In defense of Gary Johnson's "Aleppo" question?

[kentuck]

After reviewing the question and the answer from Mike Barnicle, I can see how he could misinterpret or not know about "Aleppo".

They were not discussing Syria or refugees or anything relevant to "Aleppo" and the question came from out of the blue, "If you were elected President, what would you do about ALEPPO?"

Without context, someone might think that was a new disease or an acronym for something?

Johnson has since said he thought he was talking about an acronym of some sort.

By the way, what do you think of "cito"? (Pronunciation only - the way it would sound if I were asking you a question)

In a way, it was like a loaded question. Just my opinion.

[michaz]

2. The word "Aleppo" alone should have clicked immediately. He didn't have a clue. n/t

[kentuck]

5. If your mind was thinking of something else...

I could see how Aleppo might not immediately register, coming out of the blue. The inflection that Barnicle put on the word was a bit strange, in my opinion.

[AngryAmish]

12. What I find humorous is as if Mike Barnacle has any idea about Aleppo.

I figure he has some atavistic idea that Aleppo=Bad but any insight to the actors, factions and motivations of the various forces is clearly beyond his ability.

[redstateblues]

3. Apples and oranges. He obviously hasn't been paying attention to events in the Middle East.

[safeinOhio]

4. I agree about that point, but

he is still Ayn Rand light.

[kentuck]

7. I have a friend that says...

he is a Republican with a bong...

[wheniwasincongress]

11. That is a perfect description

I would add he also seems not "all there"

[womanofthehills]

17. He was a Republican when he was NM governor

I wish Trump was asked this question. It was kind of thrown at Johnson and his big thing is stay out of foreign interventions.

[Warpy]

41. He is. He's wrong but he's not dumb

and he didn't manage to screw things up here in 8 years in office. He's better than Trump, so if you know anyone who is despairing over either voting for Trump or leaving the top of the ballot blank, steer them to Johnson.

I'm sure if the question was asked about what he'd do about Syria or Aleppo, Syria, he'd have answered. He's a non interventionist like the party platform says he is, and that's actually a good thing. Unfortunately, that also extends to humanitarian aid, and that's a very, very bad thing.

I didn't vote for him in NM and I won't vote for him now. I'll always give him kudos for speaking out in favor of legalizing pot and ending the drug war while he was in office here, but that's it. I saw no signs of his trying to persuade the lege to act on any of it while he was in office.

[CTyankee]

62. how is he on abortion rights?

I always wonder about these Libertarians...they should all be pro-choice but I wonder if some stray from abortion rights...

[Warpy]

64. He never took much of a stand

but I know stupid legislation from the hard line Catholics in the lege never got past his desk.

As I said, he didn't fuck the state up during his 8 years. I don't know if he's become a looneytarian true believer since then or he's just the same rich guy who doesn't want to pay taxes that he was as governor. I do know he's survivable. Trump isn't.

[bigtree]

6. ffs

...is there ANY concern for the competency of these contenders?

This isn't a reality show gig.

His answer today sounds like he read a wiki summary.

[kentuck]

8. No, but...

I think he takes votes from Trump, rather than Hillary, as some polls have suggested, and that if he is forced out of the race for such an error, it will probably help Trump and hurt Hillary. That is just my opinion, also.

[stopbush]

9. Is it too much to expect that the word Aleppo would instantly ring a bell

with someone running for fucking POTUS?

[AngryAmish]

16. Yes it is. Harry S. Truman had zero insight into Japanese culture.

Yet his post-war governance (or bare governance) has allowed Japan to remain a first world country after we burned that nation to the ground.

All that said, Johnson has disqualified himself today. I wonder if he knows where babies come from.

[kcr]

10. Asking a Presidential candidate about Aleppo is a loaded question?

In no way is that a loaded question. He repeated the word himself. He said the word, "Aleppo" right back, so this is beyond a stretch.

[kentuck]

13. Well...

[kcr]

14. Like, what is an opinion?

Oh, you said, "opinion". I thought you meant opinion.

[procon]

15. Anyone who casually reads the headline news over their morning coffee knows "Aleppo".

They might not know all the details, but they would at least have a vague impression that it was some Syrian town where many factions were fighting. Gary Johnson is holding himself out as a person who is qualified to serve as president, and he damn well better have a deeper understanding of current events than I do, an old lady who skims through news stories with a jaundiced eye.

