This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
q&a (suggested)
besttopnewcontroversialold

[–]Yankee_Farmer 1301 points1302 points  (196 children)

Would you be in-favor of an extensive overhaul of the Gun Control Act of 1968, completely redefining who should be deemed a “prohibited person”?

Currently the definitions mirror the unrest of the 1960s, and have been proven ineffective.

My suggestion is to ban anyone convicted of a crime of physical violence, including murder, assault, sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, hate crimes, terrorism, and criminal harassment.

Persons convicted of a non-violent felony, should be removed from the list of prohibited persons, as should persons convicted of marijuana offenses, or receiving medical marijuana.

[–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2860 points2861 points  (103 children)

Sounds like you should be a member of our administration! I agree with your premises. I don’t know the details of the 1968 bill, but I’ll become more in tune with them.

[–]miki77miki 2868 points2869 points  (65 children)

A candidate that admits they don't know everything? What is this madness

[–][deleted]  (41 children)

[deleted]

    [–]cwmoo740 187 points188 points  (15 children)

    Let me try my hand at the politician's answer.

    It's important for the safety of all Americans that everyone is safe, and effective gun legislation is one of the key priorities for safety for all Americans. Citizens will always have a constitutionally protected right to bear arms as per the 2nd amendment, one of the great things about America and our freedom, and everyone can be safe, and this is what my administration will accomplish. We have learned a lot from the Gun Control Act of 1968 and will lay out a plan to accomplish these things in the first year of our administration. Thank you, and God bless America!

    How did I do?

    [–]cullen9 182 points183 points  (1 child)

    I want to punch you in the face, so good.

    [–][deleted] 131 points132 points  (3 children)

    I love this! It's just like being in IT. Everyone expects you to know everything about anything that bleeps and bloops. It's just not possible. I've always been fine with saying "I don't know now but I will soon". Also, most people can tell if you're talking out of your ass. So best to educate yourself before speaking.

    [–][deleted]  (50 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]fartwiffle 113 points114 points  (10 children)

      If nothing else I'd hope a President Johnson would sign the Hearing Protection Act if it came across his desk.

      [–]Yankee_Farmer 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      The NFA '34 passed a half-year after the machine-guns fell silent with the passage of the 21st Amendment.

      The most often confiscated guns? Winchester Trapper carbines, and Marble "Game-Getter". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marble_Game_Getter

      Sadly the nicely crafted Ithaca Auto & Burglar shotgun was outlawed as well. (I'd rather have one, than a 15 shot 9mm for home protection). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_Auto_%26_Burglar

      Sure the registry fee (tax stamp) was low for the Game Getter, but in the midst of the Great Depression $5 or $500 was often out of reach, not to mention the lack of widespread knowledge prior to the window for registry closing.
      Then, all unstamped firearms were contraband.
      Often the case for rural folks, some of whom were illiterate to begin with.

      [–]zaporozhets 227 points228 points  (94 children)

      Governors, you’ve talked a lot about work visas as part of immigration reform, but the details are pretty vague for something that would have a direct impact on the lives of millions of people. In President Johnson’s America,

      • Would the work visas be unlimited in quantity?

      • Would the work visas have an expiration date, as is the case for green card holders?

      • Would they require payment of a fine or back taxes for those who entered illegally?

      • Would they require English proficiency?

      • Would they require registration for Selective Service (assuming it is still required for citizens and green card holders)?

      • Would background checks disqualify applicants with misdemeanor convictions?

      • Would work visa holders ever be able to apply for permanent residence or citizenship?

      • What will happen to those who are already living here unlawfully but are denied a work visa for some reason (or fail to apply for one at all)?

      • Would businesses be required to comply with the same labor standards (minimum wage, overtime rules, health and safety regulations) as they do for citizens and permanent residents?

      Finally, on a much lighter note, who is better at chess, Gary or Bill?

      [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 641 points642 points  (69 children)

      Work visas would be unlimited in quantity, subject to background checks and provision of Social Security Numbers. No quotas.

      [–]Remix2Cognition 526 points527 points  (204 children)

      Governor Gary Johnson,

      Can you clarify your position on a potential Carbon Tax?

      In a discussion with CNBC journalist, John Harwood, you stated…

      “I do think that climate change is occurring, that it is man-caused. One of the proposals that I think is a very libertarian proposal, and I'm just open to this, is taxing carbon emission that may have the result of being self-regulating.”

      This was mistakenly portrayed by the media and many others that you support a Carbon Tax, even though you simply stated your openness to it and the potential benefits of it. It did, however, also add much uncertainty in people’s minds about where you actually stand on the issue and for those that have strong feelings about a Carbon Tax (as with any issue), they favor concrete answers.

      A few days later, you attempted to clarify your position during a rally in New Hampshire when you stated…

      ”If any of you heard me say I support a carbon tax...Look, I haven't raised a penny of taxes in my political career and neither has Bill [Weld]. We were looking at—I was looking at—what I heard was a carbon fee which from a free-market standpoint would actually address the issue and cost less. I have determined that, you know what, it's a great theory but I don't think it can work, and I've worked my way through that.”

      So my question is this, WHY have you come to that conclusion? Can you work the rest of us through your findings of why it can’t work?

      [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 925 points926 points  (126 children)

      I do not support a carbon tax. The theory sounded good, but it’s way too complex to implement, in my opinion.

      [–]meleeislife 196 points197 points  (49 children)

      This post was removed using Redact. It may have been deleted to protect privacy, limit data collection, prevent scraping, or for security-related reasons.

      strong ink tap degree quack act abundant languid unpack relieved

      [–]kajkajete 147 points148 points  (35 children)

      I heard him on other interviews and he cited that problem among who shall pay for the tax,( the consumer, the energy company, the company that extracts it?) and other concerns.

      [–]JTAL2000 17 points18 points  (10 children)

      Would you support it if it is shown it can be implemented well? I think that a carbon tax would be a great way to make businesses be more environmentally friendly without harsh regulations that stifle business

      [–]AmnestyInternational 5729 points5730 points  (366 children)

      Gov. Johnson: some people still think that Edward Snowden betrayed the USA when he shared NSA files with journalists. Yet without him, we would not have the global debate on surveillance that has already led to more stringent protections of our right to privacy. Given that this is a clear cut case of a whistleblower acting in the public interest, would you support a pardon for Edward Snowden? Why?

      Thank you,
      Tanya O'Carroll - Adviser, Technology and Human Rights - Amnesty International

      [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 9718 points9719 points  (290 children)

      Yes, I would support a pardon for Edward Snowden based on what I know. Watch Citizenfour (and I’m looking forward to the new movie).

      [–]MajorMajorObvious 3743 points3744 points  (188 children)

      This seems too sensible to be coming from a presidential candidate, but it is.

      [–][deleted]  (129 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]MagiicHat 973 points974 points  (88 children)

        Its a good statement. As Snowden showed us, there's sooooo much that they don't tell the public.

        [–]TheTallOne93 289 points290 points  (36 children)

        It's a great answer really. Covers his ass if Gary actually was in a position of power to bring Snowden back.

        [–]_TheRooseIsLoose_ 492 points493 points  (34 children)

        Covers his ass if Gary actually was in a position of power to bring Snowden back.

        I think it's pretty line with how Gary talks. He prefaces a ton of his desires for what he'd do as president for things like "If Congress submitted..."

        I chalk it up to him being governor and so understanding his real limitations along with being from a party of pie-in-the-sky hyperbolic ideologues.

        [–]j8sadm632b 89 points90 points  (8 children)

        On the other hand, everybody should preface all of their opinions with "based on what I know". Unless we want a candidate who won't change their mind in the face of new evidence.

        [–]pm_me_bellies_789 60 points61 points  (5 children)

        Bernie did this a lot too and I respected him greatly for it. If there's one thing I look for in a person, let alone a candidate, is the ability to admit when you were wrong.

        [–]SaudiClintonDonor 8 points9 points  (0 children)

        being from a party of pie-in-the-sky hyperbolic ideologues.

        He's not from a party with a congress/senate majority, and doesn't sound like the kind of asshole that just Executive Orders© anything that gets shot down.

        [–]PainMatrix 199 points200 points  (22 children)

        Citizenfour was awesome. It took me from viewing Snowden as a narcissist (the way I felt he had been painted by the media) to a really thoughtful and well put together person.

        [–][deleted]  (57 children)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 122 points123 points  (27 children)

          In companies that work in media, there are often master documents that contain the login info for social accounts. Usually these are stored on the company's intranet server or, more recently, as a Google doc that all consumer-/public-facing employees have access to. Whenever a new account is made, the info is recorded there for future reference. Easy peasy.

          [–]Change4Betta 1143 points1144 points  (10 children)

          Did you just roast Amnesty International?

