Galt's Gulch
16

Can the Libertarian Party Actually Make a Difference?

Posted by DrEdwardHudgins 8 years, 5 months ago to Politics
87 comments | Share | Flag

The Libertarian Party can make a difference if it connects with frustrated voters by pledging to uproot America’s corrupt crony system.
SOURCE URL: http://atlassociety.org/commentary/commentary-blog/6029-can-the-libertarian-party-actually-make-a-difference

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by rbroberg 8 years, 5 months ago
    This point cannot be underestimated. The degree to which established media discount and disfavor "a third party candidate" is shocking to me at times, but it should not dishearten anyone. It is not about "third party", fourth party, or fifth. It is not about how Johnson will swing the plurality of votes from Republican to Democrat or vice versa. Enough with the pragmatist statist nonsense! Enough with the false dramatic pretense! While both FoxNews and CNN grow rich on the clashes, backlashes, and lies, we still have no solution to the most significant issues the US faces. The answer to "is it time to vote for a third party candidate?" is OF COURSE!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
      It doesn't go beyond that. Right off the bat you left out 46% of the electorate and focused on the next two largest groups which are in fact the one largest group. Dems and Reps ARE one party. So many people are so focused on daddy was a demo or grandpaw was a repo they cannot possibly stop to think those aren't parties in existence any more. just one big shell game full of shills ranting the same meaningless crap. read snakecane below for another good comment on the way it IS not the way the fairy tale artists learned it back in the 60's .Apologists, and socialist roaders everyone.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Snakecane 8 years, 5 months ago
    Just a gentle reminder that Ayn Rand vehemently opposed Libertarianism. Also, although I know it has wormed its way into the vernacular, there is no such thing as crony capitalism. Cronyism is corruption. Those who involve themselves in cronyism are not capitalists; they are criminals. Capitalism does not support cronyism. To use the terminology "crony capitalism" taints the concept of capitalism, and is useful as a tool for the socialist/progressive/Marxist axis who are masters of language manipulation, e.g. progressive, liberal, etc. Thoughts?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ puzzlelady 8 years, 5 months ago
      Ayn Rand criticized the Libertarians of 40 years ago for not having a solid philosophical basis for their principles. Since then the Libertarians have gained a large infusion of Objectivist members and philosophy. It was her associate, Peter Schwartz, who most strongly condemned the Libertarians of that day for wanting to cut off all foreign aid, and that would have hurt Israel. That was the main strike against Libertarians. Today's Libertarians are more aligned with individual freedom than any other political group.

      I agree that it is unfortunate that the meaning of capitalism (the still unknown ideal) is being tainted by being coupled with "crony", but it is not incorrect. "Cronyism" alone can apply in other contexts of collusion.

      We have to use words as people understand them. With ordinary folks I have some success in equating capitalism with the popular Kickstarter program.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrEdwardHudgins 8 years, 5 months ago
        I use "cronyism" when I can because, as you say, we must communicate with words the way people understand them and I think it's easy and avoids the taint to say "Cronyism" is a system in which political pull determines who gets what. As I say, there's a difference between a philosophical seminar and a political campaign.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by katiegail 8 years, 5 months ago
        Ayn Rand did not like the LP - comprised of as many Objectivists as Conservative Republicans because we were not war mongers,. Her fear of Russia clouded her judgement on the issue of politics. She was adamant that Russia should be opposed at every turn. She like Regan for his Warm War challange to the East that ended the Cold War.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 5 months ago
      This comes down to the utmost root of the difference between libertarianism and objectivism, IMO. A libertarian insists on believing -- because of the far-reaching good consequences of so believing, as understood using economics -- that each person's own good is what he says it is. David Friedman calls this principle "consumer sovereignty" and it informs all his works, but especially The Machinery of Freedom. I do accept it.

      I am not sure whether or not this is identical to the "dedicated, thoroughgoing subjectivism" that Rand considered "libertarianism" and stridently opposed. The paragraph in ARI's FAQ which explains this "subjectivism" associates it with Murray Rothbard (for whom I have no use) and with a pacifist foreign policy (for which I also have no use).

      I certainly deeply disagree with Rand on the definition of capitalism, since my definition requires the principle of "consumer sovereignty" and hers appears to forbid it.

