So you want to vote Libertarian?

If the people who voted Libertarian had voted GOP instead, the GOP would have won that race easily. The numbers are right there to see.

Click to expand...

You're obviously oblivious to the fact that we don't care. You have this underlying presumption that libertarians somehow prefer Republicans. We don't. You also must be presuming that the Republicans are the party of small government. They're not. ...Patriot Act...Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform...reasonable health care...Constitutional defining of marriage...drug wars...where should I stop here?

ArmedBear, what did YOU dop specifically to kep the Republican party from turning into the garbage it has and therefor alienating the votes of Libertarian-minded folks?

If nothing significant, let's just blame it all on you then...you're (along with others) very comfortable handing out blame to others, would you like a spoonful of sugar to help you swallow your own syrup?

I got involved starting last year, and pleaded with the Republicans in my district to do something other than what they did, I also contacted Democrats...the Republicans blew us off and lost because of it.

Kang and Kodos

Just from an outside observer, this thread reminds me of the Simpsons when the aliens replaced the Presidential candidates. The funny part was when people found out they were space monsters, they still wouldn't vote third-party.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y_5Ek5BfDu4


Homer - "America, take a good look at your beloved candidates, they're nothing but hideous space reptiles!"

Crowd - (gasps)

Kang - "It's true. we are aliens, but what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system, you have to vote for one of us."

Crowd - (murmurs) "He's right, it's a two-party system."

Person in crowd - "Well I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate."

Kodos - "Go ahead, throw your vote away! Huahahaha!"


Later, on inauguration day-

Alien - "All hail, President Kang!"


Simpsons toil while aliens whip them -

Marge - "I don't understand why we have to build a ray gun to aim a planet I never even heard of."

Homer - "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos."

If nothing significant, let's just blame it all on you then...you're (along with others) very comfortable handing out blame to others, would you like a spoonful of sugar to help you swallow your own syrup?

Click to expand...

I guess you have never heard of the "colloquial you."

What did I do to get better Republicans out there? Nothing.

I was wasting my time and money on the Libertarian Party and a campaign or two.

Actually, I think that the campaign did influence the Republican's platform, and happily, two local initiatives just passed to put our goals into law here in San Diego. But we didn't get a Libertarian in office. That, I would have liked. Mayors become Governors, etc. But failed candidates don't go on to bigger offices. Be that as it may, what I did, didn't put a better candidate on the ballot against Feinstein.

I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming the "voter" that GTSteve referred to. If all we do is vote, then, as you know, all we get to do is vote for the candidates we get. But that's not all we could be doing. That's all.

If the people who voted Libertarian had voted GOP instead, the GOP would have won that race easily. The numbers are right there to see.

Click to expand...

I didn't see one single Republican lose by the same number of votes or less than the Libertarian running against him/her got.


Clearly the LP is a waste of time as a party ... but as a source of ideals, they are a good resource.

If the Republicans want Libertarian votes, they're going to have to act like Libertarians. Simple.

The only thing that makes me want to puke more than the unprincipled Republicans that brought this mess on us is the smarmy libertarians (many who reside here) that have helped put these euro socialist Democrats into power. A pox on all of ya.

Click to expand...

You're right, what the hell was I thinking? I should have voted for the GOA F rated Republican Congressman instead of the Libertarian. It's so clear to me now...

I'm not blaming you, I'm blaming the "voter" that GTSteve referred to. If all we do is vote, then, as you know, all we get to do is vote for the candidates we get. But that's not all we could be doing. That's all.

Click to expand...

How are you focusing this comment on Libertarian voters over other parties? Just because they are a small 3rd party?

I would assume that many Lib voters actually are more active politically than all the of the Neanderthal "party-ticket" voters that show up on election day to "make their mark" on whoever has the D or R next to their name.

For me personally I spent a good portion of my time outside of work focusing on the immigration debate. I contacted my state and federal representatives and while they personally were very receptive to reform, the process was still mostly useless even with a R-controlled House and Senate. Things like that make me feel like that time was wasted trying to work within a broken party.

You're right, what the hell was I thinking? I should have voted for the GOA F rated Republican Congressman instead of the Libertarian. It's so clear to me now...

Click to expand...

Something else to remember.

I wouldn't vote for an F-rated candidate. Here, that's not an issue. The Dems are F, the GOP from C- to A. Easy choice, unless I really hate the Republican.

Extreme social conservatism isn't a California thing, either. So again, the GOP is pretty palatable. And Reagan Republicanism still lives, if in a minority of candidates.

So here, my choice is different from in, say, Texas, where the GOP platform includes making "Sodomy" illegal because it's "contrary to the fundamental, unchanging truths that have been ordained by God", and "We must have more stringent legislation to prohibit access to and generation of pornography including virtual pornography and operation of sexually–oriented businesses. We demand that Congress exercise its constitutional authority to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sexually-oriented businesses including pornography."

