[swilhelm73]

Actually, the problem with the LP is that it has distorted itself to appeal to the only group willing to vote for it in large numbers - stoners in college.

Yes, libertarian philsophy should be opposed to the WoD. However, between that and the fundamentalist nature of the party they are more irrevalent then the Greens and Socialists for God's sake. The latter, especially, have shown *remarkable* ability to control the Democrat Party by compromising and accepting non-flashy long term victories.

If the LP was really interested in advancing libertarian thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Libertarian philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc.

[thoughtomator]

The first and foremost of all liberties is the right to life. As long as the Libertarian Party avoids this central truth, nothing they can do will have any credibility whatsoever.

[MarkL]

If the LP was really interested in advancing libertarian thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Libertarian philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc.

I believe that Neal Boortz is right... That the #1 place the Libertarian party should start would be in protecting property rights. Between the asset forfeiture laws of the WOD, to the recent abuses in eminent domain we're seeing over and over again, that would be an issue that could resonate with the public.

Mark

[Conservative til I die]

If the LP was really interested in advancing libertarian thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Libertarian philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc.

The Libertarian Party's best hope is to become a third party that dangles endorsements in the Big Two's faces.

Now I live in NY, where we have a somewhat unique and effective third party system, where the third parties basically exist as endorsement carrots for the Republicans and Democrats. They rarely nominate their own candidates unless the Big Two don't hold to liberal or conservative values.

The Libertarians don't have muc of a presence in NY on the ballot because they try to act like a real national party, endorsing their own candidates. They need to start saying, like the other third parties, "Hey, it's going to be a close race, we've got xx thousand members, and if you stay libertarian enough, we'll endorse you, and those votes will be yours."

[fnord]

LP does not equal libertarian

political parties have there own agendas, removed from the underlying philosophies

[ShadowDancer]

If the GOP was really interested in advancing Republican thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Republican philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc.

As you can see, I substituted Rep for Lib. And yet, the GOP has an even more abysmal record of reaching out to conservatives than the Libertarians do.

[rb22982]

I agree 100%

[Clinging Bitterly]

>> ...the LP is that it has distorted itself to appeal to the only group willing to vote for it in large numbers - stoners in college...

I dunno about that - stoners aren't reliable voters.
Libertarians are often first associated with their position on drug laws, particularly marijuana laws.
Early in my political awareness, I bought into that narrow view and didn't really pay much attention to all that they stood for (and we're talking way back in the '70s here).
Over time, I learned more about the philosophy they are following and liked it for the most part, but still didn't like the bit about the drugs.

But now as I've witnessed more of the reality that is life, I've come to realize they are mostly right about drugs too. And to be quite honest, I vote Republican over Libertarian only because the Libertarian seldom has a chance of wonning, and I can't stomach the idea of contributing to a Democrat's election. I don't think LP's slim percentages are a problem with the ideology so much as with things like money and exposure.

There's a message for Republicans when they lose by margins slimmer than the Libertarian candidate's percentage, though (as happened in the Oregon Governor's race just last year). I haven't yet voted Big L over GOP, but I gotta tell ya, with the GOP we have in this state, with the results I see every day after 8 or 9 years of GOP control of our legislature, I honestly don't think it would have made much difference.

[Capitalism2003]

"If the LP was really interested in advancing libertarian thought they would try rather harder to reach out to conservatives - and the majority of Americans - and first work on areas where Libertarian philosophy is widely held; tax cuts, gun rights, limiting enviromental laws, etc" We have tried. It aint working...especially not with the group in power at the moment. Domestic NON-defense spending up 37% since 2001. Bush begged for a new multi trillion dollar drug entitlement and got it. Tarrifs...farm subsidies...Kennedy's education bill...enthusiastically approved by the GOP. Sorry..I think our only hope now is to cause the so-called "conservatives" in congress a little pain. It is the only way to bring them back to the right...back to truely Constitutional government. Need an example of how a 3rd party can effect major politics? Look at what Ralph Nader did to the democrats. They are pissed over his taking 50,000 Floriduh votes in 2000...They think HE caused Gore to lose...What have they done to compensate? They have gone EXTREME LEFT. Today's Greens feel right at home in the Dean/Kucinich/Hellary democratic party. They have gone back to their BASE for this election. In the same way, I'm hoping we as Libertarians can pull the Republican party back to their base...back to the side of limited government.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?"--Thomas Jefferson