Who would the Libertarian Party be better off nominating in 2016?

[sparkey]

It's possible that the 2016 LP race could be between Johnson and Ventura. Johnson has said that he'll run barring a catastrophe, and Ventura has indicated that he's open to it, but will decide later. Assuming that Johnson runs (95% chance IMO), Ventura runs (probably more like a 20% chance but humor me), and Rand loses the GOP race (95% chance IMO), who should the LP pick?

[Maxwell]

Johnson. He's not inspiring, but at least he's not a conspiracy theorist.

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Johnson, I suppose.

To be honest, it all seems rather meaningless when the LP can nominate a successful and generally well-liked former governor and still win less one percent of the vote nationally and less than five percent of the vote in his home state. They'd be better off posthumously nominating Murray Rothbard.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

Johnson. He's not inspiring, but at least he's not a conspiracy theorist.

That and two terms are better than one term. Johnson might break the percentage record this time. He was only off by 0.07% the last time.

[Maxwell]

Johnson, I suppose.

To be honest, it all seems rather meaningless when the LP can nominate a successful and generally well-liked former governor and still win less one percent of the vote nationally and less than five percent of the vote in his home state. They'd be better off posthumously nominating Murray Rothbard.

Eh, Johnson is nominally well-liked, but he's not very well spoken. I'm not saying there's anyone in the libertarian party who can do better, but that's his main problem. Still, Johnson would do a lot better if he had a billionaire sugardaddy to help him out.

[sparkey]

So I guess we're already getting a consensus here. No (outspoken) Ventura supporters,

My opinion is that pretty much everything about Johnson is better than Ventura. He has none of that conspiracy theory baggage, he was reelected, he accomplished more as governor, he is more well liked in his home state, he is more interested in the success of the LP, he is better at political organization, he is less gaffe prone, etc. The one thing that Johnson lacks is Ventura's charisma.

Honestly, if Ventura runs, he could very well get the LP nod, not because of his success as governor, but because the LP does its nominations after a convention debate. As the 2004 LP convention showed, any candidate can grab the nomination after a good debate performance. And the odds look good for The Body to beat Johnson in a debate.

[Suburbia]

Ventura can make trouble for Bush or Clinton and if he does really well, him and his running mate could be in the Sept/Oct 2016 general election debates.

[Samantha]

Ventura can make trouble for Bush or Clinton and if he does really well, him and his running mate could be in the Sept/Oct 2016 general election debates.

lol not going to happen

[/]

Jesse Ventura, or at least I like him better...

MN vs NM (lol)

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Johnson. He's not inspiring, but at least he's not a conspiracy theorist.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Ventura's not a Libertarian.  Johnson is.

[Mister Mets]

Johnson's a libertarian, and was reelected.

Ventura has some baggage. He combines the conspiracy theories with different policies.

A celebrity might be the party's best choice. They get free media, and offer a contrast to the career politicians Democrats and Republicans are likely to nominate.

[SteveRogers]

Devil's advocate: Jesse Ventura's campaign would attract substantially more media coverage, in large part precisely because he's a crazy conspiracy theorist.

[Samantha]

Devil's advocate: Jesse Ventura's campaign would attract substantially more media coverage, in large part precisely because he's a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Negative media coverage. Ventura would destroy whatever shred of credibility the LP has.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Johnson. He's not inspiring, but at least he's not a conspiracy theorist.

[Dancing with Myself]

1998-2003 Ventura could have been a good national candidate. He was a man who fought the 2 party system and won (at least election wise.) Plus he has a great persona.  Now he's ruined that with the conspiracy theory and Chris Kyle stuff.  He would be a risk to run, where let's say 11/12 years ago he wouldn't have been so.

Johnson on the other hand is a pure Libertarian who works hard for the party and has a good youth base. He's no Ron Paul but he motivates the party people well.  He is just bland as a wash board. No charisma at all.If you were to combine Johnson's overall style with Ventura's oral and badassry skills that would be a perfect candidate for the Lib-t's. 

As for who will get the nom? I'm not sure. Johnson's my favorite for it so far but then again like was said earlier if they debate Ventura unless he flies off a cliff will beat Johnson.  Maybe they can merge with Johnson as President and Ventura as VP?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

1998-2003 Ventura could have been a good national candidate. He was a man who fought the 2 party system and won (at least election wise.) Plus he has a great persona.  Now he's ruined that with the conspiracy theory and Chris Kyle stuff.  He would be a risk to run, where let's say 11/12 years ago he wouldn't have been so.

Johnson on the other hand is a pure Libertarian who works hard for the party and has a good youth base. He's no Ron Paul but he motivates the party people well.  He is just bland as a wash board. No charisma at all.If you were to combine Johnson's overall style with Ventura's oral and badassry skills that would be a perfect candidate for the Lib-t's. 

As for who will get the nom? I'm not sure. Johnson's my favorite for it so far but then again like was said earlier if they debate Ventura unless he flies off a cliff will beat Johnson.  Maybe they can merge with Johnson as President and Ventura as VP?

Johnson is a credible Libertarian, and I agree with the poster who stated that the current Jesse Ventura will destroy the credibility that the Libertarian Party currently has.

Johnson is an honest-to-God libertarian Republican who is honest enough to realize that the GOP doesn't really, truly have a "libertarian wing".  The Libertarians aren't going to elect a Presidential candidate in my lifetime, but their goal of getting 5% of the national vote isn't out of the question if they choose to begin to function like a political party.

[Leinad]

Yes, Ventura will get more media attention, but nominating a professional-wrestler-turn-conspiracy-theorist is the last thing this party needs. And he's not going to do much better in the election than Johnson, he really won't. Some real libertarians will vote for another candidate, be it third party or a write-in campaign, or they'll just stay home. He may win voters that Johnson wouldn't, but he'll lose both the base (so it'll balance out) and the party's credibility.

My hope is that the Republicans will move to us. That guys like Justin Amash and Thomas Massie are the future of the party, and in my lifetime the libertarian republican wing of the party will grow enough so guys like Johnson and either Paul have a shot at the nomination. And I think that the Libertarian Party becoming more viable will help that. Get 2 percent instead of 1, then 3 instead of 2. Lots of people are dissatisfied with the government, and the two major parties, and thus some of them are open to the libertarian philosophy.

The more serious the party gets, the more libertarian influence enters mainstream politics, and the more people join the party, which leads it to be even more formidable, which again further increases the philosophy of minimal government in the nation's political sphere. Could you imagine if a 3rd party consistently got 5-10% in the presidential election, and sometimes won state and congressional elections? That's not too hard to believe, but it would still make a good bit of a difference, even if few elections are won.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Devil's advocate: Jesse Ventura's campaign would attract substantially more media coverage, in large part precisely because he's a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Negative media coverage. Ventura would destroy whatever shred of credibility the LP has.

Agreed.  The Constitution Party, IMO, lost what little credibility it had when it nominated Virgil Goode, a guy who was a Democrat, an Independent, and a Republican in Congress before losing to a liberal Democrat.  Goode was a guy who didn't have a philosophy; he was a big-government conservative when his political interests required him to be.

Johnson is the most prominent Libertarian who is actually a libertarian  Ventura might make some waves as an Independent, but that's different from running as a third party candidate.  If Ventura ran as a Libertarian, the credibility gap would be so great that I suspect much of the LP would abandon the party and he'd end up having touble with even ballot access.