Freestate Project in trouble?


PDA






twoblink
September 28, 2004, 01:50 PM
Badnarik, the LP candidate is on 49 state ballots..

Guess which state he's NOT on because they couldn't get 3000 signatures??

New Hampshire..

For the state that's suppose to be loaded with libertarians, this is the most pathetic thing I have ever seen..

Someone will explain this to me, I'm sure.. because for a state I want to move to, this just like the 1800 calories in my Big Mac that makes me rethink my decision...

If you enjoyed reading about "Freestate Project in trouble?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Erich
September 28, 2004, 01:56 PM
What year is this? :)

twoblink
September 28, 2004, 02:04 PM
I meant on state ballots in 49 states..

It's 2am....

Cosmoline
September 28, 2004, 02:16 PM
I lost interest when it became clear that the folks behind the project had decided on NH long before the results of the poll were in. The idea that a state as tightly controlled and over-governed as New Hampshire could be home to some Libertarian utopian community is absurd. You can't paint your fence in that state without approval from some village council or historic preservation officer. Yes the gun laws are good, but nothing else is. Everything is zoned and controlled, every piece of land comes with tons of CC&R's. Call that freedom, 'cause I don't :D

Gordon Fink
September 28, 2004, 02:21 PM
Don’t the libertarians have to move there first, before they can implement a more freedom-oriented government?

~G. Fink

OF
September 28, 2004, 02:42 PM
I meant on state ballots in 59 states..Ahhh...now it makes sense. :confused: ;)

Get some sleep brother.

- Gabe

Erich
September 28, 2004, 03:16 PM
:) Night-night!

Poodleshooter
September 28, 2004, 03:29 PM
Don’t the libertarians have to move there first, before they can implement a more freedom-oriented government?

There also have to be enough of them to matter: http://presidentelect.org/e2000.html

Reform, Libertarian and Constitution parties combined totals were around 1% of the popular vote in the 2000 presidential election or 1.039 million voters. New Hampshire had about 600,000 voters in 2000, who basically split about even Republican and Democrat with third parties running about 5% of the popular vote. The LP will need about 280,000 voters moving there in order to "take over" New Hampshire.
How many LP members is the free state list up to now?

goon
September 28, 2004, 03:42 PM
I was interested in the FSP at first and still feel that it is a hell of a good idea. The state they chose is what puts me off. IMO, even with their small numbers, they should have chosen a state that was better suited to the opinions that they held, and specifically tried to congregate in a few adjoining counties in said state.
I have also become intrigued by the idea of trying to be more self sufficient. In the wake of things like the blizzards in the north and this year's hurricane season in Florida, it only makes sense to try and not depend completely on supermarkets and electricity.
I have never been farther north than PA, but I can tell you that in the winter, PA is BLOODY COLD. New Hampshire can only be worse, and it undoubtedly stays colder longer. That is not a friendly environment for trying to be more self sufficient. The growing season is shorter, heating will require more oil, gas, wood, coal, whatever, and everyone will be buying, which will drive high prices even higher.
I was on the FSP site for awhile, but I got to thinking.
I know that they say something to the effect that "You can't let a little thing like cold weather talk you out of your committment to the FSP", but that is not a real world assessment.
My "goal" of being somewhat self sufficient isn't compatible with the FSP, so I have to look elsewhere to try and acheive it.
I was not signed up and committed to their project, so my decision is a moot point, but I think that some of thier members are going to reach that conclusion as well.
I am sorry to hear that it isn't working as planned, but I am not really suprised by it.

To get back to the point, if the reason for your moving to NH is only because the FSP is endorsing that state, you need to think it over real hard. I can sympathize with your feelings, but you may be better off to cut loose of it now and just move somewhere else that is flooded with gunowners and other civil liberties.

As for me, Dixie is calling my name...
:D

sumpnz
September 28, 2004, 04:05 PM
Ummm, last I checked we still had just 50 states in this fair and beautiful country. That makes it quite an accomplishment to get on the ballot in 59 states.

444
September 28, 2004, 04:23 PM
Aw, give the guy a break: he said it was 0200 when he was writing it.


I must have missed out on this whole concept prior to about a month ago. Very interesting. I would love to read more about it. I first encountered this idea while reading Boston Tea Party's book Molon Labe. It is a novel, but IMO a good one. Of course everything goes the way I wish it would go in reality, which to me, makes it a good book. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1888766077/qid=1096402959/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/102-8340626-3016101?v=glance&s=books

I also agree that New Hampshire was a poor choice. BTP makes a very strong case for Wyoming, assuming the numbers he uses are accurate and not just part of the novel.

Zrex
September 28, 2004, 04:33 PM
Twoblink:

You could always consider the Free State Wyoming Project instead:

Free State Wyoming Info (http://www.javelinpress.com/free_state_wyoming.html)

jefnvk
September 28, 2004, 04:37 PM
Ummm, last I checked we still had just 50 states in this fair and beautiful country. That makes it quite an accomplishment to get on the ballot in 59 states.