      I also find it both self-defeating and irrational that she (and ARI) refused to partner with anyone who didn't share her core philosophy. I believe anyone who sticks to that decision accomplishes nothing except to marginalize himself permanently. Or to put it another way, my core goal is individual rights, and I don't have any problem working with allies to achieve it even if they are anarchists or believe in God.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 5 months ago
        RE: “A libertarian insists on believing . . . that each person's own good is what he says it is.” Not by any definition I’m familiar with. If a person believes his own good consists of cheating others, advocating socialism, or forcing others to adopt his religious beliefs, he is not a libertarian. A libertarian believes in respecting the natural rights of others, and pursuing what he considers to be his own good within the boundaries of such respect.

        And Ayn Rand’s definition of capitalism is “a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.”
        http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/cap...
        This definition certainly supports “consumer sovereignty,” since it defends a consumer’s right to trade his labor or property for the labor or property of others.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ pixelate 8 years, 5 months ago
      I have been thinking along the same lines; words have meaning. Whenever I heard the phrase 'crony capitalism' I felt the taint against the word capitalism. The taint was by design. I will continue to educate those who misuse that phrasing.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ CBJ 8 years, 5 months ago
        Words have meanings that change over time. Try communicating in 15th century English. Uncorrupted terms like free market are better for scoring political debate points than corrupted terms like capitalism.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 5 months ago
    Yes absolutely. I agree with the article. I would add that people have gotten used to gov't being very powerful and the president having more power within the gov't than intended. The gov't has its hands in a big chunk of the economy and people's private lives, and people perceive the gov't touches everything. In that environment, they're scared of anything that seems radical. That's why I believe Trump or Sanders could not win an election. Hillary could win because she seems like a master of this system, representing all groups in society.

    Johnson has to sell the idea of reducing gov't influence and that this is not radical. Given the power of gov't, people are rightly afraid of anything radical.

    Most people here don't like to hear this but if we had eight (8) years of a moderate libertarian and nominal (not per GDP, not inflation-adjusted) gov't outlays were the same after eight (8) years and we had a framework to keep it from growing, it would be a phenomenal achievement.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 5 months ago
      It would be a worthwhile delay in the growth of government if real cuts aren't a possibility, but then if they aren't, we might as well pack it in.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by DrEdwardHudgins 8 years, 5 months ago
      On your last point, that could be the transition phase I suggest in the article. Like it or not, many Trump supporter think they've been left behind by the new economy and free trade. While I disagree--regulations that stifle economic growth is a bog problem--they are voters and have given Trump the GOP presidential nod. So arguing that we need a transition from the crony state just a the East Bloc needed a transition from communism to free markets makes political sense.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by rbunce 8 years, 5 months ago
    Libertarian candidate does not need to get to 270 EC votes. Just needs to stop Mr. Trump and Sec Clinton from getting to 270 EC votes. Then Presidential Election goes to new US House where the top 3 EC candidates are eligible and there is one vote per State as determined by that States Representatives (or perhaps some other process in their States Constitution). If the choice that new House faced is Mr. Trump, Sec Clinton, Gov Johnson... I could see 26 States voting for Gov Johnson.

    The VP is another matter, only top two got to US Senate so R or D choice for VP would be new VP depending on how US Senate elections go in November. Gov Weld is there to try to help win a State or two in the NE US.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 5 months ago
      "I could see 26 States voting for Gov Johnson."
      They would also have some "moral" pressure pushing them that way if Johnson got the plurality of votes. If one or both of the D/R candidates have a serious scandal, something involving sex or clear theft that everyone agrees is a bona fide scandal, he has a real chance.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
      Your knowledge is right on the money. However, having it happen this November is a fantasy. I have come to the conclusion of anyone except Hillary. Even if it is Trump -- so be it. If Trump turns out bad, Mrs. Clinton will be X10.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
        Stick to your principles. Don't be cowed into voting based on fear induced by statist propaganda. That's how this stinking mess happened. HRM Donnie can't be trusted any more than Empress Hillary.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          -
        • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
          And, we'll unstink this mess -- how?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
            The only chance to do so peacefully is to abandon the looters who have betrayed our principles repeatedly (GOP and Dems) and to support and vote on principle for ethical men and women who support liberty and free markets. At present the only presidential candidate that qualifies is Johnson. Repeating past mistakes is a recipe for disaster regardless of which statist you feel will do less harm.
            The alternative is armed revolt and no sane person wants that.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              -
            • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
              You are looking down the road at the big picture. Up until recently, I would agree. However, it is my opinion that we have reached critical mass and unless we do something now, at the very least, to ease or put off the current edge-of-cliff situation, there won't be a tomorrow. By that, I don't mean a nuclear holocaust, but a socio-economic melt-down. We need something to stop or slow down the bleeding now, before the patient is too far gone.

