Comparing Trump to Hillary doesn't improve the comparison of Trump to Johnson ... but I do agree with you about Hillary. 70% of the adults in America would rejoice if she disappeared off the face of the earth. (just my guess;^)

Well, we can be sure Hillary will do nothing unethical....

I disagree. Trump used eminent domain for personal gain, and I think he would do even more unethical things with the power of the office of president. Johnson has given no indication of such unethical tendencies.

Isn't it ironic that the only commercially produced clown sized car is called -- a Smart Car?

You can step forward or backward, but if you step sideways, you don't get anywhere.

This Canada Free Press article on TOO puts it in perspective:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/...
This goes back to the days of Bush jr., who was all for it, but tried to say he wa not. It was a lot of hype about trade, but it was way too much more.

I'm so done enough with Johnson as to suggest that his idea for motor pooling would be packed clown cars zooming along on interstates..

Johnson instead of Trump impresses me as a sort of sideways move, with Trump having a far better chance.

In review of what little can be said about this document, there were only a page or two that was actually about trade...the rest was the UN's (world government), marching orders that were a detriment to all countries nevermind to all of mankind...trouble is that much of the billion useless but coercive pages of this document are not available to everyone and those that had access, swore not to say too much...that aught to be the tip off.

NAFTA was the first one to fool some people. "But we need and ought to have free trade."
Well, yes, but a "free trade" document would not consist of thousands of pages and provisions: It would REPEAL and DELETE obstacles.
Gary Johnson is not firm on this TPP support -- nor, apparently, on much else -- no, that's wrong: He is not firm on ENOUGH else.
Though I swore many years ago I would never settle for an alleged "lesser of two evils," this year, here in California, I will settle for the least of six evils. I will vote for Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, the Libertarian Party ticket.
That's less a vote for them than it is for the Libertarian Party.
And I don't just believe but know that anyone who honestly wants liberty, wants less government, wants lower taxes, wants world peace must join me in supporting the LP.
Not voting makes the statists and collectivists laugh, and otherwise accomplishes nothing.
Voting for anyone else is supporting more government and less freedom.
I hope all rational people will realize what I have said is truth: Voting for the Libertarian Party candidates is one small step for freedom.

Let's face it! Trump is not a small government, let's reduce the things that are really making us less competitive but rather let's enact more laws and regulations. The nation is careening off the cliff thinking that Tariffs are going to fix the problems years of socialism have put in place.

I for one do not hold out much hope that anything good is going to come from all the rhetoric we see flying around these days. Frick and Frack are not the answer by any means!

If I wanted a pure libertarian presidential candidate who would get 1% of the popular vote and get ignored, then you would be right. That is exactly what the result has been for 30 years and Johnson is trying to change it. I don't like this approach, but I'd like the next 30 years to look the same as the past 30 years even less. Based on his actions as governor, I think he will cut government and expand liberty, assuming he gets enough support to win.

Hi, FFA: If what you say is true, the very reasons expressed for voting for him are no longer valid. A wet waffle has more starch than him.

Johnson must have graduated from Clown School, at the top of his class with a sillinessius Maximus Degree.

Tariffs are bad. And I think Trump should stop saying he is going to punish companies that leave the US for cheaper labor and say that he will get rid of the stupid regulations and taxes that drive them to look outside the US.

I think that the alternatives (tariffs) are even worse. All we have to do is ensure that everyone is complying with the agreements. Provisions for "slave labor" should always be addressed! Other than that, let's all agree to compete and let the jobs go to where they belong all things being or becoming equal!

TPP, like all of the multinational trade agreements, is a bad idea. Each nation is unique, with different interests, and as the world's biggest economy, it makes more sense to make trading arrangements with each nation tuned accordingly. We can afford to be generous to small, struggling economies, and tough with bigger, competing economies. Our national interest should have priority over any Fantasy globalist visions.

All of the big multinational trade agreements recently enacted or proposed have been the product of big multinational corporate cabals. Smaller companies and the general public need to be party to input for any future trade agreements.

Gee, I think I just described the Trump position.

Re: “Trump could be listening, too, and changing his stance on this could happen before election day.” Would this be a good thing? Gary Johnson currently supports the TPP, but the Libertarian Party raised concerns last year that are still valid: “ . . . it (the TPP) betrays and trumps the U.S. Constitution, sells out American freedoms, and grants foreign governments vast control over American medicine, the Internet, banking services, intellectual property, and civil liberties. It also grants multi-national corporations the right to sue the U.S. government where domestic companies are forbidden to do so.”
https://www.lp.org/news/press-release...

this from the guy who claims to be a freedom -loving libertarian candidate who will put a gun to your head if you do not sell cakes to whomever he thinks you should sell to...

The companies that stand to win from TPP might be interested and could whisper to the debate managers. Trump could be listening, too, and changing his stance on this could happen before election day.

Yep. Kermit the Frog's position on TPP would be more relevant.

That article is from early June. Old news.
In my opinon, this is an issue where Johnson is letting Weld influence him and the reason, imo, is not that Johnson favors the TPP. Johnson knows he has little chance to win enough electoral votes to become president outright and this is just another stance to make him more appealing to those who decide whether he gets into the debates. Hint: it isn't libertarian voters.