Gary Johnson put a fork in him he's done

[Fanatical Meat]

Just watched him on Morning Joe say "What is Aleppo" when asked about events in Syria. He truly seemed like he had no idea what the question Mike Barnacle asked. Too early to link.

Edit:
Link but I'm not sure of the video not supported on my mobile

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...esidential-candidate-aleppo-article-1.2782949

I'm all for no more screwing around in the ME I just found it stunning he genuinely had no idea what the question was and he was obviously unprepared to talk foreign policy beyond his canned "supporting regime change never works out"

 

[Bitek]

Just saw that. WTF?

That's been my general impression of libertarians on foreign policy.

Always a bunch of "we should never get involved, cut the military, wars end up always bad" and when pressed for details they always end up speaking gibberish.

 

[PokerGuy]

On some things I really like his position, but then you see the guy say things that make him look like a complete space kadet. Not like he had any chance anyway, but yes, he's done regardless.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Just saw that. WTF?

That's been my general impression of libertarians on foreign policy.

Always a bunch of "we should never get involved, cut the military, wars end up always bad" and when pressed for details they always end up speaking gibberish.

Did you see Mika's(?) iPhones streaming the next interview?
I was shocked that it looked like he didn't even know it was a place/City. Seemed like he was thinking its a thing like we need to make more Aleppo's to get people working again or Gary please pass me that Aleppo.
This could be very good news for Trump

Edit: Nearly 15 minutes later Joe Scarborough has recovered from his meltdown from frustration on who to vote for.

 

[Genx87]

At the end of the day I dont see this as that big of a deal. If this is what keeps somebody from voting for him. They werent interested in his other policies anyways. And he wasnt going to win anyways. The goal is just to get him on the debate stage with these other two horrible people.

 

[HomerJS]

Show of hands, would Trump's answer have been any different? Would his supporters care? I agree with the title but devils advocate, why should it eliminate Johnson if it wouldn't eliminate Trump?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Show of hands, would Trump's answer have been any different? Would his supporters care? I agree with the title but devils advocate, why should it eliminate Johnson if it wouldn't eliminate Trump?

Trump is getting security briefs I doubt he'd screw it up. His plan may suck or be too vague to understand but that's a different question.
While I don't have figures but I'd guess half of Gary Johnson supporters are for legal pot and the other half are guys like Glenn or Werepossum (not meant as a call out). Generally conservative guys but wanting to tax and spend appropriately and have an intelligent leader but Trump isn't that guy.

Johnson showed a lack of practice and/or a lack of desire to understand the issues. Essentially being an aloof Politician which I would guess is exactly what guys like Glenn or possum hate.

 

[Jaskalas]

Essentially being an aloof Politician which I would guess is exactly what guys like Glenn or possum hate.

I'm sure someone can brief him if he actually stands a chance. It's not what events around the world you keep up with, but your principles on how to deal with them once informed. Moreover, I'm curious what his use of technology looks like. We are still talking about an older man here.

Embarrassing, sure. Bad PR, yes. But truthfully not important unless it indicates some sort of health / personal / policy issue.
A concern that could either be deepened or resolved upon further inspection

Gary Johnson:

"The only way that we deal with Syria is to join hands with Russia to diplomatically bring that to an end.”

"But when we've supported the opposition...
This is the result of regime change that we end up supporting, and inevitably these regime changes have lead to a less safe world"​

Damn straight. That's the correct ideal to prevent the United States from causing more violence, more refugees, and more humanitarian crises. And is a far better policy than Hillary Clinton's Neocon policy which saw the United States arm these terrorists to begin with. You want to talk Aleppo, that blood is on Hillary's hands.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm sure someone can brief him if he actually stands a chance. It's not what events around the world you keep up with, but your principles on how to deal with them once informed. Moreover, I'm curious what his use of technology looks like. We are still talking about an older man here.

