The Libertarian Effect

Real Clear Politics ^ | 11/13/06 | ROSS KAMINSKY

[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".

[GoLightly]

The right to say, "Hey, I didn't vote for that bum", is priceless for some. No matter who does win, they're not responsible, they don't own any of the blunders. They can ride in the back seat, yammering away about whether or not we're they're yet. Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?

[GoLightly]

Bush and gang get out of there and let us reset the Republican Party back to conservatism.

What makes you think it will reset back toward conservativism?

[photodawg]

Its only 'different' to those who are incapable of understanding liberty as practiced by libertarians, and call them 'loosers' out of misguided spite.

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Yes of course you enlightened libertarians functioning on an elite hight plane are the only ones capable of understanding true liberty. Just like the f-ing lefties. your playin' yourself man. your just as fallible as the rest of the human race. Just cause you get high on weed and other substances and then become a legend in your own mind don't try to B. S. me with that "true Liberty" shit. "Free your mind" means drug free my brother.

[GoLightly]

This past election just proved there's a ton of votes to be mined to the left over in RINO territory. How do you know the GOP isn't gonna go after them, since your vote has proven to be unreliable?

[lakey]

Like the votes that went to Perot to punish Bush

Wrong. It was to stop NAFTA - that wonderful specimen of brain power /sarcasm. The "lefties" went along with it, too - Clinton and the Pacific Rim deal, remember?

Where were you when Reagan sold us out on agriculture - his Kitchen Cabinet?

[cynwoody]

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.

Bingo! That's the difference between libertarians and Losertarians. Losertarians get in a snit and go third party and shoot themselves in the foot.

Maybe some form of preferential voting would fix the problem. That would allow the Libertarians (and Greens or Socialists, etc.) to mark a satisfying 1 next to their guy and a 2 next to the Republican, hopefully.

For example, in the Indiana Ninth, the Democrat won with 49.95%, less than a majority. So, the last place candidate (the Libertarian) would have been eliminated. Then the ballots would have been recounted, distributing the Libertarian's votes according to the second or third choices marked. Thus, we would have seen exactly how the 9920 Libertarian votes would have broken.

[photodawg]

Why haven't you moved to Vermont and established a libertarian paradise yet?
Typical libertarian. All boast, no action.


''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

To quote Afroman....

I was gonna clean my room, but I got high.
I was gonna get up and find the broom, but I got high
Now my room is still a mess, and I know why.....

Because I got high, because I got high, because I got high.

[photodawg]

I did you one better I moved out of the country 4 years ago. But I still vote :)



''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Where'd you go Amsterdam (smile)

[ndt]

"Where'd you go Amsterdam (smile)"

Of course no "real conservative" here would believe me but I don't even smoke pot. Now that I gave up cigarettes, two or three beers a week and a constant coffee IV drip are my last vices.

[GoLightly]

The GOP has a libertarian wing...it's largest and oldest faction.

If someone isn't voting for a member of the GOP in the general elections, can't say they're a member of the party. They've joined another party & if they didn't vote, there's exactly one person in their party.

[TeenagedConservative]

What makes you think it will reset back toward conservativism?

Nothing. But there's definitely no hope of it doing so while Rove, Rice, Bush, Martinez, etc are in command.

[george76]

[GoLightly]

Come '08, most of them are out of office. Wasn't Martinez just handed the ball back again?

GOP seems to have chosen to take a break & let the Donk's really, really, really mess up the works for awhile. Party might have figured it's worthless to go after the votes in the hard right, cuz they're demanding, willing to sit out or vote third party if they don't get what they want. I think the GOP is taking a look at votes in the middle, trying to figure out a better way to get more of those.

The new game in town is bread & circuses. Hang on for the ride of your life.

[FastCoyote]

"A "libertarian", in the shortest definition I can muster, is someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal."

If he knows his stuff, then why make a muddled statement like this. While small l libertarians are fiscally conservative, they are split on social issues between "liberal" and "non-intrusive", which are distinctly different viewpoints.

For example, on prostitution, I suspect have the libertarians are libertines, while the other half just don't believe in intrusion into sexual activities. Now, this may make no difference to the kneejerk anti-libertarians here, but it would make a 1% voting difference if you peeled the two libertarian camps apart (notably by going back to basics).

[catholicfreeper]

That is a good idea

[lakey]

Sorry you went to so much work for nothing. Everybody knows I'm no liberal. And I don't smoke pot, either.

You Bushies always register in this forum late. You use the same old tactics of liberals, name-calling, etc. - you is pickin' on us 'cause we're black, mexican, purple/green/polka dots, whatever.

Now, if we vote to make a statement of constitutionality, gasp, we are no longer Republicans.

[Blackirish]

Hey Pal neither of us are sos ....I agree with everything you said.

W after intense presser finally signs a fence bill 2 weeks before the election with no funding...no start date and no contractor...right d\after the Tues ass whooping he goes right back to a "comprehensive solution"
I don't appreciate when someone pisses on my leg and tells me it's a nice soft rain.

[oneamericanvoice]

So let me get this straight, you hate GOP spending, so it's okay to vote for the Dems that dwarf GOP spending. No I don't get it.

[takenoprisoner]

The GOP failed not because of libertarians voting for liberatarians. That is what libertarians do when they have a dog in the hunt. Rather, the GOP failed because the GOP got an "F" on it's final exam.

Why did they get an "F?" Where to start?

(un)Patriot Act intrudes into our private banking lives. I sure hope they have caught some terrorists banking in America because the Act has created a nightmare of paperwork for banks and consumers. Meantime we saw untold numbers of uncut sheets of hundred dollar bills in a video from a report in the rubble of Lebannon. They're counterfeiting the yankee dollar in Lebannon and our govt is looking the other way while reviewing and documenting our legitimate banking transactions with this act. Meantime, I'm still trying to figure out just how much an airline ticket and some box cutters must cost which initiated this act.

Then they took away the freedom for Americans to gamble on the internet. Why? Because they can and they did.

Then they pass socialistic agendas like the prescription drug plan we taxpayers must fund.

Then they failed to protect property owners from eminent domain.

Then the administration signs a socialistic executive order to fund faith based and other like community services with our tax dollars when congress failed to act.

Then they form a new monster dept to protect us. Oh yea, the Dept of Homeland (in)Security. We thought that is what our armed forces were to do. Apparently our armed forces are too busy trotting about the globe nation building and protecting foreigners to protect us.

Then they refuse to allow the voters of California their right to vote...inserting the all in one good for anything that comes up commerce clause.

Then they failed to protect our borders allowing millions of illegal immigrants into our country. Today when I go to shop everything is in both english and espanol. Why not Chinese or Arabic too? Go down the street and look at the banners: "habla espanol" on store fronts everywhere.

I could go on but the attention span of some here is just a little short.

Bottomline, forget the horse meat and the libertarians. The GOP got an "F," for their service to conservatives, and that is why they got the boot.

[kinoxi]

So let me get this straight, you hate GOP spending, so it's okay to vote for the Dems that dwarf GOP spending. No I don't get it.

I said neither. Read the thread. My comments are clear. I voted straight R by the way.