Gary Johnson and the Hard Truths About Presidential Candidates

Gary Johnson and the Hard Truths About Presidential Candidates

Gary Johnson and the Hard Truths About Presidential Candidates

The actual views of a presidential candidate don’t matter as much as you think.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Last week, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson announced his plans to seek the GOP presidential nomination in 2012. His anti-entitlement, anti-tax orthodoxy notwithstanding, Johnson was something of a conservative iconoclast as governor of New Mexico; he opposed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the recent intervention in Libya. He supports marijuana decriminalization, and is a staunch opponent of the war on drugs. As a few others have noted, Johnson is a natural fit for libertarians on the right and left, and he holds appeal for liberals as well. In his blog post celebrating Johnson’s decision to run, The Spectator’s Alex Massie captures some of this enthusiasm:

If President Johnson were to end the Drug War and that were his sole achievement in office he’d have done more good than any President in 40 years. Not since Milton Friedman helped end the draft has there been a better cause. That alone demands one welcome Johnson’s decision, announced at some point today, to enter the race for the Republican party’s 2012 presidential nomination.

Now, here’s the problem: if Johnson is a serious candidate for president, then these views will become less significant as the primary season wears on. That is, for Johnson to find real success within the Republican primaries, he’ll have to raise money from GOP donors and satisfy the issue preferences of GOP elites, donors and primary voters. And to that end, he’ll have to repudiate positions—like marijuana decriminalization and marriage equality—that run counter to the views of most Republicans.

In other words, for Johnson to even have a shot at the nomination, and thus a shot at the presidency, he’ll have to become a run-of-the-mill Republican, and not the transformative figure his supporters hope for. Put another way, when it comes to winning a presidential primary, the actual views of a candidate—while not unimportant—are ultimately less significant than intra-party conflicts, elite pressures, fundraising and grassroots organizing.

Relatedly, this goes a long way toward explaining ongoing liberal disappointment with Barack Obama. It’s not that Obama entered office and immediately moved to “sell out” the Left, but that in running for president, Obama made a lot of promises to a lot of people within the Democratic Party, and he has to juggle those interests along with his own agenda. If an issue like Guantanamo falls by the wayside, it’s partially because the administration has limited energy and competing concerns. Unfortunately, this isn’t a very satisfying explanation.

Like this blog post? Read it on The Nation’s free iPhone App, NationNow.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x