Embarrassing, sure. Bad PR, yes. But truthfully not important unless it indicates some sort of health / personal / policy issue.
A concern that could either be deepened or resolved upon further inspection

Gary Johnson:

"The only way that we deal with Syria is to join hands with Russia to diplomatically bring that to an end.”

"But when we've supported the opposition...
This is the result of regime change that we end up supporting, and inevitably these regime changes have lead to a less safe world"​

Damn straight. That's the correct ideal to prevent the United States from causing more violence, more refugees, and more humanitarian crises. And is a far better policy than Hillary Clinton's Neocon policy which saw the United States arm these terrorists to begin with. You want to talk Aleppo, that blood is on Hillary's hands.

So you think he has a good and well considered policy on Syria despite apparently having no idea of what's actually going on there? That's a deeply scary notion.

His principles appear to be having strong opinions about things he doesn't understand. That's an immediate and unequivocal disqualification for anyone who wants to be president, wouldn't you agree?

 

[HomerJS]

So you think he has a good and well considered policy on Syria despite apparently having no idea of what's actually going on there? That's a deeply scary notion.

His principles appear to be having strong opinions about things he doesn't understand. That's an immediate and unequivocal disqualification for anyone who wants to be president, wouldn't you agree?

But neither does Trump. Remember the "why can we use nukes" question he asked twice during his first briefing?

 

[fskimospy]

But neither does Trump. Remember the "why can we use nukes" question he asked twice during his first briefing?

Honestly of all the things disqualifying Trump his tendency to have strong opinions about things he doesn't understand is one of the less offensive ones. I would put his fairly obvious mental illness as the primary problem, followed by his history of fraud, corruption, pathological lying, erratic behavior, etc. (of course in some instances these are simply symptoms of the underlying mental illness)

 

[Fanatical Meat]

But neither does Trump. Remember the "why can we use nukes" question he asked twice during his first briefing?

Speculation there is zero proof that event occurred other than Joe Scarborough knows a guy, who knows a guy who knows someone who was there.

 

[Genx87]

So you think he has a good and well considered policy on Syria despite apparently having no idea of what's actually going on there? That's a deeply scary notion.

His principles appear to be having strong opinions about things he doesn't understand. That's an immediate and unequivocal disqualification for anyone who wants to be president, wouldn't you agree?

You mean like not understanding what a classified document is?

It is embarrassing for him to not know about Aleppo. But what you said is a real stretch anyways. He doesnt need to know what is going on in Aleppo to have his principle of no intervention. Unless you think if he knew more about it his principles would suddenly change to we need to bomb the town like the other two candidates?

 

[fskimospy]

You mean like not understanding what a classified document is?

Of course she knows what a classified document is. If you mean not knowing a particular marking then even if true no, I don't view that as nearly as large an issue as formulating a policy on Syria without even knowing what Aleppo is.

It is embarrassing for him to not know about Aleppo. But what you said is a real stretch anyways. He doesnt need to know what is going on in Aleppo to have his principle of no intervention. Unless you think if he knew more about it his principles would suddenly change to we need to bomb the town like the other two candidates?

He actually does need to know what is going on there in order to have a policy of not intervening, unless you think his poilcy is to never intervene anywhere, for any reason, forever. To formulate a policy without even basic knowledge is an extraordinarily dangerous thing to do. Anyone who is doing that should be kept far away from the levers of power.

I mean I would never vote for Johnson regardless as his stance on the Fed is by itself disqualifyingly stupid, but his 'I have strong opinions about this thing I know nothing about' is pretty awful too.

 

[brandonbull]

Honestly of all the things disqualifying Trump his tendency to have strong opinions about things he doesn't understand is one of the less offensive ones. I would put his fairly obvious mental illness as the primary problem, followed by his history of fraud, corruption, pathological lying, erratic behavior, etc. (of course in some instances these are simply symptoms of the underlying mental illness)

That sounds like Hillbillary's disqualifications minus the strong opinions. Apparently the things she was ultimately in charge of, she had zero understanding or recall. I guess it's hard to have strong opinions about things you don't remember.

