Gary johnson is in the news, everyone. Here is the reason he shouldn’t be in the news, here’s a video of him sitting down is getting a lot of attention with someone from msnbc, take a look at his face. Do you think if you were able to get on the debate stage you could pull even with trump and clinton in these polls? I do, and it wouldn’t have anything to do with my debate performance either, it would just be that people would recognize that there is another choice, and there would be an examination of me and bill weld is who we are and what we’ve done, and not based on that. I think i could stand up there for the whole debate and not say anything, and emerge as the leader. So that happened. Good call. This answer is going a little too well, let me sabotage it. Casey hunt’s reaction on the spot was priceless — right? Having said that, i’m actually going to once again surprisingly defend gary johnson on this. I defended him on the aleppo thing too. They have now created a circus in which you are not the juggler or not taming a tiger, no one will pay attention to you. So he has to do outlandish things to get attention.
This existed back in the day too with the former alaska governor who threw the rock into the pond and stared at it — mike gravel. Because they were all desperate for attention. And now with trump it’s on steroids, so he’s like if i just say normal things they won’t run this. I got to do some weird thing to grab the attention and do stuff like this. The last time i heard from gary johnson is when he was calling trump a pussy. Another case of, i’ve got to go over the top otherwise i will get no one to report what i’m saying. I will defend gary johnson too, but for another reason — that didn’t strike me as i’ve got to do something outlandish, that just struck me as a he had got that point across which he was making, which was interesting because instead of saying how great he was he said they just need to know it has nothing to do with my performance, they should just know there is an alternative, so he saying i could be like jerry lewis and be an imbicile and it still matters, because he was doing — i could be this bad.
He thought it was clever, it just wasn’t. He should have just said that. I could be up there like jerry lewis — you don’t go, lady! If he had said that though, we wouldn’t be talking about it and no one would be talking about it. So he’s not really that wrong. But this is not — this is not helpful, you think. But on the other hand, we are now discussing gary johnson, any discussion of gary johnson probably helps him. Accept the discussion we are about to have. And i want to be clear about this, it is a good juxtaposition that we are about to talk about his policy on climate change, but we planned this before he stuck his tongue out, now we want to show you what people should be talking about in regards to gary johnson. Here is a clip of gary johnson talking about his stance on global warming. Climate change — i think the world is getting warmer, i think it is man caused. That said, should we be engaged in cap and trade taxation? No, i don’t think we should.
We should lend a certainty to the energy field, we should be building new coal-fired plants. I’m gary, i smoke pot. And here he is taking it to its logical conclusion. Should we take the long-term view when it comes to global warming? I think we should. And the long-term view is, and billions of years the sun is going to actually grow and encompass the earth, right? So global warming is in our future. Yeah, a couple billion years from now — but we’d like to actually live for the rest of our lives and our kids’ lives, that is a little bit less relevant, when the sun gets close to us. You are thinking so short term right now. Are you disagreeing that billions of years is long-term? It seems that is your logic, sir. Long game/ short game, baby.
That’s what he’s talking about. This goes to show two things. One, you should look into people’s policies. For all the people saying there isn’t much of a difference, sometimes there is a big difference. Libertarians, in this case gary johnson flirted for a little bit with a carbon tax, and conservatives nearly ripped his head off. We don’t do any taxes, we do lord of the flies, if you have the conch we smash it over your head. So he’s like, carbon tax? We are going to do not a damn thing about this. Which is somewhat close to libertarian ideology, and that’s exactly what is wrong with libertarian ideology. At some point — look, there is huge impediments to a meaningful third-party in this country, that’s why there really has never been one. And those impediments are the nonsensical way we elect a president, but that’s in the constitution, it will be tricky for us to get around. But it would be interesting if someone led a third party who didn’t have a kooky nature to them, because even before gary johnson starts talking politics, and maybe i’m just trained to distrust someone outside the two-party system — i don’t think so — but he’s a little kooky. Jill stein to me is a little kooky.
Ross perot — who did well — was a little kooky. There was no question. That was part of his thing. So i would like to see someone principled, whether it is from the republicans or democrats, start that third party and not have a quirky quality to them. And i wonder whether — that would make some difference, i wonder how much difference. There was a time when third parties — abraham lincoln ran as a republican in the era of democrats and whigs. I know, but then the whigs got crushed. We didn’t for long have three meaningful parties, the whigs became the republicans. The republican party is on the verge of fracture, they are fractured now. That is why john boehner left and why paul ryan didn’t want to come in, they had to twist his arm. People are saying that if donald trump becomes president, it fractures the party completely. You are saying that, i don’t know that — the editor of buzzfeed said this. He said they will become a regional party, and chris hayes also said it. I was shocked, i have the video.
We can debate whether that’s going to happen and how it’s going to play out, i think a third party could be successful if it was populist — actually reasonable, i know that’s a lot to ask for — the ruling party in greece right now about 10 years ago was polling at about 4% and now they are ruling. But we don’t have the same system, they have a parliamentary system. I agree that there might be, but my hunch is the third party will end up enveloping one of the other parties. It would have to be non-corrupt, yada yada. But let’s focus on johnson’s climate policy, because some libertarians are already mad at us, how dare you, the libertarian ideology is wonderful. Because after this planet melts down we will know this was not the right planet. Then mars wins several billion years from now and that’s the way it’s supposed to go in the free market. It is mars-ket forces.
[laughter] in all seriousness, that’s what’s wrong. I know i’m being too harsh now, everybody can disagree, but the tragedy of commons is if i get to use as much of the commons as i want and there is no enforcement of anything else, i will overuse the commons until we are kind of done with the commons. That is an obvious problem for the libertarian ideology, so here we have it both in terms of resources, the oil companies go, listen, the planet might burn down but i’m going to make my money now, i’m going to use it up, with the carbon in the air, and care because i privatize the profits but i’ve socialized the costs. The costs are not going to be borne by oil executives, it will be borne by all of us. The costs go to 7 billion people on the planet, the profits go to the executives of the oil companies. And other people that work in the oil companies, etc.
That you have something that needs to be corrected there. Even adam smith didn’t say have at it, hoss — he said there are things that happen in a normal free market like monopolies that you have to be aware of and control for, otherwise you will have what is called anarchy. And libertarians get super mad when you say that, but that is the reality. They will keep on pumping the carbon into the air because it’s not their problem, it is our problem. And there is a temporal tragedy of the commons, i don’t know if there’s a better term for that, i made that up, which is if i use up the planet’s resources now and the planet melts down in the next generation or two generations from now, not my problem.
So as human beings we are greedy, selfish — that’s why i know i drive libertarians crazy but you really do remind me of the communists. No, humans will do the right thing. As soon as we see there are problems we will fix things, and then we will hold hands and we will sing kumbaya and everything will be great. That’s not how humans work, we are greedy little fuckers, we will grab and destroy and put everything in our pockets and say that’s not my problem. It’s always refreshing to have someone with a pure approach to an ideology talk because it’s so rare that we hear that, it’s so rare we hear someone listen to your question, put it through their ideology, and spit out the answer without wondering what it sounds like. It’s great, i never hear that. Sometimes there are right answers where i have to memorize it and say it, but if you let this guy talk for long enough — it was the same thing i have with ron paul. You seem nice — oh my god, how did we get here?.