Good thing the UN is watching over the election this year :neener:

rock jock
September 28, 2004, 04:50 PM
I would love if the libertarians took over a state.....................and conservatives got another 48. The liberals can keep Taxachusetts and choke on it.

Glock Glockler
September 28, 2004, 06:17 PM
Twoblink,

I spoke with a few people in the LP and apparently they fulfilled the requisite number of signatures by well over 50% but they were told that it was submitted improperly and the application was dismissed. It seems that this is not necessarily due to a lack of LP supporters but rather some funny business behind closed doors:fire:

Brett Bellmore
September 28, 2004, 06:28 PM
apparently they fulfilled the requisite number of signatures by well over 50% but they were told that it was submitted improperly and the application was dismissed.

Pretty typical, I'm afraid; Every election the LP usually has to sue in several states to get on the ballot, when state officials decide to keep the party off illegally. As opposed, of course, to the Republicans and Democrats getting on the ballot even when they genuinely don't meet those requirements because somebody forgets to file a form on time.

New Hampshire was a lousy choice, Wyoming or North Dakota would have been better for any number of reasons. But the whole idea foundered on a couple of problems: First, that getting libertarians to cooperate is like herding cats, and second, that if the project did succeed, the federal government would move in to crush it.

Cosmoline
September 28, 2004, 06:41 PM
The FSP was an interesting exercise, but their ultimate choice utterly baffled me. New Hampshire has good gun laws, but there's little else about it that would make it a libertarian paradise. It's still part of modern New England, where you need the approval of a town elder, the board of selectmen and a historic preservation committee to paint your fence. Nearly all proprety is heavy laden with CC&Rs and zoning is well established. Call that freedom, cause I don't. What land there is is far from cheap, and the job market is pretty miserable from all I hear. A mountain state would have been a better choice, or Alaska.

Oh well. The notion of libertarians doing ANYTHING as a group may be a pipe dream. It's like herding cats.

dustind
September 28, 2004, 06:59 PM
I lost interest when it became clear that the folks behind the project had decided on NH long before the results of the poll were in. The idea that a state as tightly controlled and over-governed as New Hampshire could be home to some Libertarian utopian community is absurd. You can't paint your fence in that state without approval from some village council or historic preservation officer. Everything you just said is wrong. Every FSP vote was public, you can see for yourself. There were many long threads on NH vs WY and the facts pointed to NH. All of those threads are archived. Every argument BTP made in favor of WY was just a rehash of one side of the debate, and not a very good one at that because almost all of his points have perfect counterpoints. NH is currently one of the freest states in America. You do not need building permits to build most buildings on your property, much less to paint your fence. There is almost no zoning in NH, several parts of the state have absolutely none.

As for the Badnarik not being on the ballet, there is a lawsuit over that. The Libertarians submitted many more signatures than needed.

goon: You should look over the case for NH, I was originally in favor of WY, but NH is better. The LP will need about 280,000 voters moving there in order to "take over" New Hampshire.
How many LP members is the free state list up to now? NH only has a few thousand activists total, many are Libertarians. Plus the Rs and Ds are significantly more pro freedom than almost any other state.

Also note that the FSP is not a part of the Libertarian party. Half the members call themselves dems or repubs.

101 reasons to move to NH, PDF format (http://www.lpnh.org/101-Reasons-to-Move-to-NH.pdf) Edit: That is out of dtate, more members of the FSP have been elected and appointed since then.

http://www.freestateproject.org/community/nh_info.php - go there for more info on NH.

If anyone has any questions about the FSP feel free to ask me. You can PM me or e-mail me if you want.

Leveraging the Spirit of the West in New Hampshire (http://www.freestateproject.org/archives/state_reports/leveraging.php)

GhostRider-Nine
September 28, 2004, 07:16 PM
IMHO the Free State Project was DOA the minute they picked NH.

dustind
September 28, 2004, 07:18 PM
GhostRider-Nine: Why do you think NH is a bad choice?

GhostRider-Nine
September 28, 2004, 07:19 PM
and second, that if the project did succeed, the federal government would move in to crush it.

Well.....they could try. ;)

dustind
September 28, 2004, 07:24 PM
and second, that if the project did succeed, the federal government would move in to crush it. If anyone thinks that is the case. Isn't that reason enough to join?

Edit: Govenor Benson is working with the FSP, as are over a hundred represenatives IIRC. The govenor and many legislators have signed on as friends of the FSP. Almost every pro freedom group in NH has joined with the FSP and its sister group www.nhliberty.org

Edit again: http://www.state.nh.us/osp/ZBAHandbook/StateMap.html NH areas without zoning ordinances.

GhostRider-Nine
September 28, 2004, 07:47 PM
Several things. A few are....the east coast is nowhere near as freedom loving or freedom concious as the west. And even if the FSP was to begin to succeed in NH, it would be far to easy for liberals in close by states to move and dilute the progress. Also, considering the population of NH, it would take thousands and thousands more freedom loving people to make a difference than it would in lets say Wyoming. And one last thing....there are MANY thousands of freedom loving and rugged folks out west that would not consider moving anywhere near some of the most regulated and government loving states there is out east....but they might consider moving to one central location, as long as it was in the west....and had a small enough population where they just MIGHT make a difference.

