Frank Daniels III

fdanielsiii@tennessean.com

Demonstrating the perverse nature of our presidential political season, Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico, made significant strides in his campaign last week — by screwing up.

It was a bad gaffe, on a significant platform, not excusable, and it served to get Johnson the kind of attention he has not received for any other statements, speeches or appearances.

In this election, it seems that you have to give the political media elites the chance to show their superior knowledge and intellect, give them the chance to demean you, and give them the chance to point out how unqualified you are to be president to get enough attention to be considered a potential president.

RELATED: Will Libertarians make the debate?

RELATED: Libertarian does not look so crazy

After months of never reading Johnson’s name on any of the mainstream political newsletters I receive — The Washington Post, The New York Times, FiveThirtyEight, Huffington Post, Daily Beast, Ballotpedia, Wall Street Journal — the third party alternative candidate got significant attention in almost every newsletter.

Why?

On an MSNBC’s Morning Joe interview show with Mike Barnicle and other MSNBC journalists, Johnson flubbed Barnicle’s question:

“What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo?”

Johnson, who has sort of goofy look about him all the time anyway, appeared even goofier, and clearly had no clue what Barnicle was referring to.

“About … ?” he temporized.

“Aleppo,” a stuffily superior Barnicle reiterated.

“And what is Aleppo?” Johnson asked.

“You’re kidding?” Barnicle said.

“No.”

And a presidential candidate’s defining meme was born.

‘What is Aleppo?’

Barnicle explained, “Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis …”

Johnson broke in and gave a reasonable answer, saying that the only way we deal with the “mess” in Syria is to work with Russia to bring a diplomatic resolution.

“This is the result of regime change, which we end up supporting, and have led to a less safe world,” Johnson pointed out in his answer.

Of course journalists, editorialists and the social media universe could care less about listening to the full answer.

The Washington Post, which has already declared that there is no way it will endorse Republican nominee Donald Trump, quickly published an editorial (“Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse”) saying that the gaffe “encapsulates why Mr. Johnson is not fit to be president.”

Sorry guys, his ability to be facile with the facts about Syria is embarrassing but not disqualifying; plus, Johnson is running on a platform of disentanglement with all the interventionist moves that our current and previous administrations have embraced.

We can certainly disagree with his stance, but it is at least refreshing to hear a presidential candidate, who has government experience, talk seriously about reducing the use of American troops and military power in places where success is at best unlikely.

Explanation: 'I blanked'

Normally, the political rule of thumb is “if you’re explaining, you’re losing,” but in Johnson’s case, explaining his boneheaded-ness is likely to be the best coverage he will get this month.

Thursday afternoon, Johnson told Bloomberg Politics that he was “incredibly frustrated with himself.”

In a statement to CNN, Johnson wrote, “This morning, I began my day be setting aside any doubt that I’m human. Yes, I understand the dynamics of the Syrian conflict — I talk about them every day … I blanked. It happens, and it will happen again during the course of this campaign.”

Friday, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer had the candidate on at 1 p.m. to ask him about his thoughts on the North Korean test of a nuclear bomb, and to explain his gaffe.

The interview gave Johnson the chance to point out he has been saying for months on the foreign policy front that North Korea is the biggest threat to safety, because of its nuclear weapons and commitment to building missile delivery systems.

Like his answer on Syria, Johnson said that dealing with the North Korean threat will only be successful if the U.S. and China work together to force a diplomatic solution.

The goal of working with China would be to get American troops, about 30,000, out of South Korea, which, Johnson said, is able to defend itself against a North Korean conventional army.

Additional coverage

In addition to the mainstream political press, Johnson was featured, negatively, in a piece by The New Yorker’s editor, David Remnick. It is a well-written column that explores why he thinks Johnson is a shallow candidate — his absolute support of the Second Amendment, his love of Ayn Rand, his support of raising the retirement age for Social Security benefits.

Remnick did spell Johnson correctly.

Vanity Fair also headlined Johnson’s gaffe.

It was an interesting twist to a week that began with the traditionally Republican editorial page of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, now owned by Warren Buffett, endorsing Johnson in a Sept. 4 editorial.

Need to see imperfections

We are all imperfect, every one of our presidents and wannabe presidents have been imperfect. As citizens, we must understand and choose which imperfections are important.

Watching Johnson deal with his mistake is exactly what we need to see to determine if he is a real candidate.

So far, he is far more attractive in dealing with his embarrassment than either Hillary Clinton or Trump.

Reach Frank Daniels III at 615-881-7039 or on Twitter @fdanielsiii.