Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: The case for New Hampshire  (Read 53396 times)

Heyduke

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 48
  • I'm a jerboa!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #30 on: November 10, 2002, 10:23:53 pm »

Joe...you must be in the open minded subset of the group...

NH--certainly thrid party candidates would have a chance, provided they were an option.  We really haven't had many viable options even among the established 2, so any third party options tend to not be taken so seriously.  

VT--let's see, they have a former R senator that went I at a very crucial time in recent politics...they have a socialist rep. that is listed as an I...they have a D for a governor that was formerly a lieutenant governor to a R governor when he died in office (snelling)...they have a real presence from the Greens party and a curious group called the PC (progressive coalition) that has had a major role in the burlington area for years...they have numerous little academic regions with alternative views on things...they have a large number of former hippies and social dropouts...

regardless--you folks have a curious challenge ahead of you, and I'm certainly going to play my odd humored devil's advocacy here and again...

oh--I'll up the ante...anyone that wants somersworth--I'll throw in rochester and gordon humphrey--just a little somethin' for the effort... 8)
Logged
I do not suffer fools gladly

mlilback

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 38
  • I'm nobody's llama!
    • home page
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #31 on: November 12, 2002, 07:51:16 pm »

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.

I think VT and NH share a lot of points, but I've been leaning towards VT because of the smaller size and the Boston commuter flight. But as you pointed out, there are lots of reasons NH could overcome those.

NH is my sentimental favorite, too, as I think it would be great for the FSP's state to have the motto of "live free or die". I use that and Patrick's Henry's statement all the time, but most people seem frightened that I'd rather die than be forced to do something.

(I take it too an extreme, too. Someone tried to mug me when I only had $5, but I fought anyway because it was my money and I wasn't giving it to anyone, even if it was just a penny. Of course he was crazy to go after me, as I'm 6'4"/230# while he was around 5'6"/140#.)

Mark
Logged

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2002, 01:10:23 pm »

What's the advantage of the Boston commuter flight vs. bus or Amtrak from NH? From where I live, it's only about an hour to Boston on the bus and $36 round trip - it definitely beats driving and parking.
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

milas59

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • I'm a llama!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #33 on: November 13, 2002, 08:58:48 pm »

Sorry my partial message got sent by mistake

Im a newby to the lists. I joined FSP a month ago . I am from VT and ready to go anywhere the group chooses but am a little disappointed at the many NH folks who seem to promote their state just because they live there.

NH has the same lousy climate as VT and major suburbia from MA to Manchester. VT has no suburbia. NH also has the old depressed mill town of Manchester. VT has the lovely college town on the lake, Burlington. People have been moving to bedroom in NH from Boston for over 20 years.

Like VT,  NH is part of the Great Northeast and is gradually swinging from old conservative to left liberal and it is growing from 1.2 million to almost 1.6 million in 2025.
Of our ten states NH will be the ninth  largest population.

Im a libertarian so I dont vote for the lesser of two evils very often, but I guess I dont believe conservative NH or VT is any more likely to become libertarian than MA or Hawaii where we connect on personal rather than economic issues


Ok, Ill say sure  there are other factors other than population, but when NH is at the bottom populationwise, if I was from Missouri, Id say Show Me  what NHs got REALLY to make me believe we can succeed there?!

Peter Baker
(worked in NH/lived in VT)
Logged

Solitar

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #34 on: November 14, 2002, 04:28:43 am »

Many here doubt the FSP can turn around tiny Vermont with only 600,000 people and the Burlington MSA with only 170,000. If the FSP's activists can't handle Vermont, they won't be able to handle northern Delaware or southern New Hampshire.

The following shows just how borderline New Hampshire is.
Not that Bush is a saving vote, but this election was indicative of socialist trends.
I’ve totaled the votes as following.
Republican, Constitution, Libertarian, and Independent
Democratic and Green

County: R/C/L/I vote vs D/G Vote
The three southernmost counties bordering Massachusetts:
Rockingham: 67,075 vs 66,841
Hillsborough: 82,277 vs 83,090
Cheshire: 14,176 vs 19,132
The next two heading north central:
Merrimack: 30,576 vs 32,965
Strafford: 21,740 vs 27,673
Two Western counties (what happened to the rural Republicans in Grafton?):
Sullivan: 9,541 vs 9,069
Grafton: 18,543 vs 20,109
The northeastern counties:
Belknap: 15,025 vs 11,696
Carroll: 12,864 vs 10,938
Coos: 7,542 vs 7,033
Only these northeastern New Hampshire counties are "safe" for now. The southern and western counties need reinforcements before we lose New Hampshire. If it had not been for Nader's Greens, Gore would have won New Hampshire!
Feel free to check my addition. This is where I got the numbers.
 http://www.state.nh.us/sos/general2000/sumpres.html

The populations of each NH county in 2000 was:
Coos:   33,111
Sullivan:   40,458
Cheshire:   73,825
Grafton:   81,743
Belknap:   56,325
Strafford:   112,233
Carroll:   43,666
Merrimack:   136,225
Rockingham:   277,359
Hillsborough:   380,841
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2002, 03:13:39 pm »

The following shows just how borderline New Hampshire is.
Not that Bush is a saving vote, but this election was indicative of socialist trends.
I’ve totaled the votes as following.
Republican, Constitution, Libertarian, and Independent
Democratic and Green

County: R/C/L/I vote vs D/G Vote
The three southernmost counties bordering Massachusetts:
Rockingham: 67,075 vs 66,841
Hillsborough: 82,277 vs 83,090
Cheshire: 14,176 vs 19,132
The next two heading north central:
Merrimack: 30,576 vs 32,965
Strafford: 21,740 vs 27,673
Two Western counties (what happened to the rural Republicans in Grafton?):
Sullivan: 9,541 vs 9,069
Grafton: 18,543 vs 20,109
The northeastern counties:
Belknap: 15,025 vs 11,696
Carroll: 12,864 vs 10,938
Coos: 7,542 vs 7,033
Only these northeastern New Hampshire counties are "safe" for now. The southern and western counties need reinforcements before we lose New Hampshire. If it had not been for Nader's Greens, Gore would have won New Hampshire!