 

[fskimospy]

That sounds like Hillbillary's disqualifications minus the strong opinions. Apparently the things she was ultimately in charge of, she had zero understanding or recall. I guess it's hard to have strong opinions about things you don't remember.

What you're saying doesn't make any logical sense. Not remembering something later is not at all the same as having an opinion right now about something you don't understand right now.

It would take a pretty crazily partisan person to say anything other than that Clinton has an almost encyclopedic knowledge of the issues.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

It's a simple lack of preparedness even if you support no more meddling in civil wars, even if you're good with Russia & Iran figuring out what to do in Syria all of which I don't think is a bad idea. He wants to be on the debate stage, he has an appearance booked on a National news show, the morning after the D&R candidates spoke and answered question regarding Syria. Being prepared is a good thing, Gary plainly showed he was unprepared.

 

[marvdmartian]

Meh....

ALL Presidents surround themselves with so-called "experts", who will advise them as to the current situation(s), and give them an opinion as to which direction to take the nation. Good presidents listen to their experts, and weigh that input with what they feel is best for the country. Bad presidents ignore what they don't want to hear, skip security briefings, and do whatever the hell they think is best, to hell with whoever doesn't like it!

 

[bshole]

So you think he has a good and well considered policy on Syria despite apparently having no idea of what's actually going on there? That's a deeply scary notion.

His principles appear to be having strong opinions about things he doesn't understand. That's an immediate and unequivocal disqualification for anyone who wants to be president, wouldn't you agree?

ANYBODY advocating for intervention in the Middle East at this point in the game should automatically be disqualified. It indicates that they are functionally retarded.

 

[Perknose]

Meh....

ALL Presidents surround themselves with so-called "experts", who will advise them as to the current situation(s), and give them an opinion as to which direction to take the nation. Good presidents listen to their experts, and weigh that input with what they feel is best for the country. Bad presidents ignore what they don't want to hear, skip security briefings, and do whatever the hell they think is best, to hell with whoever doesn't like it!

Meh? Really, meh?

First of all, come down out of your cloud, no President, even a "bad" one, "skips security briefings."

But the recent example of a "bad" President, i.e., one who is literally ignorant about the rest of the world and woefully unprepared to lead our nation, the Dub, is staring you in the face as a cautionary tale.

His Iraq war is the single worst foreign policy mistake in recent history, by a large margin. You can have all the experts you wish, but if you have an ignoramus at the center, a brutal and bloody and costly in every way possible tragedy like what Bush/Cheney perpetrated on us can and will occur.

I know what and where Aleppo is, and why knowing about it in the context of Syria is important. I assume you do, too. Most all of the posters here in this forum do, as well. Gary Johnson, laughably, did not.

If that doesn't scream to you what a shallow, unprepared, Clown College candidate to be our Commander-in-Chief he is, I don't know what else to say, except Gawd help us all.

 

[HomerJS]

Speculation there is zero proof that event occurred other than Joe Scarborough knows a guy, who knows a guy who knows someone who was there.

So let's say you don't believe the source or think that was just a one off. We know Trump is for expanding countries who have nukes (Japan and South Korea). He publically stated this unless it was just a suggestion or sarcasm. This goes against the worlds attempt to halt nuclear proliferation for over 50 years.

So Trump not knowing why we can't use nukes fits.

 

[cyclohexane]

So what? Trump is just as if not more clueless.

In his speech yesterday, he used the words "the cyber" no less than 10 times when discussing hacking and espionage.

 

[SNC]

Ouch that hurt!

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So what? Trump is just as if not more clueless.

In his speech yesterday, he used the words "the cyber" no less than 10 times when discussing hacking and espionage.

Point is he wants to be on the debate stage and showed he was completely unprepared

 

[ivwshane]

Point is he wants to be on the debate stage and showed he was completely unprepared

He deserves to be on the debate stage as much as trump then with that qualification.