his legacy. I suppose this is in line with 'no good Republican except a dead Republican' mantra that you'll hear plenty of people espouse.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Good 'ol bi-partisan John McCain! In true statesmanlike fashion, he could always get the Democrats to climb aboard the war wagon (until five minutes after the shooting started, anyway).

  • Wise Old Fool||

    Well compared to current Trumpster Party republicans he was bipartisan. Everything in politics is relative, especially morals.

  • CE||

    The Dems always loved McCain, particularly when he agreed with them.

  • CE||

    Is that why he wore the eye patch on Battlestar Gallactica?

  • LeaveTrumpAloneLiberal-tarian||

    Guys, maybe you can answer this question. How does he do it?

    I'm referring of course to President Trump magnificent stewardship and his ability to grow the economy at the rate Obama grew it by passing a half-trillion dollar tax cut that will only increase the federal debt by 8 trillion dollars or so. Whew... i'm Getting a little light-headed and, ok, a little aroused at Trump's beneficence, class, and fantastic leadership.

  • Just Say'n||

    You have to work on your parody, Cathy

  • FlameCCT||

    Is that what that was, parody?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    It's actually satire.

    And Trump has fucked the debt far worse than stated here -- $10 trillion vs $9.3 trillion by Obama AFTER 8 years (8-year forecast vs 8-year actual)

    Obama took office in the 2nd worst recession since the 1930s,
    and left Trump with the longest recovery EVER for a sitting President. So why the massive dent. when he campaigned on paying it off entirely in 8 years. He's so far $10 Trillion in the wrong direction.

  • BYODB||


    Paul's endorsement is sure to add pressure on Mick Rich to step aside and give Johnson, the two-term former governor of the state, a clear shot at challenging what until now has been considered a safe Democratic seat.


    I'm not going to hold my breath.

  • DataDriven||

    Endorsement from a sitting senator always helps third party candidates, who have to escape the "wacko" label.
    I'm glad two libertarians could actually set aside personal squabbles and unite. Seems rare these days.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Liberarians are about as amenable to political cooperation as cats are to car rides.

  • Robert||

    How could a the recent governor get the "wacko" label?

  • FlameCCT||

    I would suggest looking at what Johnson was doing toward the end of his time as Governor.

  • John Galt Jr||

    Why not tell us?

  • JWatts||

    This seems like an all around good move. But after John Kasich being a dick during the Republican primary and refusing to drop out, I won't hold my breath with respect to Mick Rich.

  • SIV||

    Rich says his internal "likely voter" polling has him at 34%.

  • Rock Lobster||

    John "Paddle-Hands" Kasich—the Willy Loman of the Republican Party.

  • FlameCCT||

    In the words of that famous philosopher, Forrest Gump:
    Progressive is as Progressive does!

    The Progressive GOP establishment was so caught up with stopping Cruz that they preferred Trump because they knew that Trump couldn't beat HRC.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    If you say Kasich is a progressive, you're profoundly ignorant of his Congressional leadership role in the 1990s -- to cut BOTH taxes and spending (gasp), and get a NEAR surplus

  • JWatts||

    No Kasich in't a progressive. He is, however, a self indulgent idiot. His insistence on staying in the primary, greatly increased Trump's chance of winning it.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Hardly. Having so many was the only reason Trump got the nomination, with 37% of the primary votes -- roughly the same as Birthers in the GOP. So it's hard to blame any single one. Kasich was clearly the most qualified, would have had the best chance in the general, and he's a unifier, like Reagan was. And Clinton.

  • Echospinner||

    Libertarians can't even get the libertarian vote.

  • CE||

    In fairness to Johnson-Weld, they didn't really pursue it.

  • Just Say'n||

    Stossel, is that you?

  • John Galt Jr||

    In fairness to Johnson-Weld, they didn't really pursue it.

    In fairness to Johnson/Weld they were crippled by the useless libertarian establishment (Cato, Mercatus, Reason ) Do the math.

