Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: The case for New Hampshire  (Read 53102 times)

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2002, 08:33:04 pm »

Quote
It is almost like this:
The liberals will move to NH (they already are).
A few years later the FSP will move there.
At the same time the liberals will continue to move to NH.
The 5 year move in of the FSP will end.
Liberals will still move into NH.
Some reforms will pass and a few more Freedom lovers will move to NH.
Liberals will still move into NH.
Reforms will stop passing.
Liberals will still move into NH, but freedom lovers will stop moving in.

Well, but the "so-called" liberals have been moving here for a long time. If what you say is true, how do you explain this past election? I don't have all the answers, but I think the editorial that I posted above addresses this pretty well and shows how it is a non-issue.

Besides, why would liberals be moving into a state that has been liberated by FSP and is not giving the free handouts they want or playing the nanny that they are used to? It seems to me that they would want to stay away, remaining in their own nanny-states.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2002, 08:34:04 pm »

Quote
Exactly my point you made up a number and stated it as if it was true

....since I clearly stated that the numbers were made up just to illustrate a point, please tell me how that is "stating that they are true."

I gave a general example to illustrate why I felt the percentage of freedom-oriented people in a state is one of, if not the most important criteria we should be looking at. I was careful to be very clear that these were just examples not representing any particular states. That is why I labeled them "state A" and "state B."

I then went on to explain why I think it is reasonable to deduce that a high percentage of the NH population is inherently libertarian and likely to support FSP. I don't know of a precise way to measure this. If someone does, I hope they will share it.



Right, you made up fake states and then compared them.  I took your fake states in a different direction and replaced them with real states.  I did this because I think the choice for most people is b/t WY and NH.  Just like you want everyone to move to NH I want everyone to move to WY.  You made NH look good in your post based on guessing and I made NH look bad in my post based on guessing.  I am not trying to upset anyone, in anyway, whatsoever.

Enjoy,  ;)
Logged

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2002, 09:06:52 pm »

Quote
Right, you made up fake states and then compared them.  I took your fake states in a different direction and replaced them with real states.  I did this because I think the choice for most people is b/t WY and NH.  

What??

Sorry. I don't understand. Wyoming looks great on population. I think that is really important. But I also think that even more important is the percentage of that population that will support the free state. I used my state a/state b examples to show why I feel we must take both criteria into consideration.

Do you disagree with me? If so, why?

I also gave all sorts of examples of why I think it is reasonable to think that a large percentage of the NH population will support FSP.

If that is true of WY, please convince me. Could we expect that a large percentage of the WY people will back and support FSP if we choose that state?

More important...how could we objectively measure these indicators? If you don't agree with my indicators, what do you think is important?
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

ZionCurtain

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 404
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2002, 09:17:18 pm »

You made up numbers based on opinion not facts. I could say in my opinion that 30% of Wyoming would support the FSP and provide tidbits as to why, never the less that does not make it the gospel truth.
Logged

ZionCurtain

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 404
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #19 on: November 09, 2002, 09:24:00 pm »

Also if the do not support the FSP like you say then we are screwed big time the whole thing will fall apart. If in say Wyoming, which has a smaller population, even without the initial support of the local we would still have a substantial impact which we could build off.
Logged

Heyduke

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
  • I'm a jerboa!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #20 on: November 09, 2002, 10:50:34 pm »

It is quite apparent to me, Michelle, that you will go to any extent to merely push NH as a candidate.  Your arguments do not hold as much water as you would like them to, and these other folks are attempting to point such out to you.  

That being said, I would be willing to, as a NH native, negotiate a trade with any state willing to accept the Somersworth region in exchange for future considerations.  Perhaps a village to be named later and a pack of bubble gum?  

Seriously though, I appreciate the dialogue that you are maintaining, but I will retain my right to speak for NH as I know it.  And if that means ruffling feathers, then...so be it...

 :'(
Logged
I do not suffer fools gladly

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2002, 12:15:07 am »

Quote
From the FSP state data page:
How about low dependence on the federal government? NH is #1 among the states we are considering.
How about smallest total government sector? NH is #1 among the states we are considering.
How about smallest state and local government sector? NH is #1 among the states we are considering.