Even worse, IMO, is "We oppose the sale, use, and dispensing of the “Morning After Pill”, also known as emergency contraception". Don't want to kill fetuses? Then why not the Morning After Pill? What's with that?

I couldn't support any of that.

But I live here.

If my GOP candidate wanted to jail people for what they do in private, consensually, without hurting anyone else, or if he/she got a GOA F, I'd vote Libertarian in a heartbeat. (I sometimes do anyway; I'm registered Lib. I'm just more tactical than philosophical.)

How are you focusing this comment on Libertarian voters over other parties?

Click to expand...

I'm not, except that my own efforts have been on behalf of Lib campaigns. Perhaps my efforts would be better spent on primaries, to give mainstream 20-minutes-per-two-year voters the choices I'd want to have.

However, I think that every dissatisfied voter, of any party, should think about doing something besides voting for who they offer. They is we, that's all.

I didn’t want to waste my vote, so I voted for Dianne Feinstein, since she was only one who could win in California.

~G. Fink

Good point, Gordon.

It's, in a small way, MY fault that Feinstein ran unopposed (for all intents and purposes). That's the point of my previous posts.

CA has some good, conservative candidates, Tony Strickland & Tom McClintock come to mind. The problem is that they're both lacking approximately 5-10% of the necessary votes

carpe-

I voted for both, as did other registered Libertarians.

But the remaining Lib vote would not have put either one in office.

McClintock would have needed ALL 3rd Party votes to win by a hair, and half of those were Green. No chance of that.

Strickland wouldn't have won with all 3rd Party votes put together, added to his tally.

A lot of libertarians (and even Libertarians, in battleground states) turned out in 2004. What exactly was the result? A party that held the federal executive, legislative, and (by many accounts) judicial branches didn't do jack-squat in removing restrictions on RKBA.

So why should we be worried that the Dems will manage to put more federal limits on RKBA with a mere one-third of the federal branches of government in their possession now?

If anything, you should be thanking us - you'll now have a Republican party that will take pro-RKBA-minded voters much more seriously in 2008.

Exactly!

~G. Fink

The argument against voting for a 3rd party is ridiculous. According to the "logic" of this argument, you telling me that if the Choices are:
1) Democrats with EXACTLY the same anti-BOR platform as Republicans, except that the Democrats want to ban ALL guns.
2) Republicans with EXACTLY the same anti-BOR platform as the Democrats except the Republicans will allow each household to own one single shot .22lr rifle and up to 50 rounds of ammo.
3) 3rd party that has a pro-BOR platform and wants to repeal all gun control laws.

Then I should vote for the Republicans because the "3rd party can't win" and we can't risk losing our single shot .22s?!

For generations, the Democrats have taken blacks for granted. In like manner, party-hardy Republicans have taken conservatives for granted, and then tossed them aside when the elections are over. Like the wife-beater who knocks the old girl around for her own good, the Republican party thinks that conservatives will "come home" when they vote. And they are right. Like an abused woman, conservatives are so locked into their fear and learned helplessness that they go running back to their abuser because he promises to stop beating them this time and to "protect" them from the slightly more abusive Ex. Some conservatives even have an affair with the Democrat abuser after they get fed up enough, thinking this will "punish" the Republican for abusing them. It is insane. Conservatives will continue to be beaten, perhaps to death, unless they break out of the vicious cycle and LEAVE the abusers. Yes, it is scary, yes you are afraid the other one might get you, but repeatedly going back to the abuser hoping that his promises to stop beating you are real this time is delusional.

I voted majority Libertarian, the party cannot come to a rise in power and we cannot get rid of this disfunctional two party system if we dont back them, hard less for the GOP to learn.

hard less for the GOP to learn

Click to expand...

At what cost? Here is the GOA assessment of the Senate:

The situation in the Senate may be worse (pending the outcome of the
Virginia senate race). Should Democrat Jim Webb hang on to win, the
expected new Senate Majority will be F-rated Harry Reid (NV) and the
probable incoming Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee would be
GOA F-rated Pat Leahy of Vermont

From there it really goes downhill.

The rest of the Democrats currently on the committee make up the
Who's Who of the anti-gun movement:

* Ted Kennedy (MA), the mouthpiece for Sarah Brady in the Senate;
* Joe Biden (DE), who chaired the Judiciary Committee when the Brady
bill passed in 1993, and who said at that time, famously, "The public
and the Congress have spoken unequivocally, and I don't care what a
minority wants;"

* Herb Kohl (WI), author of the "Gun Free Zones Ban;"

* Dianne Feinstein (CA), author of the so-called "Assault Weapons"
ban;

* Russ Feingold (WI), Democrat lead sponsor of so-called campaign
finance reform;

* Charlie Schumer (NY), lead sponsor of the 1993 Brady law; and,

* Dick Durbin (IL), one of the most outspoken gun control zealots in
the senate.