    Voters were open to even radical change.
    They were the only qualified candidates on the ballot.
    Against THE two most distrusted candidates in the history of polling.
    .... But NONE of the change voters were so eager for

    Trump was the only one offering change. His MAGA was Reagan's "shining city on a hill." Obama's "hope and change." FDR's "A New deal" (in depression and from a best-selling book)

    Stupid as hell, but the only change.

    Johnson/Weld were sabotaged by the crazy notion that the purpose of campaigns is to "promote libertarian ideas" -- as slogans and soundbites, not as policy solutions. They did not describe a single way to do anything better. Not on taxes. Not health care. No governance reforms, Nothing. On anything, That's what think tanks do. Ours are totally worthless.

    60% of voters are libertarian, fiscally conservatives and socially liberal. Bjut all they ever had on that was, "So are we!" For any libertarian who was here when we meant something, it was embarrassing to watch.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Libertarians can't even get the libertarian vote.

    Bingo!
    Libertarian values are expressed by over 60% of voters. By the libertarian label is rejected by 91% of those libertarians!

    Too much crazy theory and ivory tower bullshit, And "libertopia" is almost he exact opposite of a free society.
    The libertarian establishment doesn't give a shit, and voters can see it clearly.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    A 'dramatic impact on the balance of power?'

    Johnson and Rich are contending for second place. Johnson has better ideas than does Rich, so I hope Johnson finishes second and Rich third.

  • David Nolan||

    This will REALLY piss off the anti-Johnson goobers, with all their crazy bullshit.
    I LOVE IT!

  • Champion||

    The Senator from New Mexico's name is Heinrich. "(versus Heidrich's 39)"

  • mysmartstuffs||

    Jesus Christ, Gary... go away. You're not helping.

  • Just Say'n||

    Rand Paul is obviously classy enough to endorse Gary. Too bad the people around Gary are pieces of shit who will still trash Rand and his father

  • David Nolan||

    Libertarians defend libertarianism. For a half-century now. For which we have been hated by authoritarians, both left and right

    No libertarian would ever brag of sponsoring a bill that would have forbidden SCOTUS to even hear any challenges to DOMA. Homosexuals would be the first group not allowed to defend their constitutional rights since ,... slavery ... in express violation of the 9th and 14th Amendments.

    Libertarians don't drop our pants, squat and shit on the Bill of Rights,
    Like denying the 9th Amendment, as a strict limitation on the 10th, a practice tracing to the KKK and southern racists.

    Any questions?

  • FlameCCT||

    "Any questions?"

    Does it hurt being this ignorant Davey?
    Or just normal for a Progressive serf?

  • John Galt Jr||

    Why do you defend denying homsexuals the defense of their constitutional rights -- in violation of the 9th and 14th Amendments .... the first people denied constitutional protectection since slaves?

    Or ,.. why do you presume libertarians support so blatant an abuse of Equal, Unalienable and/or God-given Rights? And those two Amendments?

    2) What gives you the idea that progressives are fiscally conservative? I'd never heard that before. Is Bernie Sanders a fiscal conservative? Elizabeth Warren? FDR?

  • Wise Old Fool||

    It's pointless to argue with people who think name-calling is valid rebuttal during debate.

  • John Galt Jr||

    Your handle is quite accurate! That's a passion issue for me, so it was more a reason to restate it as questions, than a debate. I usually ignore the cyber-bullies here, and that one can even be a stalker (punitive).

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think they should change the name of the state. It may be giving people in Mexico the wrong idea.

    You don't want them thinking that the new Mexico.

    They should change the name of the state to "Old America".

  • Conchfritters||

    I'm still waiting for East Virginia.

  • Anastasia Beaverhausen||

    I was gonna say "It's about damn time Rand Paul do *something* libertarian", but then again, it's Gary Johnson.

  • Uncle Adolf's Gas and Grill||

    Well, it's not like it's costing him anything. It shores up his libertarian creds, and Johnson and the Republican are going to get buried together, anyway. It's not like Johnson will be around to embarrass him.