              Plus, the fact is, the Libertarians are not ready. They are neither fully organized nor properly funded. Look, I was there when Rothbard was the rage among Objectivists. I was among the first of them to encourage the Libertarian concept, which was difficult because A.R. was against it. However, to me, her opposition seemed to be more out of petulance than anything else. But I cannot back that up with anything other than my instinct. Perhaps in the next election cycle of '18 the Libertarians can show a little progress and actually win a seat or two, or at the very least come close in a meaningful election. Then, it may be time to take them more seriously.

              In any case, I don't believe that I am compromising my principles by taking this position. If by some miracle, the Libertarians and Johnson make significant progress between now and November, I'd be willing to reappraise.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                -
              • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                You are just doing the same thing other anti-Democrats have done for the past 30 years, and its the problem, not the solution. Trump wouldn't know the truth if it bit his privates off and spit them in his face. America revolted against monarchy 240 years ago, and monarchy is what HRM Donnie brings. If Libertarians don't make a breakthrough the primary reason will be people voting in fear (a) of Hillary for Trump and (b) of Trump for Hillary.
                Those who fearfully sacrifice liberty for the illusion of temporary safety deserve neither.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by Enyway 8 years, 5 months ago
                  There are two things in Trump's favor. First of all, he is not a politician. Politicians are who got us here. Secondly, he doesn't owe anyone that will be asking favors.No one is holding money over his head. He paid. The best part, as you have said, he couldn't lie that we couldn't know it. If you've seen his rallies, you know that already. Also, there is no way he will be worse that anybody else. Okay, so there were four.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    -
                  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                    Trump is a politician, but some haven't realized it. I must give him credit for learning weasel speech in this campaign though. Read his comments that supposedly support the 2nd amendment for an example of supporting nothing while giving a different impression.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      -
                    • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                      Part of the problem is that no matter what the candidates say, it is picked apart and used to bring them down. Secondly, none of the candidates had experience as president or have access to what's going on in upper echelons of government today (except for sanders perhaps). I don't think I would give specifics either until I was at least elected and chose my team and was briefed by the outgoing president and given secret security vlearance
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        -
                      • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                        If I was the candidate and had the financing that Trump has (to hire experts etc), I would promise to push for a specific constitutional amendment to clarify and reiterate the original meaning of the constitution so that the original limitations on government were clear. This would be designed to eliminate any laws that restrict rights or use things like the interstate commerce clause or general welfare clause as a loophole around limitations on federal government. I would post the text of that amendment on my website and would immediately fund grassroots local organizations to push it through state legislatures.
                        None of these statist looters will do this or anything else that gives me a reason to vote for them.
                        Trump could do this easily if he was really interested in individual liberty and free markets. He would win the election in the biggest landslide since 1980.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          -
                        • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                          I would vote for you. Cruz did pretty much what you say, and look where it got him. He was pretty much universally hated by the establishment, and they got rid of him. If Trump makes it to president, which I kind of doubt given the $$ Hillary has to hide things and manipulate, I would hope that at least he breaks up some of the cronyism that is prevalent today.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            -
                          • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                            So Trump should announce his amendment just after his coronation at the GOP convention ;^)
                            He could start the grassroots stuff immediately but keep the reason quiet until the announcement at the convention. He would get most of Cruz votes and piss off the insiders.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                              -
                            • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                              Hey, I would go for that. I think he would be better off waiting until after he is elected though, or Hillary would use it against him and the 50% who want freebie stuff might smell the end to their free rides.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                -
                              • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                                Trump wouldn't lose a single vote. the real free-loaders would never have voted for him anyway. Others are voting for him on his arguable personality and they wouldn't see the train bearing down until after the election when it would be too late. the real danger with Trump (and other power seekers) is that the promise is a lie. He would have to make the grass roots process happen before the election or those who don't trust him wouldn't trust his words. Ethical deeds matter.
                                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                                • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                                  I think that the campaign managers really determine who wins the presidency. Its all a stupid game. I just wonder what Hillary would do to twist and manipulate anyone who actually came out with an amendment such as this. CNN would grab onto that and produce hundreds of pundits to show how it would destroy the country as we know it, etc.
                                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      -
                    • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                      Better than hillary
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        -
                      • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                        Lies better than Hillary,yes. So do the rest of the GOP looters.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          -
                        • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                          This election is really dividing the country. Maybe it's time for the USA should be made into the divided states of America and we start over without a federal government at all

                          Even the libertarian candidate isn't at all as pure as you are thinking, and could hardly even get nominated in this culture

                          I think that AR was right in AS. Philosophy first, then politics. I have severe doubts that a large country like this one can survive over time. It's time for this one to break up.

