I'll admit I'm not much into government programs myself, but as a people, we can also choose to not openly condone behavior that has long proven its ability to destroy kids' futures.

If one is to trust whatever a candidate says, then I agree with you that Johnson is closest to the ideal (still very far, but...). However, his credibility, in my mind, is in serious doubt because:
1. Man-made global warming is not a fact. There is Zero scientific evidence (not falsified, and lately even admitted falsified) of any abnormal global warming. The Earth may even be slightly cooling. In any case, any man-made contribution is less than a small fraction of one percent. Those are scientific facts. For a person to be on a national stage, he needs to make sure that he knows and understands the issues that he is talking about. Otherwise, we're back to what I describe as my claim #1.

2. Agree - going in the right direction is preferable.

3. http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johns...

4. Weld had several interviews (Youtube) where he was asked about the right to bear arms and he sounded exactly like Bernie. Johnson was given a replica of George Washington's pistol by Austin Petersen at the convention. Johnson threw it in the trash and it was witnessed by several people there, retrieved and returned to Petersen. Says a lot about several issues.

No , haven't read it. Is it good?

Thank you for giving detailed examples. Here is my take on them.
#1 - In this case he's just stating facts. We may not like the facts, but he's stating them.
#2 - Devolving it to the states sounds like a first step toward getting gov't out of it. I am fine with moving incrementally in the right direction.
#3 - I didn't know about these.
#4 - Wow! I had never heard of that.

My original question above was if there "some other candidate on the ballot in all states has a better record than Johnson." on these issues.

" as young people would be more-so than the adults,"
The polling may back that up. I don't know. In my personal case, the older I get the less I approve of proposed solutions that involve gov't force.

Hell, no. Liquor is quicker. And legal.
Call a taxi or have a designated driver.

Johnson states that "Climate Change/Global Warming" is man-made (Johnson-Stein debate, (44:50). There are two types on people who believe in man-made climate change - those with no scientific training or knowledge on the subject who have bought the lie hook and sinker, or those that are evil and devious to make a living on the lie. Either way, doesn't bode well for Johnson. This is not directly related to the knowledge of economics, but the Global Warming lie has a huge impact on economics.

2. Health Care - Medicare - Johnson's view is that states need to control it, not federal government. Although better than federal government, it is still a far cry from a free market approach. Although understandable due to perceptions. To be fair, he does advocate free market healthcare for most others.

3. State regulation of energy prices, government meddling in energy policies, taxes and redistribution, along with environmental regulation.

4. Johnson claims to support the Second Amendment, but his choice of a blatant anti-gun rights (e.g., anti-civil rights) Weld makes his proclaimed support less than believable. Johnson tossing into garbage a pistol presented to him by Peterson give more believe to his anti-gun attitude.

And I just can't stop boiling over the choice of a sleazy, slimy RINO Weld, who calls himself a Libertarian but simply ignores pretty much every Libertarian principle and who's definitions of freedom are not related to the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Tell me who your friends are, and I'll tell you who you are.

Overall, Johnson has the best free-market claims of anyone on the American stage today. Of course, that is because no one else on that stage makes any free-market claims at all.

Bring back alcohol prohibition!

Your position seems to be that criminalizing the manufacture and sale of a substance enhances purity and assures that nobody will get adulterated products. The history of alcohol prohibition and the drug war proves the opposite to be the case.

Perfect! I heard his voice in my head as I was reading.

Next question is: Do you favor criminalization of alcohol and cigarettes?

Actually, I'm not the one making the claim. I'm only telling you what those neo-Luddite clowns are saying. They who pull "Mike Nature trick...to hide the decline."

What makes you think that something has to be done about it? The Earth, in its ice age, has been in cycles of glaciation with short interglacial warming periods in between for a million years or so. It is near the end of an interglacial period. Do you have any evidence that the glacial cycles have ended and that the present interglacial period of the ice age will continue to warm for many thousands of years?

Here's the problem: the waste product involved is carbon dioxide. A cadre of very shrill--and hypocritical--voices now have major policymakers convinced that carbon dioxide is just as much a pollutant as is an actually toxic substance dumped into the atmosphere. But we breathe that out ourselves, and plants take it in. This is absolutely crazy. And I am convinced it is all a scam--because the shrillest voices clearly don't believe it themselves. Rare is the shrill voice who actually pays any of the price they demand we pay. Ed Begley, Jr. (Living With Ed). That's it. Not to mention "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to the [proxy data]...to hide the decline." Under the circumstances, I declare that this does not lend itself to a free market solution, because it is bunk and hokey-pokey with a view to scaring people into submission to statism.

Ever read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress?

Never said he did. But the Libertarian platform puts that front & center, so for voters that are attracted to that, as young people would be more-so than the adults, it may attract them in numbers.

This reminds me of how the moderators at one of the debates read a passage critical of a maverick candidate's positions, implying the passage referred to Trump. After Trump responded, they revealed the quote had actually been about Sanders. It's like ah-ha-ah-ha; we made you look like an ass, as if Trump agreeing on some issues with Sanders made them the same.

I like that Johnson agrees with Sanders. Maybe that will help him win. Any criticism of Johnson not being libertarian enough IMHO should always compare him to one of the other candidates on the ballot in all states. There's no point in comparing him to a hypothetical pure candidate who is not on the ballot.