444
September 28, 2004, 07:59 PM
Without really knowing any of the details about this whole thing, it would seem obvious to me that Wyoming would be the better choice.
The type of people who would go for something like this are already living in Wyoming.
There is plenty of room. Real Estate is much more resonably priced. The bordering states are much more friendly to ideas such as this: Utah, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Idaho sound a lot more close to the earth, indepenant thinking, and conservative than the Atlantic coast states.

dustind
September 28, 2004, 08:47 PM
You are right about land prices, but there is still lots of land in NH for about $1000 an acre. There are also places where there are no people around for miles.

NH has resisted the influx of statists so far. It has also been a haven for freedom loving people. I seriously doubt anyone would move just to oppose our group. It does draw freedom loving people from its neighbors, and once it starts to get even more free. Only people who support or do not mind the project would move in.

NH(with the exception of some democrats and the MMM) welcomed us with open arms, something I doubt any western states would do. Several cities in Vermont have voted to join NH due to taxes and regulations. This was done heavily with the support of the FSP.

If there where more western freedom lovers they would have joined before the vote, and WY would have won. http://www.freestateproject.org/about/states_count.php shows membership by state. Note that no one can join from NH after the vote was cast, but it easily has the most sign ups per population. NH has 298, WY 17.

NH also has one of the few citizen legislatures. 400 representatives in the House that get paid $100 a year.

twoblink
September 29, 2004, 12:56 AM
I use to watch He-man.. and he taught me a lot about why a libertarian has very little chance compared to a democrat...

Here's why..

He-man had to save all the innocent lives, and he had to play by the rules, while Skelator didn't...

Libertarians find it fundamentally wrong to take government money to run a campaign, while the dems don't, and so with that much of a disadvantage, it's a very uphill battle.

I'm a bit biased because BTP was my instructor, and I've had talks with him about the concept, prior to the free-state project. So the concept is not new.



If you want to know where to take over, the obvious answer is Catalina Island.. Filling the island with enough people to vote in great local laws and drop out of the Union is quite the easier task than what the FSP is proposing.



I think the FSP faces serious problems. The weather sucks, the land is not as cheap as say, Nevada or Wyoming, The neighbors are MassaChokettes, and the east has been traditionally very less freedom oriented than the "wild west"..

The fact that 3rd parties have to jump through so many hoops to get on a ballot is rediculous..

And yes, I probably shouldn't post at 2am.. edited... Sorry!

CZ52GUY
September 29, 2004, 09:04 AM
I'm a life-long resident of the state and familiar with its political evolution.

NH has really become two states:

Concord (the state capital) and south is becoming more like a "province" of Mass' every year. If you review school curriculum, zoning, and general attitudes about freedom, voting results, etc., you'll find that the southern half of the state (with a few exceptions) provides supporting evidence to many of the concerns raised within this thread about NH.

The northern part of the state is still largely unspoiled, presents a much more attractive environment to the hunter/fisherman/shooting sports enthusiast. The opportunity to impact local and regional government entities is much greater.

NH's position as an "island of freedom" within a sea of regulation and anti-gun sentiment is undeniable. That "proximity issues" didn't carry greater weight with the Lib's puzzled me.

The FSP is an interesting idea that I as a non-Libertarian have observed with some interest. In the end, I don't think it will pan out as the organizers had hoped because within our fair state, those they share the most common ground with also strenously object to much of the Libertarian dogma.

There may yet be some "fireworks" as Libertarians attempt to exert influence locally, but statewide? I don't think so...

Safe shooting,

CZ52'

Bruce H
September 29, 2004, 09:10 AM
I don't want to see just one free state. I want to see fifty free states like it should be. This is what we should be working for. The nation as a whole is what's important not one individual feel good place.

goon
September 29, 2004, 10:09 AM
The nation as a whole is what is important. The only thing is that we don't have enough people left in the nation that care about freedom any more. When we get on boards like this, we forget that because everyone on here agrees with you. If you take a look at the rest of the country though, we are against a numerically superior force.

CZ52GUY
September 29, 2004, 10:22 AM
If you take a look at the rest of the country though, we are against a numerically superior force.

Maybe not...I think it's clear that we are up against a vocally louder force, but numerically? We get contradictory information on that point.

Take AWB...the anti's claim ~80% of Americans were for it. At the same time, during the "Gunmaker Protection" legislative debate in the Senate, Mr. Craig quoted a Zogby poll which indicated that >60% of Americans tended to align themselves with the NRA's position on gun laws. Given that advocacy groups tend to point to polling results to reflect their point of view, you have to look for more objective evidence.

On AWB, used only as a representative example, you had the House (elected by the people of the United States) that by all indications wasn't going to extend that law. A sharply divided Senate which included betrayal votes by RINO's from states more likely to support the traditional view of the 2nd...and a President who has been concurrently accused of caving in to the anti's and secretly being in bed with the NRA. The law died because those we are against (despite numerous howls and hysteria from a biased media, academics, and Hollywood's "beautiful people") couldn't find the votes.

