Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Libertarian Thread (Was: Gary Johnson Thread)


Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

Well, given that she continues to characterize our involvement in Libya as "successful", it gets a bit confusing.

Let's see if I have this straight:

1. If we didn't get involved, Libya could fall into a dangerous civil war.

2. We got involved and were "successful".

3. Libya is now in a state of civil war.

When I read that I am less worried about Johnson's lack of foreign policy acumen and terribly concerned that the Presidential frontrunner appears to either be completely full of #### or still suffering from that concussion that caused her to forget all of the briefings on proper handling of classified information. 

 

 

Libya is better off than Syria right now - Agree or Disagree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was kind of funny, but I'm surprised anybody actually thinks this was a big deal.  We all know that Gary Johnson isn't going to be elected president.  A vote for "him" is a vote for his general worldview, not really a vote for him personally.  

In an alternative universe where the Libertarian Party is one of our two major parties, presumably they nominate somebody a little less flaky.  (Note: Gary Johnson was definitely the least flaky available nominee for the LP in our actual universe).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dickey moe said:

I'd like to hope so, but this stings right now.

He has never been the greatest candidate to show off pragmatic libertarianism. I mean he is far better than nutbags like John McAfee, but he lacks charisma and comes off a bit flaky at times.

It is too bad, because if you could put the basic tenets of pragmatic libertarian philosophy in the hands of a likable and dynamic public speaker, he/she would make some serious waves in this election cycle. But Johnson isn't that guy.

So he isn't going to win. Particularly if he doesn't get into the debates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

It is too bad, because if you could put the basic tenets of pragmatic libertarian philosophy in the hands of a likable and dynamic public speaker, he/she would make some serious waves in this election cycle. But Johnson isn't that guy.

I completely agree. In the modern age of social media, charisma and having the ability to articulately communicate your positions mean more than ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I thought it was kind of funny, but I'm surprised anybody actually thinks this was a big deal.  We all know that Gary Johnson isn't going to be elected president.  A vote for "him" is a vote for his general worldview, not really a vote for him personally.  

In an alternative universe where the Libertarian Party is one of our two major parties, presumably they nominate somebody a little less flaky.  (Note: Gary Johnson was definitely the least flaky available nominee for the LP in our actual universe).

Exactly. This is a meaningless story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cstu said:

Who needs to know about Syria's largest city and where most of the conflict is taking place?

I always thought Damascus was the largest city.  I consume a decent amount of media, haven't heard it mentioned very much at all. 

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=aleppo,%2Fm%2F02gjp,%2Fm%2F03hz03 

 

But MSNBC certainly got him.  More press from this than him as a candidate

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

How about the NY Times, which needed two corrections to get things right in the story where it was highlighting Johnson's lack of knowledge about Aleppo? In the first version, it identified Aleppo as Syria's capital (it isn't). In the second version, it referred to Aleppo as ISIS' "capital" (it isn't). 

Their third version referred to it as "an old, old wooden ship used during the Civil War era".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TobiasFunke said:

Sure, but I think there's also something to the fact that libertarianism rejects the notion that the government should take an active role in addressing societal ills, and white guys tend not to be the victims of those ills.  They also tend to disproportionately benefit from most libertarian tax proposals/cuts.  They also may be more willing to trust the private sector far more than the people who feel they have been victimized by large companies in a variety of ways (whether that victimization is real or perceived).

Well, a lot of people think the welfare state and drug war did nothing to reduce poverty and effectively crippled black neighborhoods that would have otherwise assimilated just fine into regular society.  It also seems to be the only political party that even talks about central banking, which also prolongs the poverty and suffering that minorities are subjected to.  Personally, I think the whole notion of blacks being a race in need of white saviors and free stuff is itself sort of racist and patronizing.  

I do agree that libertarians are overwhelmingly white

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

Huge gaffe, and disappointing, but it doesn't "disqualify" him from anything.

