I conducted an initial phone interview with Gary Johnson campaign manager Ron Nielson on Thursday. The interview was based on questions asked by our readers in this thread.

Because I had additional notes that were not with me at the time, and because IPR was experiencing site outages before and during this time, we are tentatively planning on a second interview in the next few days, allowing our readers to ask additional questions in the comments here.

Because I was not able to do both effectively at the same time, I read off IPR readers’ questions and Joe Buchman took notes. There’s no verbatim transcript of the interview, but these notes seem pretty accurate to me based on my recollection of the call.

Editor’s notes are from Joe; I note my own editor’s notes separately.

PAULIE: One of our readers asks “I want to know where radio/tv ads have been run and how much they’re planning to invest in this in the near future. What states have been targeted? (i.e., battleground states or safe states?)”

RON NIELSON: We’ve spend about $180,000 on radio advertising.

(Editor’s Note: You can listen to the radio ads here: http://soundcloud.com/garyJohnson2012)

RON: Our strategy for radio was first to solidify the Libertarian Party vote and secondly to appeal to former Ron Paul voters. We bought time on radio programs that typically attracted Ron Paul listeners and/or were Libertarian-leaning programs.

Our television advertising has been present on our website (garyjohnson2012.com) and starts streaming as soon as you go there. Those television ads have been shared on lots of social media, in emails and other formats, but our paid television advertising on major media outlets has just started. We have bought television time in nine markets – New Hampshire, Burlington Vermont, Washington, DC, New Mexico, Denver and other markets mostly in the west.

PAULIE: What about Swing States vs. Safe States?

RON: In battleground, or so called “swing states” the media is so saturated with ads from the Republicans and Democrats that we are unlikely to break through to the point we could even be noticed or heard. Those markets, due to classic supply and demand, are among the most expensive. So in terms of our goal of maximizing the value of each dollar donated to us – as measured by votes for Gary and Jim, it just doesn’t make sense for us to invest our resources in those markets first. So we’re looking for the biggest bang – the greatest return – for the hard-earned dollars that have been donated to the campaign.

Now Colorado is something of a battleground state. But there we also have viewership in Boulder, where we have traction in terms of calling for an end to the war on drugs, and thanks to cable systems in Wyoming which carry the Denver market stations, we also get viewers there. Otherwise we’re not in any battleground states.

[Note from paulie: Of the markets named, NH and NM have also been characterized as swing states, and the DC market includes northern Virginia, a swing state. Other parts of the DC media market, Wyoming, and Vermont are considered safe states. I hope to get the rest of the list of nine media markets, but haven’t received it yet.]

RON: Also, television has been a part of our strategic discussions since the very early discussions with Governor Johnson about how to best run this campaign. Rather than simply spend every dollar donated on television advertising – which would have made my job a heck of a lot easier (LAUGHS), what the Governor and I set out to do from the very beginning was to build a grassroots movement for Liberty. We knew to win the Presidency that we needed a solid foundation of supporters. So that means putting money into travel, organizing, building teams, connecting supporters with each other through social media and other methods, printing support materials, paying for rally venues, gaining free media, putting our video and audio advertising online for that grassroots movement to begin sharing — and all that as a strategy before looking at investing in paid, major media television advertising – especially where that advertising is lost in a sea of other political commercials.

Again, two million in television ads for Gary would have been up against two thousand million (2 billion) in ads from the other candidates. It’d have been wasted.

So our strategy was to support the Libertarian base, then reach out to Ron Paul supporters to build on that base, and expand our efforts to reach out to progressives on social issues. We’ve built momentum through those efforts and the free media associated with them. And I think we’ve been better at investing the dollars donated to us by doing that, rather than by simply putting it all into a series of media buys.

PAULIE: Another reader at IPR asks if you could provide, along those lines, a general accounting of expenditures and how decisions were made.

RON: We’ve put that out in the form of a letter from our Treasurer for our spending through the end of September.

(Editor’s Note: Available here: https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.231/qkc.c33.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/GJ-2012-General-Election-Summary1.pdf)

RON: Our Treasurer will update those numbers for October and at the end of the campaign.

PAULIE: Another reader asks: As the campaign ends, how can the national Libertarian Party best integrate, support and build on the Johnson 2012 campaign organization to maintain the momentum for the future of the LP? [A similar question: How can the campaign and the state affiliates work together more efficiently in the future?]

RON: I hope everyone can find a way to continue to work together. We all need to work to build a Liberty movement and to increase membership in the Libertarian Party. I think every American needs to be engaged in the ideas that show how Liberty is what is best for all of us. So I believe all of us here with the campaign, Gary, Jim, many of our volunteers and staff plan to continue building momentum by speaking at rallies, on campuses, in the media as much as they will have us. We have Our American Initiative, a 501 C4, as one foundation for that.

(Editor’s Note: See —http://ouramericainitiative.com/)

PAULIE: In terms of campus events, isn’t it difficult to organize those when you have only the fall semester? In the past, when our candidates were nominated earlier, they had a lot more time for campus organizing – over a full school year. One reader asks, do you wish now that you would have started the “college tour” in 2010?

RON: I wish the nomination had been earlier. It would have helped us to build a base and would have worked a lot better in terms of campus organizing.

PAULIE: What states do you expect to break 2 percent in?

RON: Our goal is to exceed expectations. I believe we will do that to a greater degree in many of the Western states and that we will also find we have some surprising strong pockets of support in other areas. We certainly expect to gain the highest vote total for a Libertarian Presidential candidate ever — something significantly beyond that.