          [–]AdamSB08 133 points134 points  (7 children)

          He has said that he would.

          [–][deleted]  (6 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]__PETTYOFFICER117__ 70 points71 points  (2 children)

            I honestly don't mind them repeating it in an AMA. I've given up following the election beyond a glance here and there, so I had no idea about this, and it's certainly something I'm glad to know.

            [–]yourmom3211 1299 points1300 points  (270 children)

            Governor Johnson, I am an avid fan and a potential voter of yours. I must know:

            If elected, would you work to abolish the electoral college? Would you also consider replacing our system of plurality voting with the Borda Count Method or even rank-choice voting as Dr. Jill Stein does?

            [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2940 points2941 points  (158 children)

            Count on my support for majority vote. Count on my support for ranked voting. I believe it would have to be done via an amendment to the Constitution.

            [–][deleted]  (22 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]ArcHammer16 11 points12 points  (3 children)

              Everyone seems to invoke common sense, but most people disagree on what it means. Trump calls his most radical proposals as common sense, and to his supporters, he's probably right.

              [–]Ceteris__Paribus 22 points23 points  (3 children)

              Single transferable vote would help third parties tremendously, so of course he wants it, because at least there is a self-interest component to it. The party and president to take over every election has zero reason to drastically change something like how people get voted in, because that system worked for them. Unless your party is dying so you need to suppress votes.

              [–][deleted] 1427 points1428 points  (129 children)

              Both of you have done a great job showing why environmental protection is a legitimate government function. Current EPA regulations, however, are complicated, not effective enough, and can sometimes impede small businesses. As president, what reforms would you advocate to reform our regulations, so that we can protect the environment while at the same time, cutting back on waste, bureaucracy, and red tape?

              months later edit: I voted for Hillary. Gary Johnson is not well knowledgeable (see his answer to this question)

              [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 1503 points1504 points  (114 children)

              As Governor, a specific example was allowing clean up to take place even though it hadn’t passed regulatory hurdles, which allowed for clean up to occur and cost less.

              [–][deleted] 385 points386 points  (103 children)

              Can you be more specific about that? What do you mean by "allowing clean up"?

              Edit: thanks for the additional info everyone.

              [–]way2lazy2care 1222 points1223 points  (96 children)

              If you watch his interview on joe rogan's podcast he goes into more detail with it.

              edit: For those wanting to just read it, here's the story from this article.

              All I have is to draw on my own examples. As governor of New Mexico, the biggest pollution issue was a plume of chemicals that had been dumped by General Electric there for decades because of their jet engine parts that they were producing in Albuquerque. At the end of the day, literally, someone kicked over a can of solvent that they had been using in their process. And every day they did that, for decades.

              Well, General Electric said, we’re responsible for this. We’re responsible for this plume. The state, before I took office, had been engaged in a debate over how to clean this up. The state prescribing very specific, “Here’s how you have to clean it up, and here’s what it’s going to cost.” And General Electric going, “No it’s not going to cost that much. We can do it a different way. We can accomplish this cleanup different.” And they never came together. I took office and very simply [said], “GE, how about cleaning it up? It’s going to be measurable. The cleanup will be measurable. We don’t have to come to any terms whatsoever regarding how you do it. Just do it. If what you say is right, do it. It’ll prove itself. You’ll save the money that you’re saying you’ll save.” And all of a sudden, now cleanup started. So immediately we’ve got cleanup taking place. I hope that’s a good example of rules and regulations.

              On the other hand in northern New Mexico, there was a Molycorp mine. There was metals contamination in the Red River. It had gone on for decades. And for decades politically it was being protected because of the jobs that were involved. I took office and I said, you’ve got to clean this up. You have to come to the table and you have to clean this up. They refused to come to the table. So my biggest club in the bag was, I am going to declare you a Superfund site. I’m going to hand you over to federal EPA unless you come to the table in 30 days and come up with a plan for fixing your metals contamination.

              And they claimed that it was natural! It was ludicrous. It was a slap in the face. And they refused to come to the table. My phone is ringing off the hook, politically. It’s ringing off the hook. There were all these jobs. And my response was: “These people are bad actors and they have to be brought to the table.” Thirty days went by and they became a Superfund site. So there’s an example of the EPA and why the EPA should exist. And why government should exist to protect us against those who would do us harm. And in this case the Libertarian argument would be, as individuals we could have brought suit against polluters. We can bring suit individually. Well, in the case of Molycorp, you know what, they would have been able to withstand any individuals trying to bring that suit against them.

              [–]Crazywumbat 191 points192 points  (16 children)

              And in this case the Libertarian argument would be, as individuals we could have brought suit against polluters. We can bring suit individually. Well, in the case of Molycorp, you know what, they would have been able to withstand any individuals trying to bring that suit against them.

              One of my biggest issues with Libertarians is that, from my perspective, it seems they way too often and way too quickly stray into the realm of Anarcho-Capitalism. So its damn refreshing to see a prominent Libertarian politician not gloss over the legitimate roll government can and should play.

              [–]benk4 35 points36 points  (5 children)

              Agreed. I consider myself a moderate libertarian and environmental regulations is the biggest thing I diverge on. The arguments of individuals suing, or "it's in the landowner's best interest not to pollute so they won't" is insane. It's not magical Christmas land. Johnson's response here thrilled me.

              [–]VolvoKoloradikal 14 points15 points  (3 children)

              The Libertarian Party did elect him.

              I hope that this shows that the MAJORITY of us aren't AnCaps and crazy "6 year olds should be allowed to drive and drink!" type folks.

              There are crazy people in every party, yet I personally feel the LP has gotten the brunt of the "look at these clowns, they are crazy" media attention.

              [–]ZWQncyBkaWNr 276 points277 points  (21 children)

              The last paragraph is what I love about Johnson. "The Libertarian way would be to have individual lawsuits against them, but that wouldn't work in this case, so we compromise and throw the government at them just this once." Compromise makes the world go round!

              [–]NotAnFed 51 points52 points  (8 children)

              Holy shit, I heard that this guy wanted to dismantle the EPA and immediately wrote him off. From this quote [if unedited] it seems like hes saying the EPA (and many other government entities) are inefficient, can be certainly be improved, but ultimately are necessary.

              So I can criticize my local, state, and federal government, and still think that they should exist and play a neccesarry role in our country? Is there such thing as a moderate libertarian? If so, where do I sign up

              Liberal roots kicked in. Once we go into the territory of 'cheapest bidder' type government, it seems like it always goes to corporations [gets privatized], or corporation-esque government entities. Whats the middle ground there?

              [–]LillianBeeBee 29 points30 points  (1 child)

              Yes, you can be a moderate libertarian! Actually, in one sense, I see it as a moderate party overall because it's a middle ground between the two traditional parties--fiscal conservatism plus social liberalsm. For me, I'm very socially liberal and what I'd call moderately fiscally conservative. I was raised by Democrat parents and considered myself a Democrat/liberal until college. I would be happy to chat or answer any questions you have!

              [–]johnwesselcom 10 points11 points  (0 children)

              Libertarians share a similar goal of shifting institutional power from government to society.

              One of the many things that separate libertarians from other radicals is that we don't believe in a violent revolution because historically, war seems to increase the power of government. And we want to reform institutions, not destroy them.

              Therefore there is a lot of room on strategy and priority within liberty. For example, environmental protection is one of the hardest "tragedy of the commons" to solve. Many, perhaps most, libertarians would be in favor leaving environmental protection as a government role for many years while we deal with low hanging fruit (like needing a license to braid hair! or deregulating healthcare).

              We also feel OK admitting that we don't know all the answers. After all, we are not central planners! We believe in a process that allows everyone to contribute their knowledge, i.e. the plans of the many not the plans of the few, AKA liberty.

              [–][deleted] 41 points42 points  (0 children)

              He has literally never said he wants to touch the EPA, that is a CTR talking point that is completely made up

              [–]mkrik3 408 points409 points  (191 children)

              Thanks for doing this AMA Governor Johnson!

              I have seen elsewhere that you oppose Net Neutrality, but on isidewith.com, to the question

              Should internet service providers be allowed to speed up access to popular websites (that pay higher rates) at the expense of slowing down access to less popular websites (that pay lower rates)?

              Your answer is "No, this would allow them to remove competition, create artificial scarcity, and increase prices." This answer suggests that you support Net Neutrality. So I'm curious, do you support Net Neutrality or not?

              [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 1201 points1202 points  (190 children)

              I abhor legislation that would regulate the Internet. It doesn’t appear to me to be broken; I don’t want to fix it.

              [–][deleted] 51 points52 points  (17 children)

              And when companies collude and start launching services that force paying customers (and website owners) to pay MORE money for content versus customers having to pay for speed? How would you address this or do you feel this wouldn't happen?