[shadowmayor]

18. Uh no

Horseshit to Gary on this one. He obviously hasn't been paying attention and probably doesn't care that much about conflagrations in that part of the world. Anybody pretending to run for President or otherwise would know Aleppo or Mosul or Fallujah etc. Maybe he's not a republican with a bong, but a bong with a republican? Wadda maroon!

[kentuck]

19. What is a lepo ?

I think it could be heard in different ways? He's a dumbass and this is not meant to excuse his ignorance? I wonder if Trump could have answered the question the way Barnicle asked it?

[shadowmayor]

25. What is a lepo?

What you get stuck between your brain and your skull when you don't have a lert.

[Thor_MN]

33. My Pediatrician, some 50 years ago was Dr. Leppo...

It's a Finnish surname, but Johnson still isn't qualified to be POTUS.

[shopgirl]

21. He's a complete lightweight like Trump

I'm not running for President, but I know exactly what Aleppo is. Is it too much to ask that someone running for the highest office in the land should know at least as much as we know? Not to mention the fact that when Johnson was cornered in the hallway after the interview (by Mark Halperin, I think), he still seemed to have no clue as to what "Aleppo" meant.

I am completely over this idea that we should give people a break when they are running for the LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD. Sorry to shout, but, seriously. Donald Trump is intellectually lazy. He does not care to know what's going on in the world. He's happy as a clam to spout slogans (he will make America great again, in case you missed it). Now Gary Johnson seemingly has no idea where or what Aleppo is. And, by the way, we also have someone in the race who is incredibly intelligent, competent and is, more or less, respected by the rest of the world. Her name is Hillary Clinton.

I am completely. over. this. nonsense.

[CrispyQ]

20. Afterwards, Johnson said:

“I’m incredibly frustrated with myself. I have to get smarter and that’s just part of the process.”

If HRC had said this, the outrage would have solicited enough whine to drown out the entire noise of the universe.

[StrictlyRockers]

24. He also said he's only human.

That's right. A human who is unqualified for the presidency.

[Beartracks]

39. You know, some things I like about Johnson.

Oh, no, he's not, you know, he's definitely not qualified to be President of the USA! But I'd like to have a beer with him. lol



==================

[Rex]

22. It was a gotcha question. They are mad that Johnson will take away votes from their idol Trump.

What makes me want to puke, is how the media treats Trump vs the way they treat HRC.

[democrattotheend]

36. Exactly

I am not sure why people on here are attacking Johnson. We should be helping him get into the debates. He will take some votes from Clinton, yes, but he will take more from Trump.

[muriel_volestrangler]

43. Oh, for fuck's sake, they're attacking a candidate who knows nothing about the job he wants

Aleppo is in the news. They've been talking about ceasefires and aid.

15th Aug: Aleppo: Russia ready to 'fight together' with US in shattered Syrian city https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/16/aleppo-russia-ready-to-fight-together-with-us-in-shattered-syrian-city

4th Sept: Syrian troops recapture parts of Aleppo, severing supply line http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-37271625

7th Sept:

U.S., Russia 'not there yet' on Syria deal: State Department

Russian and American experts have worked since July on details to halt the violence in areas where moderate opposition groups, supported by the United States and Gulf allies, and Russian-backed Syrian government forces have been battling.

Those efforts were complicated by a significant offensive in the southern part of the divided city of Aleppo where al-Qaeda- linked groups had become more intermingled with opposition fighters. Russia is insisting that opposition forces be separated from the militants.

"A lot of the sticking points focus around Aleppo, around Nusra, around delineating between where Nusra is and the opposition is, and around ... the next steps and how we get to a nationwide cessation of hostilities," a senior State Department official told reporters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-kerry-idUSKCN11D2HR

No, another know-nothing candidate in the debates would not help the USA. It would make ignorance look like the normal position, and take away from time showing why Trump is too ignorant, as well as too psychopathic, to be president. Plus, it would make the USA even more of a laughing stock.

[Rex]

70. They have their own personal agenda.

Watched it over the years...same shit, different year with them.

[angrychair]

23. If it was fair or not

Who cares. Libertarians are nuts and would drive this country into the shitter if given the chance at real power. Anything that keeps them away from office is a good thing.