How about density of current LP members in each state. NH is #1 in the nation (Sept. 30, 2002 figures):

State / Rank against 50 / density

NH / #1 / 202.5
AK / #2 / 184.3
VT / #3 / 164.7
WY / #9 / 123.4
ME / #14 / 105.7
ID / #17 / 103
MT / #18 / 96.2
DE / #27 / 76.6
ND / #43 / 52
SD / #44 / 48.9

What about a history of rejecting laws restrictive of personal freedom just to get federal highway dollars? Again, NH comes out ahead:
Least restrictive helmet laws in the nation: http://usff.com/hldl/frames/50state.html
Least restrictive seatbelt laws in the nation: http://www.iihs.org/safety_facts/state_laws/restrain.htm

How about some of the lowest taxes in the nation? NH comes out on top (SD looks good here too):

Taxes as a percentage of gross personal income:

#1 NH 4.54% - 1st in nation
#2 SD 5.05% - 2nd in nation
#3 MT 7.26% - 28th in nation
#4 WY 7.61% - 31st in nation
#5 ND 7.94% - 34th in nation
#6 AK 8.04% - 36th in nation
#7 ID 8.32% - 39th in nation
#8 ME 8.63% - 43rd in nation
#9 DE 9.19% - 47th in nation
#10 VT 9.57% - 48th in nation

State taxes per capita:

#1 SD $1226/person - 1st in nation
#2 NH $1372/person - 4th in nation
#3 MT $1564/person - 9th in nation
#4 ND $1826/person - 25th in nation
#5 ID $1837/person - 28th in nation
#6 WY $1952/person - 34th in nation
#7 ME $2087/person - 37th in nation
#8 AK $2270/person - 41st in nation
#9 VT $2416/person - 44th in nation
#10 DE $2721/person - 48th in nation

How about $s spent per citizen (state budget / state citizens). NH comes out on top:
This is a calculation that was done by Keith Murray and posted on the e-list, I'm posting the top 5.

New Hampshire
2985.95

South Dakota
3323.87

Idaho
3505.54

North Dakota
3920.90

Montana
4022.41

How about highest # of elected Libertarians? NH comes out on top:
http://www.lp.org/organization/states.html

NH - 26
VT - 18
ME - 7
ID - 3
DE - 2
SD - 1
WY - 1
AK - 1
MT - 0
ND - 0

I posted some facts and asked for intelligent conversation about whether or not these were indicators of existing libertarian attitudes. Nobody has any opinion about these?

So far, everyone has just accused me of being biased or something, but nobody has addressed my questions or my post. If being biased means that I have an opinion about which state I think we are most likely to succeed in, then I guess I am biased. But, I also have a very open mind and am willing to listen to the facts supporting other states. FSP is too important to me not to have an open mind.

So...if I'm wrong, how am I wrong?
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2002, 12:23:00 am »

Quote
You made up numbers based on opinion not facts. I could say in my opinion that 30% of Wyoming would support the FSP and provide tidbits as to why, never the less that does not make it the gospel truth.

I never said NH would have X% support. I said I didn't have an objective way to measure that and offered possible indicators that I have been thinking about. I then asked for intelligent discussion about how we could measure it because I think it is a critical criteria.

Just because you say I did something doesn't make it so. This is a web forum and anyone can easily scroll back to look at earlier messages.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2002, 12:30:19 am »

Quote
Also if the do not support the FSP like you say then we are screwed big time the whole thing will fall apart. If in say Wyoming, which has a smaller population, even without the initial support of the local we would still have a substantial impact which we could build off.

That is a pretty good point. But, if we aren't supported by the existing residents of the state, how far would we really get?

Of course, you are also ignoring the fact that we already narrowed it down to the ten states most likely to succeed based on population. NH obviously made that cut, so I can't see how it would fall apart.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

ZionCurtain

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 404
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2002, 12:34:19 am »

You said State B has 30% and that state B was NH.