Gun owners should look twice at the above list. Most or all of these
members will remain on the Judiciary Committee when the new Congress
convenes in January, and will help shape American gun laws for at
least the next two years.

Click to expand...

The best thing that could happen is for a 3d party to win the house in 2008. That way both parties will wake up and see they are way off on their values. I feel neither side really sides with my beliefs.

I live in Illinois, I hope all you folks get a good dose of what we have to tolerate under Democrat rule in your "free" states. Serves your right.

Click to expand...

I live in California... I know what it's like to live in a democratic state. I also know what the libertarian party is, and what it stands for. Increasingly, it stands for values no longer represented by the Democrats or the Republicans... values like self-determination, personal responsibility, self-reliance, and ethical conduct. Values of people like me, my mother, my father... everyday Americans who grew up voting Democrat or Republican, whose parents and grandparents grew up voting Democrat or Republican. Everyday Americans who have been betrayed by the parties of our parents and now must stand outside the system and attempt, however ineffectually, to send a message that can be heard over the tumult of our money-driven mass-media political system.

Voting, in other words, for people who actually represent us.

Those are the people I vote for. The people I have voted for since Clinton was in office. The people who aren't fooling anyone, and aren't likely to win, but change the dialog just by doing what our representatives are supposed to do: by representing the people who vote for them. They are our representatives even if they are never elected. And if I can't find such a person, I don't vote for anyone.

If you voted Democrat because that party represents you... then you voted your head and heart and I respect that even as I disagree with your ideals. If you voted Republican for the same reason, again, you have my respectful disagreement. If you voted for someone not because they are your preferred representative but because you thought they were the lesser evil or would serve some narrow focus... I say you didn't vote at all but threw your one means of communicating with the heart of our nation away. You took your chance, and blew it making noise. Noise which overwhelms the signal we are supposed to be sending to the elected when we vote. Noise which gives the elected license to ignore us, because they can point to the only poll that matters, the poll that got them into office, and say they are doing what they are supposed to do...even when they aren't.

I'll take it a step further... you didn't vote, you lied to your republic. You told your republic you want something that you don't want. And that lie isn't just a tactical error -- it is sabotage. It is an intentional destruction of the ideals and values our nation was founded on... a micturition upon the graves of our founding fathers and all who died to create and defend this nation. It goes beyond unpatriotic -- it is evil. You say I should vote for a republican not because he represents my ideals but because he has a better chance of being elected... I say I cannot because I love my country too much. You say you want to vote for a republican not because he represents your ideals but because he has a better chance of being elected. I say you should keep such shameful revelations about yourself private. Do you who lie with your votes really want the world to know that much about your character? I wouldn't if I were like you. Maybe you are so inured to your sophistry that you don't realize how far you have strayed. Maybe you are just being used by the people you think you are using ... you've been fooled by the parties you falsely support into thinking that a lie is the only way.

Lying is not the only way. Even if you've made mistakes in the past, you can still return to the heart of the republic... you can vote honestly next time, vote your head and heart in a way that matters... a way that counts towards truth instead of adding to the noise... a way that, even if you do not win, will tell the elected what you believe. Because it is sending a message that matters... not, "being on the winnings side."

The OP can blame the Ls for the loss that is his right but let's see the voter turnout numbers. Let us see the turnout of Rs last cycle vs. this cycle.

If Rs, who have a history of voting decided to stay home this cycle instead of voting for the R candidate who is to blame for that? Not the Ls and not the Ds.

Well, I like to hate Democrats as much as the next guy. But the FACT is that the current Republican administration has outspent every Democrat administration except for FDR and LBJ, and they might just beat LBJ on their way out.

At least the Democrats openly claim to be Socialist. When the Republicans wreck the economy with socialist programs (e.g., Hoover), then the public blames... free enterprise?

The OP can blame the Ls for the loss that is his right but let's see the voter turnout numbers. Let us see the turnout of Rs last cycle vs. this cycle.

Click to expand...

That's a good point, this election was probably decided by Republicans sick of out-of-control government, who couldn't find anyone to vote for... and stayed home.

I think it likely Burns lost due to Montana conservatives being sick of his embarassing, oafish statements.

Doubtful it was due to the protest vote (3%) which happened to land in the L's lap. I bet most of that 3% were moderate conservatives angry with Burns but unable to stomach the idea of voting D. Even at that, the election was still very close.

Well, I like to hate Democrats as much as the next guy. But the FACT is that the current Republican administration has outspent every Democrat administration except for FDR and LBJ, and they might just beat LBJ on their way out.

Click to expand...

That isn't true as a percentage of the GDP.

Doubtful it was due to the protest vote (3%) which happened to land in the L's lap.

Click to expand...

Probably true. The only way to find out who people really want to vote for is to use proportional representation systems. I suspect the number of people who actually want the particular basket of socialism offered by the major parties is a minority. Of course some people really want even more, like the Greens, so I'm not saying that we'd always like what we found out...