  • TLBD||

    Rand Paul will do more for liberty before he eats breakfast tomorrow morning than you have done in your entire life.

  • John Galt Jr||

    The Christian Taliban is not liberty.
    The exact opposite, And so far he's done nothing at all for liberty. Talk. is not do.

  • Rock Lobster||

    "Talk. is not do."

    But some talk is doo-doo. And you paint your bathroom walls with it, don't you, Hihn?

  • John Galt Jr||

    The Christian Taliban is not liberty. It's the exact opposite. And so are you/

    Tell readers why you supported the moral atrocity of a bill that would have forbidden SCOTUS to even consider any challenges to DOMA. Why would you deny homosexuals Equal, Unalienable and/or God-given Rights .. in violation of the 9th and 14th Amendment ... and homsexuals would be the first people deny defense of constitutional rights sine slavery? That's NOT the opposite of liberty!

    Tell us also why you believe marriage EQUALITY is a grave threat to America, so we should hold religious tent revivals nationwide? How is THAT liberty?

    What's a Hihn, and why do you defend the Christian Taliban over individual liberty, the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment.?

    Do NOT even dream of debating liberty with me, or with any seasoned libertarian.
    Stay with Breitbart and Infowars.

  • Rock Lobster||

    Hihn, you're a mentally ill leftist who thinks he's a libertarian. Your entire comment is a hallucinatory argument with a strawman.

  • Wise Old Fool||

    so instead of debating you fall back on insults and say someone else is making a strawman. Niiiiicccceeee

  • John Galt Jr||

    Libertarians have been fiscally conservative and socially liberal for 50 years. The authoritarian right and let can't cope with that. So In understand why you'd assume (falsely) that I'm a progressive, because I oppose the extreme socons.

    Here;s how it works

    The Authoritarian Right wants government out of your wallet and into your bedroom.
    The Authoritarian Left wants government out of your bedroom and into your wallet.
    ONLY libertarians DEFY government intrusion into BOTH economic and personal issues.

    Democrats borrow trillions to provide free stuff.
    Republicans and faux libertarians borrow trillions to provide free tax cuts.
    Libertarians know CUT SPENDING is the only way to shrink government. (Grade-school arithmetic, duh!)

    A growing majority of Americans agree, and now SELF-define as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Left and right are now less than 40% of Americans combined and shrinking

    Thanks for giving me the opportunity to explain that, for the 80-90% of readers here who never comment. I've been proselytizing liberty for many decades, and enjoy every opportunity.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Great. We need girl-bullying antichoice Republicans to endorse our candidates? Who next? Kim Jong Un? Mark David Chapman? John Hinkley Jr? Robert Dear?

  • Rock Lobster||

    Shout your abortion, Hank! The sooner, the better.

  • John Galt Jr||

    He's not as crazy as his dad, which is not saying much.

  • RoninX||

    Good for Rand.

    I'm pleasantly surprised, given all of his recent Trump-adoration. Maybe the Rand Paul whose campaigns I donated to is actually still in there.

  • TLBD||

    Rand Paul is pragmatic. Some think that makes him unprincipled, yet it has enabled him to do more for liberty than any other politician, and by a long shot.

    Rand Paul's principle is increasing liberty every chance he gets, which, in my eyes, makes him far more libertarian than almost anyone here, and certainly more libertarian than Reason.

  • John Galt Jr||

    Name one thing he;s actually done for liberty.
    The phony threatened threatened to shut down the government over a spending bill, claiming he cared about the debt. Then he voted for tax cuts that are twice as bad on the debt.

    His cult says, "He's letting me keep more of my own money," which is mind-blowing stoopidity.
    What kind of fiscal conservative is too stupid to know that "his" money, here, is actually trillions stolen from his own children and grandchildren. duh. Rand is as morally bankrupt as his today's GOP.

    alt-right =/= liberty. Nor his shameless suckups to the Christian Taliban, in shameful defiance of the 9th and 14th Amendments, like his dad.

