3rd Party Presidential candidates, a comparison

I've seen several comparision posts for presidential candidates going around, but they all compare the top two and maybe Johnson or Stein, and none of them really seem to actually address anything at all in depth. I decided to put one together of the alternative candidates running. In the interest of space and clarity, I did not include the "top two". Even still, each of these issues mentioned are often more complex than the snippets included here, so I do encourage you to research them further. All information I used is either from the respective candidates campaign sites, or from ontheissues.org I tried my best to not favor any one candidate, but to share what they have said on each subject. I know there are also many other issues than the ones mentioned here. In the interest of full disclosure, my preferred candidate is Gary Johnson. That said, I hope this helps you decide on a candidate that more aligns with your perspectives. Unlike many of my other posts, I did my best here to remain objective and not steer towards any particular candidate.

Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
Abortion	State issue, supports parental notification, supports counseling, opposes government funding, opposes insurance mandate, up to the States per 10th amendment, individual decision.	Pro choice, healthcare is a right, abortion and birth control fall under healthcare	"Our respect for life is the most important measure of our humanity. From conception to death - and any time in between - life is precious and we have a responsibility to protect it. A culture that subsidizes abortion on demand runs counter to the fundamental American belief in the potential of every person"	right to life under 5th and 14th amendments, "1. Veto and refuse to spend every penny of funding for Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers. 2. Recommend to Congress, and work to convince Congress, to take away the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction over such matters."	No official position, personally pro life, social issues are not constitutionally federal matters
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
Firearms/2A issues	Supports concealed carry, Supports gun rights, armed law abiding citizens reduces crime, opposes "no fly no buy" and other federal lists as violations of right to due process	Favorable of Australia style gun control, wants increased regulation, increased focus on mental health	"As president, Evan McMullin will never infringe upon the rights of law-abiding gun-owners. Instead, he will respect the founding spirit of our country by ensuring that Americans have the ability to defend their families and enjoy their sporting traditions without government interference." Favors use of watch lists, but states due process concerns must be addressed	"The Constitution Party stands opposed to his efforts to disarm the American people, whatever the president’s motives may be. The Constitution Party opposes what the government usually refers to as “gun control” – and that is gun or ammunition confiscation, gun or ammunition registration and the restriction of semi-automatic firearms with high-capacity magazines. We in the Constitution Party understand that armed people are free while disarmed people are slaves"	Per the constitution "Shall not be infringed"
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
healthcare	favors free market solutions, state issue, federal government should not be involved	healthcare is a right, supports single payer universal healthcare	"ObamaCare has failed American families, driving up costs and reducing access to far too many. With competition, deregulation and innovation we can build a modern health care system that delivers accessible, affordable and high-quality care. Vulnerable populations, including patients with preexisting conditions, should be protected. Real healthcare reform means putting patients, families, and doctors at the heart of health care."	" If the supply of medical care is controlled by the federal government, then officers of that government will determine which demand is satisfied. The result will be the rationing of services, higher costs, poorer results – and the power of life and death transferred from caring physicians to unaccountable political overseers. We denounce any civil government entity using age or any other personal characteristic to: preclude people and insurance firms from freely contracting for medical coverage"	constitutionally not a federal issue
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
taxes	eliminate the IRS, completely redo tax code, favors the fair tax	Increase taxes on the "rich", increase inheritance tax "aristocracy tax"	"make the tax code fairer and simpler, helping to spur business innovation, especially the growth of small businesses, which are the country’s most important job creators. Small businesses should pay closer to 25 percent of their profits in taxes, whereas now there are many that must pay almost 40 percent. Right now America also has the highest corporate tax rate – 35 percent.....it should be substantially lower. Income tax rates also need to come down, especially for the middle-class; once the economy starts growing again at an acceptable rate, high-earners should also get a break."	"I have proposed a taxing system whereby taxes would be apportioned to the states as the census dictates. If my state of Tennessee had two percent of the nation’s population, for example, it would be liable for two percent of the budget. It would be incumbent upon the representatives from Tennessee to help hold down Federal spending. The Federal Government would be encouraged to spend less not more. The states would be empowered and Washington would be dis-empowered. Washington’s hold over the states would be broken and the states would be sovereign again – Washington would have to ask the states for money. States would be free to collect their revenue as they see fit. Alaska might tax its natural resources and Florida might tax tourism. In Nevada, it would obviously be gambling. Since people could keep their income the economy would explode with growth."	eliminate the income tax, replace it with a consumption tax or possibly a flat tax
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
