. The same kind of terrorists who support Obama did this: http://www.frugalsites.net/911/attack/ Never apologize for them. Never appease them. Never forget.
Posted on 05/27/2008 9:33:19 AM PDT by pissant
What happened
The Libertarian Party nominated former Republican Rep. Bob Barr (Ga.) as its 2008 presidential candidate at the Libertarian convention in Denver over the weekend. The party is already on the ballot in 28 states, and Barr said he will get on the ballot in at least 20 more. National polls put his support as high as 7 percent, but Barr said he is "in this to win,” not be “a spoiler.” (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution)
What the commentators said
Libertarians are touting the Barr-led ticket as their strongest yet, said Andrew Malcolm in the Los Angeles Times’ Top of the Ticket blog (free registration), but “that may not be saying much.” There simply aren’t enough Libertarians “to elect their ticket to anything.” However, in a “close election” between John McCain and Barack Obama, Barr might be able to “draw enough votes of dissatisfied conservatives” to hurt McCain’s chances.
“I don’t buy it,” said Michael Goldfarb in The Weekly Standard’s The Blog. Barr's best hope is that he will inherit the supporters of McCain’s only remaining GOP rival, Rep. Ron Paul. But "Ron Paul voters" are mostly an anti-Iraq War protest vote, so they'll be tempted to vote for the anti-war Obama. Barr is also anti-war, so he “seems likely to siphon votes from Obama, not McCain.”
Without the backing of Paul himself, said Jonathan Martin in Politico, the Libertarian candidate “could be as much of a non-factor this year as in every other recent presidential cycle.” So far, despite some ideological similarities, Paul has shown “little enthusiasm for Barr,” so his supporters and donors won't, either.
Paul or no Paul, said John Cole in the blog Balloon Juice, the Libertarian vote will never be anything more than “a protest vote.” The party can’t seem to build the “solid grass roots structure” needed to win elections—which makes sense if you look at the core, anti-government Libertarian message. “No one is going to fill the bingo halls to hear about all the things you are not going to fund for your district.”
Listen Now [4 min 8 sec] add to playlist
Weekend Edition Saturday, June 16, 2007 · Former Rep. Bob Barr, who opposed admitting gays into the military when he served in the U.S. Congress, now says that the military can't afford to exclude this group of Americans.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11131900
This ain't gonna help him win over conservatives....
Stupid of Barr. What is Barr’s latest position on amnesty and our borders?
Before the election - "Ha! You Losertarians will never get .0001% of the vote! Go smoke some pot and look at child porn!
After the election - "Waaa! Why did you Libtards cause our RINO to lose! Momma!"
If a candidate fails to convince me to vote for him, am I hurting him when I don’t? Why should his failure be placed on my shoulders?
This guy’s right about one thing: It’s tough to get elected here when your message is self-reliance, independence and good economic decision-making at an individual level. The Dems and the Pubbies have become indistiguishable in that arena: They are pitching the Free Lunch (to be paid for by our kids and grandkids).
Before the French Revolution, much of the aristocracy took the position characterized by the phrase “Apres moi, les deluge.” That translates literally to “Let the floods come after I am dead.” (Most of THEM went to the guillotine! So much for their plan!!)
That’s how these politicians — and most voters — are operating.
If Bob Barr is on the ballot in YOUR state (and he will be in some 47 or 48 of them) YOU NOW HAVE A ONCE-IN-A-LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW YOUR TOTAL DISDAIN FOR THOSE RUNNING THE TWEEDLE DUMB/TWEEDLE DUMBER (Pubbie/Dems) PARTIES (INTO THE GROUND ALONG WITH OUR KIDS’ FUTURES).
You’re thinking “If I vote for Barr, it might let the wrong guy win.” In this election, they’re BOTH the “wrong guy.” For some different reasons but they’re both the wrong guy so WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?
Don’t know about you, but THIS grandfather is sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils and then being surprised that the evils of destruction of American sovereignty, massive unfunded debt and the consequent inflation, presidentially ordered wars, stupid energy — among thousands of other — policies, ballooning bureaucracy, etc., etc., ad nauseum continue without letup.
Unless you just enjoy those increasingly frequent ankle gripping exercises ordered by the Gang of 535 and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, time to PUT UP OR SHUT UP, PEOPLE!!
TIME TO PUT UP OR SHUT UP!!!!!!!!
He has zero credibility.
I was following the articles on the Libertarian Convention in “The Weekly Standard.”