    Get real.

  • Mithrandir||

    His cult says, "He's letting me keep more of my own money," which is mind-blowing stoopidity.
    What kind of fiscal conservative is too stupid to know that "his" money, here, is actually trillions stolen from his own children and grandchildren. duh. Rand is as morally bankrupt as his today's GOP.

    Great parody

  • John Galt Jr||

    You lie that he did not do that?
    You think borrowing trillions is "free money" like a progressives?

    Democrats borrow trillions to provide free stuff.
    Republicans and faux libertarians borrow trillions to provide free tax cuts.
    Libertarians know CUT SPENDING is the only way to shrink government. (Grade-school arithmetic, duh!)

    A growing majority of Americans agree, and now SELF-define as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Left and right are now less than 40% of Americans combined and shrinking. Your time has expired.

  • RandomInternetPerson||

    This matters less because Rand Paul's endorsement means anything in New Mexico (it doesn't), or even because it can move that much money (it can't), but because Rand doesn't take a leak without Mitch McConnell's permission and approval. So this is clearly signaling tacit support for Johnson from the broader Senate GOP & King Turtle, and the intended target audience for that signal is their donors & outside groups. It's not so much Rand bucking the GOP, because nothing about endorsing Johnson in the current scenario means going against the GOP. It's not like anybody other than Mick Rich cares about Mick Rich.

    They've got nothing to lose. Rich is done. Backing Johnson at least forces Heinrich to work for it and the Dems to spend money on a race they wouldn't otherwise have to worry about. And who knows, maybe lightning strikes and Johnson actually wins, in which case there's one less vote to make Chuck Schumer the majority leader.

    This is less about Rand embracing the LP over the GOP, and more about a confluence of interests for both the LP and the GOP.

  • vek||

    This is cool. As I said in other threads about GJ running for senate, I think he'd be a pretty decent guy in there. Since this is a Democratic lockdown situation, the GOP has nothing to lose by pulling out... I think it would be a wise strategy for the GOP to simply stop supporting lost cause races in blue areas, and leaving it entirely to the Libertarian Party to run there. The LP COULD maybe win in some spots the GOP has zero chance in. If the GOP did this on a large scale, it could in fact help them out vote total wise on lots of fiscal stuff.

  • Braunasaurus||

    Hey guys this guy thinks the gop cares about ficsal stuff

  • vek||

    Well, the truth is SOME of them do. And MOST of their actual voters do.

    If you look at how the GOP house has voted, I think a lot of the guys in there are actual fiscal conservatives. Not as much as libertarians are, but not horrible either. It's always been the senate that shoots all the sweeping legislation down.

  • Brandybuck||

    IT'S HAPPENING!!!

  • Sonny Bono's Ghost||

    Who knew the "Libertarian Moment", should it ever materialize, might be the Libertarian take-over of the GOP - fingers crossed.

  • David Nolan||

    The movement is stone-cold dead. Rejected bu 91% of libertarians! Anti-government, no longer pro-liberty. The two are not the same. Priorities.

    And only pro-liberty has (had) actual policy solutions to transition back to the private sector. Expanding liberty always reduces or limits government. Shrinking government (as a priority) can have the exact opposite effect..

    Consider Medicaid. Pro-liberty would transition the entire program back to the private sector, which provided universal treatment (not coverage), regardless of age orr income, through charity hospitals, financed by MANY different charities, foundations and fraternal organizations. It had slowly evolved since the 1500s, but the infrastructure must be rebuilt, this a phased transition,

    "Git gumnint out" (repealjng) does ... nothing And hands victory to progressives.

    Americans have always been willing to pay for the uninsured -- all advanced economies did -- since the 1500s. If Bernies is the only one CLAIMING to to provide what Americans have always wanted, he wins. We lose/

    The crazy, failed attempt to repeal Obamacare showed that Republicans had nothing -- after saying they did for years. So, Obamacare is now more popular than ever.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online