                          I thought perhaps the crony establishment would fall under the attacks by sanders and trump, but the hatred that has come out towards both of them is so strong that the establishment will continue to thrive under Hillary and her supporters at the expense of the rest of us
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
                            Anything to promote divisiveness the real reason for diversity.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                            • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                              People are tribal, I think. They like to be around people that they feel are similar to them, at least in the way they think and act. And whats wrong with that really?
                              I agree that diversity just breaks up the tribes and makes people feel they need to be only out for themselves. There isnt a lot of group unity anymore.
                              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  -
                • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
                  I think your distaste of Trump has distorted your view. I don't think he aspires to a monarchy, nor do I think he'll be a dictator. He will expect what he wants done to be carried out with a minimum of friction. He won't brook objections. But that also describes Lincoln. He's not the best choice, but he has espoused in his rhetoric enough good stuff so that if he only holds that course for 4 years it will be a huge benefit.
                  Most people know that I wasn't a Trump supporter but if you don't have the tool you want, you must make do with the one you have, or do nothing. Doing nothing now, would be a calamity.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    -
                  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
                    Acting on principle is doing something to stop statist evil. Consenting to more statist evil is worse than nothing.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      -
                    • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
                      You stick like glue to that one premise. Voting for Trump will not be statist evil. I understand your viewpoint, which is what I call objectionable Objectivist. However, if you believe as many Objectivists do, that the difference between good and evil, has no shades of grey, then there is no common ground on this issue between us. I realize that A.R. seems to promote that idea, but it doesn't work, nor did it in her own life. I am not denigrating either you or her. I just think that such an attitude is immature and does not jibe with my life experiences. Also, that does not mean that I don't believe in Objectivism as a philosophy, but no philosophy is perfect because of the variable nature of men.People are not gas meters. In the red = bad, in the green = good. There's a space between the red and green, whether you or anyone else cares to admit it.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
                      I am beginning to think the establishment will finally conquer the rest of us by electing Hillary Johnson will get nowhere, although he will help hillary
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ Abaco 8 years, 5 months ago
    No, not for a long time. The American voters have been mentally conquered and only see two parties. That's why we'll end up with choosing between Trump and Hillary...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
    The chart shows just how completely brainwashed voters are, shows just how completely insane voters are, shows just how utterly suicidal voters are:
    http://atlassociety.org/images/Gary_J...
    Those who vote for either Trump or Hillary have no rational thought whatsoever.
    Democracy has been proven a failure repeatedly. Voting should be restricted to those who can demonstrate the ability to think rationally, own property, and have ethical training.
    Frightened children have no place in a voting booth.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ blarman 8 years, 5 months ago
    The two-party system actually came about as a result of the Twelfth Amendment. Until it is repealed and the Vice President's office seats the second-highest vote-getter in the Presidential Election, third parties are going to continue to be second-class citizens at the polls.

    What I would suggest is that after Donald Trump becomes the Presidential disaster I believe he will be, the Republican Party should disintegrate and a new Party take its place. From a naming perspective, however, I don't think "Libertarian" really captures people's imagination as well as "Constitution". I wouldn't use "Tea Party" because the Progressives have already railroaded that one with vile epithets and it wasn't what the movement was about in the first place.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
      How about a straight up counter revolution starting with any slave states that do not have recall and initiative get them. Those that have them use them and go after any of the Government Party people that so much as grunt the wrong way. Spend so much time defending themselves ... then start replacing them with Constitutionalists. Simple, easy, effective and requires no vowel substitutions as in ballots to bullets. We are after all fighting a socialist revolution that appears to have won judging Democrats and Republicans.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by RobertFl 8 years, 5 months ago
    The internet makes a difference. Before the MSM controlled the polling and what/who was presented to them. With the Internet, "trending" changes that. If we daily do searches for "libertarian", and "Gary Johnson" that will move him up in the trending list and thus draw attention. I also think, the MSM wants someone else to come in and mix things up more. The want another November of hanging chads. I think Johnson will do that. But he has to get that exposure
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by brkssb 8 years, 5 months ago
    The Political Future of Freedom (Edward Hudgins): Found in Wikipedia: Politics: involves the use of power by one person (read: "entity" or "political party") to affect (read: "compel") the behavior of another. There are no political candidates to vote "for", only "against". I know with some degree of animosity where Hillary and Sanders will take this country; Trump will endorse the whim of the day or the hour; Johnson has little to offer except chasing the electoral votes away from others. -- I believe the more appropriate venue for attention is the US Senate and then the House which vie for cronyism and collusion in the acidic name of compromise. The members of the legislative herd abdicated long ago.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 5 months ago
    I like what I hear from Johnson and Weld -- mostly. But I have always thought that the Libertarian Party was not a "serious" party. In the past it has been a vehicle for people calling themselves Libertarians to have a more intensive debate every 4 years or so. To be a real party, they must raise lots of money, get grassroots organizations growing nationwide, and laboring 24/7 to make it relevant in the eyes of voters. It just reminds me of people still playing house though having grown up. I'll take them seriously when they take themselves seriously.