I also saw some coverage on CSPAN2.
We’re talking fruits and nuts, people. The lefties have theirs and we’ve got ours.
I especially liked the contingent in the black “9-11 was an inside job” T-shirts. Where do I get mine?
Don’t know. But if he is in bed with the ACLU, it can’t be all that great.
Well, with his strong 2A position and small government credentials, Barr should win over conservatives. Then he steps on his John Thomas with his flip flops about gays in the military, medical maryjane (became a spokesman), the Patriot Act, and the Iraq war.
He sounds confused.
The libertarians have had decades to prove a viable 3rd party. It has not happened. From their pansy ass treatment of the USSR to their pansy ass treatment of the jihadis, getting them the same results, they might want to rethink national Security .
The place to go for 2012 is FALCON.
And to think he could have joined the ACLJ instead. Oh well.
That’s how I look at the GOP these days.
The simple math of it determines that it is going to hurt McCain more than Obama (or whoever the Dem candidate is)
Even if there is a third party candidate on the liberal side such as Ralph Nader, any third party candidacy that draws off votes from the Republican side is going to be a net loss for the Republicans in a tight election, as the last few have been.
The left always has some percentage that is siphoned off into some third party candidate tilting at windmills, the most green candidate (Nader), the most race/sex conscious (Jackson)or the most antiwar or whatever.
The republicans have not had a third party candidate who siphoned votes off of them like that since Ross Perot who captured a fairly large minority (19% if I recall correctly) and look what happened. One of the greasiest, slimiest, most corrupt anti-American politicians ever to reach the presidency got there without a majority of the population voting him in.
There is a body of people who aren’t going to vote for McCain because of some reason or other.
There are plenty of reasons, and those people are angry and want to inflict damage on a party that has betrayed them, or want to keep their hands clean and say “Yeah, Obama/McCain/Whatever sure sucks, but I didn’t vote for them...”
They will deny that a vote for Barr or his equivalent is simply a vote for Obama or Clinton. But hey, it keeps their hands clean.
Having worked for the ACLU, Barr will not draw the conservatives who oppose McCain, but he will draw the Democrats who dislike Obama.
Neither. He'll get the same 0.4% that every other Libertarian candidate gets each time around.
You’re thinking “If I vote for Barr, it might let the wrong guy win.” In this election, they’re BOTH the “wrong guy.”
True enough. That is why there is a groundswell for a legitimate conservative party and that is why we plan to change America for the better.
He does have zero credibility, but in my opinion, he will hurt McCain because there are people (some in this thread) who think his involvement with ACLU (as an example) is no big deal.
They are ALL CAPS angry, and want to make a statement. They just don’t want to acknowlege that statement is to put someone like Obama or Hillary in the White House.
Hey, it is their vote. I think they should be realistic enough to acknowlege the collective effect of their votes.
But it is more important to make a statement or keep their hands clean than it is to be realistic. But it is their choice.
Exactly. According to most GOPpers, the LP, like all third party candidates, is not even a blip on the radar.
Well, that is, until it comes time to cast blame for their electoral losses. Then, they're looking for anyone to blame but themselves.
A vote for Barr is a vote for Obama
And so the blame-game begins...
“One of the greasiest, slimiest, most corrupt anti-American politicians ever to reach the presidency got there without a majority of the population voting him in.”
In America, the populace does Not elect the president, the electoral college elects the president. We have had many presidents who received less than the majority of the popular vote, and some who received fewer votes than their opponent, including GW Bush in 2000.
I sure hope Barr draws votes away from McCain.
A vote for Barr is a vote for the ‘Founding Fathers’, and how they intended the country to be run.
More and more ppl are seeing through both parties, and realize they don’t serve the ppl.
‘The Libertarian vote will never be anything more than “a protest vote.”’
So, what’s wrong with a protest vote? I might vote for Barr as a protest vote to show my disgust with the quality of the candidates we are offered by the two main parties.
The groundswell for a new party is understandable and perhaps inevitable, but surrendering for the next several election cycles the Executive and Legislative branches to a never before seen level of socialism is not.
It may be that there will be a new party, but if so, it is not going to bear fruit for another 8-12 years while the split is sorted out and a winner emerges. During that time, the conservative movement will win nothing. Our country could (and will) be very different by the time that happens.
To think it is going to make a postive mark for conservatism between now and 2012 is fantasy. Conservatism is going to wander in the political wilderness, and the socialists and liberals are going to entrench themselves and their philosophies.