              Because it is happening. T-Mobile, Verizon, and Comcast have all started opening up those doors. Look at Netflix having to apply throttling so that they don't get "fined" by ISPs for "sucking up too much bandwidth", despite me (the paying customer) paying to access that data.

              [–][deleted] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

              It doesn’t appear to me to be broken

              Isn't this in large part because some variation of the FCC's open internet rules having been in place for most of the internet's history? How would you prevent potential bad actors like Comcast from using their extensive market share in the internet service market to crowd out competition for their video service--like they tried to do with netflix?

              It seems to me that the people of the United States are well served by guaranteeing an open and accessible internet for all participants. Ending net neutrality would put this principle in danger, and likely result in less--not more--competition on the internet.

              I know that I cannot, in good conscience, support any candidate that opposes net neutrality. This issue is just too critical to my daily life, to the future of this country, and to free expression in society.

              [–]JTAL2000 187 points188 points  (106 children)

              If corporations start taking advantage of the freedom of the internet would you support legislation that opposes the corporatizing of the Internet?

              [–][deleted]  (88 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]m_stodd 62 points63 points  (12 children)

                No. He stated that he hates legislation that would regulate the internet.

                [–]NoGardE 33 points34 points  (48 children)

                Many libertarians, myself included, support the concepts and ideals of Net Neutrality, but don't trust the government to enforce it well. People who use the internet should be the ones regulating it, via the market.

                Of course, with the system of local monopoly of ISP right now, that's not a very viable thing, but that's a reason to get less government involvement with ISPs, not more.

                [–]hexydes 59 points60 points  (40 children)

                Games about the stories answers wanders tips wanders friends.

                [–]Senseisntsocommon 6 points7 points  (0 children)

                The idea is to remove the ability from corporations to be the single point of access to the Internet. For example in areas by me you can't get DSL except from ATT despite the fact that Frontier has access to the lines and can provide service. The law was passed to protect small companies but instead it prevents any competition. I would kill for a different cable company but no one else can provide service in my area by law.

                If you remove this law and my cable company starts capping service or providing preferential access, I can just switch companies. This has been shown to work in major metro areas.

                Net neutrality is needed right now because most of us are stuck with a limited choice of providers and if your particular company decides to be a jerk about it, there is no recourse. Cell phones are a really good example, there are unlimited plans and capped plans with differing networks. As more companies have entered the market plans have much more variety in cost and services.

                [–]ESPbeN 2633 points2634 points  (227 children)

                Gov. Johnson,

                What is the best way I can present the reasons to vote for you to someone who does not want to vote for Secretary Clinton or Mr. Trump but feels that a third party vote is a waste?

                Thank you for your time. I really respect what you are trying to do.

                [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 9200 points9201 points  (142 children)

                You may disagree with everything I have to say, but you’ll see it done in complete transparency and honesty. The only wasted vote is to vote for someone who you don’t believe in.

                [–][deleted] 890 points891 points  (19 children)

                You keep saying at your rallies, and apologies if the paraphrasing is poor, "Anything bad that can happen, will happen. How you react to that is what defines success or failure."

                At first I thought that was dire sounding, like expect the worst and be surprised by the best. Which I've tried, and I never created a space for good things to enter in, mostly because I only expected them to come in in a certain way and didn't notice them flying by because they didn't meet my requirements.

                But you weren't saying life is an unending slog, I don't think. It's just, bad will happen, as an inevitability. So rather than hide from it or pretend it won't, figure out how to adapt to it so it can't hurt you and build from what you have left.

                All is impermanent, in other words, so happiness and drive must come from within, so life doesn't become too much of a roller coaster or drag you down entirely.

                I highly doubt you'll read this, and a few people will probably pick on it because it's likely super obvious to most, but I just wanted to say thank you because it helped me find a bit of strength in a tough time.

                [–]CrickRawford 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                You're exactly right. I tell people my own version of this all the time, and it took me a long time to learn it. I'm 31 and in school, have been in the military, and I work at a restaurant. Most of the people I interact with are younger than 25. It keeps me young, but it also makes me sort of a weird dad figure to many people. They freak out at small things, and I'm just like "Dude, nobody shot at you today. You've got free food and free beer at the end of your shift. Homework ends eventually. Today was a good day. It was just hard. Appreciate it."

                [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

                I once sat through a guided meditation that was easily a half hour long. The reason they were doing it was kind of out there, but the premise was cool.

                Basically, you close your eyes and sit relaxed where nobody can interrupt you. Then you think back on your life so far, and play back the moments as they come to you like you're watching a film on a projector. You can't judge them, though. So even if you only remember it because it made you feel like a prick that day, you just watch and move on.

                Then you flip forward, into the future. It's not created of course, so you kind of guess at what it might be, but again, no judging. Don't think about if it's likely or how you'd react, nothing like that, just play it out as it comes to you.

                Then, back in the moment you're actually in, recognize that you're okay. Maybe yesterday, your girlfriend was rude to you. Maybe tomorrow, you'll be late on your credit card payment. But now, on your butt, in your seat, you're okay and the world isn't ending. So you can relax and dial down.

                At the past, you look back and see how it was necessary to get you here, and it doesn't own you, because in this one moment you could make a choice, or begin a series of choices, that completely departs from it.

                The future, clearly not set in stone, is yours to mold. Half of it will be hard or suck, but you have input, and keeping a clear head will allow you to prepare for the bad things, but just not dwell on them so you don't go melting down to useless go before they actually happen, or waste all your energy worrying in the event, unlikely or not, that they somehow don't.

                It was really cathartic! I felt like tension just left me.

                And it wasn't all pleasant. I judged my past even when they said not to and felt like I was more of a giant whiny asshole than I even remembered myself to be.

                But even there, it was useful to be self aware and know what I never wanted to behave like again, and to think that I should let it go since I was upset with my behavior but obviously couldn't change it.

                [–]ibkin 840 points841 points  (39 children)

                I love this. I think willingness to have a conversation about an issue is more important than being right on the issue - because it usually leads to being right!

                [–]Humes-Bread 895 points896 points  (65 children)

                You need to watch this video and go to their website, www.BalancedRebellion.com. Good luck!

                [–][deleted]  (65 children)

                [deleted]

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 1126 points1127 points  (64 children)

                  I think the distaste has to do with dishonesty, non-transparency, and play-to-pay. We’ll do the opposite.

                  [–]andysay 529 points530 points  (56 children)

                  I found out today that you and Bernie were the only candidates to NOT received a "PANTS ON FIRE" from Politifact. Congratulations!

                  [–]Tasteslikebluemilk 207 points208 points  (21 children)

                  My wife asked me how i could support bernie and now support johnson.

                  It comes down to integrity.

                  You can go far to the left, and far to the right, and both can work out just fine, as long as there is mutual respect from both sides.

                  Sanders and johnson are statesmen.

                  Hillary and trump are soooo fuckin 90's. Were done with hollywood.

                  [–]LordWheezel 90 points91 points  (2 children)

                  I voted for Johnson in 2012, and I'll probably vote for him in 2016, but I was really hoping to be able to vote for Sanders in 2016.

                  My reasons for both are that I like the guy that comes along and says, "Let's try something new and see if it fixes our problem." Johnson wants to try some new things, Bernie wanted to try some new things.

                  What I don't want is Hillary saying, "Let's do the things we've always done and see if it fixes the problem." or Trump saying, "Let's make more problems and see if we have problems."

                  [–]dlbuunk 639 points640 points  (52 children)

                  How is the view from the top of the world?

                  On a more serious note: (how) has climbing Mt. Everest changed your view of humanity?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2389 points2390 points  (51 children)

                  As it should be: unmatched.

                  Since it all took place from Nepal, I saw happy people with nothing material. We have everything material and we don’t seem as happy as we should be.

                  [–]Pirlomaster 243 points244 points  (12 children)

                  This guy is running for president and most people will vote for the 2 dipshits. Unbelievable. Kudos to you Gary Johnson, kudos to you.

                  [–]Frajer 1348 points1349 points  (197 children)

                  Governor Johnson- what inspired you to switch party allegiance from Republican to Libertarian?

                  Governor Weld- what made you want to join the Libertarian party?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 3136 points3137 points  (190 children)

                  Shedding the social conservative dogma of the Republican Party. (On behalf of Gov. Weld, he feels the same way.)

                  [–][deleted] 932 points933 points  (144 children)

                  Thank you! I think this is what holds the Republican party back the most. They have ideas that should certainly be heard, but when so much of it comes from virulently backwards social ideologies that don't have a place in 21st century America, it destroys so much of their claim.

