The Libertarian Effect

Damocles

Damocles

New Nicotine Free Version
Staff member
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,229439,00.html

In one closely watched Congressional race — Indiana's 9th Congressional District — 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 3,746 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 in Indiana, 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.

more at the link...
 
that's nice and all but we are failing to take into account how many votes the republicans might lose if they adopted certain views and platforms to court the libertarians.
 
People have been saying the same thing about the Greens and our uneasy relationship with the Democrats for the past 6 years. We got Bush elected, you know. Everybody knows that.
 
Damocles said:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,229439,00.html

In one closely watched Congressional race — Indiana's 9th Congressional District — 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 3,746 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 in Indiana, 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.

more at the link...
Click to expand...

Well this settles it.

Everytime I point out the libetarians are for the most part, disaffected republicans, I get jumped on by libertarians on the boards who proclaims that: "No, there are just as many former Democrats, as there are republicans, in the LP! There is NO bias towards either GOP or Dems!"

Case closed.
 
yup case closed, because of what one person said. Way to keep an open mind cypress, DAMO SAID SOMETHING! - Case closed!
 
Grind said:
yup case closed, because of what one person said. Way to keep an open mind cypress, DAMO SAID SOMETHING! - Case closed!
Click to expand...
I didn't even say it. I just posted a link to an editorial. I haven't given an opinion yet.
 
Damocles said:
I didn't even say it. I just posted a link to an editorial. I haven't given an opinion yet.
Click to expand...


I don't know how representative they are, but many of the prominent libertarian posters on FP seemed relieved that the goose-stepping authoritarian republicans got a spanking. In my years on message board forums, I've never seen such fury by libertarians at republican authoritariansism.
 
Cypress said:
I don't know how representative they are, but many of the prominent libertarian posters on FP seemed relieved that the goose-stepping authoritarian republicans got a spanking. In my years on message board forums, I've never seen such fury by libertarians at republican authoritariansism.
Click to expand...
I'm personally relatively happy about it... Finally a chink in that armour so that we can take a foothold back in the party and get the party of personal responsibility back!
 
someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Surely someone who believes in economic laissez faire would be described as an economic liberal?
 
AnyOldIron said:
someone who is fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

Surely someone who believes in economic laissez faire would be described as an economic liberal?
Click to expand...
You'd think so, wouldn't you? Unfortunatly, political discourse is rarely rational.

In this country "fiscal conservative" has become a cypher, indicating someone who dislikes government spending money on social programs.
 
The big PROBLEM with both Republicans and Democrats is that both rely on substantial voting blocks comprised of irrational extremists. Fortunately, said blocks, despite having some sway on policy, do not run the show. They are in the minority, albeit somewhat powerful minorities.

The Libertarian Party is RUN by it's extremist block.
 
It is easy to understand, those states were full of disappointed Neocons.
Bush had let them down, but they could not bring themselves to actually vote for Demoncrats so they voted Libertarian.
 
Agnosticus_Caesar said:
The big PROBLEM with both Republicans and Democrats is that both rely on substantial voting blocks comprised of irrational extremists. Fortunately, said blocks, despite having some sway on policy, do not run the show. They are in the minority, albeit somewhat powerful minorities.

The Libertarian Party is RUN by it's extremist block.
Click to expand...
And it is why most small "l" libertarians are not in the Party. Not all people who lean libertarian are slobbery extremists. They are the most effected by the current lean of the R party though. I feel it.
 
uscitizen said:
It is easy to understand, those states were full of disappointed Neocons.
Bush had let them down, but they could not bring themselves to actually vote for Demoncrats so they voted Libertarian.
Click to expand...
Or... They were small "l" libertarians as the article actually talks about and voted where their beliefs lie closest... But heck, we can just pretend that everybody in the R Party are all Bush Lovers with a hard on for Nation Building...
 
Damocles said:
Or... They were small "l" libertarians as the article actually talks about and voted where their beliefs lie closest... But heck, we can just pretend that everybody in the R Party are all Bush Lovers with a hard on for Nation Building...
Click to expand...
Naah you are a couple of years too late with that nationbuilding statement Damo. It was pretty much true, but fortunately enough people woke up.
 
uscitizen said:
Naah you are a couple of years too late with that nationbuilding statement Damo. It was pretty much true, but fortunately enough people woke up.
Click to expand...
Too late? I've been saying it for 5 years now! I've been saying it since before the fricking war... Too late? Rubbish.
 
Yeah too late. A couple of years ago it would have been hard to find a rebutliken against what Bush was doing in Iraq.
Now, fortunately it is not that way ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top