Posted on 11/14/2006 6:25:58 PM PST by Purple GOPer
In one closely watched Congressional race (Sodrel v Hill, IN-9) and two critical Senate races (Missouri and Montana), the Republican candidate was defeated by fewer votes than the Libertarian candidate received.
[Note: the last data I could find on the Missouri race still had two of the 3746 precincts to report, so it is possible that statement isn't true for Missouri, but if it is not true it is still very close and does not diminish my point.]
In other words, in these two critical Senate races and if the Republican had gotten the Libertarian's votes, the Republican would have won.
For the rest of this article, please recognize that I am speaking of the small-"l" libertarian, and not the Libertarian Party of the candidates mentioned above. A "libertarian", in the shortest definition I can muster, is someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal. In other words, it is someone who wants the government to perform a very small set of legitimate functions and otherwise leave us alone.
I can hardly contain my glee at seeing this happen after years of hoping it would. And in such dramatic fashion, with such important results. I did not hope it would because I wanted Republicans to lose, but because the Republicans had become corrupted (by which I do not mean corrupt in the typical sense.) They became enamored of power, and believed that they could get away with expanding the size, intrusiveness, and cost of government as long as they had government aim for "conservative" goals rather than liberal ones. This loss, and the way it happened, was the best thing that could have happened for Americans who care about a government focused on limited government and liberty.
No, the Democrats are not that government. They believe in anything but limited government, and they only believe in liberty in one's personal life, but not in one's economic life. In a sense, Democrats believe that the citizens work for the government.
Republicans on the other hand have acted in just the opposite way: they believe in economic liberty and they know we do not work for government. But they do not believe in personal liberty. The failure of the strategery of the Republicans, to focus on "the base" by trotting out social issues such as the South Dakota no-exception abortion ban (which lost, I'm pleased to say) demonstrated two things: First, social issues do not have long coat-tails. Second, the GOP base is fiscal conservatives more than it is social conservatives.
Fiscal conservatives, even more than social conservatives, were the demotivated voting block. Fiscal conservatives who are not socially conservative, i.e. voters who are libertarian even if they don't know it or wouldn't identify themselves that way, were the key swing vote in this election and were the reason that the GOP lost Congress...the Senate in particular.
In a recent study called "The Libertarian Vote", David Boaz (Cato Institute) and David Kirby (America's Future Foundation) discuss the growing number of American libertarians, the growing dissatisfaction among them (including me) with the GOP, and the continuing shift in voting patterns caused by that dissatisfaction. Tuesday held the obvious conclusion of this shift.
The party which went from reforming welfare to banning internet gambling by sticking the ban inside a port security bill, the party which went from Social Security reform to trying to amend the Federal Constitution to prevent gay marriage, the party which went from controlling the size and scope of government to banning horse meat became a party which libertarians and Republicans alike could not stomach.
The Democrats are a disaster, though they probably realize they need to move to the center. The Republicans have just been taught a brutal lesson that they also need to move to the center (on social issues) and back to fundamental principles of our Founders on issues of economics and basic liberties. No party can rely on the unappealing nature of their opponent to be a strong enough motivation to win elections, nor should we let them win if being just a bit better than the other guys is all they aspire to.
What I love about libertarian voters is that they vote on principle, not on party. The GOP might not like it, but politics should not be about blind loyalty if your party has lost its way. So, I disagree with suggestions that libertarians are fickle and unreliable voters. Instead the Republicans became an unreliable party. The Democrats on the other hand are extremely reliable -- they will always raise spending and taxes, get government involved where it doesn't belong. But other than the tax cuts of several years ago, the Republicans have been no different other than choosing different areas of our lives to intrude upon.
I hope that the result of the Libertarian Effect, particularly on the GOP, will be that the next election may provide us an opportunity to replace this batch of Democrat placeholders with Congressmen who not only have read the Constitution, but respect it. Congressmen who understand that Republican voters do not elect politicians to have them impose their (or our) morality on the people, but rather to keep government from interfering in our lives and leaving us, in the immortal words of Milton Friedman, "Free to Choose".