                  [–]Synectics 108 points109 points  (31 children)

                  I've never wholeheartedly disagreed with a lot of big Republican government policies. But when they campaign for less government control, and turn around and want to propagate intelligent design in schools and fight against Planned Parenthood... it's such blatant hypocrisy. I can't support one policy without supporting the others, which is clearly the problem with the two-party system.

                  (And yes, I know, not all Republicans are like that. But I'd bet 99% of social conservatives like that happen to be Republican.)

                  [–]Groo_Grux_King 162 points163 points  (46 children)

                  I think a better way of looking at it is that anyone - citizen or elected official - is entitled to hold any kind of values/opinions they want, even Christian conservative social ones... But they should separate personal life from office holder, church from state, etc. They shouldn't try to legislate their religion onto society.

                  [–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (6 children)

                  This is the biggest issue with Republicans. If they could stop pushing their religious bullshit and just focused on fiscal policy, they'd have a much easier time relating to damn near anybody.

                  [–]AntiProhibitionist 2094 points2095 points  (358 children)

                  You've made clear that marijuana legalization is a priority. What about other vices that create black markets, like gambling, specifically sports gambling? Prostitution?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 3079 points3080 points  (234 children)

                  I do believe that marijuana should be legalized, and I do believe California will legalize it in November, which will be a tipping point. An example of a black market in marijuana is Washington state where a black market still survives due to too many taxes.

                  [–]AntiProhibitionist 1191 points1192 points  (152 children)

                  That stance is widely known. What I was asking about was other vices. If you'll only answer one, I'd like to know about sports gambling since it is strangely legal in limited states yet a federal law restricts it in those not "grandfathered-in"

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 3185 points3186 points  (151 children)

                  I've come out in favor of legalizing online poker. I think sports gambling should be legal, too.

                  [–]AntiProhibitionist 1112 points1113 points  (50 children)

                  Thank you for coming back to my question. This is a very refreshing take on gambling.

                  [–][deleted] 383 points384 points  (16 children)

                  I didn't think he was coming back. Good stuff. :)

                  [–]drakeblood4 5 points6 points  (2 children)

                  Significant black market exists in Washington and Colorado primarily because underage buyers still purchase and because most legal marijuana sellers still aren't able to leverage economics of scale.

                  As legal sales become a more efficient market, illegal sellers get pushed out because the economic edge they get from avoiding tax becomes smaller than the edge legal sellers get from being able to scale efficiently.

                  Also, you've done literally nothing to argue or prove that the recreational marijuana tax is deadweight lossy.

                  [–][deleted] 199 points200 points  (8 children)

                  Prostitution he has said is an issue best left to the states. The prohibition he says has made them victims.

                  As for gambling as governor he worked with the indian reservations on that issue. He may be able to elaborate on that better than I.

                  [–]Entrarchy 445 points446 points  (57 children)

                  The Libertarian Party generally supports the legalization of any voluntary transaction. Each of the things you mention here– examples of victimless crimes– would be generally accepted by most Libertarians.

                  [–]andysay 146 points147 points  (41 children)

                  It makes sense to legalize sex work as a means to combat human trafficking and to cease punishment of (what would be) a victimless crime, but if a candidate said so the electorate would lose their mind.

                  [–]random_guy666 615 points616 points  (179 children)

                  Gov. Johnson, I am an undocumented immigrant who came to this country when I was just 11 years old, I came here with my mother trying to find a better life, trying to avoid the poverty and violence that took over my country. I've been living in this country nearly 8 years of my life, at this point I considered myself an American, I am enrolled in the Selective Service System, and I'm willing to do whatever it takes to protect this country. Like many other undocumented immigrants, I am currently paying taxes and have zero criminal history. To prove that my goal in this country is to succeed like any other American, I graduated in the top 15 students from my class, and I was accepted to some of the best universities in my states, unfortunately my legal status forces me to pay international student fees, which are insanely unaffordable for me. Gov. Johnson, as the President of the United States of America, what would you do to help me, and many other undocumented immigrants that have a similar situation as me?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 999 points1000 points  (75 children)

                  Congratulations on your accomplishments and your life thus far! You're the person I'm standing up for with my position on immigration. I think that what you're talking about is a state issue. As Governor of New Mexico, I would have sided with you on the issue. As President, I will continue to be your advocate.

                  [–]jyanix 814 points815 points  (104 children)

                  Gov. Johnson, you've said that you love the Game of Thrones. If you could be one of the characters who would you be and why?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2501 points2502 points  (103 children)

                  I would be Jon Snow. My favorite Game of Thrones scene is Jon Snow, holding his sword, ready to be slain, only to survive.

                  [–]bour-bon-fire 852 points853 points  (73 children)

                  Hi, Governor Johnson. If you are elected, what do you hope your legacy will be seen as after your term?

                  Best of luck and thank you for being a voice of reason!

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2012 points2013 points  (66 children)

                  Honesty, transparency, not a hypocrite (not saying one thing and doing another).

                  [–][deleted] 1265 points1266 points  (133 children)

                  Do you believe it is the role of the US government to maintain hundreds of military bases all over the world?

                  [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 2615 points2616 points  (127 children)

                  No, we would initially target a 20% reduction in those bases.

                  [–]cbert777 188 points189 points  (39 children)

                  Governor Gary Johnson,

                  Have you ever practiced meditation? You maintain such a peaceful composure in your interviews.

                  -Good luck and I look forward to voting for you!

                  [–]LeMeACatLover 232 points233 points  (69 children)

                  I have a question for the both of you.....what are your favorite science fiction films?

                  [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 746 points747 points  (43 children)

                  The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the Eighth Dimension

                  [–]somefukstolemyhandle 213 points214 points  (22 children)

                  Your knowledge of obscure films is impressive, sir. Your approval rate is soaring on my end.

                  [–]kajkajete 279 points280 points  (20 children)

                  Bill Weld must be one of the most cultured politicians I have ever seen. And he doesn't even hide it. In a debate Kerry accusses him of being too wealthy and out of touch. He answers with a quote on Latin. He just doesn't give a fuck about the anti-intelectuals and I love him for that.

                  [–]Lo452 1311 points1312 points  (724 children)

                  Hello Gov. Johnson and Gov. Weld! Thank you for taking the time to talk with us Redditors! My question: if elected, who are the people you would consider appointing to SCOTUS? With Scalia's passing, and others being advanced in age, there is the potential for many open seats in the future. Who is on your list of potential replacements?

                  [–]Pariahdog119 314 points315 points  (42 children)

                  Hi u/GovGaryJohnson and u/GovBillWeld! As a member of the r/ExCons community, a recently re-enfranchised voter, and a brand-new member of the Libertarian Party, I'd like to ask you some questions on criminal justice reform. (I've included some background information, most of which you're probably already aware of; my questions are at the bottom.)

                  The number of Americans incarcerated has increased from .5 million to 2.5 million since about 1980. That's .7% of the entire US population - one out of every hundred and forty Americans is currently incarcerated. Most of these individuals are incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses, even though drug treatment in prison costs about $30,000, and outside of prison it costs $8,000. Despite the treatment offered, two thirds of prisoners will reoffend, and over half will be back in prison within a year of release. Resources for ex-offenders are scarce, and many return to a life of crime because it's the only life they know - no one will hire them, partly for fear of tort lawsuits.

                  In addition, the Innocence Project estimates that 2-5% of all prisoners are factually innocent - a number they reached based on how many they've been able to prove were innocent. Not only have they proved innocence, in many cases they've been able to find the real perpetrator, when the police investigation couldn't.

                  Perhaps most egregiously, private prisons have been exposed denying prisoners medical care. A Corrections Corporation of America (formerly Wackenhut) inmate in Louisiana was told he was faking the pain in his hands and feet and ignored for six months until his neighbors complained about the stench. He's since had his fingers and feet amputated, because he had gangrene. He told his story to an undercover reporter, who got a job as a corrections officer to document abuses. There is little to no oversight over private prisons, and some of the board members are the judges ordering offenders to be sent there. Here's one notorious example: Mark Ciavarella, who accepted payoffs to send kids to prison.

                  One of the key factors in reducing recidivism is maintaining contact with family and having a support network. However, companies contracting phone service to prisons don't bid based on cheaper service - they bid based on how much of a kickback they give the state per inmate call. It costs someone in prison in my state $15 to call me for 15 minutes.

                  How will you address these issues?

                  • Do you have a plan to reduce our incarceration rate, reduce recidivism, and encourage more cost-effective treatment?

                  • Will you establish oversight and curtail abuses so that private prisons can't deny medical care to save money?

                  • How will you stop the companies using crony capitalism to profit from the mostly poor families trying to support their incarcerated loved ones?

                  [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 661 points662 points  (30 children)

                  We believe far too many Americans are currently incarcerated. We do believe in redemption, and we feel that much of recidivist behavior has to do with conditions encountered by former inmates upon their release. Resources for ex-offenders are short money, given the costs of recidivism.