Just my opinion.
Exactly. The whole arguement about how voting for a third party will “steal” votes away from someone else is the height of arrogance. As if my vote somehow “belongs” to a particular person or party.
No, a vote for Barr is not a vote for either Obama, Hitlery or McClown. It is a vote for Barr.
If these candidates cannot convince the Barr voter (of which, I am not), then the reason for the loss of the vote is the candidate, themselves.
True. But until recently, it was rarer than not.
From the Libertarian perspective it is conservatives who are confused: small government is a government small enough to butt out of people’s decisions over what to smoke, who to have sex with, or what any government besides our own in doing to anyone other than American citizens.
Go read about Falcon. There is no wandering. It is there, and as it gets in front of people, no matter who wins in 2008, it can only grow. The same arguments to vote GOP will be made in 2012, I’m sure: ‘The other guy is worse’
I’m not suggesting to anyone to vote for Obama, 3rd party or to abstain in 08. People can make up their own minds. I take the longer term view that as the GOP continues along on its path, a legitimate, non-kook infested party must emerge in its wake.
Still, he will hurt McCain to some extent by giving hard-core McCain-haters who would rather see even Obama or Hillary in office a semi-respectiable refuge.
Maybe we’ll throw General Lee up for balance. ;o)
No, your vote belongs to yourself.
The ramifications of your vote also belong to yourself.
Perhaps you are intellectually honest enough to admit to yourselves and others what that result will be.
There are many who will not.
To them, it is an exercise in keeping their hands clean and making a statement. I am fine with that. It is their vote.
What I do not agree with is denying the reality of what your collective votes do.
While GHWB was nothing to write home about, I made the mistake of voting Perot/Stockdale, and that is indisputably what put Clinton in the White House. As much as GHWB was no conservative, he was no Clinton either. I accept the result of my vote and regret it, especially after seeing what was done to our country and political systems in the following eight years.
He should thank his lucky stars he has two lemons on the major party tickets.
Neither. Like it or not, the majority of voters still believe in the idea of voting for who they believe is the “lesser of two evils”, and this will truly continue to be the case on November 4 between just Barack Obama and John McCain. All third party/Independent Presidential candidates will truly have no impact on the ‘08 Presidential race between the major party candidates, IMHO, but all of politics can change very quickly for a variety of reasons that we don’t even know about yet.
A legit conservative alterantive is going to take some serious work. We have started the process, and by 2012 should have the best candidate running on the FALCON ticket.
Well said, but that is not going to do anything to stave off the results of a third party candidacy that in my mind has absolutely no chance, zero, of winning, but has a very, very good chance of decreasing votes into a Republican candidacy enough to tip what is going to be a close election.
But thanks for the suggestion. I am someone who is disappointed the path the GOP has taken, and I recognize that an alternative could be in the works.
But it ain’t going to happen between now and November. And I am committed to fighting the liberals for every square inch of ground they wish to take.
If the ostensible “leader” (McCain) is MORE liberal and causes us to lose more conservative ground than we might have with a REAL conservative, I am still going to vote for him rather than cede that ground with a pull of the lever.
I am going to make the liberals pay for every inch they gain, because I know that re-taking that ground is a LOT harder than giving up up to make a statement.
Again, just my opinion.
Without any reason, they assume people with a libertarian bent should naturally vote for McCain. Nonsense. It would be equally preposterous to claim that communists voting for the communist party are hurting McCain.
BINGO! Especially since both parties have screwed their supporters by going ever futher to the left in each successive election. At what point do the Party Faithfuls cry "enough!"? Both parties have degenerated to their present state because people kept voting for "the lesser of two evils".
Well said..
Lincoln also served in a time where the disintegration of the US was eminent. Hardly an easy term in office.
How cool, Bob. Why don’t you align with the ‘Greens’, and get Cynthia McKinney to run as your VP? Two wackos for the price of one! (from Georgia, bored with Libertarians)
How cool, Bob. Why don’t you align with the ‘Greens’, and get Cynthia McKinney to run as your VP? Two wackos for the price of one! (from Georgia, bored with Libertarians)
How cool, Bob. Why don’t you align with the ‘Greens’, and get Cynthia McKinney to run as your VP? Two wackos for the price of one! (from Georgia, bored with Libertarians)
Why all this talk about how Barr might affect McCain adn Obama, but virtually none about how Alan Keyes, who WILL be on the ballot in your state, will affect things?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.