Tell me the population of NH then Wyoming. If both states ended up supporting us equally then Wyoming would be the best choice due to 20,000 being a higher percentage in itself.
Logged

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #25 on: November 10, 2002, 12:56:26 am »

Quote
You said State B has 30% and that state B was NH.

Well, you are still leaving out the key pieces of what I actually stated. But whatever, I'm sorry if I wasn't clear. I tried to be. I guess it could have been confusing the way I phrased it. If I could go back, I would simply say, I think that based on the evidence NH likely has a higher percentage of its population that will support FSP, and that factor trumps population.

Is that better?

I don't know the population of WY off the top of my head - I'd have to go look it up. But that kind of misses the point. Now that we've already narrowed it down to the ten lowest population states, any has the possibility of success. I'm now trying to determine the next most important criteria.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

mlilback

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
  • I'm nobody's llama!
    • home page
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2002, 12:10:30 pm »

I posted some facts and asked for intelligent conversation about whether or not these were indicators of existing libertarian attitudes. Nobody has any opinion about these?
I agree with you here. All the other posts seem like attacks on you and the premise, but not on the facts you posted. The facts are the long lists of stats, not that people can't understand the hypothetical in your first post that you meant to show might apply to NH (with an unknown percent).

I'd been leaning more towards VT over NH, but I think you make a very compelling argument for NH.

How about highest # of elected Libertarians? NH comes out on top:
http://www.lp.org/organization/states.html

NH - 26
VT - 18
ME - 7
ID - 3
DE - 2
SD - 1
WY - 1
AK - 1
MT - 0
ND - 0

This is one of the most important factors to consider, IMHO. If a state has never elected a third party candidate, what are the odds the FSP will have any success in that state?

I see this as a much better sign of native support than how many people voted republican, as many like to use. Republicans, aside from Ron Paul and Jim Jeffords (before leaving the party), rarely if every vote against the party line. We need voters willing to accept candidates who aren't republicans or democrats.

Mark
Logged

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #27 on: November 10, 2002, 01:57:48 pm »

Quote
I'd been leaning more towards VT over NH, but I think you make a very compelling argument for NH.

Thank you Mark.

Why Vermont? I haven't seen too many people advocating for Vermont although I suspect it could have a lot more potential than people are giving it credit for.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2002, 02:28:35 pm »

Quote
Why Vermont? I haven't seen too many people advocating for Vermont although I suspect it could have a lot more potential than people are giving it credit for.

Me again.

Mark - don't feel like you need to restate your position again here unless you want to. I've just been reading your arguments for VT on other threads and they make good sense to me.
Logged
Please join NHLA today! http://www.nhliberty.org With every new member we gain political weight to support liberty-friendly candidates and promote liberty throughout NH.
Support the Liberty Scholarship Fund. Please make a donation today! http://www.lsfund.org

Solitar

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #29 on: November 10, 2002, 03:43:17 pm »

For those of us who consider the freedom to carry concealed weapons with no permit Vermont is tops. It is also tops for apparently no lower age limit for hunting (New Hampshire require accompaniment under 16),
For those of us who prefer small towns and shy away from large urban or metro areas, and for just the smallest population and pool of voters Vermont and Wyoming are tops.

I think Vermont is a lot more doable than people give it credit for:
Figuring the cause of liberty is in worse shape in both NH and VT
          In VT assuming a vote of 30% for liberty and 70% against
19% of VT voters are for liberty, 44% are not, 37% don't vote.
  37,940 or 13% need to be turned or
  75,880 or 26% new voters need to be convinced to vote for liberty.
           In NH assuming  a vote of 40% for liberty and 60% against
24.5% of NH voters are for liberty, 36.5% are not, 39% don't vote.
  36,840 or 6.5% need to be turned or
  73,680 or 13 % new voters need to be convinced to vote for liberty
See the details of the above at
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=195

As to LP officeholders - please look behind the number to the significance of those offices.  Such success would be laudable after three years of LP "effort", but not after thirty years of LP "effort"!!   The LP also inflates their numbers by listing each of the several offices that one person holds!)  I've tabulated the details of the much-vaunted LP officeholder numbers at the following thread.
Ranking states by LP officeholders
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=808
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 12   Go Up