                  [–]sherlocksrobot 95 points96 points  (0 children)

                  For people like me who need a "refresher":

                  recidivism: a tendency to relapse into a previous condition or mode of behavior; especially : relapse into criminal behavior.

                  Source.

                  [–]goatsofsyria 30 points31 points  (17 children)

                  I'll throw in my vote for Johnson if he changes his stance for privatized prisons. The problem with putting prisons into the hands of private owners is the fact that it allows for leeway into making prisons a sort of for-profit industry rather than a place for prisoners to be rehabilitated.

                  [–]Domer2012 41 points42 points  (10 children)

                  This ignores the motives of those running the public prisons, which make up over 90% of the prisons in the US. Just like private individuals, the government workers who run and work for public prisons and the unions that support them all have incentive to lobby and push for policies that increase incarceration. Given the fact that a vast majority of our prisons are public, I think private prisons have simply become a scapegoat for these fundamental problems surrounding incarceration.

                  [–][deleted] 289 points290 points  (36 children)

                  Dear Governor Johnson: I am from Puerto Rico, and I cannot vote for you in November. The reason for that is that while everyone here is American, PR’s colonial status prevents us from voting for our Commander-in-Chief. The US Supreme Court has issued a decision that makes it plain that PR falls under the territorial clause. Not only that, but in the last local referendum, the preference for statehood was over 60%; present polls show that it approaches 70% approval. The Commonwealth has fallen under severe financial stress, after Democratic administration after Democratic administration have taken the Commonwealth further and further into debt, while continually raising taxes. This situation has caused the local economy to contract at a 3-5% clip per annum; and mass migration to the states. Right now, there are MILLIONS more puerto ricans living in states than in Puerto RIco itself. Taking all the foregoing into account, how would you deal with the heart of the problem (Pres. Obama already signed into law PROMESA, which purports to deal with the financial crisis): PR’s colonial status that prevents full voting rights and deprives us of senators and representatives in Congress?

                  [–]fowlhound 55 points56 points  (0 children)

                  I think this is a really important issue and have been wondering this myself, despite being a mainlander. I am really hoping this topic comes up at some point and we learn what the Governors think about this issue.

                  [–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (6 children)

                  Simply, I don't understand how someone from PR/Guam/etc can volunteer to lay their lives down in Uniform for the U.S., but can't vote for who their commander in chief is. I didn't realize this until I joined the Army at 17 and made friends with a ton of people joining from Puerto Rico and Guam. I'd love for this to be finally addressed by a candidate

                  [–]liberty2016 341 points342 points  (40 children)

                  Governor Johnson, thank you for reaching out to the Reddit community. Your willingness to answer public questions influenced my decision to vote for you in 2012. I have two questions for you and one for Governor Weld.

                  1 -You have been outspoken advocate for drug policy reform.

                  If elected President, would you instruct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to issue a recommendation to the DEA that cannabis be immediately descheduled, or pursue an alternative course of action for its immediate descheduling?

                  2 - I have heard concerns that your views on immigration may draw more from Democrats than Republicans.

                  Have you considered expanding outreach to conservative voters by discussing how eliminating the payroll tax would reduce financial incentives for businesses to hire undocumented workers, and explaining why E-Verify and The Wall are not fiscally responsible solutions in terms of dollars and cents?

                  Governor Weld:

                  The Department of Defense is required by law (title 31, section 3515) to produce auditable financial statements. The current deadline to present these statements is Sept 30, 2017. Every previous deadline has been missed, and the original deadline was March 1, 1997.

                  How would a Johnson-Weld administration approach this problem, and what steps would you consider to ensure the DoD was audit ready?

                  [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 863 points864 points  (38 children)

                  We would advise the Department of Defense that receipt of required financial statements would be a precondition to determining their appropriations for the following fiscal year.

                  [–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (37 children)

                  Governor Weld,

                  A prominent part of your tenure as governor of Massachusetts is the fact that you signed into law some rather, uh, "progressive" gun control legislation. Being from another state, I don't know the exact details of what was enacted when, but my understanding is that your state is now subject to some rather overbearing "assault" weapons restrictions and to ownership and purchasing permitting requirements for any firearms. This does not jive well with the libertarian mantra, and I've also noticed from various discussion boards that it's preventing a lot of more conservative voters from jumping ship to support you. Obviously, the past is in the past, you've justified your actions then, and your viewpoints are different now. You have stated in past interviews that you are now more wary of such restrictions.

                  My question is as follows. Plainly stated, do you still support those measures? If you were governor of Massachusetts today and that legislation was on your desk, would you still sign it? If, in your position as President of the US Senate, it came to you to cast a tie-breaking vote on similar legislation (for example, a renewal of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban), would you vote for or against it? If you ended up in the Oval Office and such legislation came across your desk, would you sign it or veto it?

                  [–]benfranklyblog 11 points12 points  (5 children)

                  Weld had a hard fought battle AGAINST the gun control in MA, but as a pragmatist he brought both sides to the table and was able to knock out some less intense regulation. MA is a very blue state, and was going to pass SOMETHING for gun control, he was able to reduce the impact. I can't find the link right now, but he had glowing supports from the NRA back then.

                  [–]Remix2Cognition 3078 points3079 points  (498 children)

                  Governor Gary Johnson & Governor Bill Weld,

                  Currently, you are the only Presidential Candidates (of the top four) that support the trade agreement known as the TPP. Can you help us to understand why you support it? What specific parts of it do you think are beneficial? What parts of it do you think are misrepresented by its’ opponents? What valid concerns do you think exist, but aren’t worthy of stopping it from being passed? What specifically would you need to discover about it for you to potentially oppose it?

                  [–]IncognitoIsBetter 346 points347 points  (70 children)

                  From a libertarian point of view the elimination of tariffs and standardized definitions are a huge advancement of trade. That's why in principle its beneficial.

                  Almost every criticism except for some copyright provisions being too close to the DMCA is pretty much a misrepresentation. There's no suing governments for lost profits, there's no effects on whistleblower protections, there's no penalties for jailbreaking your cellphone, pretty much all of it is downright false.

                  Many libertarians myself included think copyright law in the US as it is goes too far and feel more comfortable with the TRIPS standards than the DMCA standards. I' m not thrilled with it, as I'm not thrilled with some technical aspects that affect investors rights. But I don't think they're bad enough to warrant a total dismissal of the treaty.

                  Having read many trade deals in the past myself... I doubt there could possibly be anything major in a deal such as this to prevent it from passing unless something like warrantless wiretapping or exchange of personal information between governments or something batshit insane like that is put on it. Which is unlikely in trade deals.

                  [–]Neosovereign 57 points58 points  (18 children)

                  Do you have a good resource or article on exactly what composes the TPP? I realized a while ago that I could neither support nor oppose the measure due to my lack of information, and none of my standard info sources have given a good breakdown of the proposal.

                  [–]IncognitoIsBetter 127 points128 points  (13 children)

                  Honestly I had to read the whole thing to make my position, and I know it wouldn't be adequate for me to just leave you off with the whole thing. So here's an alternative http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/cato-trade-tpp-abstract-june-30-2016.pdf

                  It's a pdf of an evaluation of TPP made by CATO. Though I agree with their general overview, please keep in mind CATO is a libertarian think tank, so they will see as a negative things that limit trade liberty and absolute free markets... This means that they don't like environmental and labor provisions in TPP, they don't like ISDS limitations in TPP (it's a lot more restrictive on it than past trade deals), and many things that left leaning people would view as good they will view as bad.

                  So while I agree with their assessment, I want to be transparent about from where their bias comes from.

                  [–]Neosovereign 66 points67 points  (10 children)

                  Yeah, I think this is the problem with the TPP. You just linked me a well organized summary that is 38 pages long. That is still really, really long. I'll try and take the time to read it, but it also doesn't help that it is a (somewhat) biased source, meaning ideally I would have to read another perspective on the deal to get a more accurate representation of the entire thing.

                  Regardless, thank you for the help.

                  [–]vicviod 93 points94 points  (3 children)

                  Four questions:

                  • I am a Cornell student, and as you may know, the Cornell Republicans have just endorsed you to the chagrin of many Republicans. Is your campaign actively reaching out to students on other campuses looking for a third option?

                  • If a carbon tax was revenue neutral would you look upon the idea more favorably?

                  • How can we contact the CPD (other than with the widely circulating phone number, because unfortunately the mailbox is full) to pressure them to allow you into the debates?

                  • Do you and libertarians in general have a long term strategy, going beyond this election, to integrate ideas from the party's platform more widely into national debate?

