Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 05/22/2008 8:55:57 AM PDT by Turbopilot
Playing the Spoiler Role?
The Libertarians say they're not out to ruin McCain's chances. But they could cost him.
At Tuesday night's Libertarian debate, the party's most celebrated presidential candidate wasn't even there. In fact, he isn't even a Libertarian. And yet his name was invoked almost a dozen times in the course of the hourlong debate leading up to this weekend's Libertarian convention.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
They are assuming that Libertarians are McCain’s natural constituency but that is idiotic.
You’re right. The only spoilers in this race will be the libs who vote Dem instead of voting for their buddy.
The whole question sort of implies that he's "owed" votes. He isn't. McCain is owed nothing and this conservative isn't giving him anything, including a vote.
If the Libertarians, by their very existence, can siphon away enough votes from the GOP candidate to decide the election, he must be a pretty weak candidate to begin with.
I don’t think Ron Paul is going to run as a Libertarain. He did that once, lost and had zero impact. I believe he made a conscious decision to stick with the GOP in hopes of influencing it. I’m reading his book now. I don’t agree with everything in it. Particularly I think he has a somewhat naive view of Islam. But having said that his book is a breath of fresh air. He’s the only politician in the GOP race who seriously talked about a real downsizing of the FedGov monster and a return to our roots as a nation. Oh, yeah, he has an extremely pro-life voting record.
If that makes me a “Paul-bot” so be it.
I’ll vote for McCain because Obama is a scary person with weird anti-American anti-Freedom and anti-white beliefs. But I don’t think for a minute he’s much of a conservative and I dread the many idiotic policies he will put in place.
But as time goes by the GOP seems to have less and less to offer. I’m drifing away. If they can’t hold the house or senate or executive branch they will see their much vaunted “big business” base leave the for the Donks. People buying tax breaks and government contracts will go to whoever can sell them.
A 6% Libertarian victory would be pretty big news. Unlike Perot the Libertarians have some history and philosophy. It is imaginable they could grow more in the Obama era as big government becomes absurdly invasive. The highest vote total a Libertarian has ever got was 1%, and that was almost 30 years ago. (Ed Clark, 1980).
I agree with some of your analysis about why Perot did well. But there are a few other points. He was media savvy. He knew how to talk and present ideas. He was a billionare (at a time when there were few). He got tons of free media time. He knew how to organize things, having built a multinational company, and did manage to overcome all obsticals to get on the ballot in all 50 states.
He spent $65 million dollars. He won 19% of the vote, but no electoral votes. George Wallace was a more effective third party candidate.
Could a media-savvy, plain spoken, populist-fiendly libertarian with $100 million beat either Perot’s or Wallace’s totals? Perhaps. It certianly would change the face of the election.
Bob Barr has hired Perot’s campaign manager. I believe it is Barr, not Paul, who is the odds-on favorite to win the Libertarian nomination.
There is little in common between the LP and the RP. Acutally, it is a clear option for your vote. I don’t understand the complaints.
These days, it seems the only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is whether citizens and taxpayers will get violated from the front or the rear.
If the Republicans don't want libertarians to run then they need to craft a message that appeals to them. Yeah, let's just get mad at people for voting libertarian but we'll just keep acting like Dems.
How? If there was no Libertarian Party, would these people even vote for McCain?
People wrongly assume that libertarians are automatically going to vote Republican. That's simply preposterous.
>> Perot did as well as he did because people were more naive in 1996, more inclined to believe the media.
I totally agree with the rest of your post, but I take issue with this.
I despised Clintoon, didn’t think much of Dole, and voted Perot.
My vote was from the POV of a small businessman, and my reasoning was that we needed a businessman, not another smarmy politician, in the Oval Office.
Then, as now, I didn’t watch teevee. I would occasionally read a newspaper but not regularly.
My vote for Perot was misguided and arguably dumb, but it WASN’T really media influenced.
I was rather apolitical then. Clintoon, Lewinsky, and (especially) the stolen election attempt in 2000 changed that. Thank goodness for FR and the internet. I won’t repeat that mistake again. (But McCain still sucks even though I’ll prolly punch his chads out.)
The Constitution Party might also spoil McCain’s chances, but, at least at this point in time, I really don’t see any third political parties/Independent Presidential runs doing too much damage to either McCain or Obama. I do see both the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party POTUS candidates getting more votes than usual for them from conservative voters too disappointed with McCain.
They'd either stay home, or vote for a different 3rd party candidate.
As you said the biggest threat to McCain, is McCain.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed freepmail me or post a message here.
Dear McCain Campaign,
Neutralize the Libertarian Party by choosing wisely your running mate. Mark Sanford would keep the LP below 0.05 percent and bring most of the stay-at-homes into nose-holder status.
Choose another big-government pseudo-Democrat and you will lose much the libertarian vote (say 3%, whom normally vote Republican) and a fraction of the staunch conservative vote (say another 3% the GOP has usually counted on). After the media gets done with trying to anoint the Messiah, you will not be able to pull enough independents to make up for the loss of the Right. You cannot afford to lose the strongest advocates of limited government - you cannot win without us.
How bout a Paul/Barr Ticket?
Mug.
Okay. . .so you're saying the Libertarians are really closer to being Dems than Repubs.
I've thought that for a long time. It appears you agree.
McCain will spoil McCain’s chances.
The underlying assumption is that a libertarian voter would vote for McCain otherwise...and WE’RE the ones called potheads...
“Okay. . .so you’re saying the Libertarians are really closer to being Dems than Repubs.
I’ve thought that for a long time. It appears you agree.”
Uh...the same can be said that the Republicans are looking more and more like Dems.
It this happens, its not because of the Libertarians, who are simply believing what they believe, its because of McCain, who se liberalism will lead some people to like the Libertarians better than him.
Please spare me the "But THIS YEAR it's really important to vote for the Rino's." Y'all say that EVERY YEAR
I am done being Charlie Brown to your Lucy.
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.