Gary Johnson

Last night Gov. Johnson released the beginnings of his economic plan at a Reason Foundation event. Me likes. Arnold Kling summarizes the plan as:

Not down to specifics, but states right at the top “Scale back entitlement programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, which threaten to bankrupt the nation’s future” and later “Legalize, tax, and regulate marijuana; emphasize harm reduction for other drugs…Expand free trade and legal immigration. “

But Kling is doubtful of Gov. Johnson’s chances in 2012:

As he describes how he governed New Mexico, Johnson is quick to mention his hundreds of vetoes. He does not come across as a coalition builder. Instead, he seems to be one who tries to rally people around his ideas. Johnson wears his ideology on his sleeve–not up his sleeve, which is what I think that Obama did with his vague, gauzy campaign rhetoric. (I think the true source of anger among independents is not over the state of the economy. It is over the fact that as a candidate Obama did not warn people of the statist onslaught that he was going to unleash as President.)

I see very little chance that Johnson could capture the Presidency, or that he could accomplish much if somehow he were elected. However, his potential to help the libertarian cause is very high. He could raise the profile of libertarian thinking, so that more people start to listen for something other than the mainstream progressive and conservative slogans.

Keep in mind the Masonomic view that politics is not about policy. It is about the relative status of various groups. Johnson does not represent a coalition of groups. The Democrats represent a coalition of minorities and people who identify themselves as the educated elite (note that Obama gets to qualify on both counts). Republicans represent a coalition of non-urban whites and people who identify themselves as sticking up for traditional American values. Libertarians represent…what…a cult of oddballs and misfits?

Personally, I don’t think that Libertarianism and true conservatism – at least as I understand them – are so far apart that both groups couldn’t rally around a Libertarian-ish candidate like Gary Johnson. Isn’t that why Ayn Rand hated the idea of a Libertarian party? Because it could create a brain-drain from the conservative party and allow the social conservative, evangelical wing of the Republican party  to take over? I read that she also detested Libertarians for stealing her ideas.

I think the problem may be that there aren’t that enough Libertarians and Republicans on the conservative end of the red spectrum (note to self – must find better shorthand to differentiate between socially conservative, big government Republicans and conservatives – perhaps “Huckabees” for the former and “Buckleys” for the later?) to vote Gary Johnson into office. (Note to you: I’ve decided to run with the “Huckabees” and “Buckleys” terminology, until someone comes up with something better in the comments, hint hint.) Unless, of course, the GOP takes a lesson or gets better at challenging democrats.

Gary Johnson, Socio-Political