You don’t have to vote for Clinton or Trump. The former is a criminal who risks national security and is likely in ill-health. The latter is a tax-dodging scammer. Both of them will promote what is literally the greatest government-created threat to democracy – the NSA – since Adolf Hitler. You will never have any privacy ever again if either of them wins.
Fortunately, there is a viable third choice: Gary Johnson. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he is by far the most sane, most reasonable, and most honest candidate we have. (And, yes, he did know what Aleppo was. Once he realized what they were talking about, he gave a nuanced answer where he suggested that the US and Russia broker a cease-fire. That’s exactly what happened within weeks.)
Don’t let the libertarian title scare you from voting for Gary Johnson. The overwhelming majority of what people will tell you he believes is flat out lies based on nothing more than his political affiliation. In the past 24 hours, I’ve had people either wonder if or outright say that he’s a creationist (no), he rejects global warming (no), and he’s against environmental regulation (no).
Filed under: Misc, Politics and Social | Tagged: Election 2016, Gary Johnson |
For the Sake of Science 
One “Aleppo moment” is excusable. Two is a pattern. Johnson just isn’t ready for the job:
That’s not a terribly intelligent argument. First, the man knew exactly what Aleppo was and he gave a nuanced answer to the question that showed he had come to the exact same conclusion as the State Department. Second, I doubt he particularly admires many world leaders as a libertarian. In fact, he has since said as much.
So, are you trying to tell me that he isn’t ready for the job because he isn’t great at gotcha-questions? What about the fact that he’s the only non-criminal in the race?
Neither instance was a “gotcha” question, unless you consider having a basic level of factual familiarity with current events and world affairs occult knowledge. These were, to use the sports term, “unforced errors”. Even if he doesn’t admire other world leaders, Johnson ought (as President) to know who some of them are. These will be disqualifying moments to most voters. It’s like with any other trailblazer. The first third-party candidate to win will have to be clearly far superior to any alternative, and be “perfect” in performance on camera.
Since none of the candidates has ever been convicted of a felony, they are ALL non-criminals. I take the presumption of innocence seriously.
How can you possibly think he doesn’t have a basic level of factual familiarity with current events when his assessment of the situation in Syria was exactly the same as the State Department’s? He said we needed to broker a cease-fire that involved the Russians. That exact scenario happened two weeks later.
And you can’t seriously be contending that he doesn’t know any other world leaders. He isn’t an idiot by any means. The fact that he drew a blank for a grand total of 26 seconds while Matthews yelled at him to pick anyone isn’t exactly a great insight into his base of knowledge.
But to be clear: Your first point has been objectively defeated. He not only knew what Aleppo was, he knew what the very next step was that we needed to take.