Posted on 09/19/2013 9:45:28 AM PDT by shego
The libertarian philosophy is taking the Republican Party by storm, according to a poll conducted by FreedomWorks, a DC-based grassroots service center with over 6 million members.
With Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) and many other liberty-minded politicians gaining influence, libertarianism has generated new interest inside the Republican Party, much to the chagrin of the GOP's political establishment....
"FreedomWorks' poll shows that 42 percent of Republicans have a favorable view of the word ‘libertarian,' and only 10 percent don't know the word, compared to 27 percent who don't know nationally," they added.
And the term "libertarian" may still turn off some Republican voters, the basic message of the philosophy earns significant favor. The poll found that 68% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents agree with the statement that "individuals should be free to do as they like as long as they don't hurt others, and that the government should keep out of people's day-to-day lives."
What's more, an eye-popping 78% of Republicans consider themselves to be "fiscally conservative, but socially moderate," which is a significant finding given the debate in the GOP on social issues.
Looking outside of just the Republican box, the poll found that 66% of respondents consider themselves to fiscally conservative and socially moderate.
These numbers show that the libertarian message is appealing, not only to Republican voters, but also to all Americans; further advancing the case for conservative-libertarian fusionism as a way to promote free market ideals, limited government, and personal liberty....
(Excerpt) Read more at unitedliberty.org ...
So the libertarian position on that is just like the libertarian party's "policy view effectively stated on the LP platform."
I assume that is your view as well more or less. I just like to know the politics of the people I'm talking to on political forums about politics.
>> I assume that is your view as well more or less.
So it’s not that you need me to explain the LP platform, but instead you suspect I support views not inline with Free Republic?
I didn’t ask you about the party platform, I asked you about the libertarian position, you said that it is spelled out in the party’s platform, you are a libertarian, it is your position as well.
I thought so, but it can be so tough to get you guys to say such things, thanks for your openness.
>> I thought so
You form conclusions prematurely.
You don’t agree with my definition of libertarianism and how it’s distinguished from liberalism, right?
Read post 403 again, I agreed with you and merely said that I [had] thought so, your last few posts have been pretty clear and I had already assumed that your position was what you posted your position is.
I asked you about the libertarian position, you said that it is spelled out in the party’s platform, you are a libertarian, it is your position as well.
You’re avoiding my question in 404, why?
Good God Man. You think that I am here to discuss the nuances between liberalism and libertarianism?
I want to know why you are for homosexualizing the military and homosexual marriage and spreading your message among conservatives.
Have you been drinking? I’m asking you a yes or no in 404. What’s your answer?
I answered your question in 407.
You wanting to explain the differences between your libertarian push to homosexualize the military and the liberal push to homosexualize the military, is not exactly freerepublic material.
I wonder if you realize the reaction to you that the founders would have had, they did not recognize homosexual marriage at the federal level, and did not allow homosexuals in the military.
No you didn’t. You’re dodging...
You don’t agree with my definition of libertarianism and how it’s distinguished from liberalism, right?
Good gosh man, if there is something you want to spit out, just do it.
As a freeper, my interest is in your support for and efforts to homosexualize the military, not in how you have a nobler reason for it than a self professed/open liberal.
You’re a liar.
Man, you people can do this for hours.
You and everyone reading this thread knows you bullshit falls apart on the following question:
You don’t agree with my definition of libertarianism and how it’s distinguished from liberalism, right?
LOL.
ROTFL.
Yeah this is deep.
We know that you both support homosexualizing the military, now spit it out, tell us the philosophical differences in how you and Obama got to the same political purpose serving the homosexual agenda.
So you’re still drinking?
Everyone knows Gene Eric’s politics, but your response to the following is still a mystery:
You don’t agree with my definition of libertarianism and how it’s distinguished from liberalism, right?
Post after post of me begging you to just explain it, get it over, post it.
We know that you both support homosexualizing the military, now spit it out, tell us the philosophical differences in how you and the rest of the left got to the same political purpose serving the homosexual agenda.
Do it.
You’re playing a game that casts the ground rules to the wind...
Only until we agree on terms does it make sense to proceed:
You don’t agree with my definition of libertarianism and how it’s distinguished from liberalism, right?
Yikes, this thread is a keeper, libertarians are just insane.
It takes hours to get you to admit that you support homosexualizing the military, and then you revert back to your evasive nonsense and don’t want to explain that radical leftist position.
If you want to explain how your homosexualizing the military is different from a “liberal” homosexualizing the military, then do so, as I have asked you to so many times.
You’re a coward, but more intelligent than I thought. Bye.
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.