    PS: Some idiot doing a chubby strip doesn't inspire seriousness.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 5 months ago
      Yes, the LP needs to purge itself of kooks. It also needs to start hiring the professional event managers the major parties use, which means persuading some of their big-money donors to defect. I hope Johnson is thinking this way.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 5 months ago
      Yes, the LP needs to purge itself of kooks. It also needs to start hiring the professional event managers the major parties use, which means persuading some of their big-money donors to defect. I hope Johnson is thinking this way.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 5 months ago
    Libertarians need to find the big money requited to present their case with massive ad campaign.
    The lefty "mainstream" media surely won't help them.
    The key commentators at Fox News appear to now be backing Trump regardless of what each personally may have to say about that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by gwilhelm56 8 years, 5 months ago
    Mr Johnson has just stated that he agrees with Comrade Bernie about 73% of the time, and Socialism is just fine, as long as it is Voluntary??? Makes Trump sound like an absolute GENIUS!!!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 5 months ago
      “Now, that’s the side of Bernie that has to do with pro-choice, pro-marriage equality, let’s stop with the military interventions, that there is crony capitalism, that government really isn’t fair when it comes to this level playing field, legalize marijuana,” he said. “Look, 73 percent of what Bernie says I agree with. We come to a T in the road when it comes to economics. I would really argue that if we absolutely had a fair system of economics, that free markets, that we would do a lot better than going down the– going down the path of socialism.” - Gary Johnson

      However, since all the demrep candidates are looting liars who will never do the pro-liberty, free-market things they say, it doesn't matter if Johnson "agrees" with what Bernie says because Bernie is a looting liar.

      FWIW, I took the "test" at www.isidewith.com and agreed most with Johnson, and least with Hillary. Hillary, Bernie and Jill sloshed around near the bottom with HRM Donnie in the middle of the disgusting bottle of poison. Only Johnson rose to the top.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Dobrien 8 years, 5 months ago
        +1 Well said Freedomforall .

        The lies that are so frequent . John Q public yawns and repeats their brainwashed reasoning .The end justifies the means.

        I wouldn't give the time of day to anyone who freely lies.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 8 years, 5 months ago
    Absolutely, it can pull votes from the R (in this instance Trump) and hand the election to the D (in this case Sanders - Clinton will either be in jail or 6 feet under).

    Ds won't vote libertarian no matter what, its contrary to how they've been taught to think. The only party hurt by the rise of libertarianism is the Rs (they deserve it, but not at the expense of the POTUS).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by $ Suzanne43 8 years, 5 months ago
      Two words...Supreme Court.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by tohar1 8 years, 5 months ago
        Agreed. We (America's Citizens) have allowed the Supreme Court to usurp too much power...way more than the Constitution ever granted (anyone remember 3 EQUAL branches of government...Judicial, Executive, Legislative)
        Now, (IMHO) a vote for the President is going to sway this out of control branch for generations to come. I will not vote for Hillary because of this, as well as several other factors. A Trump vote is the only way to block the liberal ideology from being further ingrained into our society. Something could/should be said of the lack of quality candidates in all parties. I, for one, am tired of holding my nose when walking into the voting booth..."Lesser of Two-Evils" argument.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by JohnConnor352 8 years, 5 months ago
      I completely disagree. I know a great deal of democrats here in Colorado who would vote for Gary Johnson over Hillary. I've heard them say it. And I can bet you that if (big if) Sanders gets the nomination you'll have a good number of Dems either staying home or voting otherwise.
      This is a very different election. The people who will actually vote are extremely difficult to predict right now. It's a time for new paradigms.
      Finally, The GOP dos this to themselves by selecting a lunatic for a candidate. It is completely wrong-headed to blame those who vote their conscience for the disaster that is to come this election season.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 8 years, 5 months ago
        I agree about the GOP, they are idiotically suicidal. How can they botch an election that wa all but a sure thing after 8 years of O?

