[A CA Guy]

They did get 1/3rd of a percent in the primary. Out of millions that voted, CA had 3,330 or so Libertarians.

I have more problems with the fact that they get Democrats elected all the time.

[Roscoe]

They did get 1/3rd of a percent in the primary.

That seems low for California, even by LP standards. Must have been a lot of LPers who didn't bother voting.

[RWG]

The last time I saw those lunatics they were going around saying government doesn't work, but it does and that's why nobody can take them seriously. Sometimes the problem with government is how and why it works the way it does, but government does work. Sometimes the problem with government is who owns it, but government does work. The government, in spite of itself, tracked down and got the snipers. The libertarian candidate for governor in iowa is virtually indistinguishible from the green party candidate for govenor and those 2 are hardly recognizable as anything other than left wing extremest nuts.

[HetLoo]

"They did get 1/3rd of a percent in the primary. Out of millions that voted, CA had 3,330 or so Libertarians.
I have more problems with the fact that they get Democrats elected all the time"

If 3330 votes is all it takes to get a Democrat elected, you Republicrats have major problems.

[null and void]

I have more problems with the fact that they get Democrats elected all the time.

0.33% of the vote makes that much difference? Maybe the Republicans can find ONE candidate that is 0.33% better than Greyout, or any other Demonrat. Most people are sick and tired of voting for tepid, insipid candidates just because the other guy is slightly worse. Then sitting back and not seeing any real difference in the resulting government's haste to lord over the peons.

When was the last time you voted FOR someone, as opposed to AGAINST his opponent?