Presidential candidates, and the media, commit similar or worse gaffes and foreign policy and world geography all the time.

I won't use Trump as an example, because that is too easy. How about the NY Times, which needed two corrections to get things right in the story where it was highlighting Johnson's lack of knowledge about Aleppo? In the first version, it identified Aleppo as Syria's capital (it isn't). In the second version, it referred to Aleppo as ISIS' "capital" (it isn't). 

Just last night Clinton seemed to suggest that there wasn't "an ongoing civil war" in Libya. That is, to me, a more shocking gaffe than the former governor of New Mexico not immediately recognizing the name of the second or third largest city in Syria. Especially since she was pretty heavily involved in starting that civil war.

There is some serious incompetence in the journalism world. When people talk about left/right media bias they really need to take this into account first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, humpback said:

Well, he's gotten more coverage today than he has the rest of the election season combined.

Exactly! Plus, 95% of people hearing about Johnson today from this press coverage don't know what Allepo is either. I wouldn't be shocked if he got a bump in polls from this. 

I also don't care that he didn't know. I wish we would stay out of the middle east. I think the situation is worse there because of what Hillary did as SoS. In fact, had we had a competent SoS instead of Hillary, the press probably wouldn't even be asking Johnson about Allepo today. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Ren Ho3k said:

Well, a lot of people think the welfare state and drug war did nothing to reduce poverty and effectively crippled black neighborhoods that would have otherwise assimilated just fine into regular society.  It also seems to be the only political party that even talks about central banking, which also prolongs the poverty and suffering that minorities are subjected to.  Personally, I think the whole notion of blacks being a race in need of white saviors and free stuff is itself sort of racist and patronizing.  

I do agree that libertarians are overwhelmingly white

The drug war was created by Nixon.  Carter wanted to decriminalize marijuana.  Unfortunately, Bill wanted to appear tough on drugs given his past and continued it.  Obama has been disappointing in this area as well.

As for welfare the intention was good but flawed by creating disincentives for working.  A BIG would have been more productive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Slapdash said:

I always thought Damascus was the largest city.  I consume a decent amount of media, haven't heard it mentioned very much at all. 

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=aleppo,%2Fm%2F02gjp,%2Fm%2F03hz03 

 

But MSNBC certainly got him.  More press from this than him as a candidate

It used to be Syria's second largest city. Was never the largest. So the media still hasn't got it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cstu said:

The drug war was created by Nixon.  Carter wanted to decriminalize marijuana.  Unfortunately, Bill wanted to appear tough on drugs given his past and continued it.  Obama has been disappointing in this area as well.

As for welfare the intention was good but flawed by creating disincentives for working.  A BIG would have been more productive.

Fyi the Harrison Narcotics Act criminalized drug addiction and distribution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

1914.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, bueno said:

It used to be Syria's second largest city. Was never the largest. So the media still hasn't got it right.

Aleppo (/əˈlɛpoʊ/; Arabic: ﺣﻠﺐ‎‎ / ALA-LC: Ḥalab, IPA: [ˈħalab]) is a city in Syria, serving as the capital of the Aleppo Governorate, the most populous Syrian governorate.[4] For centuries, Aleppo was the Syrian region's largest city and the Ottoman Empire's third-largest, after Constantinople and Cairo.[5][6][7] With an official population of 2,132,100 (2004 census), it was Syria's largest city and also one of the largest cities in the Levant before the advent of the Syrian Civil War.[8][9][10]

Damascus (Arabic: دمشق‎‎ Dimashq IPA: [ˈdimaʃq]) is the capital and the largest city of Syria after Aleppo prior to the civil war. It is now most likely the largest city of Syria, due to the decline in population of Aleppo because of the ongoing battle for the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Fyi the Harrison Narcotics Act criminalized drug addiction and distribution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Narcotics_Tax_Act

1914.