        I hope you are right. If not, she or sanders is exactly what we'll get.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Dobrien 8 years, 5 months ago
          GOP is filled with frauds. the so called republican party (now the rightwing of the left).
          They do not have any solutions to issues. For example :Healthcare costs are exorbitant. With ACA Obamacare .There was a crisis at emergency rooms filled with uninsured people using them like office visits causing ambulances to reroute during critical emergencies in major metro areas often with fatal results.That could be fixed with a different approach.

          It is obvious the healthcare system is bloated with uncontrollable expenses the way the current system dysfunctions. A huge expense is CYA. Brought about by a vulgar legal liability.
          Enabled by the AMA--- they allow bad doctors to continue to practice. (10% of Doctors cause 90% malpractice cases).
          Health Insurance money is massive and wasteful in addition to taking away an individual's self determination how to spend their own money. Republicans lack a solutions based approach to opposition of ACA.

          So they are an easy target from the left . They say
          " see Republicans don't want you to have healthcare"
          Same story on many issues. They are weak on creativity and consciousness.

          So called public servants ( Kakistocrats) spend most of their time raising $ to be reelected.
          They don't get the message out about the disaster of failed welfare programs or personal responsibility.
          The list goes on and on.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 8 years, 5 months ago
    This is indeed the time for the LP to reject the aristocracy of pull ... before Trump seizes that banner undeservedly.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
      After that shameful debacle which must have the hard core socialist roader fellow travelers all wormy wiggly with delighted thoughts of sugar plum sanders it's no longer inconceivable for Trump to be their saving grace. They show no talent for savings themselves much less leading a constitutional coalition.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 5 months ago
    Right now, about the best the LP can do is to kill the Republicans' chances, at least for this year, maybe forever. I argue that that's a good start.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by mia767ca 8 years, 5 months ago
    spot on...excellent post and analysis...i have posted your presentation to facebook...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
      Did you give the credit to James Carville where it belongs?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        -
      • Posted by mia767ca 8 years, 5 months ago
        sorry i did not, but i did get 40 likes on your article on the facebook post...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
          Doesn't matter I don't do facebook or any of that other social media stuff. Five minutes of facebook whose sole purposes is to take over my life was more than enough for any one with any vestige of independence and a real life to live . So I'm not familiar with the jargon of that collective. It's like to trying to explain some TV show? Haven't owned one in over twenty years and before that it was only to watch movies. But thanks for the effort. If it helped you out thats ok too.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            -
          • Posted by mia767ca 8 years, 5 months ago
            it is a good thing...my kids put me on facebook...otherwise i am in the same boat...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 5 months ago
              That's one of my objections. Anyone can put anyone else on the damn thing and they will absolutely not take you off no matter what. What the hell happened to privacy? And the guy that runs it is a billionaire? What exactly did he do for his billion dollars besides invade my privacy? Mindless country deserves what their getting. Just Say No To Facebook or Just Say No to Social Media. But there is this compelling potty training that says you must answer the door, the email, the last post right this second. I gave you ten mimutes ha ha but I'm going fishing so I'll leave you wit this. You don't HAVE to answer anything until you are good and ready - if then.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wmiranda 8 years, 5 months ago
    Right now, a third party would only benefit the opposing party from which the third party is created. If a third a party viable candidate campaigns with ideas and principles throughout a campaign, then it would make a difference. At this point NO.

    At this point it all sounds like cry baby stuff, "I don't like it so I won't play", even if it means fundamentally changing the supreme court for the next few generations into the future.
    Every intelligent argument I've heard or article I've read is either a year too late or 3 years too early. The time has come, the battlelines are drawn. It's time to join the battle and try to influence the next four years. Anything less is just commentary.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 8 years, 5 months ago
    If one looks at the unbelievable bashing of Trump, one can easily see what would befall the Libertarian party if they were even moderately successful.

    Libertarians are so far from both of the established parties that they will get it from all sides.

    As Trump says- he just wants the voters, and thats what the libertarians need BEFORE they make a big splash politically.

    All the libertarian party would do now is help elect hillary.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo