Libertarians Have A Chance To Make Some Noise. But Not With These Candidates

[ExFreeper]

Libertarians Have A Chance To Make Some Noise. But Not With These Candidates

They need a charismatic candidate to make a compelling case to disgruntled conservatives.

The Federalist - By David Harsanyi - May 20, 2016

I’ve long been skeptical of the notion that libertarians are gaining ground in the United States. And the policy positions of both presumptive nominees — on trade, free expression, size of government, free association, and pretty much everything else — tell us that the bulk of the electorate is rejecting traditional liberalism.

That doesn’t mean the Libertarian Party doesn’t have any space to make a difference. In this peculiar populist year, it’s not completely far-fetched to imagine a small, spoiler-sized block of erstwhile GOPer and independent voters organizing around some energetic, idealistic, and well-funded third party candidate. Right now, 63 percent of Americans don’t believe Donald Trump will unite the GOP. Libertarians are on the ballot in all 50 states and have the infrastructure to reach a lot of voters...

For most people, a libertarian is just someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It far more complicated, of course. And to entice anti-Trump social conservatives, libertarians will need to cast themselves as a party of federalism — one that protects individual rights, expands school choice, and preserves freedom of association, religious liberty and so on.

And that’s a tough sell, already. So it doesn’t help that Gary Johnson, the languid former New Mexico governor and frontrunner, has some perplexing — no, atrocious — ideas about the First Amendment. As it stands, I’m not sure how any conservative could give him a protest vote...

Legitimacy would be found with someone like Rand Paul or maybe Peter Thiel (too late) or some other known gifted orator who could demand media attention. The Libertarian Party, endlessly factional and self-destructive, has always been a sort anti-consensus party driven by a narrow ideological focus that often stands apart even from mainstream libertarianism. But, despite its best efforts, there is an opportunity here. And the only chance for it to work — a slim one — is for some charismatic candidate to make a compelling case to disgruntled conservatives. These are not them.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/20/libertarians-have-a-chance-to-make-some-noise-but-not-with-these-candidates/

[libertybele]

Johnson just named his VP a couple of days ago; William Weld a former MA governor.  I know that some see this as a Trump alternative, but  both are noted and admittedly pro amnesty and pro abortion. No thank you!

#NeverTrump

http://www.ontheissues.org/Bill_Weld.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/Gary_Johnson.htm

[truth_seeker]

The LP has more in common with Peace & Freedom and Green Party, than with traditional Reagan conservatism.

So accordingly when supposedly serious members of this forum raise the LP option, I think they are not serious, not conservative, etc. All #nevertrumpbriefingroom, btw.

[ExFreeper]

So accordingly when supposedly serious members of this forum raise the LP option, I think they are not serious, not conservative, etc. All #nevertrumpbriefingroom, btw.

Did you actually read the article? So we can't post an article from a conservative site such as "The Federalist" actually highlighting the LP positions?  Who are you to call any LP posting not "conservative"?  Are you the TBR police? 

 

[Mechanicos]

They should join the Dope and Guns Party....
http://gunsanddopeparty.net/

Their platform is almost identical to that of the modern Libertarian one:

We advocate
[1] guns for those who want them, no guns
forced on those who don't want them (pacfists, Quakers etc.)
[2] drugs for those who want them,
no drugs forced on those who don't want them (Christian Scientists etc.)
[3] an end to Tsarism and a return to constitutional democracy
[4] equal rights for ostriches.

[montanajoe]

The LP has more in common with Peace & Freedom and Green Party, than with traditional Reagan conservatism.
So accordingly when supposedly serious members of this forum raise the LP option, I think they are not serious, not conservative, etc. All #nevertrumpbriefingroom, btw.

Like it or not there are some Conservatives that cannot/will not support Trump or Clinton and they are looking for an alternative. For those disagreeing 100% with the GOP or the Dim candidates, finding that you only disagree with 80% of the LP has to offer may be enough to cast a vote.

This is an election season dominated by anger. Some express that anger by supporting Trump others express that anger by refusing to support Clinton or Trump. It pisses off those on each side and they can't believe that those on the other side refuse to see their point of view, but that's the way it is this election cycle.