True, but it was the Controlled Substances Act in 1970 and creation of the DEA in 1973 that greatly stepped up law enforcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aleppo has a long and glorious past, it was a very Christian city. Which relates to nothing but I love the idea of that kind of history and faith gripping through this kind of turmoil.

Honestly it bugs me that Johnson has no clue, I've been planning to vote for him and this isn't the first time his 'yeah dude whatever' attitude has aggravated me. At least act liek you want it and you;re ready for it, show the voters that much respect.

Having said that he's still the most decent man in the race, but possibly too ill informed to hold the job responsibly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Aleppo has a long and glorious past, it was a very Christian city. Which relates to nothing but I love the idea of that kind of history and faith gripping through this kind of turmoil.

Honestly it bugs me that Johnson has no clue, I've been planning to vote for him and this isn't the first time his 'yeah dude whatever' attitude has aggravated me. At least act liek you want it and you;re ready for it, show the voters that much respect.

Having said that he's still the most decent man in the race, but possibly too ill informed to hold the job responsibly.

Seems like a pretty aggressive assertion based on what happened today.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, cstu said:

Aleppo (/əˈlɛpoʊ/; Arabic: ﺣﻠﺐ‎‎ / ALA-LC: Ḥalab, IPA: [ˈħalab]) is a city in Syria, serving as the capital of the Aleppo Governorate, the most populous Syrian governorate.[4] For centuries, Aleppo was the Syrian region's largest city and the Ottoman Empire's third-largest, after Constantinople and Cairo.[5][6][7] With an official population of 2,132,100 (2004 census), it was Syria's largest city and also one of the largest cities in the Levant before the advent of the Syrian Civil War.[8][9][10]

Damascus (Arabic: دمشق‎‎ Dimashq IPA: [ˈdimaʃq]) is the capital and the largest city of Syria after Aleppo prior to the civil war. It is now most likely the largest city of Syria, due to the decline in population of Aleppo because of the ongoing battle for the city.

I stand corrected (#######). :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Aleppo has a long and glorious past, it was a very Christian city. Which relates to nothing but I love the idea of that kind of history and faith gripping through this kind of turmoil.

Honestly it bugs me that Johnson has no clue, I've been planning to vote for him and this isn't the first time his 'yeah dude whatever' attitude has aggravated me. At least act liek you want it and you;re ready for it, show the voters that much respect.

Having said that he's still the most decent man in the race, but possibly too ill informed to hold the job responsibly.

He's not being elected to be president of Syria.

I like that he's far more focused on how the US needs run and not letting problems in other countries be our problem to solve. 

You say he has no clue. I say he's properly focused. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Politician Spock said:

He's not being elected to be president of Syria.

I like that he's far more focused on how the US needs run and not letting problems in other countries be our problem to solve. 

You say he has no clue. I say he's properly focused. 

I'm ok with the non-intervention argument, I'm probably for it, he's my guy if I walked into the booth right now, however I think he should at least still know what the heck is going on over there.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I see your point, but if he was at least briefed on the subject how is he unaware of Aleppo?

I am a bit of a foreign affairs enthusiast and am definitely a geography nerd, so I can't relate to not knowing about it. But I also try not to make snap judgements on things based on extremely limited data.

So again, I agree that it was a bad gaffe, but probably not quite as bad as being unfamiliar with proper procedures for handling classified information despite holding the title of Secretary of State and having been briefed on said procedures.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I'm ok with the non-intervention argument, I'm probably for it, he's my guy if I walked into the booth right now, however I think he should at least still know what the heck what is going on over there.

I'm pretty sure he categorizes it all as "Syria". If the reporter asked him what he will do about Syria, then I doubt anyone would be up in arms about his response. In fact, I have not heard anyone refer to the issue over there as "Allepo". I have more issue with the reporter asking his question that way, than I do with Johnson's response. 

Edited by Politician Spock
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I thought it was kind of funny, but I'm surprised anybody actually thinks this was a big deal.  We all know that Gary Johnson isn't going to be elected president.  A vote for "him" is a vote for his general worldview, not really a vote for him personally.  

In an alternative universe where the Libertarian Party is one of our two major parties, presumably they nominate somebody a little less flaky.  (Note: Gary Johnson was definitely the least flaky available nominee for the LP in our actual universe).

For me its a vote for him personally, because the two people ahead of him are pieces of ####, and I'm not going to waste my vote on a piece of ####.

Edited by Rove!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rove! said:

For me its a vote for him personally, because the two people ahead of him are pieces of ####, and I'm not going to waste my vote on a piece of ####.

I agree with this also. And the fact Johnson didn't recognize Aleppo immediately doesn't change my appraisal of him as a human being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

I am a bit of a foreign affairs enthusiast and am definitely a geography nerd, so I can't relate to not knowing about it. But I also try not to make snap judgements on things based on extremely limited data.

So again, I agree that it was a bad gaffe, but probably not quite as bad as being unfamiliar with proper procedures for handling classified information despite holding the title of Secretary of State and having been briefed on said procedures.

 

LOL.  This is good shtick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

Huge gaffe, and disappointing, but it doesn't "disqualify" him from anything.

Presidential candidates, and the media, commit similar or worse gaffes and foreign policy and world geography all the time.

I won't use Trump as an example, because that is too easy. How about the NY Times, which needed two corrections to get things right in the story where it was highlighting Johnson's lack of knowledge about Aleppo? In the first version, it identified Aleppo as Syria's capital (it isn't). In the second version, it referred to Aleppo as ISIS' "capital" (it isn't). 

Just last night Clinton seemed to suggest that there wasn't "an ongoing civil war" in Libya. That is, to me, a more shocking gaffe than the former governor of New Mexico not immediately recognizing the name of the second or third largest city in Syria. Especially since she was pretty heavily involved in starting that civil war.

Hillary Clinton was heavily involved in starting the civil war in Syria?  Do you really believe that?  

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/syrian-civil-war-guide-isis/410746/ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, pettifogger said:

Hillary Clinton was heavily involved in starting the civil war in Syria?  Do you really believe that?  

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/syrian-civil-war-guide-isis/410746/ 

No. She was heavily involved in starting the civil war in Libya. 
Upon re-reading what I wrote I guess which civil war I was referring to could have been slightly ambiguous. Perhaps more than slightly to people who have poor reading comprehension.

Edited by RedmondLonghorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every other week it's a different dumpster fire in the middle east.  I quit trying to remember what the latest story is at this point.  [Insert city] is being attacked by [Insert local group of armed crazies] and [Insert Euro country, US or Russia] stepped into the #### and can't get it off of their shoe now.

 

I probably know more cities in the middle east than I do cities in Wisconsin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cosjobs said:

No. Aleppo is NOT a gotcha question. Any candidate for any national office should be familiar with it, regardless of the competency of his staff.

Watching the whole interview, this question seemed to come out of nowhere.  

For all the importance everyone seems to be giving this issue, how many times was "Aleppo" said in last night's big commander in chief forum?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, shuke said:

Watching the whole interview, this question seemed to come out of nowhere.  

For all the importance everyone seems to be giving this issue, how many times was "Aleppo" said in last night's big commander in chief forum?

 

Maybe I'm more of a geo-political nerd than I thouhgt. I figured if I was familiar with it, certainly anyone auditioning for our commander in chief would be. It also did not strike me as an agenda or gotcha question.

We know Syria is in civil war and millions are dead or refugees. Just the refugees are having a major global impact, whether you care about the all the dead or not.

I'm no expert, I just read a lot  and I try to find unbiased sources.

As I see it, Russia is backing the Syrian president Assad. We have been backing the rebels, or at the very least trying to reign in the slaughter from Assad. Aleppo is apparently the key city in the conflict. Besides the rebels we are (somewhat) backing against Assad, there is also an IS/ISIS/ISIL contingency also holed up in eastern Aleppo.  I believe I have heard a number of times that the war on ISIS is being fought mainly in ALeppo.

Again, I'm just relaying what I have gathered as a lay political nerd over the last year. I could be wrong, but what the #### does it matter if some old Austin hippie doesn't understand the nuances of what's happening there. I'm talking about the knowledge I expect of wannabe world leaders.

And I really have no idea what we as a country should do. On the one hand ISIS is now evidently a major force against Assad/. But Assad has been destroying huge numbers of rebels and civilians intermingled with IS. Its complicated and while I can see a scenario whereby we joined Russia in supporting Assad in fighting ISIS, what about those other rebels we used to support? And what about the Kurds? And what about Iraq?

Its a huge, impactful, explosive situation with global ramifications.


And yes, I expect anyone wanting me to consider them as a CIC for the US, to have at least some working knowledge of the situation.

Edited by cosjobs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

Quick, without consulting a map or Google, what is the other big city in Syria besides Aleppo and Damascus?

 

 

I could not tell you nor would I necessarily expect a presidential candidate to do so. But I absolutely need them to know about Damascus and Aleppo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cosjobs said:

Maybe I'm more of a geo-political nerd than I thouhgt. I figured if I was familiar with it, certainly anyone auditioning for our commander in chief. It also did not strrike me as an agenda or gotcha question.

We know Syria is in civil war and millions are dead or refugees. Just the refugees are having a major gobal impact, whether you care about the all the dead or not.

I'm no expert, I just read alot  and I try to find unbiased sources.

As I see it, Russia is backing the Syrian president Assad. We have been backing the rebels, or at the very least trying to reign in the slaughter from Assad. Aleppo is apparently the key city in the conflict. Besides the rebels we are (somewhat) backing against Assad, there is also an IS/ISIS/ISIL contingency also holed up in eastern Aleppo.  I believe I have heard a number of times that the war on ISIS is being fought mainly in ALeppo.

Again, I'm just relaying what I have gathered as a lay political nerd over the last year. I could be wrong, but what the #### does it matter if some old Austin hippie doesn't understand the nuances of what's happening there.

And I really have no idea what we as a country should do. On the one hand ISIS is now evidently a major force against Assad/. But Assad has been destroying huge numbers of rebels and civilians intermingled with IS. Its complicated and while I can see a scenario whereby we joined Russia in supporting Assad in fighting ISIS, what about those other rebels we used to support? And what about the Kurds? And what about Iraq?

Its a huge, impactful, explosive situation with global impact.


And yes, I expect anyone wanting me to consider them as a CIC for the US, to have at least some working knowledge of the situation.

I don't know why you believe he doesn't have at least some working knowledge of the situation. A lot of people have participated in discussions here about Syria over the years. Calling the situation "Aleppo" is rare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Politician Spock said:

I don't know why you believe he doesn't have at least some working knowledge of the situation. A lot of people have participated in discussions here about Syria over the years. Calling the situation "Aleppo" is rare. 

If he is unaware of the major city in the battle for at least five years, I call him unaware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cosjobs said:

If he is unaware of the major city in the battle for at least five years, I call him unaware.

I did a search for the city in this forum, and prior to today it produced only two pages of results, half of which were people quoting a post about a guy selling falafels there. You can count the times people used in regards to the Syrian situation with your fingers. 

If I asked you "what are we going to do about St Louis", would you know I'm talking about Black Lives Matter?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RedmondLonghorn said:

The other city is as strategically important as Damascus or Aleppo.

 

I'll take your word for it. Has it produced millions of deaths/refugees? Is it bombed daily by Assad and chlorine gassed?> Is it so dangerous that doctors and humanitarian aid cannot  get it in? Is it home to ISIS and the "good rebels" and hundreds of thousands of civilians being constantly (all of them) bombarded by Syrian army and Russian airstrikes??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maurile Tremblay changed the title to Libertarian Thread (Was: Gary Johnson Thread)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...