Pro-CCW laws have swept the nation in recent years. Range protection laws have passed statewide and through local efforts. Hunters more and more are learning they need to band together with the CCW crowd and the sport shooters because the anti's are after them too. Even soccer mom's seem to be in favor of Pilots with pistols in the cockpit.

Still, ~150 electoral votes reside in states that have a statewide variant of the AWB...or a local metro' law within that state (e.g. Chicago, NY City, etc.).

Are we outshouted and outspent? Absolutely!

Are we truly outnumbered nationwide? I'm not yet convinced of that.

Safe shooting,

CZ52'

twoblink
September 29, 2004, 11:03 AM
The difference is, as every senator knows, when one person is pissed off enough to write a letter, they echo the sentiments of 1000 more. So that's why letter writing is important more so than emails, faxes, and phone calls. And I don't mean typed, I mean hand written... Short of photo copying your middle finger, a handwritten letter tells how you feel clearly.

I would put up 20,000 libertarians against 200,000 democrats anyday. Libs are resourceful.

I suspect that if NH is as CZ52 says, then it's much akin to Illinois.. Let me go ahead and quote Jeff White here..

"Illinois is a great state except for the little cancer they call Chicago.." I suspect that Illinois is a 99% conservative state, if "the cancer" was removed from it...

I have angst about the possibility that NH will play "follow the Boston example".. That thought should keep everybody up at night.

What I feel the country needs, is another dumping of tea in the boston harbor..

I don't find moving out of California to be the answer, but I have to admit, I am so sick and tired of the amount of regulations there. But I'm also afraid on the other hand, the democrats will think "if we raise enough taxes, then all the loudmouthed libertarians will leave, and we will win.." They are right of course, but that doesn't benefit the country any...

I'm not sure how to get it done though, because as we know, getting libertarians to agree is more like herding cockroaches...

Cosmoline
September 29, 2004, 02:23 PM
I admit my knowledge of NH comes from the southern half, and what I've seen and heard has made me conclude the FPS made a huge mistake. But perhaps things are still OK where the rivers run north. I hope so. As was pointed out, we need FIFTY free states, not a handful.

Gordon Fink
September 29, 2004, 03:19 PM
Fifty-nine free states would be even better. ;)

~G. Fink

444
September 29, 2004, 03:21 PM
Saying that we NEED 50 states is like saying that I need to be the President of the United States. Yeah, it is theoretically possible. But it is highly unlikely. I want five million dollars right now. Is it going to happen ? I doubt it, but I do have a valid lotto ticket for tonights drawing.
As a result, we are losing ground in all 50 states. Yes, we have made some inroads over the last several years: CCW and the AWB are two good examples, but over all, we have been losing ground inch by inch for the last 50 years (just a number, not really based on anything). I don't see anything changing. The majority of voters in this country are not educated on this issue. They are not going to make intelligent decisions. Even our fellow gun owners are not making intelligent decisions on the candidates. As was clearly pointed out in the last Presidential election, we are a blue and red country. The majority of voters are located in extremly large population centers and they have historically not been with us in this fight.
So instead of bashing our heads against the wall, why not try a different tactic ? Why not realize that our present attack is doomed to failure and go to plan B ?
So we get a couple states that are pro-freedom and the rest of the country is mired in feel good legislation that is bleeding them dry. They made their bed. We can make ours.

rl2669
September 29, 2004, 03:45 PM
I grew up in the Boston area, and I can tell you first hand that NH has been creeping steadily left for years, largely due to people from MA moving there to retire, get "away from it all", etc.

The freestate folks should have done their homework a bit more, studied demographic data, voter registrations, etc. a bit more.

For example, in the current election NH is considered a "swing" state!! Granted, given that all the rest of the northeast is in the bag for the left, I guess you could argue that its "relatively" good NH is a swing state. But, "Live Free or Die" it ain't. Also, check out property taxes there (typical is 2%-3% of property's market value).

I think they freestate folks would have done better with MT/WY/ID, etc.

TallPine
September 29, 2004, 03:48 PM
we need FIFTY free states, not a handful
Actually, I think we need a handful of states like ************ and Nazi Jersey as a relief valve, so that "sheeple" will have a place to flock to.

:neener:


I still don't know why FPS didn't pick Montana ... lots of natural resources and an international border. Alberta might even join us eventually ...;)

CZ52GUY
September 29, 2004, 03:59 PM
I think you'll find that while there is a leftward drift...there's also an almost "schizophrenic drift"...strong Buchanan showing in '92, McCain in '00...the "why isn't she home baking cookies Governor..." I actually saw signs in the '02 Senate race reading "Sportsman for Shaheen"...give me a break!

While property taxes are high (and school funding formula remains in chaos), the overall tax burden is among the lowest in the US (no retail sales tax or comprehensive income tax...while there is an investment income tax).

The proximity issues also provide potential employment opportunities for FSP families. NH has a very low unemployment rate...good jobs can be found...real estate is getting more expensive but if you are willing to commute (or can telecommute), you can buy a decent house where you can set up a backyard range and still feed a family.

I can see why FSP found NH attractive, but I think they overlooked some serious obstacles...which may include some politically active gun-owners like myself in NH who are more likely to support traditional political alliances.

Safe shooting,

CZ52'

Cosmoline
September 29, 2004, 04:58 PM
I just can't abide the East coast. I suspect most unshorn types like myself from the wild west feel the same way. The idea of being that close to Boston and New York City makes me itch all over. I can't see folks like me moving en masse anywhere, least of all to someplace on the Atlantic Ocean within driving distance of the Kerry and Kennedy compounds
:D

CZ52GUY
September 29, 2004, 05:00 PM
I never expect to move to Massachusetts...it moved to me :banghead:

Stay safe and unshorn :D,

CZ52'

444
September 29, 2004, 05:12 PM
Here is something interesting for Badnarik

"For Courage of Conviction"
Badnarik accepts award for third parties

Orlando, FL (PRWEB) September 29, 2004 -- Hurricane Jeanne lashed Florida
on Saturday, but the fourth major storm of the season didn't keep the
American Muslim Alliance from holding its ninth national convention -- or
Libertarian presidential candidate Michael Badnarik from addressing that
convention.

Badnarik accepted the AMA's Al-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz Malcolm X Award "on
behalf of the Libertarian, Green and Independent parties."

Named for the civil rights activist and Muslim convert, assassinated in
1965, the award is inscribed:

"For showing courage of conviction in upholding American ideals, for
demonstrating total honesty and integrity in dealing with fellow
Americans of all religions, colors and creeds, and for doing the right
thing at the right time and for the right reason. The coalescance of
their convictions and commitments will be remembered as the the
institutionalization of a US-wide civil rights movement."

"Muslims have borne the brunt of draconian government actions since
9/11," says Badnarik. "A plurality of American Muslims supported George
Bush in 2000. Now they're looking outside the major party club for
candidates who support their rights."

twoblink
September 29, 2004, 10:10 PM
I just wish there was a warmer state for me to move to...

Also, I don't want to live in a big city anymore, but I would like a warm state, (preferably in the west) that has a big city about an hour's drive away...

I think NH will have the problem that NV and AZ are now facing.. What I call "leakage".. PRK refugees who hate the draconian laws of the PRK, and so they move.. and then vote in the same Draconian laws..

They call it the "Helsinki syndrome", when you fall in love with your captures..

444
September 29, 2004, 10:18 PM
Your criteria seems to be a perfect match for where I live.
But, you are right.
The enlightened masses from PRK are moving here in droves and voting in the same type of people they are trying to get away from.
On the one hand you would think they were the intelligent people because they left that hell hole. But, then they turn around and prove that they didn't learn their lesson.
That is a little too simplistic. I am sure one of the main reasons they are leaving there and moving here is the substantially reduced cost of living. You can sell your house there and pay cash for a nicer one here. So, many of them arn't leaving for political reasons.
For those that haven't read BTP's book Molon Labe, the governor of Wyoming (in the book) makes laws specifically aimed at keeping the blissninnies out of the state. Laws such as anyone carrying a functional handgun doesn't have to pay state sales tax. And, you get a state income tax credit for qualifying with a rifle every year. The tree huggers don't want to live in a society where everyone but them is walking around openly armed, so they stay away: move back to the workers paradise.

Glock Glockler
September 30, 2004, 09:16 AM
CZ52GUY,

Is it that bad by you? Yes, we do have those mass***** invading but I still notice a world of difference between the 2 states. Where do you live? Also, the FSP isn't necessarily about creating new political alliances butrather it's a grassroots movement to increase freedom. I know of several freestaters who have registered as Republicans. It's also no secret thnat Benson has a lot of support among libertarians. At the end of the day our goals are probably not that different from yours.

We are working on cutting doles to get the welfare democrats out of the state, though I don't think ANY state could pull off what BTP does in his book.

rl2669
September 30, 2004, 10:46 AM
Your comments about NH's taxation regime get right to another of my points - NH is a VERY undesireable place to retire, bum around for awhile without working, etc.

NH is a state that has chosen to place the majority of its tax burden on investment income and home ownership (and by extension renters who wind up paying their landlord's taxes through higher rents, over time, assuming the elasticity of demand is somewhat robust). Well, as a retiree, you don't get out of the tax net much ...

In most parts of the country a $250k house would have a tax bill of say $1000 to $2000 or so, this is achievable for most retirees. In NH, said house is likely to have an annual tax bill of $7k or more. Off to Walmart to be a greeter I guess?

Furthermore, as you say many/most younger people in Southern NH wind up working in MA anyway, and thereby paying non-resident taxes to MA.

No thanks, I'll stay out West -

Hey look at the bright side though, NH is the one state that may get a shot at redesigning their state quarter, given that the original subject matter fell down :evil:

DigitalWarrior
September 30, 2004, 12:06 PM
We are not in trouble over property taxes, because the overall tax burden is among the lowest in the nation.