[tonyt53]

26. Not buying it. He is a Libertarian. Those people are isolationists. He ignores news from outside.

[Adrahil]

27. Seriously?

Aleppo has been all over the news over the last few months. ANYONE who considers themselves a statesman and worthy of the office of POTUS should know what the fuck Aleppo is.

[wisteria]

28. Why are you defending this Libertarian on DU?

[anoNY42]

52. If he steals votes from Trump

defending him advances DU's cause...

[Loki]

29. Why didn't Lauer ask Trump that question "What would you do about Aleppo?"

I think he probably would have made an even worse (if that's possible) statement like, "maybe that's someone with leprosy". I'm not mocking people with that disease, but this disease called Trump is going to kill us all. Then we would have had to listen all day to the journalistic posers make excuses for his awkward sense of humor, remember he's just being sarcastic. I feel like I'm in an alternate universe.

[TCJ70]

30. It was definitely a poor question...

...especially if it didn't flow with the conversation. It would like asking Hillary out of the blue: What are you going to do about Rio? Without context, the question makes no sense. Did they mean the refugees? Assad? ISIS? What?

[Jim Beard]

38. I saw it and I agree with you.

[Peregrine Took]

32. No excuses. I'm a 70 yr old retiree and as soon as

I saw the word when I woke up this morning I knew exactly what it was.

[kentuck]

34. I think...

sometimes what we see and what we hear can be two different things. I just think he is getting a similar treatment as Governor Dean did with his "scream"... I will not lose any sleep over it although I believe it will hurt Hillary if he slides in the polls.

[kimbutgar]

35. I am not a smart person and I knew Aleppo was in Syria from reading my daily newspaper

And I also saw the picture of that little boy covered in dust after his town was bombed and his brother died.

Gary Johnson another soulless libertarian.

[Onyrleft]

37. It wasn't dumber than falling for libertarianism.

Goofy Gary is just waiting for magic free market faeries to fix Syria.

[likesmountains 52]

40. NO..

[Chathamization]

42. Pretty much. The whole thing is kind of ridiculous, more about signaling by pseudo-experts than

anything else. The question came suddenly in the middle of a discussion about the two parties:

BARNICLE: Which of those candidates of the two-party system — Republican candidate, Democratic candidate — do you draw the most votes from?

JOHNSON: You know, in all of these polls it’s just, remarkably, 50-50. Amazingly, I think, though, that with the exception of just a few polls it’s more votes from Hillary.

BARNICLE: Do you —

JOHNSON: But I think — I think when it ends up it will really be 50-50.

BARNICLE: But do you worry about the Nader effect in 2000?

JOHNSON: I don’t worry one bit about it. I really do think that the two-party system is broken. I don’t think Democrats are able to balance a checkbook these days. That’s it’s all about bigger government and higher taxes. And then Republicans with, I think, the social agenda. Look, whatever your social inclinations are just don’t force it on me. And I think the Republican Party has gotten really extreme in that category.

BARNICLE: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo?

JOHNSON: About?

BARNICLE: Aleppo.

JOHNSON: And what is Aleppo?

BARNICLE: You’re kidding.

JOHNSON: No.

BARNICLE: Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the — it’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis.

JOHNSON: OK, got it, got it.

If we were discussing superdelegates with most people and suddenly asked them "But what about a LEPO?" most would probably ask "What's a 'LEPO'?"

But the other thing that gets me about this question is that the people saying Johnson should know about Aleppo don't seem to have much interest in knowing about the city. Barnicle said "it’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis," the New York times wrongly identified it multiple times, I saw a popular online explanation of Johnson's response (had hundreds of upvotes) saying the city had been under siege since 2012, etc.

It's signaling - people are criticizing Johnson not because Aleppo is important, but because it gets talked about a lot. People wouldn't have the same expectations if the question was about, say, Afrin Canton. In fact, most would probably think it would be ridiculous to expect a candidate to know about that if it was dropped in an interview question. That's not because it's not important, but because it's not talked about. At least, not yet. If it heats up enough and gets enough attention, all the people ignoring it now will suddenly become experts and start telling everyone what we have to do about it, and laughing at anyone who doesn't know about it. Their knowledge is extremely superficial and subject to the whims of the hyperactive media.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. Not 'in the middle of', 'after a question about'

Johnson had already claimed as his basic position:

JOHNSON: Well, I think there’s a big six-lane highway down the middle that encompasses 60 percent of Americans. And broadly speaking, fiscally conservative, socially inclusive, skeptical when it comes to our military intervention. Skeptical when it comes to our going in and supporting regime changes that have not resulted in a more safe world — free markets.