They're still in denial & may possibly remain that way, like a bunch of Buchanites that hang around here.
Here's my "libertarian" stance on abortion: If it's human, initiation of force against it such that it dies is murder and punishable by death.
Is that "principled" enough for you?
###
I agree with that. Many small "l" libertarians do. Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party official stance, many of its members, and most of its establishment, supports abortion on demand.
***
Other than that, each individual SHOULD be allowed to do what they want as long as doing so doesn't interfere with the equal Rights of others. And no, using the excuse of socialism's "cost" via insurance and medical care rates doesn't count. Those are problems created by government, not by freedom of action.
###
I tend to agree, but we may disagree here if you are one of the Libertarians who believe the country shouldn't have any controls on who crosses its borders. Other than that I agree.
I don’t just fault the Libertarians on these issues. I also fault the Republicans and so-called conservatives, who attack libertarians for being against helmet laws, drug prohibition, socialized schooling, and on and on.
Both groups need to give a little to make the country a better place.
Libertarians' desire for an ungoverned society and the Democrats' acceptance of social immorality significantly makes that large gulf a pool.
Baron Hill (D) got 9682 more votes than Mike Sodrel (R), with Eric Schansberg (L) siphoning off 9920 votes (CNN). So, it would have taken 97.6% of the Losertarian votes to have swung the race to the Republican.
Here's what Schansberg posted on the Reason Magazine blog afterward:
Given the available polling data, it appears that I was getting more votes from Hill than Sodrel-- ironically, keeping Sodrel in the race.This is also consistent with the issues I emphasized in the race-- fiscal conservatism for traditional GOP voters, but quickest out of Iraq and ways in which the govt harms the working poor and middle class for traditional DEM voters. I had good reasons for voters in both camps to leave their normal choices.
After looking at this thread and several others I think the main point why we lost is being missed. That is we ate our own. My email was full of pieces slamming fellow Republicans all year long calling them every name under the sun. It seems we forgot that there was another party out there that was truly the political foe till it was too late. Over the last year the emails focused on some issues we have dealt with the
Gang of 14-
I keep hearing this is a reason why Republicans lost? Really over the Nuclear option? That is so inside baseball no one cared. Never even heard it mentioned
Dubai Port deal- Well the President and others got slammed on that and boy did that help us at the polls. Another live or die issue of the hour that was not
Harriet Myers-
Somehow this is a reason but its often brought up even though we got Judge ALito out of it. For some reason Alito was never mentioned as a plus in this campaign
Immigration-
Emotional and complex issue that pretty much sent us on attack mode on each other.
That being said Republicans are a weird group that has a coaltion of business(big and small), Social and Religious Conservatives, Free Traders, Buchananite conservatives, Liberatarians,Fiscal Hawks, and small Govt types. Pretty much each of these factions and more were told to go to hell by their fellow Republicans and Conservatives.
THe key is sort out the difference in the Primaries. That is what they are for. We had some good examples of Republican primary races were there was a competition of ideas. After the Primary make up and shake hands and support the winner. It seems well into Sept I was still hearing about RINOS or Religious nuts taking over the party, or Big spending Republicans. Bad move. No one woke up to the fact that Pelosi and Brain Trust like Bennie Thompson chairing such things as the Homeland Security Committee was about to happen till it was too late.
Like the votes that went to Perot to punish Bush 41....then we got Clinton.
This logic of moral relativism that ends up putting in a lefty in power is stunning.
I guess that it is like sitting high up in a tree to be closer to god ?
"Wow truly stuck on stupid..LOL"
Brilliant come back.
Have another toke, man.
What difference can it make now?
"I don't understand why losertarians hang here?"
I don't understand why you big government, country club republicans hang here. Don't you have another entitlement to grow?
We do work for the government.
"There's two LIBS. Liberals and Libertarians, and they both love their weed."
And they are both heavily funded by George Soros.
In fact, if somebody could show me where the LP and Soros part ways in their high-minded principals, I would eat my hat.
The only way I know to tell them is at the polls. Letters don't seem to work....I've done that for 20+ years.
Bush is in over his head. He is beholden to the corporate elite.
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.