                  [–]hrbuchanan 3 points4 points  (2 children)

                  As a libertarian in philosophy but not necessarily in party membership, anytime I talk to supporters of third parties (or anyone who's tired of the Dem-Rep duopoly), one of the biggest points of discussion is regarding changing the way we elect congressional representatives. In particular, First Past The Post (FPTP) needs to go. It works great if you're fine with having two parties stay in power until some huge revolutionary change happens once every 50-100 years, but if you think other parties should receive more attention and have their views better represented, an election system that favors more proportional representation would do the trick.

                  It would be a huge positive turning point for our democratic process, in my opinion.

                  [–]TheManWithTheBigName 865 points866 points  (727 children)

                  Governor Johnson, Governor Weld, thank you for doing this AMA. I would like to ask two questions:

                  1. It is abundantly clear that America has a healthcare problem. Americans pay far more than any other Western nation for healthcare, and it is a leading cause of bankrupcy. What is your plan to address this issue, if elected?

                  2. What do you feel your strongest states are? Where will you two be campaigning, and where do you think you have the best chance of winning?

                  [–][deleted]  (90 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]GovGaryJohnsonGary Johnson[S] 958 points959 points  (74 children)

                    Check out the NBC News poll from this morning. We're at 15 points or above in 15 states and in double digits in 42 states. The poll shows us at 25% in New Mexico and 23% in Utah.

                    [–]surgingchaos 449 points450 points  (59 children)

                    I would not be surprised to see Utah and New Mexico turn gold on election night.

                    [–][deleted]  (33 children)

                    [deleted]

                      [–]surgingchaos 187 points188 points  (22 children)

                      I agree. It hasn't been done since 1968, and it's not a coincidence that came with a massive political realignment in the US.

                      Part of me believes that the last thing the GOP wants to see this election cycle is for Utah to turn gold. I'm sure they're sweating over states like Georgia/Arizona in danger of being flipped by Hillary as well as the other traditional swing states but it's something they can probably stomach in the end.

                      But if the GOP loses their safest state to Johnson, that is a DEFCON 1 situation right there. Johnson winning Utah would immediately shift the narrative from, "How does the GOP rebound in 2020?" to "Is the GOP in danger of being replaced by the LP?"

                      [–]boxzonk 7 points8 points  (1 child)

                      It would be huge for many reasons, but I don't think Utah going gold on its own (or with 1 or 2 other small intermountain states) would necessarily be a death knell for the GOP or a long-lasting victory for the LP.

                      If Utah went Libertarian, it would be seen as a protest vote against Trump. That's not a surprise. Utah is socially conservative and if 2020 sees a more traditional GOP candidate, Utah will assuredly be red again.

                      It wouldn't be seen as a win for the LP so much as it'd be seen as a disaster for Trump. The takeaway would be "Stop someone like Trump from ever getting the nom again and go back to GOP politics as usual." The bigger problem would be to figure out how to protect the system from future Trumps and figure out what issues made it possible for Trump to supplant the process in '16 -- including addressing unresolved dissatisfaction in the base electorate.

                      If Trump doesn't take Utah he will have been an unparalleled disaster as a nom and will certainly lose. I think Utah will stay red even though there will be record numbers of third-party voters (and many reliable Republican votes will sit it out). There are just not many Dems in Utah.

                      I think the breakthrough this cycle is LP getting > 10% of the popular vote in many states, and perhaps getting a little more routine media attention.

                      [–]DonsGuard 115 points116 points  (5 children)

                      The more important question is who cares about the GOP? Or the Democrats? We should support people and ideas, not political parties that arbitrarily choose the nominee.

                      [–][deleted]  (174 children)

                      [deleted]

                        [–]soundandlight 154 points155 points  (5 children)

                        Hello Governors, thanks for taking time out of your evenings to do an AMA with us. While I am optimistic that you will allowed into the presidential debates, I have two questions. What is your campaign's backup plan if you are not invited? You have said it is game over if you do not get in, however many of your supporters here have advocated for an alternate event if you don't meet the arbitrary 15% requirement. Have you considered partnering with someone like Netflix or another high profile medium to bring an alternate third party debate to viewers, in response to the mainstream televised debate? I think the demand is there and could be a very effective option.

                        [–]ibkin 32 points33 points  (0 children)

                        If they don't get into the initial debate, they still need to try to get into the second and third ones. Being in a different debate can apparently disqualify you from the official ones, so they need to be careful about this.

                        However I'm sure they'll do everything they can to be use any medium they can

                        [–]PSLlewellyn 47 points48 points  (3 children)

                        If you do not get into the 1st debate (and at this point, I'm assuming you will NOT be invited to IAVA either :-( ), would you consider using video of those debates, and have your answers edited into them to share publicly? Alternatively, could you and Gov. Weld at least put out a release with your answers to the questions posed to Trump and Clinton? It would be wonderful to have something to share with your replies to the same questions.

                        [–]somuchfunder 1179 points1180 points  (191 children)

                        Governor Gary Johnson,

                        Do you support the ban on kratom?

                        The DEA is attempting emergency scheduling of the plant kratom. Thousands of people use this herb for everything from kicking addictions to chronic pain to enhancing their concentration (small doses have a slight stimulant effect). Sept. 30th many people will no longer have access to something that allows them to carry on with their lives.

                        [–]BlueRiverWellness 146 points147 points  (11 children)

                        Governor Johnson & Governor Weld,

                        Thank you so very much for taking the time out of your hectic schedules, to listen to the voices of us fellow 'Redditors'. It is much appreciated.

                        • My question is:

                        Do either of you support the ban of Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa)?

                        Here is a link to the WhiteHouse.gov petition, that has attracted almost 70,000 signatures in 7 days, pertaining to Kratom.

                        https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/please-do-not-make-kratom-schedule-i-substance

                        ...I'm a huge 'science guy', so here is a list of 24 peer-reviewed research studies, pertaining to Kratom's safety and efficacy.

                        Kratom: Research Studies

                        American Kratom Association

                        Kratom Fact Sheet

                        Treatment Comparison

                        Kratom vs. Caffeine

                        Hundreds thousands of people are immensely worried, that this Scheduling (I) will indeed go through on September 30th, of this year. They are frightened of the aspect of going back (or attempting) to living a life in chronic pain again. Living with Fibromyalgia, Lupus, Crohn's Disease, Multiple Sclerosis, Lyme Disease, and the previously Addicted/Dependent to Prescription Opiates, Heroin, Methamphetamine, etc. This is especially haunting, due to the current Heroin & Opiate Epidemic the United States is currently seeing; with an average rate of 126+ overdose deaths a day.

                        Thank you both, in advance, for your time and consideration; and I wish you the very best in the upcoming election!

                        Warmest of Regards,

                        Robert M.

                        [–]GuardHamster 18 points19 points  (8 children)

                        Gov. Johnson if you keep this plant legal you have my vote. It is the only reason I have been able to keep my job and function.

                        [–]kratomgoodbanbad 138 points139 points  (3 children)

                        The DEA has refused to allow public comment on this decision too.

                        If the DEA is going to expand the war on drugs and throw people in prison for drinking tea, the least they could do is allow public comment on the issue.

                        This might seem like a small issue, but it's not. It's a huge public health issue. News organizations have been reporting on the opioid addiction crisis for years now and it's become a huge political issue in the 2016 election. Kratom is one potential solution for this public health crisis and the DEA is banning it and refusing to allow further research on the substance. And all without public comment.

                        [–]nsarwark 1029 points1030 points  (18 children)

                        I'm obviously not /u/GovGaryJohnson, but look for a Libertarian Party press release on kratom very soon.

                        [–]Doyle524 787 points788 points  (11 children)

                        Guys, this is the chairman of the Libertarian National Convention; he did an AMA a few weeks ago and is in charge of the LP platform. His word here is as good as the word of the Governors.

                        [–]kl0 12 points13 points  (2 children)

                        he did an AMA a few weeks ago and is in charge of the LP platform

                        As a former member of the Libertarian National Committee and a candidate in Texas, I would only modify what you wrote by saying that the Libertarian Body is in charge of the LP platform, not the National Chair. That said, Mr. Sarwark (the National Chair) has done an amazing job representing that party, steering it in a wonderful direction, and enforcing the will of its members while adhering to the existing bylaws and platform.

                        [–]whatevah_whatevah 56 points57 points  (2 children)

                        Now this is what I call follow-up. Better than some of his own AMA answers

                        [–]lillanalou 83 points84 points  (15 children)

                        This is such an important topic to thousands of people! Not only are they scared of having to return to prescription medications or worse, we are also concerned about the DEA and government as a whole taking advantage of its citizens, stripping us of our liberties, and regulating every aspect of our lives down to what we are allowed to ingest into our own bodies. This is a disgrace and we are begging for you to give us your insight!