So I think that that encompasses about 60 percent of the electorate and I think that the two-party system has really, really got to the fringes on both sides.

http://time.com/4483779/gary-johnson-aleppo-transcript/

So, in response to that, Barnicle asked one question about where Johnson saw himself in relation to the 2 main candidates, and one about the "military intervention" and "regime changes" that Johnson has mentioned a few seconds before.

Aleppo is one of the largest cities in Syria, and one of the most famous, before the war as well as during it. It's the centre of a lot of fighting, right now, and a subject of discussion between the USA, Russia and others. No, Afrin isn't as important. If you think having heard of Aleppo is 'superficial' because it's in the news, then how much worse is a presidential candidate not even having heard of it?

[Chathamization]

48. You don't think candidates should know about Afrin Canton?

This is exactly the mentality I'm talking about. It's OK not to know about important areas of Syria, as long as they're not talked about in the mainstream media (yet). Having a deep understanding of the crisis doesn't matter - what matters is having a superficial understanding to signal to other people with a superficial understanding that you're in the know. Ignorance is fine, as long as it's the same kind of ignorance I have.

This happens all the time - people think they know all they need to know from a NPR news update, have zero interest in actually understanding complexities of the manner, but consider themselves informed.

And saying that Barnicle's question was in response to that excerpt seems a bit disingenuous:

GEIST: That’s a good place to start. For people who don’t know a lot about you and haven’t had a chance to hear and learn about where you stand on the issues, what is the lane for the Johnson-Weld ticket between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton? What do you bring that’s different from those two?

JOHNSON: Well, I think there’s a big six-lane highway down the middle that encompasses 60 percent of Americans. And broadly speaking, fiscally conservative, socially inclusive, skeptical when it comes to our military intervention. Skeptical when it comes to our going in and supporting regime changes that have not resulted in a more safe world — free markets.

So I think that that encompasses about 60 percent of the electorate and I think that the two-party system has really, really got to the fringes on both sides.

BRZEZINSKI: Mike?

BARNICLE: Which of those candidates of the two-party system — Republican candidate, Democratic candidate — do you draw the most votes from?

JOHNSON: You know, in all of these polls it’s just, remarkably, 50-50. Amazingly, I think, though, that with the exception of just a few polls it’s more votes from Hillary.

BARNICLE: Do you —

JOHNSON: But I think — I think when it ends up it will really be 50-50.

BARNICLE: But do you worry about the Nader effect in 2000?

JOHNSON: I don’t worry one bit about it. I really do think that the two-party system is broken. I don’t think Democrats are able to balance a checkbook these days. That’s it’s all about bigger government and higher taxes. And then Republicans with, I think, the social agenda. Look, whatever your social inclinations are just don’t force it on me. And I think the Republican Party has gotten really extreme in that category.

BARNICLE: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo?

JOHNSON: About?

BARNICLE: Aleppo.

JOHNSON: And what is Aleppo?

BARNICLE: You’re kidding.

JOHNSON: No.

BARNICLE: Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the — it’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis.

JOHNSON: OK, got it, got it.

Yeah, Johnson's an idiot for a lot of reasons, but not because of this. This just underscores the superficiality of our foreign policy discussion.

[muriel_volestrangler]

51. Compared to the city of Aleppo, Afrin is far less important

Afrin is one corner of Syria, that you can find an occasional mention of. Aleppo is a major city of Syria, that has been in the news for years, and is the scene of a significant amount of the fighting. As I said, there was a chemical weapons attack in it just a couple of days earlier. To not recognise the name is awful. To dismiss that with "well, I bet other candidates haven't heard of Afrin" is bullshit. Sorry, but that's the word for it. Bullshit.

No, not 'disingenuous', as the excerpt shows. His foreign 'skepticism' was what he claimed as a major difference from Clinton and Trump, so he was asked a question about foreign intervention.

[Chathamization]

56. Again, this shows the superficiality of our foreign policy discussion

Whether or not Afrin is as important as Aleppo (given the current situation I'd say it's pretty important, but that's another discussion), it's something a candidate should know if they're putting together a competent strategy. But again, it seems people aren't interested in whether or not someone has a coherent Syrian policy or an in depth understanding of the issue. Does their level of ignorance match mine; is the candidate is keeping up with what's hot in the mainstream media.

