Posted on 10/29/2004 8:50:48 PM PDT by freedom44
WASHINGTON -- Move over, Ralph Nader: A New York Times analysis says that Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik could be 'critical' to the outcome of the 2004 election, and that the party's 2000 candidate may have cost Bush at least four states.
In the Sunday, October 24 "Political Points" column, New York Times writer John Tierney asserts that in 2000, Bush "could have won Florida easily, and possibly several other states, if the Libertarian candidate, Harry Browne, was not in the race," assuming that Browne's votes would have gone to Bush.
In Florida, Browne earned 16,415 votes, while Bush defeated Al Gore by just 537 votes.
In three states won by Gore -- New Mexico, Oregon and Wisconsin -- Browne won more votes than the difference separating Bush and Gore, the article notes. In New Mexico, for example, Gore prevailed by 366 votes while Browne earned 2,058, and in Wisconsin, Gore beat Bush by 5,708 votes while Browne garnered 6,640.
With New Mexico, Wisconsin and other battleground states too close to call again in 2004, Libertarian Badnarik has the potential to "Naderize" Bush by attracting conservative votes, according to Tierney and other analysts.
A recent Zogby/Reuters national poll shows Badnarik tied with Nader at 1 percentage point, which is "not much, but possibly critical" to the outcome on Election Day, Tierney says.
Rasmussen polls have put Badnarik as high as 5 percent in New Mexico and 3 percent in Nevada, which Bush won by just 4 percentage points in 2000.
Increasing Badnarik's impact, according to Tierney: "Unlike Mr. Nader, Mr. Badnarik is on the ballot of every battleground state except New Hampshire."
Nader will be absent from the ballot in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Oregon, Missouri and other key states, prompting many analysts to predict that Badnarik will have a bigger impact on Bush than Nader will have on Democrat John Kerry.
In an attempt to attract votes from fiscal conservatives, the Libertarian Party has launched an advertising blitz on the conservative Fox News Channel -- a campaign that is "aimed directly at Mr. Bush's Republican base," notes the Times article.
Responds Joseph Seehusen, executive director of the Libertarian Party: "Fiscal conservatives aren't abandoning the Republican Party; the Republican Party has abandoned fiscal conservatives. Bush has fattened up the government far more in percentage terms than Bill Clinton did, and responsible voters don't want to reward that behavior. So they're sending a message by voting Libertarian."
oh, I didn't say that the MSM would be effective in their efforts. If that were the case, the Republicans would have lost the House and Senate long ago.
As for the early voting results. I have read stuff that goes both ways, i.e. Kerry is ahead, Bush is ahead. Who the hell knows.
By the way, does anyone know where I can make book on what the 60 Minutes story will be. I want to place $100.00 that it is about Bush sleeping with Sheep. Either that, or Bush personally stole every soldiers MRE's before they went to Iraq, or Bush invested heavily in Big Baby Wipes and sent the troops to fight in the desert knowing that Baby Wipes would be at a premium.
They wish.
"I saw the first libertarian commercial of the season today in phoenix"
A libertarian ad has been running in Ohio, seen it several times. It is a pure attack ad against President Bush.
If these infantile, arrogant, anti-American chckens**t punk spoiler bst&rds cost us Ohio, I will definitely lose all respect for them, and my sense of humor as well.
In your dreams New York Times; in your dreams.
Call Vegas - the Binions Horseshoe Casino; they'll take a bet on anything. :)
Legalize it is about the ONLY thing the Libertarians have right!
If Buchannan wasn't in the race ....
If Nader wasn't in the race ...
If pigs could fly ...
Every libertarian I have seen here would have stayed home if not for the LP so the vote margins would not have changed.
I support alot of the Libertarian platform ideals, however:
1) In order to live up to the ideals, first you have to live.
2) Isolationism has NEVER worked; post 9-11 it could be fatal.
3) I won't vote Libertarian (for President) until the party actually runs a reasonable, rational candidate.
4) They can stay home if they want to, or vote for Badnarik if they choose; won't make a bit of difference.
Who?
IMHO, the NYT article could very well help Bush.
The coin has two sides. If a Libertarian thinks his vote could help Kerry to beat Bush, one could assume that a Libertarian may very well not waste his vote, especially in light of the 2000 election.
Hard core libertarians would never vote for any republican or democrat. If a libertarian isn't on the ballot, they'll write in "the US Constitution" or whatever.
If a republican loses in a 3-way race with a libertarian it's their own fault. They were never going to get those votes anyway.
If conservatives vote libertarian, I don't think a republican would ever have got that vote either.
Assuming libertarians draw off GOP votes is hogwash. Blaming libertarians for GOP losses is shirking responsibility.
Are there ANY requirements for being a writer for the New York Times besides having a ballpoint pen and a notebook?
The Republican Party flacks (and FR 'bots) get really pissed off every time it's pointed out what a bunch of big-spending, big-government, budget-busting hacks they've become, once in charge.
In the Gray Lady's dreams.
The only person I personally know who is voting for Badnarick I culled off of Kerry's teat.
This is an absolutely critical election. Maybe the libertarians ought to consider the real-life ramifications of their actions for once, instead of bitching about the only people willing to stand up to terrorists - THE REPUBLICANS.
Why did the Republican Party simply turn into the other Big Stupid Government, free-spending party once getting control of everything? And why has it ceased even pretending to care about doing anything to rein in government?
Saying "vote for us now, and maybe we'll be good in the future" is getting awfully lame. Now it's come down to "vote for us, or the terrorists will kill you".
That's America?
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.