Home | About | Donate

Critics Say Gary Johnson's Latest Foreign Policy Gaffe Should Cost Him


#1

Critics Say Gary Johnson's Latest Foreign Policy Gaffe Should Cost Him

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Raising further questions about his presidential bona fides, Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson failed to name a single foreign leader he admired, in what he called an "Aleppo moment" during a town hall-style interview on MSNBC Wednesday night.


#2

Any Progressive who even thinks about voting for Libertarian Gary "Know nothing" Johnson or "WTF did I get myself into" Weld should have their membership card revoked immediately.


#4

CD I would think this is a bigger Headline story! Part of the bizarro world we are currently living in I guess.


#5

This is your big conclusion. Did you WATCH the hearings yesterday with the Comey testimony? These are as important as the Watergate hearings, in fact, Clinton by FAR surpassed the criminality of Nixon. Right now, underlings such as Jeffrey Sterling are serving YEARS in jail for accusations of whistle blowing not sufficiently proven and Clinton and her cabal engaged in mass coverup (most likely to hide bribes through the Clinton Foundation) and she is running for the Presidency of the United State. But, by all means, go on about Gary Johnson, someone not viable for the Presidency and lecture everyone about how he is not a valid choice while this page supports someone who should be facing jail time. I am SO done with the hypocrisy of liberals. Until you start to walk the walk, stop your slams on Trump/Johnon supporters. I don't support either of them but you are NO BETTER as you engage in support of the more effective evil. Its ugly, this liberal hypocrisy and the co-dependent enabling of criminals out of fear and dishonesty. Pathetic.


#6

You must mention Sidney Blumenthal the mafia chieftain.


#9

Agree, Sanders and Johnson are opposites.

Post edit: One example: Gary Johnson supports Fracking and other environmentally destructive policies. Therefore, he and Sanders are opposites regarding that.

I support Jill Stein

Johnson supporters might want to do this quiz: https://www.isidewith.com/

I should also add (edit-in) this comment:
I strongly believe in respect for democracy, life and the environment. This includes Equitable News Coverage for All Candidates, which unfortunately most news sites lack. --- I like C/Dreams due to news coverage on issues such as life and the environment, but it is troubling that it lacks equitable news coverage on Jill Stein who I trust most and has the most humane, sensible and doable solutions.


#10

He lost any consideration from me when he was asked about the TPP. He said that he did not know anything about it, but his advisors said it was good. The most talked about trade agreement that Obama is pushing and the public is protesting. And he can't even bother to learn about it. He should withdraw before he embarrasses himself further.


#11

The MSM (and CD) still don't get it. There is a growing swath of voters who don't care what you think of this or that candidate. For decades (maybe even centuries) the establishment elites in the US have hoisted a big middle finger of contempt towards the electorate. Now the electorate is returning the favor. It's as simple as that.


#12

Yes. Now can we all get onboard with Jill, the only candidate not taking $ from special interests so she's free to represent US!!


#14

But, there must have been at least one that he identified with in this great bi world of ours?
Johnson is an airhead.


#15

She most certainly gets my vote.


#16

So now we have a crook/warmonger, a shill/fascist, and a man too lazy to do his homework (unless someone is paying him to look dumb?). Thank god for Jill Stein!


#17

how any Bernie supporter can vote for this ignorant, right winger is unfathomable. He wants to privatize everything we care about as social democrats or socialists or perhaps that is not why you voted for and supported Bernie - like expanding social security, working towards free college for all, medicare for all and on and on. so now you are willing to give the establishment your finger and vote to take away all we care about just to act like a 5 year old. I guess you will deserve what you get, except the rest of us will have to suffer as well. Grow up people! now - before it is too late.


#18

I agree, but according to the polls that I have seen, Gary is way ahead of Jill in those polls. Why?


#19

GRRR! Goddamnit, JILL STEIN AND THE GREEN PARTY DO EXIST! It irritates the piss out of me, the transparent attempts to shepherd everyone who isn't a Trumpista into voting for Hilllary. Therer is a much better choice--like Hillary, Stein's expressed views coincide well with Bernie's--but anyone who has been paying attention for years doubts Clinton's sincerity, and not Stein's. Then there is foreign policy, where Sanders' antiwar bona fides are rather weak, and Hillary is in enthusiastic support of every war ever proposed, while Stein's agin it.