All of the blame and shame that each side directs at the other won't change a single vote, in fact, in just hardens one's position IMO.

[truth_seeker]

Like it or not there are some Conservatives that cannot/will not support Trump or Clinton and they are looking for an alternative. For those disagreeing 100% with the GOP or the Dim candidates, finding that you only disagree with 80% of the LP has to offer may be enough to cast a vote.

This is an election season dominated by anger. Some express that anger by supporting Trump others express that anger by refusing to support Clinton or Trump. It pisses off those on each side and they can't believe that those on the other side refuse to see their point of view, but that's the way it is this election cycle.

All of the blame and shame that each side directs at the other won't change a single vote, in fact, in just hardens one's position IMO.

Gary Johnson, leading LP candidate:

1. Legalized abortion on demand
2. Open borders
3. Legalize most drugs
4. Cut military spending by 43%
5. Supports same sex marriage

This website is going through a series of schizophrenic episodes. Originally called "GOP" (explicitly NOT conservative), later called conservative, not Republican.

Now anything. No boundaries. Often bogus reasoning. Like this libertarian fantasy.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Yes we need our own JimRob to determine who is and who isn't a true conservative and get the zots ready.

 

As for Gary Johnson, p'shaw. I don't agree 100% with any candidate, do you agree 100% with Trump? I doubt it.

[truth_seeker]

Yes we need our own JimRob to determine who is and who isn't a true conservative and get the zots ready.

 

As for Gary Johnson, p'shaw. I don't agree 100% with any candidate, do you agree 100% with Trump? I doubt it.

Of course I don't agree 100% with any candidate. Just expressing my own amusement, over what I perceive to be a ridiculous swing by some members here.

I have always been pretty much good with Reagan, and his admonition for 80% quote....

"Die-hard conservatives thought that if I couldn't get everything I asked for, I should jump off the cliff with the flag flying-go down in flames. No, if I can get 70 or 80 percent of what it is I'm trying to get ... I'll take that and then continue to try to get the rest in the future.

– Ronald Reagan"

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I think November will come down to how much Trump scares me vs. how much Progressives annoy me.

[cato potatoe]

Gary Johnson, leading LP candidate:

1. Legalized abortion on demand
2. Open borders
3. Legalize most drugs
4. Cut military spending by 43%
5. Supports same sex marriage

This website is going through a series of schizophrenic episodes. Originally called "GOP" (explicitly NOT conservative), later called conservative, not Republican.

Now anything. No boundaries. Often bogus reasoning. Like this libertarian fantasy.

There are plenty of small "l" libertarians within the GOP.  They've been kicked out in 2016, so Johnson will probably do better than any Libertarian ever has.

[montanajoe]

This website is going through a series of schizophrenic episodes. Originally called "GOP" (explicitly NOT conservative), later called conservative, not Republican.
Now anything. No boundaries. Often bogus reasoning. Like this libertarian fantasy.

I think it's a function of this election, both major candidates often engage in bogus reasoning, and have personal lives with no boundaries where everything goes. It not just this website it's what is going on in the country. The country is schizophrenic and the fact that out of more than 300 million people we have these two losers as the prospective Dim and GOP nominee reflects just how dysfunctional our nations political process has become.

When Reagan made his 80% quote we had people in office that, regardless of party, had the nations best interest at heart.  Today's politicians only have their own self interest at heart. Personally, I find both Clinton and Trump so morally repugnant that I cannot vote for either for the simple fact that I could not honestly explain my vote to my kids without lying to them. The only solstice I have is knowing the political process is so screwed up that none of the candidates if elected will be able to accomplish much.

On the other hand I think this website will flourish because it seems open to change and new people with widely divergent ideas. Other sites like FR that demand  purity and fidelity to a particular candidate or principal not so much. But who know's

[jmyrlefuller]

The LP has more in common with Peace & Freedom and Green Party, than with traditional Reagan conservatism.

So accordingly when supposedly serious members of this forum raise the LP option, I think they are not serious, not conservative, etc. All #nevertrumpbriefingroom, btw.

Do you have a better option not named Trump or Hillary?

The rest of the candidates are amateurs and we have to pick someone. Johnson may not be totally perfect but he's at least tolerable in the short term.

