In this article I am ONLY comparing these two candidates: Gary Johnson for the Libertarian Party and Jill Stein, the presidential candidate for the Green Party.
On foreign policy and social policy Johnson and Stein have similar positions:
- the military out of Afghanistan and out of other foreign bases;
- reduce military spending
- change the relationship with Israel where we treat Israel as another sovereign nation and do not let her determine our foreign policy and we do not fight wars for Israel or support Israel in wars which have nothing to do with our national security;
- oppose becoming involved in any warfare against Iran;
- women having control of their own bodies;
- legal partnerships/marriages irrelevant of gender
- the legalization of marijuana.
They differ in economic domestic policy.
- would cut Medicare and Social Security and turn the truncated versions of these programs over to the individual States
- opposes all stimulus programs.
- opposes any move toward progressive taxes
- wants a “fair” flat tax with rebates for those under a certain income
- wants removal of all corporate taxes (including no new cigarette taxes)
- wants removal of all taxes of capital gains
- no limit on campaign contributions
- no publicly supported health care (except a 43% cut on Medicare and that is to be distributed to states by block grants)
- a job stimulus program in the footsteps of FDR: she would put 25 million Americans to work
- move back TOWARD the tax structure of the 1950s when American was a strong economic power
- Promote greater public control and oversight of the public airwaves(invoking anti-Trust)
- a strict requirement of a voter-verified paper audit trail for all voting machines installed
- The Electoral College is an 18th century anachronism--direct direct election of the president
- We propose comprehensive campaign finance reform
- All viable candidates at the state and federal levels should have free and equal media time
- a publicly available healthcare plan like Medicare for all
We believe that the wealthy would benefit under Johnson’s “laizzez faire” economic system. job hopes, free hand in funding campaigns. The American public has tried much of this as has Europe: it doesn’t work except to benefit the 1%. No corporate taxes and no taxes on capital gains leaves the largest source of wealth for the rich fully untaxed. We find these elements fully to benefit the 1%.
In summary, which is always grossly misleading, both agree on the generalities of foreign policy, foreign military intervention, and reductions in military spending. They also agree on domestic social policy: marijuana, women having control of their own bodies, and legal relationships. On domestic economic policy, Johnson’s programs seem to follow “trickle down economics. Since we support the 99%, we believe that Jill Stein is the best candidate for the country.
I invite corrections, disagreements. (Any politicking for Obama or Romney will be deleted.)