Even just looking at Aleppo - many the articles and comments about this (even the original interview), show that many now talking about the importance of Aleppo have little understanding of what's happening there and it's significance. Ignorance is fine, as long as you send the right signals.

No, not 'disingenous', as the excerpt shows. His foreign 'skepticism' was was he claimed as a major difference from Clinton and Trump, so he was asked a question about foreign intervention.

Barnicle asked him about it after discussing the effects of the two parties and third parties. If they were discussing Syria it would be one thing, but it's not uncommon for people to get confused by something when someone suddenly switches topics. If we were talking about superdelegates and I typed "But what should we do about a LEPO?" I don't think anyone here would pick up what I was talking about.

[muriel_volestrangler]

60. Barnicle didn't ask "but ..."; there was no conjunction

It was clearly a new question, from the way he asked it. And, as I said, Johnson had mentioned foreign intervention and regime change just moments before.

You think that other people don't have enough of an 'in depth understanding' to be able to criticise a presidential candidate for not recognising a major battleground. Aleppo has far more people (well, had - many have fled, of course) than Afrin, and has been in the news for years (it's not just 'hot' now), because the fighting there has been sustained. No one can have a decent policy if they don't even know what place is being talked about. You're defending Johnson as being no worse than we are, when he plainly is.

[Chathamization]

65. Nor was there any segue to indicate they weren't talking about polling and the two-parties anymore

It's not uncommon for people to not recognize a word when they think you're talking about another subject. Johnson says that the case here. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but it's silly for people to assume he didn't know about the city based on the transcript.

You think that other people don't have enough of an 'in depth understanding' to be able to criticise a presidential candidate for not recognising a major battleground. Aleppo has far more people (well, had - many have fled, of course) than Afrin, and has been in the news for years (it's not just 'hot' now), because the fighting there has been sustained.

No, I think that criticizing him for superficial reasons when most people are happy with their ignorance is silly. There's a lot that gets said in the media that shows a complete lack of understanding, but it mostly gets ignored.

Yes, if he doesn't know what Aleppo is then it show's he doesn't have an in depth understanding of the situation there. But the same is true for not knowing a number of other places there, as well as having actual knowledge of what's happening in Aleppo besides "there's been fighting there." When people are ignoring the errors in the descriptions of Aleppo, or acting as if major areas of the Syrian conflict aren't important, then they honestly aren't actually interested in what's happening there. They're interesting in what's being talked about on cable. The fact that many conflate those two is pretty unsettling.

You're defending Johnson as being no worse than we are, when he plainly is.

Can't say I've paid enough attention to Johnson to make that judgement. But yes, most of the people who are talking about this don't know much about the situation there - and most importantly don't seem to care. I think most of the articles and comments about this demonstrate that.

[muriel_volestrangler]

66. "Can't say I've paid enough attention to Johnson to make that judgement" - then stop judging

And, yes, you are judging - "pseudo-experts", right from the moment you joined this thread. You call him being unable to recognise 'Aleppo' "superficial", while saying DUers are showing "ignorance" - though your evidence for that seems to be mistakes in some media reports.

Aleppo is extremely important in Syria - which is why, for instance, the BBC can produce a piece, around the time Johnson made his gaffe (but I think it must have been made well before that), titled "Aleppo: Key battleground in Syria's civil war". This isn't about "cable"; it's about the war. You can look at how much Afrin comes up in Department of State documents, and compare it with Aleppo - less than 1 full page, versus more than 10 (I don't know how to get the total of results, since they just give a 'next' button - it could go on for hundreds): https://findit.state.gov/search?query=afrin&affiliate=dos_stategov&search-button=Search . There will be a limit on what people's knowledge is - you've picked one small piece of the conflict, and said that if people don't know about that, there's no difference from not recognising 'Aleppo'. This is literally a false equivalence.

At what point has Johnson claimed he thought they were still talking about polling or the two party situation? All I can find is him saying he should have recognised it. He thought it might be an acronym, but that just shows he didn't know what it meant, and so started guessing.

[Chathamization]

67. Hmm, maybe you should re-read my posts

And, yes, you are judging - "pseudo-experts", right from the moment you joined this thread. You call him being unable to recognise 'Aleppo' "superficial", while saying DUers are showing "ignorance" - though your evidence for that seems to be mistakes in some media reports.

