[colorado tanker]

Well this should be an interesting thread . . .

[xrp]

It's just such a damn shame that the Repressivecans message didn't appeal to the 3000 some voters in South Dakota. Maybe if it had, they would have voted for the Repressivecan candidate :)

[TheAngryClam]

Now, as much as the Libertarians bug me sometimes in close races, all that would have happened is that Johnson would have "miraculously" found a few more votes in that last precinct.

Yay for voter fraud. /sarcasm.

[Afronaut]

And how do you feel about the Green Party? Better start sending them cash and hope Ralphie boy runs again.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Medved just doesn't get it. He, and other "compassionate conservatives," with their me too plans on prescription drugs, farm subsidies, etc. create an opening for libertarians to thrive. Physician heal thyself!

[RANGERAIRBORNE]

I would never vote Libertarian, but I really think that this line of argument is seriously misguided. We have a perfect right to vote for anyone we wish- and if that means that a "mainstream" candidate loses, well, so be it. Maybe Thune should have campaigned harder, or taken better measures against voter fraud on the reservations. It's not the fault of people who voted for third parties- most of whom probably would have stayed home, anyway, except for the chance to cast their little "protest vote".

Michael Medved is often wrong- and I don't think much of his movie criticism, either.

[antaresequity]

He sounds like a liberal with this blame game nonsense...Thune lost because he didnt get enough votes (to overcome fraud), not because liberatarians voted their convictions...

MedVed is wrong...its not about winning...its about issues and messages....

[Dems_R_Losers]

I'm no fan of libertarians, but the truth is that the vast majority of voters voting for libertarian candidates would probably not vote at all if there were not a libertarian on the ballot. This would not help Republicans. In South Dakota, the libertarian candidate quit and endorsed Thune, but it was too late to get his name off the ballot. The votes for him were "none of the above" votes, or votes of genuine libertarians who are not Republicans and don't want to be. I don't believe a single one of them would have voted for Thune under any circumstances.

And as for third parties in general, I would say Jesse Ventura was pretty successful in Minnesota.

[My2Cents]

There was a time (recently) when I was considering registering as a Libertarian, but from most of the posts I see from such ilk on FR, the Libertarian Party's main appeal (despite all the glowing rhetortic) is to people who want weed and prostitution legalized.

[jeremiah]

Mr. Medved harps on the devolution from polite discussion in American politics, to name calling, then resorts to this tactic,ad nauseum. Truth is, a high majority of those that vote for 3rd parties, would stay home instead of casting votes for the Tweedle dumb or Tweedle dumber choices.

[mysterio]

Well, since demonization of libertarians didn't work out too well for you, I guess you Republicans will have to do something to bring them in. Perhaps first you should try actually being the smaller government party. Government appears more bloated to me than it ever was. Until then, I guess you won't be able to count on us to pick the lesser of two evils.

[tpaine]

REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/rlc/721810/posts

The RLC [libertarian] Caucus Forum, was set up and endorsed by Jim Robinson.

The REAL lo0sers around here are the anti-libertarian trolls.

[The Green Goblin]

Dante is generally credited with the statement that "the hottest circles in hell are reserved for those who in times of moral crisis maintain their neutrality." In the wake of the recent elections, we should reserve some space in those inflammatory precincts for those who in time of moral crisis--and hand-to-hand political combat--cast meaningless votes for Losertarians.

Michael Medved wants to send us to Hell for exercising our right to vote our conscience!

[End Times Sentinel]

I'm not a libertarian, but if the Republican Candidates would adopt some of the libertarian's issues such as violently slashing taxes, eliminating the Department of Education, and taking a literal translation of the Constitution, maybe they'd get those libertarian ballots.  Maybe the ballots of a lot of apathetic Republicans too.

Owl_Eagle

" WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH"

[Egregious Philbin]

Over at DU they vilify the Green Party in exactly the same way - their platform is silly, they're stealing votes from our candidates...

Here in Massachusetts the two other parties widened the debate in the governor's race and the Libertarian party nearly got their ballot question passed. The two candidates (and a third Independent) addressed several issues the two mainstream candidates didn't want to talk about. Both candidates were serious people, there wasn't anything "silly" about them running.

[breakem]

"America's Libertarian Party services only one purpose: Distracting and confusing the determined combatants in all our critical national struggles."

The first sentence is so stupid, whay read anymore?

[End Times Sentinel]

Paging Willie Green... Paging Willie Green...

Owl_Eagle

" WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH"

[WashingtonCollegeofLaw]

Why not just pony up and say that the republican candidate lost because the democratic candidate got more votes? I get tired of hearing that libertarians cost elections. If by some miracle the entire republican voter base was motivated and had 100% turnout, and the republican candidate still lost, then, and only then could the blame even possible fall on libertarians. And even though, i was under teh assumption that we live in a democracy where i can vote for whoever i want. Im sorry that i dont agree 100% with the republican party. Maybe if the Republicans had motivated 600 more registered republican voters to go out and vote, we wouldnt be having this discussion. Let the derrogatory "drug induced militia lovers" comments begin. Not all libertarians are wackos, i for one consider myself to be libertarian largely because i feel that the war on drugs has failed and the money spent could be put to better use and because i feel that social welfare is unconstitutional. To those who would bash libertarians, if we are supposedly so insignificant, why does it upset you so if we vote for a libertarian candidate?

[My2Cents]

Someone will invariably post a comment that voting Libertarian is simply voting one's conscience...as if one's conscience requires them to throw away their votes, which is what voting Libertarian results in.

In the Libertarian mindset, there is no room for pragmaticism. I doubt the Republican Party represents 100% of what anyone wants it to represent -- everyone is going to have an issue with something in the Republican Party. But the issue is this: Practically speaking, there are only two viable parties in this country. If you don't want Democrats elected, one needs to vote Republican.

If I agree with Republicans more often than not, I'm satisfied, because I agree with the Democrats about 0% of the time, and even if I could swallow what the Democrats were serving, they are such a corrupt and bankrupt political institution, they should be opposed for that reason alone. "Voting one's conscience" without acknowledging the consequences that failure to vote for the only real alternative to the Democrats isn't noble -- it's irresponsible.

[monday]

This kind of article always makes me shake my head. The funny thing that people like Medved don't realize is that perhaps 75% of Libertarians hold their noses and vote Republican nearly every election.

Even though we see little difference in the tax and spend authoritarian impulses of the Republicans or the Democrats, we usually will vote for the lesser of two evils so as not to waste our vote. Guys like Medved make us wonder why we bother.