PAULIE: What LP state affiliates seem to have their act together the best and gave you the best support?

RON: In each state we had two groups that we worked with. First we had the already organized existing state party organizations, many of which were very, very well organized. But we also had, in each state, as a part of the campaign our State Director, a State Campus Organizer, and a State Finance Chair for the campaign.

(Editor’s Note: Much of this organization was put in place prior to or during the Governor’s campaign for the Republican Party nomination, and was continued through the campaign for the Libertarian nomination, and then through the general election).

RON: We also have four regional directors coordinating the activities of our 150 campus, finance and state directors.

So in each state we had those two groups coordinating with each other and as a back-up to each other.

And we reached out to all the various Libertarian candidates and campaigns in each state as well.

So in no place were we weak in any way. In fact almost all our volunteers were working hard, giving it their all. I know both the Governor and the Judge who have met many, if not almost all of them in person are very grateful to them.

PAULIE: Another reader asks, do you feel you have been treated fairly by the major media in the US this election cycle?)

RON: We have not been treated fairly by the major media.

Gary Johnson should have been in every one of the Republican Primary debates. He clearly met their stated criteria by their own guidelines. He was in two of them, but even then not treated with equity.

Gary should have been in the CPD (Commission on Presidential Debates) debates. His exclusion from those was due to a combination of media bias, and the efforts of the Republican and Democratic Parties through the CPD to limit competition.

In many of the polls this past summer Gary was reported to be well above five percent. But let’s just take five percent. Over this campaign season, for every 100 times a presidential candidate was mentioned by the major media, did you hear Gary’s name five of those times? There’s no way.

We did manage to get some coverage, and we’re grateful for that. But there’s no way that coverage was either proportional or fair.

PAULIE: Have you read Harry Browne’s post-campaign reports?

RON: No. I would like to see Harry Browne’s materials.

(Editor’s Note: Interested readers can find an index of articles by Harry Browne, here: http://www.harrybrowne.org/ArticlesIndex.htm)

[Paulie’s note: While I highly recommend those as well, I was more specifically talking about Harry Browne’s campaign journals during the campaign and his post-campaign analysis and the insights they provide for Libertarian presidential campaigns].

PAULIE: What do you say to people who are afraid of wasting a vote*?

RON: I think there are two answers to that question.

First, Gary says that if you don’t like the choices you have then don’t waste your vote on someone whose values you do not support. The whole scenario of a spoiler is only relevant in swing states. Where there is no possibility of being a spoiler – for example in California or New York whose electoral college votes are going to President Obama, or in Utah or Texas whose electoral college votes are going to Romney, everyone should feel free to vote their conscience. To cast a vote for the values they truly believe in. To send a message to the major parties to move in the direction you really want.

Secondly, if you are not happy with the results of Republican and Democratic policies/governance and you want your vote to really count as a protest for gaining ballot access and general campaign funding then you have the opportunity to fundamentally change the dynamic of the Party system in this country.

PAULIE: I want to thank you for your time. IPR readers really appreciate this. Could we do a follow-up sometime next week, before the election?

RON: I’d love to. Sure.

* The “wasted vote” question appears to have been gobbled up along with a few other comments in the site switchover to a new hosting company. It was emailed to me in the format below. It was too long to read in full during the limited time we had for the interview but is included here for informational purposes:

Spencer Awes // Oct 25, 2012 at 12:57 pm Dear Mr. Nielson, I believe in what Mr. Johnson stands for and your team has done great work since taking up the Libertarian ticket, however, I am weighing my belief as to whether or not a protest vote for Johnson is the best I can do at this time for furthering the political and economic change our country needs to make. How is a protest vote that fails to win, better that a winning vote backed by people who pursue change? When a heart patient is on the table after years of feeding on bacon and butter, switching to vegetable soup the night before isn’t going to make a difference. Surgery with the Dr. available has to go forward. Now, if we can get the patient through surgery, changes to our diet can be helpful, and new medicinal discoveries may even emerge over time to repair all the damage done; then, selecting a new Dr. that advances these proactive remedies would be sensible. So the question; what is the benefit to Americans of a 5% protest vote for Johnson, if it means Obama will retain the Presidency, and given my belief that his administration will accelerate the deterioration of our nation’s financial and sovereign health? Assuming one believes that a Romney administration will do more for free market mechanisms than Obama, and be a more adept negotiator on the military and economic fronts in the Middle East and with China — both which appear to present a crisis-event-horizon within less than 4 years — is THIS the time for changing our diet, or choosing between doctors “in travel range” for surgery in the morning? Mr. Nielson, while I applied the metaphor above for attention, please if possible give me some substance on which to value a protest vote at this junction. Sincerely, Spencer Awes

The substance of Mr. Awes’ contention that Gov. Romney represents the “lesser evil” was not discussed, although I will be happy to debate it in the comments.

The 5% threshold was not discussed in specific terms, but the “general election funding” refers to millions of dollars in Federal money that would be made available to the Libertarian Party if Gary Johnson gets 5% or more in the election, allowing the party to provide much more support for the nominee next time. I’m not sure whether Mr. Awes was aware of this threshold when he used the 5% figure or whether it was just a coincidence.

In other news, Dr. Walter Block has been announced as an economic adviser to campaign after having supported Ron Paul through the Republican Primary. His endorsement is expected to serve as a bridge to many Ron Paul supporters who are primarily concerned about economic and foreign policy issues.