[libertybele]

Do you have a better option not named Trump or Hillary?

The rest of the candidates are amateurs and we have to pick someone. Johnson may not be totally perfect but he's at least tolerable in the short term.

The better option I see, is either not voting for president and voting down ticket, or writing in a candidate; hopefully denying Trump or Clinton the necessary majority. Johnson is pro amnesty, pro abortion, supports gay marriage and buys into global warming.  I'm not so sure that he'd be tolerable in the short term.  While I understand your thinking, without knowing his demeanor or character, I can only judge him by the issues.  Perhaps the biggest concern right now with him is he has selected Weld as his running mate who is anti gun.

To me; they seem to be more liberal than most Libertarians.

[jmyrlefuller]

The better option I see, is either not voting for president and voting down ticket, or writing in a candidate; hopefully denying Trump or Clinton the necessary majority. Johnson is pro amnesty, pro abortion, supports gay marriage and buys into global warming.  I'm not so sure that he'd be tolerable in the short term.  While I understand your thinking, without knowing his demeanor or character, I can only judge him by the issues.  Perhaps the biggest concern right now with him is he has selected Weld as his running mate who is anti gun.

To me; they seem to be more liberal than most Libertarians.

That has been a longtime issue with the big-L Libertarian Party, and up to now I've never really seriously considered them for the very reasons you've mentioned. They always seemed to be spoilers: always stay too extreme to gain support from the population as a whole, but garner enough support to throw an election, usually to the Democrats. Their fiscal stances are often so extreme as to be caricatures, and the social issues are quite far-left.

Some here are hoping Austin Petersen, who's even closer to a mainstream conservative with libertarian tendencies than Johnson or Weld are, can score an upset at the Libertarian convention next week (May 26-30 for those of you who are interested). That's probably a longshot, and Petersen is still quite green. I would normally recommend the Constitution Party, but they're unfortunately in disarray this year and they basically had to beg Darrell Castle to be their nominee; he didn't even want to run. Besides, that party doesn't always get on the ballot in my state. The only other serious option would be, I suppose, the America's Party/American Independent Party, the vanity party of Alan Keyes and Tom Hoefling (a.k.a. EternalVigilance for those of you from FR).

I want to make a serious effort to stop both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and to do that, a lot of people are going to have to come together and find a candidate to rally behind. As diverse as the Neither Trump Nor Hillary crowd is, it's going to be difficult to do that without some compromises.

By all means, vote your conscience, but if you do, try to find a way to actually make your vote count.

[libertybele]

That has been a longtime issue with the big-L Libertarian Party, and up to now I've never really seriously considered them for the very reasons you've mentioned. They always seemed to be spoilers: always stay too extreme to gain support from the population as a whole, but garner enough support to throw an election, usually to the Democrats. Their fiscal stances are often so extreme as to be caricatures, and the social issues are quite far-left.

Some here are hoping Austin Petersen, who's even closer to a mainstream conservative with libertarian tendencies than Johnson or Weld are, can score an upset at the Libertarian convention next week (May 26-30 for those of you who are interested). That's probably a longshot, and Petersen is still quite green. I would normally recommend the Constitution Party, but they're unfortunately in disarray this year and they basically had to beg Darrell Castle to be their nominee; he didn't even want to run. Besides, that party doesn't always get on the ballot in my state. The only other serious option would be, I suppose, the America's Party/American Independent Party, the vanity party of Alan Keyes and Tom Hoefling (a.k.a. EternalVigilance for those of you from FR).

I want to make a serious effort to stop both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and to do that, a lot of people are going to have to come together and find a candidate to rally behind. As diverse as the Neither Trump Nor Hillary crowd is, it's going to be difficult to do that without some compromises.

By all means, vote your conscience, but if you do, try to find a way to actually make your vote count.

It's very unfortunate that the Constitution Party doesn't look they are going to make the ballot in all 50 states.  I think they could have very well won, it's really a shame.  This was a very opportune time for them.

I feel that writing in a candidate does count as there is a slim chance that combining write in votes and 3rd party votes just may deny Trump/Clinton the majority ... that is my hope.  Please keep us posted on the outcome of the Libertarian convention.