We are not in trouble because of Massachussetts, because it can be a place of work, until we develop our own Silicon Valley.

We are not in trouble because of zoning, there are still places in NH that have NO zoning laws.

We ARE in trouble because of people who wish that they could have 50 free states and will not settle for less.

We ARE in trouble because some people are afraid of the cold. They don't seem to know that you can heat a home with Fire wood (there are trees in NH). George Washingtons's men froze. You have a heater in your car. There are words for people who use that excuse. And I swear if I ever see one of them start a "Is it time to shoot" thread I will laugh for hours.

We ARE in trouble because people agree on 999 out of a 1000 things, they start posturing and preening. Instead of getting the other 999 things done. Yes Wyoming would have been good to, but it wasn't picked. So I exert my best efforts to going to NH. Maybe after NH is freer, we can work on the next state.

We ARE in trouble because of people who make excuses instead of making solutions.:fire:

duck hunt
September 30, 2004, 12:25 PM
My husband and I are signed FSP members.

If they make 20,000, we'll go. I don't think they will, because from what I can tell, they're acting like a bunch of Libertarians.

(This said as a practicing, dues-paying Libertarian)

...I know they're saying it was funny business, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people in NH didn't refuse to sign the Badnarik petition because of the FSP. Libertarians have a way of driving away people who were probably leaning our way until they met some of us.:banghead:

goon
September 30, 2004, 12:50 PM
Libertarians have a way of driving away people who were probably leaning our way until they met some of us.

That is why I am a closet libertarian disguised as a somewhat liberal Republican.
I have found that if you just plant an idea in someone's head, that is far more effective than harping on something.

duck hunt
September 30, 2004, 12:55 PM
far more effective than harping on something

Wish you could give seminars to some of the Libertarians I know. After that we'll hose 'em down, maybe let the "Queer Eye" team have a shot at them and send them through some kind of EST-type thing to deflate their massive egos. Perhaps then we can start to shed our "pushy freaks on the fringe" reputation.

DigitalWarrior
September 30, 2004, 03:20 PM
I agree with all that has been said about the typical Libertarians.

I think that the best way to show the world that Liberty does not mean crazy, is to show them a place where we are free and there is no horrible consequence. I unbuckled my seatbelt for two miles on a highway a few days ago, in NH, and I wasn't breaking the law. No children died.

The activists I have met in the FSP are different than other Libertarians I have met. I think there is something that happens to people when they realize that they have to cooperate with someone else to become free to be left alone. I know nudists, people who anti-federal tax, republicans of the old school, homeschoolers, private space-ship builders, gays who want to get married, and people who want to own the gun of their choosing. And all of them are good people. I think that we in the FSP are those people who are reasonable. The FSP attacts those who want practical solutions for real problems. Sure sometimes there are people who are more extreme than others, but the vast majority of us just want to live and let live.

dustind
September 30, 2004, 04:18 PM
I have met several members of the FSP, and the meeting where like a THR meet. Everyone was great. I have said before that the people alone are reason enough to stay politically active. We may not get along too well online at THR, but in person you could not ask for a better group.

I would suggest that you find a local FSP and attend a meeting.

Jeff Timm
September 30, 2004, 05:12 PM
As I recall, a seaport was considered a necessity. NH has one, WY well....

Geoff
Who can't afford the move, but would be tempted. :cool:

boltaction
September 30, 2004, 05:15 PM
I am,in principle, interested in the freestate project. However I joined a local FSP discussion group on yahoo, where I asked an honest question about the FSP (do not remember what is was now), and got no answer. As I visited the site waiting for a response (that never came), two of the other members who were planning some type of activity started to squabble and insult each other in their messages. To say the least, I was not impressed. As I say, I am interested in priniciple, but...first impressions...(yeah, I will proably try again to meet up with some Free-staters again to give them another chance).


_________________________
http:www.individ.us
A Site for Rugged Anti-Collectivists

dustind
September 30, 2004, 09:15 PM
You can go to the main message board located here http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=12 There is also a Live journal board that I go to. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=freestate

The group leader's email is katemrick AT yahoo.com for the Mid-Atlantic region.

MrAcheson
September 30, 2004, 09:55 PM
NH sounds a lot like DE. You have the suburbs at one end of the state and freedom at the other. The problem is that the suburbs have more people. Folks moving out to a "quiet house in the country" has been a real problem here. Turns out farm land isn't quiet and tends to smell funny. Plus noisy farm work starts before the sun comes up. Who knew? Stupid country not being country enough. Time to pass some zoning laws so its the way I think it ought to be...

I'd have to say that WY would probably have been a better choice. Not because of local laws but because of the neighboring states and the culture of the region. The West really is more individualistic and freedom loving than the East, especially New England. Even if you didn't reach your goal, you might be able to convert the locals to your causein WY. I don't see you doing that in southern NH, too many ex-massachusetts liberals.

Oh and I've read enough stuff from Badnarik to know he doesn't deserve the vote. Anyone who wants to destroy all corporations in favor joint proprietorships just doesn't know basic finance.

twoblink
October 1, 2004, 01:25 AM
I would suggest that you find a local FSP and attend a meeting.

