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".
One thing we have to remember with Clinton, after 1994 he was dealing with the Newt Gingrich Congress which was very conservative. It would probably be fair to give more credit to Newt than Clinton. I don't believe we have the same disapline in congress today -- in either party.
That'll certainly save time...
I am personally acquainted with the Libertarian candidate who ran in the Sodrel/Hill race in IN-9. (A fine fellow, by the way, even though I didn't vote for him.) He got 4% of the vote, the margin of victory was less than 3% (if memory serves). But he told me that the polling indicates that he took most of his votes away from the Democrat, Baron Hill. (The polls ask questions on things like abortion, as well as who you voted for.)
Then get your house in order and we might come back.
Move to Vermont and show us how it's done.
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
posted by Jim Robinson
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/721810/posts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"-- This is not a Republican website. It is a conservative one, and in fact is much more libertarian than Republican, when you consider what small-l libertarian means and what capital-R Republican is, these days.
In fact, as you can see on the FR home page:
Free Republic is not affiliated with any political party, group, news source, government agency or anyone else. --"
"Move to Vermont and show us how it's done."
I did you one better I moved out of the country 4 years ago. But I still vote :)
Yes, Perot screwed things up quite a bit, but he also helped set the stage for '94 IMO.
They are actually snobs
Standing above the fray and proclaiming to the unwashed
I am a Libertarian
We'll see. I doubt it though. The dems think our money is ment for them and they give us back just enough to get by on. I remember them too well.
The GOP lost the middle - centrists, independents and libertarians.
I prefer to stay in California, and fight statism & communitarians on my home ground.
Typical libertarian. All boast, no action.
Typical Eccles. All invective, no sense.
"What I love about libertarian voters is that they vote on principle, not on party"
read the last paragragh in this post
Thursday, February 02, 2006
George Soros and the Libertarians
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1735129/posts?page=140#140
(snip)
Libertarian ideologues are so hardline with their beliefs, that they believe anyone who disagrees with their policies is to the Left of them. That type of thinking can lead to exploitation by anti-American ideologues and Communist agents through people like Soros and his associates. Such ideologues like these can no longer remain sane and are being used as puppets to forward a secret agenda.
Well shoot, I didn't see this post earlier! Missed it completely.
Looks good devolve!
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.