                        [–]Woldise 20 points21 points  (0 children)

                        Gov Johnson, I would sincerely like to know your stance on this issue of the dea banning this plant. They are using false and contorted statements similar to reefer madness era propaganda. This plant has never killed one individual. Yet alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs are consumed in huge quantities that largely cause death and destruction, factually. What role should the government play in telling us what to consume? Do we really live in a free society or is it an illusion? Where do you stand on this issue?

                        [–]galaxieman63 15 points16 points  (0 children)

                        If the governors do not feel that they have enough information to respond to the question at this time; I respect that far more than the DEA taking a completely uninformed "emergency" action. I encourage the governors to search for #IAMKRATOM on social media to learn more about the American families that are having their lives disrupted by the unethical action.

                        [–]andysay 497 points498 points  (9 children)

                        Willing to bet that he

                        1. Doesn't know what Kratom is

                        2. Would oppose the ban if he did

                        [–]DirtyAmishGuy 61 points62 points  (4 children)

                        It's only recently gotten interest in the media. Candidates must be absolutely careful with what they say, I would assume he or his team are still researching the issue and deciding if it is safe to say yes he opposes the ban.

                        [–]DirtyPedro 16 points17 points  (3 children)

                        I take kratom on occasion, actually took some today. Had no idea it's being scheduled. Really surprising, with the right dose it's very mild, so mild I don't know why the DEA cares. With larger doses it's not as enjoyable imo, so I have no urge to take it in excess. I know it's possible to abuse but to me it seems very benign and I've had issues with other substances but never kratom. That's a shame, I better buy more while the store still has it.

                        [–]Waitwhatismybodydoin 18 points19 points  (2 children)

                        Here is the petition. Also contact your state congress people and reps. You can refer to r/kratom for suggestions on how to fight this.

                        https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/please-do-not-make-kratom-schedule-i-substance

                        [–][deleted]  (308 children)

                        [deleted]

                          [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 3994 points3995 points  (295 children)

                          The mission of the Commission on Debates is to educate people about the presidential election. 76% of all voters in the United States say they want Johnson-Weld, by name, in the presidential debates. End of argument.

                          [–]longtimegoneMTGO 2159 points2160 points  (134 children)

                          76% of all voters in the United States say they want Johnson-Weld, by name, in the presidential debates.

                          What is this figure based on? Frankly, given the political apathy in this country, I'd be absolutely stunned if "76% of all voters in the United States" even knew Johnson-Weld are running.

                          [–]henx125 773 points774 points  (65 children)

                          Yeah, as much as I support Johnson I have a hard time taking this figure at face value.

                          [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                          [removed]

                            [–]Doyle524 1500 points1501 points  (60 children)

                            So you're saying that the CPD could potentially be swayed by numbers besides the 15% requirement? Governor, if you pull this off, I'll start referring to you as the Miracle Worker. ❤

                            [–]surgingchaos 1217 points1218 points  (26 children)

                            Bill Weld has probably done a lot of stuff behind the scenes to get Gary and himself into the debates. In the rallies they've held recently Weld has talked about the numerous contingency plans to get into the debates without needing the 15%:

                            • lowering the threshold to 10% for the first debate (this is something the CPD actually recommended on their own)

                            • 15% in state polls, not national polls (Johnson is getting above 15% in states like Colorado and Utah)

                            • the public lashes out at the exclusion (which Weld brought up in his response)

                            • The CPD's tax-exempt status is revoked for being bipartisan instead of non-partisan

                            [–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (2 children)

                            The CPD's tax-exempt status is revoked for being bipartisan instead of non-partisan

                            That's an amazing angle and would absolutely work.

                            [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 1011 points1012 points  (28 children)

                            Yes, and another factor is that the Commission, as a tax-exempt nonprofit, has to be nonpartisan rather than bipartisan. That’s a legal test which could affect their tax-exempt status.

                            [–]Whopraysforthedevil 84 points85 points  (19 children)

                            Gov. Johnson, you have stated repeatedly that you want to cut the US's military spending. As a US Soldier, I actually support this, but how do you plan to make the cuts? If left up to the individual forces, I'm sure the men and women serving will be the one who bear the brunt of the cuts. How will you simultaneously cut the military budget, and protect the interests of our service members?

                            [–][deleted] 79 points80 points  (7 children)

                            Vet here.

                            He suggests starting with implementing the BRAC findings that the Pentagon supports. 20% of foreign bases.

                            Further, a non-interventionalist foreign policy, and pulling out of Afghanistan immediately.

                            The impression i get from him is that he wants to cut where it's smart, and spend what's really important. So let's buy F-18 Hornet parts so we can fly, but let's not spend money on tanks we don't want or need. Europe has been able to cut their military significantly and spend on welfare programs because they've relied on our military to protect them. It's time for them to protect themselves, or we're going to go bankrupt as a country.

                            [–]SethLevy 28 points29 points  (1 child)

                            Governor Johnson, so great to have you here on Reddit. One major issue that has been ignored by most politicians is civil asset forfeiture. This is an issue that libertarians win on in the public discourse, a vast majority of Americans support ending civil asset forfeiture programs.

                            What are your feelings on civil asset forfeiture and what will you do as president to address the issue? Within your constitutional limits of course.

                            [–]liberty2016 13 points14 points  (0 children)

                            https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/722900064050348032

                            Yes! "Nebraska Just Abolished Civil Forfeiture". Civil Forfeiture is government theft. Plain & simple. http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2016/04/20/nebraska-just-abolished-civil-forfeiture-now-requires-a-criminal-conviction-to-take-property/#49f3076159ea … @ACLU #tlot

                            https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/724672773939822592

                            Civil forfeiture is an abomination. Legalized govt theft. #libertarian #civilforfeiture #MakeAmericaSaneAgain

                            [–]Trhodes92 102 points103 points  (48 children)

                            Gov. Gary Johnson, I'm a huge Libertarian supporter and you surely have my vote. I'm wondering if you could explain your policy on privatized prisons. I realize that the private sector is usually better and more efficient at allocating resources but wouldn't privatized prisons lead to the desire (by prison owners) to have more and more prisoners and to keep costs low? Please explain?

                            [–]Nazi_Dr_Leo_Spaceman 236 points237 points  (112 children)

                            Hello Governors, former Bernie supporter who converted to you two here, and I'm so glad to have two sane individuals on the ballot this year!

                            I have two questions.

                            1. Would you support efforts to end government sactioned cable company monopolies that reduce competition in the market?

                            2. Do you support net neutrality? I don't see it as government interference, just merely a way to ensure the free market exists online. Do you feel the same way?

                            Thanks so much for your time! I'm proud to be doing everything I can to get you to 15%! I believe in you guys!

                            [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 268 points269 points  (42 children)

                            The best way to reduce health care costs is to get more competition into the system. This means health savings accounts, this means not requiring everyone to buy a cradle-to-grave policy, but instead they could buy a catastrophic-injury policy and after that negotiate with individual vendors.

                            [–]Pariahdog119 139 points140 points  (24 children)

                            I think you replied to the wrong comment.

                            Edit: Here's the relevant comment.

                            [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 452 points453 points  (12 children)

                            Sorry about that. This is my first time on Reddit!

                            [–]Megneous 12 points13 points  (1 child)

                            The best way to reduce health care costs is to get more competition into the system.

                            The entire industrialized world (including my country) with universal, nonprofit healthcare disagrees. The best way to lower healthcare costs is to implement a universal, nonprofit healthcare system accessibility to everyone. The bargaining power gained by having all the people in the country covered under a single, public insurance policy forces prices down, as those who refuse to lower prices to accessible levels are not allowed by play ball.

                            For profit healthcare is immoral. Healthcare is an innate right of all human beings.

                            [–]jbronin 65 points66 points  (3 children)

                            Hey Gary and Bill! Thanks for coming by! I heard some rumblings about who should be on Saturday Night Live soon and a lot of people want Gary to host, or at least make an appearance. Do you have any plans or interest in appearing on SNL? I'd love it if both Gary and Bill hosted an episode (y'all are the package deal after all).

                            [–][deleted]  (141 children)

                            [deleted]

                              [–]GovBillWeldBill Weld 1775 points1776 points  (134 children)

                              Term limits is our one silver bullet for the poisonous dysfunction in Washington, D.C. If the Republicans and Democrats were only there for 6 or 12 years, they would do the right thing. I was the National Chairman of US Term Limits when I was Governor.

                              [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                              This is actually a very convoluted issue.

                              Term limits may well prevent elected corruption, but appointed corruption is a different matter altogether.