#24

George Warmonger Bush pronounces nuclear as "nucular" & that never stopped the American sheeple from voting for him twice. Gary Johnson is good about being anti-war but not so good about dealing with corporations.


#27

It seems to me that our truly deranged political culture has created such despair, such a shared feeling of helplessness in our ability to have any say in shaping our political landscape, that a shared nihilistic impulse has taken hold of the electorate. The status quo is unendurable. We are abandoned by those who claim to represent us. What we have is the stark reality that either Drumpf or Clinton will be our next president. Whatever one may think of the qualities of Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, the hard truth is that neither has a hope in hell of winning the presidency. It will be either Drumpf or Clinton, period. That is simply an objective reality.

Clinton is the status quo. If she wins, not much changes. Corporate fat cats get fatter, wars go on and on, and with a republican congress, gridlock continues. Unendurable, and for so many more reasons, but we know the status quo and it does not need much enumeration.

Drumpf is not the status quo. He is a thuggish right-wing wrecking ball, a moronic troglodyte who thinks all blacks should be stopped and frisked, that climate change is a hoax, and therefore he will open up national parks and the rest of the world to uninterrupted oil exploration, that our problems can be laid at the feet of black and brown immigrants, that racism is a virtue, that women exist as pleasure units for men, that the wealthy must have even more at the expense of everyone else, that war with Iran will be at his pleasure, that he is smart for not paying taxes, and that he can fool enough people with phony populist talk about troubles they suffer with which he has no empathy, sympathy, or any true desire to alleviate.

One of these two will be our next president.

The status quo is so bad, that many of the electorate choose Drumpf over it, or simply do not care because, well, he really can't be worse than what already exists. Because the status quo must go, and Clinton represents the status quo, Drumpf may very well be our next president. The status quo is so bad, that many have a hard time imagining that it could get any worse, and therefore, let's tear it all down.

It CAN get worse, much worse. Drumpf represents what is much worse than what is in place now, as unendurable as that may be. What was once a luxury because it appeared that Drumpf could not possibly win the presidency is now a fight to maintain what we really need to change to prevent a change that takes us to a place none of us should even imagine we should go. That Drumpf is this close to taking us down a really deep hole represents to me a form of nihilism, an idea that the status quo must go at any cost, no matter how bad a place we end up.

I fight that idea. I fight the idea that Drumpf can EVER be president. We have only two choices here. The day after election day we will have either Drumpf or the status quo. Over Drumpf, I choose the status quo, to preserve what is good about this country, all the good that Drumpf threatens to destroy, even if that preserves the bad as well. I do not do so at all happily, but our choices are that stark and unhappy. Jill Stein represents me, she represents what I believe in. Jill Stein and what I believe in will not be in power the day after election day. And, though most at this site will excoriate me for saying so, I AM voting my conscience by preventing Drumpf from taking over my country. Unhappy choices indeed, but those are the choices we have.

Finally, to those who think that Drumpf has no chance, or that if he does he is not any worse than Clinton, think again. I once thought the same way, until I saw Drumpf in action and see how he can really win the election. To preserve the good that Drumpf will certainly destroy, I feel that I must prevent his ascension to power.


#28

But that implies you at least have some names. I'd pick Morales and Corea for starters. Johnson could have said Dilma Rouseff. Any of these would have aligned him with the courageous leaders in South America who have tried to chart their own way outside the clutches of the US government. Maybe they'll ask Jill the same question.

It is disappointing that the article failed to mention Stein at all.


#32

I have a dearly beloved family member who is considering Gary Johnson for his libertarian foreign policy positions. She thinks the government has intentionally been made so unwieldy and unyielding that Stein's reliance on getting the government to improve citizen's lives is a hopeless cause. Point well taken but I'd rather take my country back than turn it over to the corporations.

She suggested that third party voting depends on which party you want to send a message to: a vote for Johnson is a message to the Republican Party and a vote for Stein is a message for the Democrats.

Unfortunately, I have little faith either will attend to the message. I'm voting for Stein.


#34

Though I agree with some Libertarian positions, their fatal flaw is not recognizing that above and beyond natural limits to growth, the free market is not free. It becomes a captive of monopoly and oligarchy dictatorship ensues.