Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson couldn't name the leader of North Korea

[NED funded]

Seriously this is basic knowledge that everyone should know.

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson couldn't name the leader of North Korea

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson seems to have drawn a blank again.

In an interview with The New York Times published on Wednesday, Johnson skirted around a question about whether he could name North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Un.

When asked whether he knew the name of the volatile leader, Johnson said, "I do."

When The Times pressed him further to identify the North Korean leader, Johnson appeared incredulous.

"You want me to name the person," Johnson responded, according to The Times. "Really."

Johnson may have been skittish about answering to avoid another gaffe, after two recent occasions in which he flubbed answers to foreign-policy questions.

During an MSNBC interview last week, Johnson struggled to name a foreign leader he admired.

And last month, he asked "What is Aleppo?" in an interview in which he appeared unfamiliar with the epicenter of the Syrian civil war.

From the NYTimes:

In the Times interview on Wednesday, Mr. Johnson conspicuously sought to avoid another misstep. Asked if he knew the name of North Korea’s leader, Mr. Johnson replied, “I do.”

“You want me to name” the person, he said, then paused, before adding dryly, “Really.” But he declined to supply the name.

[Celista]

I think it's a stretch to claim he didn't know who it is, based on the content of the article.

[LilSaihah]

Poe's Law mixed with news media unreliability.

[NED funded]

I think it's a stretch to claim he didn't know who it is, based on the content of the article.

Then why he did not give the name? It's not a hard question.

[LilSaihah]

Then why he did not give the name? It's not a hard question.

Because the interviewer is taking the fucking piss.

[TwoNineMarine]

Not that he shouldn't know the guys name but in the end who cares? North Korea is irrelevant and their leader even more so.

[Azadina]

Then why he did not give the name? It's not a hard question.

Why should he entertain the question?

[LilSaihah]

Not that he shouldn't know the guys name but in the end who cares? North Korea is irrelevant and their leader even more so.

On the contrary, North Korea is extremely relevant. China's a regional power with militaristic ambitions. North Korea is one of their only military allies and holds South Korea, one of the world's biggest economies, at gunpoint.

[Spectral]

I don't think Johnson should indulge every dipshit reporter that thinks asking trivia questions about geography and world leaders until he pauses too long on one is solid journalism.

[NED funded]

Because the interviewer is taking the fucking piss.

Why should he entertain the question?

Because, then he could have avoided this specific moment. It's not hard, just say Kim Jong Un and get over it and if his ego is so big that he can't be bothered to answer questions of basic knowledge that every presidential candidate gets asked then he shouldn't be running for president.

[alzoron]

Given the opportunity to ask important questions like what the candidate believes and what his plans are for running the country and the reporter fucks around with childish bullshit questions like that. The question was meant to be insulting. I would have told them to come back later when they're serious and ended the interview right there.

It's the New York Fucking Times not some 2-bit tabloid.

[Azadina]

Because, then he could have avoided this specific moment. It's not hard, just say Kim Jong Un and get over it and if his ego is so big that he can't be bothered to answer questions of basic knowledge that every presidential candidate gets asked then he shouldn't be running for president.

It was intentionally stupid question. I wouldn't have answered either. If press can't be bothered to make serious questions, then they can resign and ask Putin for a chance to join one of his factories.

[Spectral]

It's the New York Fucking Times not some 2-bit tabloid.

Over the past decade, this has become a distinction without difference.

[Deleted]

He's not gonna get elected anyway. So for all I care he couldn't know the leader of the US.

[paralleluniverse]

With every trainwreck interview, Gary Johnson continues to prove he is almost as stupid and ignorant as Trump. Just like his libertarian ideology.

Who are the clowns voting for this idiot?

[LilSaihah]

Because, then he could have avoided this specific moment. It's not hard, just say Kim Jong Un and get over it and if his ego is so big that he can't be bothered to answer questions of basic knowledge that every presidential candidate gets asked then he shouldn't be running for president.

If you think a big ego is a disqualifier for the presidency then you've got a grand total of fucking nobody to vote for mate.

[NED funded]

Given the opportunity to ask important questions like what the candidate believes and what his plans are for running the country and the reporter fucks around with childish bullshit questions like that. The question was meant to be insulting. I would have told them to come back later when they're serious and ended the interview right there.

It's the New York Fucking Times not some 2-bit tabloid.

He was asked a lot of questions, specially regarding foreign policy. This question in specific was just thrown around there.

[Spectral]

With every trainwreck interview, Gary Johnson continues to prove he is almost as stupid and ignorant as Trump. Just like his libertarian ideology.

Who are the clowns voting for this idiot?

I'll be voting for him. I broadly agree with the direction of his policies on a number of issues, while disagreeing with many specifics; knowing what politicians can actually accomplish in practice, he'd be my preferred choice among the four (sort of) candidates. This particular interview is a decent example of him knowing enough about media trolls to not engage and move on.

Rather than being "clowns", his voting demographic is likely to consist heavily of the young and the highly educated, as libertarianism skews young, educated, and high income.

[NED funded]

If you think a big ego is a disqualifier for the presidency then you've got a grand total of fucking nobody to vote for mate.

Seriously? Because even Trump answers this type of questions.

[Dezerte]

It was an unprofessional question to ask.