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".
Wrong. They feel it isn't the FedGov's job to be ruling in either way on this as they don't have the Constitutional authority. It should be decided at the State level.
Not "ungoverned", "self" governed. You are an adult. Act like it and you won't need a Nanny State coddling you from cradle to grave. You and only you are 100% responsible for your actions and only you should suffer the conseqeunces of your mistakes.
Dems, and lately the GOP, are hell bent on making sure they protect you from yourself by removing choice, buffering you against your mistakes, and spreading the misery you create to as many around you as possible.
No thanks.
Notice: It isn't the LP trying to say "vote for us, or else!"
My vote is very reliable. Act like a conservative Constitutionalist, and you have my vote. It's very easy calculus to understand.
If there was an "alliance", I wasn't told. How the LP could make such an alliance with a Party so opposed to everything they stand for... It'd be like Jesus and Lucifer getting together and deciding on policy...
The assumption that all those libertarian votes got taken away from the Republican candidate is conjecture too. Trying to argue that we can only talk about the 53% that showed up because 47% of the electorate might have been in a coma that day is desperate stupidity. Don't even try.
"Wrong. They feel it isn't the FedGov's job to be ruling in either way on this as they don't have the Constitutional authority. It should be decided at the State level."
How laughable.
If abortion is wrong, what difference does it make what "level" it is decided on?
If government should stay out of the decision -- then how can the state decide?
Childish irrationality is the hallmark of l/Libertarians.
No wonder you make such perfect Soros stooges.
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.
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
I'll believe what you say until proven otherwise. If you don't do weed, that's great (imho). But you haven't stated where you moved to.
Because we are a Constitutional Republic. You want abortion to be a Federal matter? Pass an amendment.
Such childish ignorance as you exhibit is curable, but only if you want to grow up.
I'm a Republican and vote like a conservative. I refuse to encourage any moves to the left by the GOP--if we don't hold them accountable, who will? But during this election, I was fortunate enough to have relatively conservative candidates for whom I could vote...unfortunately, though, they lost.
I realize it's like talking to stoned walls to try to reason with l/Libertarians, but even you should be able to recognize that a state government is still government.
If it is wrong for government to intervene in a decision about abortion, that would apply to both the state and the federal government.
It would apply even if our representatives passed an amendment to the Constitution.
But apparently you are too stupified to grasp such a fine point.
Your other posts on this thread are typical as well. You are are waste of everyone's time. But a perfect example of the problem with l/Liberertarians.
You want what you want (dope) and nothing else matters. Facts, logic, the survival of our country. To hell with them. You must get your dope.
Yeah, what "principals" you all have. (Though you are high-minded. LOL.)
Yeah... I didn't think so. "All hat, no cattle" ain'tcha...
You are a troll. You have no interest in a rational discussion.
Look at how you answered FreeReign's questions re what is wrong with the ACU's rating.
This has nothing to do with the Constitution. (Of which I am sure you are as ignorant as you are of the LP's actual positions.)
The libertarians (l and L) position on abortion is that government should never interfere.
That would include all sizes and types of government.
This is the third time this has been explained to you.
Go waste someone else's time.
"Wasn't that one of the reasons you listed for voting for the terrorist enabling Democrats -- or staying at home in Mom's basement and playing Dungeons and Dragons instead?"
I should have posted this to you.
Your "home page" says all. LOL!!!
And I'm not suprised you have no clue re:the Constitution. Here's a link you should spend the next couple weeks studying. Particularly this page.
Then get back to me once you have a clue....
"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual." --Thomas Jefferson
Sentiments you apparently don't like much and feel a need to ridicule. Are you sure YOU aren't the "troll"?
I've been reading and posting here since 1996, when JimRob and one other guy (whose name escapes me) were the only ones who posted articles.
You know as much about me as you know about everything else.
LOL.
If fiscal conservatism is your core principle, why would you vote republican? They have been just as bad as democrats from that perspective. Why would republicans change if the voters do not hold them accountable? The only hope for fiscal conservatives is to vote against republicans in the hope that they will get the message and return to their fiscally conservative roots.
Yeah... sure you have.
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.