Lincoln Chafee files to run for president as a libertarian

CNN ^ | 1-6-2020 | Paul Leblanc

[logician2u]

You left out the other part, but that's probably just as well.

If his cancer had waited until a year or two ago, after California changed the law, he might still be alive and healthy today.

[Eleutheria5]

Blahblahblahblahblahblah Trump wins. Dems lose House. Media melts down. Life goes on. Sandy boy wins lawsuit, grabs WaPo and CNN. Becomes media mogul.

[fieldmarshaldj]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3786718/posts?page=37#37

This was just the Governorships. Add to that the KY Governor’s race to the list. Bevin needed 5k votes, the Libertarian got 28k. Think gubmint will get smaller under Beshear (whose first act was to grant voting rights to felons) ?

I haven’t even listed the Senate races, Congressional races and other state races which have been spoiled by Libertarian candidates.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Whut ?

[Impy]

Another Bill Weld “Libertarian”.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Never expected the Libertarian party to attract these types. I think it’s just cause they have built in organization and ballot access and a brand name.

The true believer Ron Paul types can’t be happy.

[NobleFree]

That's more than I would have guessed. Thanks for the info!

(Also, thanks for pointing out that Libertarians take votes from Republicans - which gives the lie to characterizations like "No Principles Hedonistic Drug Addict Party" (in this thread), which would be a platform clearly more attractive to Rat than Republican voters.)

I would think a substantial portion of the blame for Republican losses lies with Republicans who campaign in such a way as to leave tens of thousands of voters seeing less than a dime's worth of difference between them and their Rat opponent.

[BillyBoy]

Yeah, its probably because the Losertarian Party gets on the ballot in all 50 states and runs more candidates than any other third party. That fact makes it very attractive to any washed up, out-of-office politician who is trying to get on the ballot as a third party candidate. The weird thing is the Losertarian Party members themselves are so hardcore on key issues that there ISN'T any such thing as a "moderate Libertarian" (if there was, a guy like Jesse Ventura would have have found a home as a Libertarian instead of under the Reform Party label). Yet, at their annual presidential conventions they keep nominating goofball traitors who were NEVER "Libertarian" in the past and are only using the party for ballot access. I think the last ACTUAL Libertarian they ran was Harry Browne. He ran a crappy campaign (which the LP members bizarrely acted like it was a very successful campaign) but at least we knew where he stood.

They lost all credibility for me when Gary Johnson picked big government RINO Bill Weld as his "Libertarian" running mate. Weld is as far from libertarian as it gets.

At this point, running The Missing Linc as a "libertarian" would just be on par for them. I do find it funny when traitors like Bob Barr flip-flop 180 degrees on EVERY issue (the ONLY thing Republican Bob Barr and Losertarian Bob Barr had in common was being pro-gun rights) and put on a dog and pony show to get the LP nomination, then swiftly renounce all their newfound "libertarian" beliefs after they lose.

Someone said the reason why LINOs keep getting nominated for President is some odd quark in the party's nomination process, where you can win a small minority of the delegates but get more votes than anyone else because "None of the Above" is sucking all the support away. Probably a handful of idiots just want to run someone with "name ID" and "star power". The LP should seriously rethink that strategy.

[fieldmarshaldj]

True, although for a party that claims to want less government, how can they and their candidates justify that their presence on the ballot stands a good chance in a close election of electing “Biggest Government of All” candidate by a plurality/minority of the vote ? If I were the Dems, I’d want to fully fund Libertarians so they could expressly win these 49-48-3% races. It pays off for them. They probably are. They did in the 2013 VA Governor’s race, which was designed to split the GOP vote and elect the execrable Terry McAwful.

https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=584602

[NobleFree]

Another page linked from your URL suggests the Republican was not so “limited government”: https://www.ourcampaigns.com/NewsDetail.html?NewsID=86577 - “Ken Cuccinelli Really Wants to Ban Oral Sex”

[fieldmarshaldj]

That’s unenforceable anyway. I was reading articles years ago about how Virginia’s motto was “Virginia is for lovers” and the authors complaining that any copulatory actions outside of missionary was illegal.

[NobleFree]

That’s unenforceable anyway.

Perhaps - but supporting it nonetheless narrows the perceived difference between oneself and the Rat. Republicans who want the limited-government vote need to take it seriously as a principle, not just an occasionally convenient slogan.

[fieldmarshaldj]

I suspect that had an infinitesimal impact on the race. The Dems played filthy-dirty in that contest and openly recruited that fake candidate to run as the Libertarian to take GOP votes, which was frankly scandalous. The media paid it no mind. If the GOP had done the same with a Green Party candidate, it would’ve been 24/7 on the news cycle.