trade	Supports free trade, considers tariffs and other restrictions "protectionism", "skeptical" of trade agreements but would sign NPP	Opposes trade deals including NPP. "To stop the outsourcing of our jobs, it's very clear we need to stop expanding the free trade agreements that send our jobs overseas and which also undermine wages here at home by effectively threatening workers that if they don't drop their wages and their benefits, that their jobs are gone. We saw the first free trade agreement, NAFTA, enacted under Bill Clinton, a Democrat. We saw it carried out under George Bush, but then we saw Barack Obama expand three free trade agreements and is now negotiating a secret free trade agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, that will continue to offshore jobs, undermine wages, and, as well, this time compromise American sovereignty with an international corporate board that can rule on our laws and regulations and say whether or not they pass muster. This is an absolute outrage against American sovereignty, democracy and our economy."	Supports trade agreements, including TPP, "Evan believes that trade is an engine of prosperity and that well-designed trade agreements can help our economy grow even more."	Opposes TPP and other trade agreements as attacks on national sovereignty	vacate existing trade agreements, impose penalties to make overseas manufacturing "less attractive"
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
immigration and border security	2 term governor of a border state, opposes mass deportation, focus on keeping criminals out, create a path to easier work visas and welcome those who want to work "Having served as Governor of a border state, Gary Johnson understands immigration. He understands that a robust flow of labor, regulated not by politics, but by the marketplace, is essential. He understands that a bigger fence will only produce taller ladders and deeper tunnels, and that the flow of illegal immigrants across the border is not a consequence of too little security, but rather a legal immigration system that simply doesn't work. Militarizing the border, bigger fences, and other punitive measures espoused by too many politicians are all simplistic "solutions" to a problem caused by artificial quotas, bureaucratic incompetence and the shameful failure of Congress to actually put in place an immigration system that matches reality."	"Obama's recent night raids and deportations of Central American families and children are inhumane and morally reprehensible. Deportation of these vulnerable, abused refugees is morally abhorrent. We are all immigrants in this country--with the exception of native Americans. The diversity of multicultural immigrant America has always been the core strength of our nation. Our 12 million undocumented immigrants are hardworking, tax-paying community residents who take the hardest and worst paid jobs. They should be celebrated, not intimidated with the threat of deportation. It's time to create a welcoming path to citizenship and put an immediate end to the shameful era of deportations and detentions. Fundamentally, the immigration crisis must be resolved by ending the harmful US policies (including drug wars, predatory trade agreements, and political and military interventions) that are turning whole populations into refugees to start with."	"The path to reform begins with securing our borders. Once they are secured, there should be a process of earned legalization for the illegal immigrants who are already here. There is simply no efficient way to deport 11 million individuals; doing so would break apart families and likely cost $100 billion. Furthermore, legalization is not amnesty. While addressing illegal immigration, it is vital to remember that legal immigration is one of America’s greatest strengths. Immigrants and their children have a long record of hard work, starting businesses, and creating jobs. Still, we need to reform the legal immigration system so that it prioritizes American interests and security, including the protection of workers from low-wage, low-skill competition."	According to the Constitution Party’s platform, its members oppose illegal immigration and amnesty of any sort, including proposals that would provide some sort of pathway to citizenship for those who are in the U.S. illegally.	Reform and streamline the immigration process, current process is a "bureaucratic quagmire, encourage input from states, immediate moratorium on deportation of immigrants awaiting citizenship by marriage
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
foreign policy	avoid foreign entanglements, cut foreign aid that does not directly serve national interest, remain in the UN and NATO but cease interference in foreign affairs. "American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups."	End overseas meddling, US is member of world community, not world cop, end foreign aid to countries with "humanitarian abuses", focus on human rights, international law, and diplomacy, end support for Israel, refers to Israel/Palestine as "apartheid occupation"	"Evan McMullin will continue this tradition of leadership that has made America the world’s indispensable nation.""Opposing brutal dictatorships and speaking out on behalf of democracy and human rights are also essential to American leadership. Other nations follow our lead because they understand that we pursue the collective good, not just our own narrow self-interest. While American soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and intelligence officers have borne the cost of this leadership, the pursuit of common interests has enabled us to build a network of democratic allies across the globe."	Withdraw from the UN, opposes a "globalist agenda", "I believe in a strong defense, but I believe in a ‘mind your own business’ type of government as the Constitution requires us to do,"	pursue a policy of non-interference, continued, conditional participation in the UN, overseas actions must be constitutional
Issue	Gary Johnson	Jill Stein	Evan McMullin	Darrell Castle	Chris Keniston
Ballot Access	All 50 states(including DC)	on the ballot in 44 states (and DC), Write in for Georgia, North Carolina, and Indiana, not on the ballot in Nevada, South Dakota, or Oklahoma.	On the ballot in 11 states, write in brings total to 34 states, click here for full list	on the ballot in 24 states, write in for 18 states, 3 states pending write in access, click here for map and state party list	ballot access in Colorado and Louisiana, Write in status confirmed or pending in 27 states, click here for list