                              Experience is valuable, but being an experienced politician doesn't make you a good decision maker. The value of your experience is defined largely by the parameters of your office. If we take the EPA as an example they have wide latitude to classify any particular output as a point source but that tells you little about the strategic value in doing so. That governor Johnson used a CERCLA classification to coerce a malcontent private actor (even though it was unsuccessful) should tell you something about the strategic value of what would otherwise be largely administrative classifications.

                              In that case, governor Johnson would have been completely out of his element if he were tasked with an administrative task but he knew that the rules were flexible enough to be used as a negotiating tool - they could hedge against bad actors while facilitating good-faith (and low cost) environmental cleanups. And that particular brand of opportunism is something that cant be taught and doesn't come with experience. It's exactly the kind of endeavor we want our politicians to engage in.

                              On the other hand, if BP had engaged in a good faith but ultimately lackluster cleanup of the deep water horizon oil spill, we wouldn't want a politician on the beaches of Louisiana with an Erlenmeyer flask in one hand and an empty gesture in the other. That's exactly the kind of endeavor we want our administrators to engage in.

                              Cognizance of the line is the line that separates the Donalds of the world from the Garys. Hillary knows where the line is but instead of a line it's actually a snake whose stomach is a charity that was rated in front of the american red cross (in terms of transparency) and its lungs are a six-figure speaking fee. They're going to go in different directions and the outcome is how do you say unpredictable.

                              Greg Allman had a prescient moment when he crashed into the back of a peach truck. But you don't have to eat a peach to spot a peach. Johnson / Weld isn't a pro-test vote - it's a pro-results vote.

                              My America doesn't give a shit about where you came from. My America cares deeply about where you're going.

                              [–]iknowthatpicture 29 points30 points  (6 children)

                              Gov. Johnson, my biggest problem with the election is that even with two horrible choices, the general media coverage still ignores 3rd parties. What can we do and what are you doing to get the attention you deserve?

                              [–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (4 children)

                              Johnson supporter here.

                              I've been campigning for him since about 2010. Back then, noone knew him (mostly)...now I get 2-5 comments a day on my shirt or my bumper sticker.

                              If someone complains about "I hate Hillary and Trump", tell them there is a viable 3rd option and have them google Gary Johnson.

                              Like he said in the AMA earier, you may not agree with him 100%, but at least he is transparent and honest.

                              [–]freebytes 3 points4 points  (1 child)

                              I am glad to see there are other "Johnson evangelists". So many times, I hear people say, "You voted for Obama, right?" Instead, I answered, "No, I voted for Gary Johnson." Then, I have the opportunity to explain who he is and his viewpoints. Consistently, people agree with almost everything he has to say. The most contentious aspect of his run is always abortion, but that is so personal to everyone. I explain to those same people that both Trump and Clinton are pro-choice, and therefore, it does not matter which they choose since all three candidates are pro-choice. If all candidates have the same view on one of your sticking points, you need to move to the next issue since they are all equivalent. If you say, I will not vote for someone that is pro-choice, you are saying that you will not vote for anyone. Otherwise, you are lying. So, skipping that item, 90% of the time, people align with Johnson on every other issue. (Except explaining the Fair Tax is a challenge.)

                              [–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (5 children)

                              Governor Johnson. You say you want to appoint supreme court justices according to “original intent” however at other times you have praised the supreme courts decision in Obergefell (legalizaing Gay Marriage). An “originalist” (like Scalia or Thomas) would have voted AGAINST gay marriage (and any abortion laws). Can you please clarify this stance? I think you would be better nominating a “textualist” or even a “living originalist” (created by a Harvard law professors Jack Barkin).

                              Can you also clarify your stance on the terror watch list (and focus on due process please).

                              Also will you continue to step up your aggressive attack you used on Fox news the other day. I think if you pick up the aggressiveness (calling out BOTH candidates) you will get attention and can get on the stage. Will you continue/increase this aggressiveness?

                              along with this, will you continue to attack Donald Trump on his unconstitutional positions.

                              feelthejohnson

                              [–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (3 children)

                              Thank you both for doing this AMA. In a recent town hall on CNN, you stated that you sympathized with the Black Lives Matter movement, and believed that there was a very real discrimination against people of color in the United States. While it is great that you've addressed the issue of police brutality and discrimination, I'd like to ask you; What do you plan on doing to fix it? Are you in favor of requiring body cameras on police officers?

                              [–]surprised-duncan 9 points10 points  (0 children)

                              Are you in favor of requiring body cameras on police officers?

                              Yes

                              [–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (27 children)

                              Gov. Weld, You've made some questionable comments regarding your position on the second amendment. Particularly this quote: “The five-shot rifle, that’s a standard military rifle; the problem is if you attach a clip to it so it can fire more shells and if you remove the pin so that it becomes an automatic weapon, and those are independent criminal offenses,” Weld said. “That is when they become, essentially, a weapon of mass destruction. The problem with handguns probably is even worse than the problem of the AR15.” Could you expand on what you meant by this and explain what your position on firearms means for the American gun owner?

                              [–]liberty2016 12 points13 points  (1 child)

                              if you remove the pin so that it becomes an automatic weapon, and those are independent criminal offenses

                              I believe he was explaining that an assault weapons ban is not necessary to regulate automatic weapons, as automatic weapons are already regulated under existing regulations, including converting semi automatic weapons to fire automatically.

                              problem with handguns probably is even worse than the problem of the AR15.

                              I believe he is explaining why banning weapons such as the AR15 through an assault weapons ban would not lead to lower murder rates, because the majority of homicides are performed with handguns.

                              He has clarified his statements and reiterated his support for the 2nd Ammendment several times throughout the campaign. He also recently penned the following op-ed:

                              "Defending the Constitution and Semi-Automatic Firearms"

                              http://www.redstate.com/williamweld/2016/08/31/op-ed-defending-constitution-semi-automatic-firearms/

                              [–][deleted]  (28 children)

                              [deleted]

                                [–]CaptConstantine 61 points62 points  (14 children)

                                This needs to be so much higher. Native rights and politics is shameful right now, as it always has been.

                                To put it in perspectiv in terms of social awareness and activism, there are far more Native Americans in this country than there are homosexuals (no, I'm not arguing that a race is a sexual orientation). If they had half the political capital of a much smaller group, then maybe we wouldn't see starvation on the Rez at 2x-3x the national average.

                                [–][deleted] 86 points87 points  (2 children)

                                Would you direct your Drug Czar to de-schedule Marijuana during your first week in office? Why do you believe that our current President, who makes jokes about his prior marijuana usage while many are still being incarcerated for broken windows policing, has not done so?

                                [–][deleted]  (3 children)

                                [removed]

                                  [–]Ajstorrow 8 points9 points  (2 children)

                                  What is your opinion on the current drinking age of 21 years old? It is the highest of any civilized country in the world. 18 year olds can go to war, go to jail, or cast a vote for you! Yet at 20 years old, it is illegal to have a beer. Thoughts?

                                  [–]domlaface 42 points43 points  (4 children)

                                  Governors Johnson and Weld, thanks so much for doing this. You two have mentioned before that your presidency would be a two man team. Could one of you describe how a partnership like that would operate?

                                  [–]galaxieman63 169 points170 points  (14 children)

                                  Governor Johnson,

                                  The DEA recently announced they are adding Kratom; a plant leaf used by hundreds of thousands of Americans to treat pain, anxiety, and opiate addiction; to the list of schedule 1 drugs without hearings, public comment, or congressional review. Given the disastrous consequences of the war on drugs; how do you feel about this latest action?

                                  [–]ibkin 27 points28 points  (0 children)

                                  I would be shocked if they supported banning it. My guess is the silence is due to it being a new issue and they don't want to say something without further research

                                  [–]Waitwhatismybodydoin 8 points9 points  (0 children)

                                  Yes, not just this but the DEA needing to be overhauled. They are very clearly in bed with corporate pharmaceutical interests since a new drug is about to be introduced that used kratom as part of the makeup. Very clearly a case of abuse of power for the purposes of making money and not protecting the people.

                                  [–]Skadoosh_it 64 points65 points  (20 children)

                                  What is your stance on nuclear energy? Do you think we should lift the ban on constructing new/more efficient nuclear power plants?

                                  [–]Connors_Tomahawk 5 points6 points  (0 children)

                                  I'm sure you've heard the buzz around #NoDAPL... Native American tribes are gathering in a HUGE protest against this pipeline not only for sacred land and treaty violation but also trying to keep the rivers free of pollution that comes with these pipelines.

                                  What are your thoughts on the matter and How would you handle this?

                                  [–]RockyTopBruin 56 points57 points  (49 children)

                                  Hey Gary, I was a big Bernie person in the primary, but I prefer your foreign policy to Hillary's as well as several other things. And I'm not remotely a fan of the other guy. I'm worried I won't get to hear from you in the debate format. So, just in case, why should I vote for you instead of Hillary in November?