There's pretty good evidence of psuedo-experts. Not sure why you assumed I was talking about DUers.

Thought if you want, we can talk about some of the claims made by people here. I still remember arguing with people here who were convinced that Ur Bill was about to fall. If you don't think that most of the chatter people have is mainly about what they see in the mainstream media (rather than about which important things are happening), I would suggest you look at a more diverse collection of sources.

There will be a limit on what people's knowledge is - you've picked one small piece of the conflict, and said that if people don't know about that, there's no difference from not recognising 'Aleppo'.

Actually that's not what I said: "People wouldn't have the same expectations if the question was about, say, Afrin Canton. In fact, most would probably think it would be ridiculous to expect a candidate to know about that if it was dropped in an interview question. That's not because it's not important, but because it's not talked about."

[struggle4progress]

44. Yeah, we've only been bombin Syria for a few years now, so why should we expect a candidate for Prez

to have given the matter any thought? He's been thinkin about how to abolish the Fed, and defendin the right of states to display the Confederate flag, so Syria's not much on his radar

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. I mean, what would you know about Aleppo from reading DU for 2 weeks, for instance?

Aug 28: Syria barrel bomb attack: At least 16 killed at wake in Aleppo

Sep 6: Syrian government 'drops chlorine gas' on rebel-held part of Aleppo

So, 2 days before, there's a chemical weapons attack in Aleppo, but the man who seconds earlier had described his policy as about being skeptical of military intervention and regime change cannot recognise the name of a city at the centre of current US policy about military intervention and regime change?

Meh. You're making excuse for ignorance. And ignorance on the right, too.

[GeorgeGist]

47. Recfor exposure.

[brooklynite]

49. Do you know why Twitter blew up right after this?

Because everyone else DID immediately know what Aleppo meant.

[boston bean]

50. His answer once informed was abysmal...

[sarae]

53. There's no excuse for a presidential candidate not knowing about Aleppo.

Having said that, people are crucifying Gary Johnson for making the kind of mistake Donald Trump makes every time he opens his mouth. Donald Trump has gotten a free pass for making similar mistakes thousands of times. The only difference is that Trump would never admit he doesn't know the answer to a question. Instead, he'll bullshit his way through answers he doesn't know – although it's still very clear that he doesn't know the answers.

[LanternWaste]

54. Much as "Moscow" may be an interpreted as an acronym or a disease

Much as "Moscow" may be an interpreted as an acronym or a disease if one is queried about US-Russian relations?


"Without context..." Yet the context did exist.

[JI7]

55. there was a later video where he still sounded clueless on the issue

[Johonny]

61. exactly

After being further informed about the questions details he basically rambled out a random exchange of factoids to show he knew something about the area, but in no way actually answered the question as to what he would actually do. It got to the point where Trumps 30 day mandate sounded more reasonable than Gary Johnson's non-answer answer.

[Avalux]

57. Someone might think it was a disease or acronym if they have no clue about Aleppo.

Johnson is running for president - he should have been able to answer the question without context.

There's no defense for his ignorance, sorry.

[KMOD]

58. How kind of you to come to Gary's defense.

The libertarian is clearly clueless on the Syrian crisis. Sorry, but he blew it. There's no way he can be taken seriously as a Presidential candidate now.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

59. when someone told me gary johnson didnt know about aleppo

i immediate knew who GJ was (libertarian candidate, prior republican gov) and what Aleppo meant.

If i know that, i expect someone running this country to know that.

[lame54]

63. Johnson is suffering from standards held in previous elections

[Blue_Tires]

68. Perhaps, but nothing excuses him not knowing Harriet Tubman

[kentuck]

71. Agree.

Did that really happen?

[Blue_Tires]

72. Well, he needed a serious memory jolt:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512404273

[jcgoldie]

69. Well it was a big mistake but...

At least he owned up to it. Johnson needs to watch Donald Trump field questions 24/7 on shit he knows nothing about.

Mr Trump, what would you do about Aleppo?

DT: "Oh Aleppo. That's a serious issue. Yes we're looking at that. Sure, Aleppo, it's concerning it really is. We may need to do something about that. Trust me, we have our best people working on it. We're looking into it we really are. Believe me, that's something I've always taken very seriously."