Why am I voting for Gary Johnson?

It's easy to post about what is wrong with a candidate, to point out problems. It's easy to be cynical and negative about "the worst choices in history". But there is hope, there's another way, with a plausible, albeit longshot, chance of taking it all. Aside from that, there are other benefits.

The long game
If a third party gets above 5% of the popular vote, that party gets federal party status, the last time this happened was Ross Perot's Reform Party, and the momentum fizzled away pretty quickly due to infighting and party politics, among other issues. The potential is building for another strong third party, a solid challenge to the stagnate and corrupt two parties. Even if you don't agree with everything Johnson has to say or stands for, I encourage you to look at the LP platform. He has announced that he won't run again. So, maybe you distrust Clinton, and you distrust Trump, you're sick of hoping that this is the election where we turn things around and being let down by more of the same. You can't vote for either of "them". Maybe you've looked at Johnson, maybe you like the libertarian message but you have an issue with a particular stance of Johnson and/or Weld. Consider this, let's be honest here, statistically, it is pretty likely that one of the terrible two is probably going to win. I know, this sucks, and some of you are giving into the fear and the lesser of two evil mantra that happens every...single...election....but consider this. Say Johnson gets 10% (this is a conservative prediction, it's very likely he could place even higher, and even net some electoral votes...) but anything above 5% is historic. It lays a solid foundation to build on for elections to come. It's been a slow battle to get here, but we are here. It's also a safe bet that Austin Peterson may well smooth up some of his rough spots, and be the 2020 nominee. Think of what a third party can do if it doesn't have to battle for ballot access, the LP obtained ballot access in all 50 states this year, that is a major feat, now take all that energy, all that funding, and imagine where it can go if the party isn't fighting nonsense lawsuits just to be on the ballot! A vote for Johnson is a vote for a strong third party, a vote against the corruption and games of the two parties.

Now, of course, you can't just vote for a party, I often argue vote the man, not the party. So even as a registered Libertarian, I wouldn't vote on the above alone, and I won't ask it of you. So, what sets the Johnson/Weld ticket apart?

Constitutional issues and civil liberties
As I and many others have discussed, both Clinton and Trump are, well, awful on the constitution. There's no argument that Clinton would appoint activist judges, expand the federal government, and trample on constitutional rights. There's also no argument, if you're paying attention, that Trump is just as terrible. So what's a voter to do? Vote for one to stop the other? Some of you may well have decided that direction, and if you have, well, that's your right. But if you, like me, are fed up with the constitution being treated as an afterthought or an inconvenience, Johnson is your man. Now, you might be going "I heard Weld said some really stupid stuff about guns?!" Yea, he did, and conservative libertarians such as myself collectively winced and facepalmed. He's since clarified his position.

"I am a lifelong hunter and gun owner. In 1993, as Governor of Massachusetts, I went along with modest restrictions on firearms. Governing involves tough choices. Today, I would make different choices. Restricting gun rights doesn't make us safer, and threatens our constitutional freedoms. I support the Supreme Court's decision in the District of Columbia vs. Heller -- a decision that embraced the notion that Second Amendment rights are individual rights, not to be abridged by the government."

 I'll be honest, were he the nominee and not the VP, it wouldn't be enough. But Johnson has a much more reliable stance on 2A positions, as well as a solid view of constitutional issues as a whole, with a proven, consistent history of being a strict constitutionalist.

Immigration
Gary Johnson was a two term governor of a border state, and has a common sense approach to reform our broken immigration system, without the fear tactics. Here's his view, from his own mouth:




Tax Reform

Johnson would redo our broken tax system from the ground up, simplifying the tax code, removing loop holes, and ultimately, replacing the flawed income tax system with a consumption tax. There are some valid concerns about how such a system would impact lower income people, but a prebate would be built in, not to mention the beneficial impacts of overall lower taxes, the boost to the economy, and meaningful tax reform combined with getting federal spending under control and actually reducing the debt. Taxes and reform is a complicated area, as it's more than just "cutting taxes". The entire system is flawed and needs to be retooled, removing programs that shouldn't be handled on the federal level and reducing overall spending. This is an issue tied in with many others, and Johnson is the only one with a history of balancing budgets, reducing spending, and successfully reforming taxes, reducing spending, and sound fiscal policy.

Foreign Policy
Clinton would continue the failed interventionist policies we have been trying for decades, the same meddling approaches that created the very problems we are reaping now. Trump's foreign policy is inconsistent and all over the place. Johnson has a sound approach, based on economic factors, working with our allies, seeking diplomatic solutions, and reducing our overseas footprint while actually focusing on what will really keep our nation safe and secure. Here is an excellent overview of where he stands on foreign policy issues.

Now, I know some of you are asking, "what's this I've heard about him and Aleppo?" Basically, in case you aren't aware, he was asked in an interview what he would do about Aleppo. He asked for clarification, and then gave a solid answer about how he would handle Syria and the refugee issues. But the focus seems to be on him seeking clarification rather than his answer. Personally, I would much prefer a leader who clarifies a question he doesn't understand rather than blustering his way through it. Do your own research on it for sure, but overall, I think his foreign policy remains one to be considered, and not dismissed over not immediately recognizing a place most Americans had to google. I also feel that he gave a reasonable response, admitted his mistake and explained himself well

 Veterans issues
This is an issue that I will actually say I respect Trump on, but Johnson also has a strong view on this. He is leading in polls of military voters, has strongly stated that he will honor promises made to vets, will reform the VA and improve mental health treatment options. As a vet, I am pleased to see his solid stances on veterans issues, and that, in his words, we have a "moral contract" with all who have served. Also, Johnson is the only candidate I have seen do 22 pushups.

#22Pushups
A highlight of my visit to Cleveland was joining Griff Jenkins of Fox News to do some pushups to raise awareness of suicide among our veterans. Proud to do it!
Posted by Gary Johnson on Friday, July 22, 2016

Abortion
The final specific issue I am going to mention here is abortion. I know for many christian voters, this is a sticking point. Many have told me they will vote for Trump on this issue alone. However, Trump has been a longtime supporter of pro choice causes, including planned parenthood. He may have changed his stances recently, but if we judge by the fruit, it is not dependable. I submit that, when you get to the substance of the issue, Johnson is the most pro life. He opposes late term abortions. He supported parental notification and required counseling as governor. He believes that birth control should be a market decision, not mandated by the government, ie, he would not mandate insurance companies provide it, or that employers provide it in their coverage against their beliefs. Also, as a strict constitutionalist, he would not overstep federal bounds on 10th amendment issues, meaning he would respect state decisions. I understand he isn't the dream candidate for a pro life voter, but he is a consistently pro limited government candidate, which means that you are free to pursue pro life laws in your state, as it should be, and the federal government shouldn't be involved. This is a far better stance than Clinton, and a more reliable stance than Trump.


If you would like to check out more of his positions and stances, I encourage you to google Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party, and further research. I won't tell you who to vote for, only who I support and why. Also, here is the issues page from Johnson's website. I'll post more here and there, both on here and my facebook page. Another excellent source is reason.com if your looking to find news from a liberty minded perspective, and learnliberty.org if you want to further explore the general concepts of liberty as a whole.

Statement from the Libertarian party on Common Core and education:

As a number of state governments struggle with Common Core education rules, the Libertarian Party (LP) cites Common Core as a reason to get government out of education.

Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict commented, "Since Democrat Barack Obama took office, some conservatives have switched positions on Common Core. But conservatives were for it before they were against it. Republican George W. Bush paved the way with No Child Left Behind, and he helped double the budget of the federal Department of Education. Common Core was created by the bipartisan National Governors Association."

Benedict continued, "Republicans like Chris Christie and Jeb Bush have not flip-flopped, however. They still support Common Core."

Benedict continued, "Common Core is one more reason why government should not be involved in education. Government programs generally grow more centralized, bureaucratic, and one-size-fits-all. As the Cato Institute's Neal McCluskey said, Common Core 'treats students like soulless widgets.'"

Earlier this year, libertarian commentator John Stossel pointed out, "Common Core, like public school, public housing, the U.S. Postal Service, the Transportation Security Administration, etc., are all one-size-fits-all government monopolies. For consumers, this is not a good thing."

Full statement

2014 Governor's race: Chris Edes

Chris Edes, Libertarian Party

State chair in 2009

Founder and chair of the Greater Rochester Libertarian party

Candidate for Senator in 2012

His site is not entirely clear on all of his ideas, other than that he has ideas.

Some he does mention:
 ending corporate welfare
 cutting personal income taxes in half, ending the use tax
 dropping the drinking age to 18: "If young adults can be trusted to fight and die in combat, they can be trusted to drink responsibly."

 He also states
"Fraud should be prosecuted as it is an act of aggression. When fraudulent actions threaten the stability of the free market, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Exceptions cannot be made for persons or corporate entities which have political influence or are “too big to fail”. The only thing we should consider “too big to fail” is the American people.
If the federal government will not hold Wall Street accountable, then New York State must do so."

Interview from his 2012 Senate campaign, I include it because it gives pretty good insight into his views, he seems very articulate and knowledgeable.




Personally, of the 3 Libertarians running, I like him the best, they are all 3 interesting, but my personal choice of the 3 is this guy.

Speaking of the 2012 race, his campaign raised around $2000, and spent around $700 of that, and he still managed 28,000 votes.  For a third party candidate, thats saying something.

2014 NYS Governor's race: Nate Lebron

(I could not find a website for this candidate, if you know of one, please let me know so I can add it here)

Libertarian

Candidate for mayor in Albany in 2009, as well as candidate (sort of) for Albany county executive in 2011

plans to focus on opposing the safe act, opposing common core, reducing government waste, and focusing government economic efforts on small, local business instead of corporate welfare.

Interesting ideas, I particularly like the last one, I'll be keeping my eye on this guy if he survives April....

Times Union article

Sidenote: you would think a guy with a masters in IT from Harvard who owns his own tech consulting firm would bother to have a website?

2014 NYS Governor's race: Richard Cooper

Richard Cooper, Libertarian party

Former state chair of the Libertarian party

Strong opponent of eminent domain abuses, including an (unsuccessful) campaign to save St. Luke's Pentecostal Church in New Cassel, Long Island.

He would end the corrupt Empire State Development Corporation

He favors repealing the SAFE act, and goes even further, advocating repeal of the sullivan act

He proposes having the board of Regents appointed by the governor, this to me, while I understand his intent, has problems in and of itself.  We see how easy it is in NY to fire a governor we don't like.  Perhaps make it elected positions, but regional, rather than statewide, to allow for more local control.

He opposes Common Core, and has some interesting ideas about election reform

http://www.antonnews.com/features/36868-the-local-man-who-would-be-the-governor.html

All in all, some interesting ideas, I'd be interested to see him in a debate with Coumo and Astorino, but, well, that probably won't happen, and thats a shame



**********************************************************************************

Bob Barr, Libertarian for president

June 06 interview with Glenn Beck



Bob Barr for president campaign site

Bob Barr, Civil Libertarian