The problem is, I am not only the founder, president, vice president, secretary, and treasurer, I'm also the only member of the Taiwan Chapter :uhoh: .. Well, technically, there are 2 members, my gf being the other. And since we live together..

Nowhere does being a libertarian mean having to put up with horrible living conditions. If there is a good freestate choice in a more ideal climate, with friendlier neighboring states, then why shouldn't I move there?

This is by no means whining, as I've only driving through NH, know almost nothing about the state, and I have only lived in NJ (which is a different country all to its own) for 2 years, and am not so familar with New England, its politics, its cultures, nor what moving there will mean as far as social, economic, and political impact on my life. To move there JUST BECAUSE THE FREESTATE PROJECT SAID TO would be a very democratic thing to do, to be a sheeple and be herded, without thinking out the consequences..

So what you hear that might be confused with "whining" might not be. There have been quite a few questions, issues, problems, that I have voiced, that Glock Glocker has addressed one by one. But for that fact, I would not even consider NH, because the 101 reasons did not even address my issues and concerns.

Getting up and moving, is not like buying a wratchet set from Sears, where you get a Lifetime Guarantee; and so to just "up and move" without serious thought I think is stupid.

There are things posted that might not be a concern for you, but might be for me or someone else. There are things posted that don't relate to my concerns, but are interesting to me, as they are possible concerns I never considered.

My first consideration was to move to Vegas. The problem arising currently is that there are a lot of PRK refugees moving there, which has changed the laws, and skyrocketed the housing prices. If this has taught me something, it is that with Mass. and Boston so close as a neighbor, I mean close enough to work in Boston and live in NH, the Bostonians might carry their politics on over, as they vote in the state they live in, not the one they work out. And when we are talking cockroach infestations, Boston has quite a bit of cockroaches to offer to NH.

So I for one, would like to hear ALL the complaints, I am educated enough to filter what is a concern and what is not, and when it's all said and done, I will weigh my own cost/benefit ratio, and decide accordingly.

Those who do any less, probably isn't a libertarian...

dustind
October 1, 2004, 01:54 AM
Several years ago the Democrats gained control of NH and passed a few anti freedom laws. They then got voted out a little while later and the state has been moving towards freedom ever since. They can not even get anyone to run against Benson. (the current Republican but Libertarian leaning, FSP friend, Governor)

There is IIRC a 40 mile gap between the Boston suburbs and NH. The only people that move there are those that want to be in NH and do not mind the drive. They get hit with Massachusetts income tax and NH property tax, so they must like the freedom.

I hope you keep looking into it. Here is an old thread that may interest you.Is NH being invaded by statists? (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=2298;start=0)

New taxes only have an 11% support in New Hampshire.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/nhpoll/nhp43.html

"My Kitchen Table Budget is the first step towards controlled spending, greater efficiency, and, of course, lower taxes. The voters came out in record numbers and their message was loud and clear: No income tax. No sales tax. No higher taxes. No way. I couldn't agree more. "
- NH Governor Craig Benson

NY vs. NH STATE RANKING:
Lowest State-local tax burden - NY #50....NH #2
State business tax climate - NY #44....NH #2
Economic Freedom Index - NY #50...NH #7
Most livable State - NY #33....NH #1
Healthiest State - NY #33....NH #1
Safest State - NY #23....NH #4

Byron Quick
October 1, 2004, 04:31 AM
The FSP is not a project of the Libertarian Party. Nor is it even meant to just include both big 'L' and small 'l' libertarians. Rather it is meant to be a project embracing all freedom loving individuals who fervently want liberty in their lifetimes.

The goal of 20,000 is not meant to be enough to take over the state. Or even a cluster of a few counties. Think about using sheer numbers to wrest control of a few local governments from the natives. I cannot think of any strategy, short of open violence, that is more likely to cause resentment, resistance, and backlash throughout a state.

Rather, the FSP wants 20,000 freedom loving people to move to New Hampshire to act as a catalyst for change in the hearts and minds of all of the residents of the state. To fan the ember of freedom into open flame and with that example to attract even more.

I think it's a good idea. I'm glad they chose a state with a coastline. I wish it had been Alaska.

twoblink
October 1, 2004, 10:55 AM
NH is not that bad of a choice.. If we assume that more and more freedom loving people move there, then any current complaints about the laws in the state, should only get better, not worse. So I'm very optimistic.

Of my 2 state choices, NV and NH, NH is ahead..

Glock Glockler
October 1, 2004, 11:14 AM
A little note about the statistics people quote when they say that X% of New Hampshire residents are from Mass, regardless of whether or not that number is accurate, is the fact that many of those that left Mass. are freedom minded people that couldn't stand it there anymore. MANY people I know in the FSP and the LP are from Mass or other New England states (I'm a refugee from NY).

Sorry but the sky is not falling.

DadaOrwell2
October 12, 2004, 08:37 PM
Why all the slings and rocks thrown at the one libertarian movement that is actually having success? I can only say they won me over. Three months ago I became the 45th person to officially move to NH and it's the best thing I've ever done. It's like coming up for air.

As a side benefit I got to meet Hunter in person last month!

If you don't want freedom but just want to talk about it, no one's stopping you from staying where you are. Otherwise come here. One thing I've noticed is the endless debate pefectionists tend not to make the move, so most of the people here are doers not whiners.

BTW besides having the 2nd lowest tax burden in the U.S. we have a state law that protects your right to carry firearms inside public schools. Kids can even do it. That's what I call an existing commitment to freedom.

Liberty in Your Lifetime.
www.FreeStateProject.org

444
October 12, 2004, 09:15 PM
That sounds great. I would love to hear more about it, however I can tell you that I am not moving to New Hampshire now or ever. I don't really think this makes me either a doer or a talker: it just ain't going to happen. After experiencing life in the west, I can't see moving back east, let alone the north east.
By the way, this is nothing against the state or the people living there. It is just not for me. I am not real big on snow, cold weather, a lot of rain, or confined spaces. I am happy right where I am.

DadaOrwell2
October 12, 2004, 10:17 PM
rl wrote:

<<The freestate folks should have done their homework a bit more, studied demographic data, voter registrations, etc. a bit more.>>

Where were you when we were doing this homework and seeking participants to fight for their state of choice? If you were part of the debate, cool, otherwise you're playing Monday morning Quarterback.

I was a Wyoming supporter for a full year before realizing *that* would be a mistake. We were unwelcome there while NH practically rolled out a red carpet for us. They have a higher tax burden, major dependence on the feds, almost no trees, bad economy (raw material driven), no local movement in place to start the fire going before the move, higher prevelance of social conservatism. The list went on until I couldn't support Wyoming anymore even though my heart was there.

Also for what it's worth the other Western states had even bigger problems than WY.

But like anything else, competition is good, even competition between "liberty spots" and liberty movements. So far NH is winning the first and the FSP is winning the second.

I cannot tell you how cool it is to live here and know that my actions are affecting the political environment around me 100x as much as they ever did in TX, that I am surrounded by liberty lovers even here in the most liberal part of the state.

twoblink
October 13, 2004, 02:25 AM
I think I'm moving to Reno..

Glock Glockler
October 13, 2004, 08:21 AM
Twoblink,

Reno is only the long way to NH, the PRK blissninnies are moving to NV by the horde and it'll only be a few years before they start turning NV in PRK East.

Cosmoline
October 13, 2004, 12:04 PM
Second lowest? Why not move to the state with THE lowest :D

I wish you guys the best of luck, but I for one would not feel too happy that close to the heart of darkness.

DigitalWarrior
October 13, 2004, 02:41 PM
Alaskais cheapest because it pays it's residents because of the oil there. NH is number 2.

Cosmoline
October 13, 2004, 03:54 PM
Yes indeed, which is why I will never leave Alaska. Yes the PFD was low this year, but on the other hand with oil prices where they are and the stock market on the recovery path we'll be living like Saudi princes in Octobers to come. The PFD averages out over five years or so, which means the low numbers now are a result of the oil and stock market slump of a few years back and will soon pass.

publius
October 14, 2004, 06:27 AM
I tried leaving the tropics once. It was a mistake I won't repeat, even for a free state.

Mowlawn? Prob'ly!

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
October 14, 2004, 08:23 AM
deleted

Points already covered

muleskinner
November 6, 2004, 10:09 PM
Several years ago the Democrats gained control of NH and passed a few anti freedom laws. They then got voted out a little while later and the state has been moving towards freedom ever since. They can not even get anyone to run against Benson. (the current Republican but Libertarian leaning, FSP friend, Governor)
Benson lost to a Democrat. The FSP's "friend" will be out of office.
Here is the sad news from the official horse's mouth.
http://www.sos.nh.gov/general%202004/sumgov04.htm

But there is hope.
Concord (the state capital) and south is becoming more like a "province" of Mass' every year. If you review school curriculum, zoning, and general attitudes about freedom, voting results, etc., you'll find that the southern half of the state (with a few exceptions) provides supporting evidence to many of the concerns raised within this thread about NH.

The northern part of the state is still largely unspoiled, presents a much more attractive environment to the hunter/fisherman/shooting sports enthusiast. The opportunity to impact local and regional government entities is much greater.
Add that to "GOON's" advice...
they should have chosen a state that was better suited to the opinions that they held, and specifically tried to congregate in a few adjoining counties in said state.
Some are trying to do just than in Coos County, New Hampshire.
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=36;action=display;threadid=7704
Okay, so it is cold, but that keeps the Massacockroaches out. Very few can survive for long "North of the Notches" . Northern Coos County doesn't have zoning either. :neener:
Lots more info at:
http://www.nhes.state.nh.us/elmi/htmlprofiles/pittsburg.html

Also up there in the north country they have
The Dalton Gang Cowboy Action Shooting Club
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=36;action=display;threadid=4175

So do move there, but move "North of the Notches".

If you enjoyed reading about "Freestate Project in trouble?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!