The vote does look pretty bad.  However, that is just one election.  The most recent (2002) elections seem to favor the R and LP more.  However, the answer is true.  The NH voters voted for people who are Athoritarian (both Gore and Nader) (according to the Worlds Smallest Political Quiz) over the Athoritarian Bush, Conservative Howard, and Libertarian Browne (according to the Worlds Smallest Political Quiz).
« Last Edit: January 08, 2003, 05:32:16 am by FreedomRoad »
Logged

eoffshore

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
  • The Meek Shall Inherit the Gulag
    • Author of The Philosophy In Defense of Firearms
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2002, 11:53:38 am »

When we left Wyoming in '93 to liveaboard a sailboat, we bought a boat in Maine, traveling along the eastern seaboard as we made our way to FL and ultimately TX.  And while I liked Maine and NH the culture (to which I was briefly exposed) didn't seem as thoroughly individualist as the Wyoming we had left.

As a choice for eastern FSPer's, I guess NH isn't so bad, but being surrounded by statist neighbors, there is no buffer to defend against further liberal degredations.

Here back in WY, we have CO to the south (slowly becoming more liberal), conservative NE and conservative/libertarian SD to the east, our Militia of Montana brothers to the north, and allies ID and UT to the east. I think ID is being infiltrated by quite a number of left coast types, however.  Chose WY: small pop, great quality of life (for outdoorsmen), surrounded by strong buffer states,  and a bright, sunny winter climate that doesn't feel as bad as you'd think.
Logged

Eddie_Bradford

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 567
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #37 on: December 12, 2002, 01:01:17 pm »

Yeah NH!  You can commute to Boston and actually get a job in your field.  Delaware too has access to major cities.  Whithout access to major cities the vast majority of us won't be able to find a job in out field.  Basically I think any choice beside NH or Delaware is suicide no one will show up because they can't find a job.

-E
Logged

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #38 on: December 13, 2002, 01:21:22 pm »

Eddie,

I got a buck says people will show up to Idaho.  Jobs in Boise are the best in the west (among our candidates), according to all of the information available here.  

V-

Logged
Departed Fresno, PRC (Peoples Republic of California): October 18, 2004
Arrived Keene, FS (Free State!): October 25, 2004!
To contact me, please use email, not PM here.

Greggers69

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
  • For life and liberty!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #39 on: December 13, 2002, 11:49:03 pm »

Well one good thing is I could see some Patriot games.  Love to see them in Action at the Gillette stadium lol  Greg
Logged
All is stake, and the little conviencys and comforts of life when in comptition with our Liberty, ought to be rejected, not with reluctance but with pleasure.

 George Mason

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #40 on: December 14, 2002, 05:53:20 pm »

I'm really hoping for Wyoming or Idaho, but I also like to lay all the cards on the table. I can see one advantage that NH has that no other state does: being cheek-by-jowl with socialist Vermont!

Some of you guys are looking at this proximity as a disadvantage, but I don't know. What I would expect to see, is refugees from socialism running to NH. The very kinds of people we'd need to reinforce us. Same thing from MA.

What makes me think this, is what happens here in Portland, Oregon. People move to Vancouver, across the river in Washington, to escape the Oregon income tax, while they shop in Oregon to escape the Washington sales tax. There are strong tax incentives to move across a border if that border is close. NH must be drawing tax-hating Vermonters and MA folks like crazy.

If we were in NH and kept prosperous and free, while VT and MA went down the socialist crapper, think of what an example that would be to the rest of the country!

I know you guys have posted some election numbers that make things look iffy, but what would really be convincing would be the trends in those numbers. Are they getting worse, or better?

There is another problem with those numbers. They assume R's are more freedom-loving than D's (I'm talking ordinary citizens, not legislators). I think that is at least questionable. R's like libertarian rhetoric, but the reality is, when they come into power, government grows just as fast as if D's control it. To me there is a lot of evidence that D's (citizens, not legislators) are tired of their party and looking for somewhere to go...

Again, I want to emphasize, I really think the best bet is Wyoming. I've lived all over the country, (including Delaware) and the interior west is what I like best. The proximity of large, statist population centers makes me nervous, despite the point I raised above.

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.
The reforms will start to be repealed by the liberals.
Freedom lovers will start moving out West for more freedom and lover taxes.
Liberals will continue to move into NH.
Back to square one.
This is actually a general problem. When our state becomes more free, it will naturally become more prosperous, and draw people for economic reasons who have no commitment to freedom. We'll have to think of an antidote, something like requiring supermajorities for revenue bills and measures to pass, and other such tactics...
Logged

Kelton

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 604
  • el resplandor de las llamas de la libertad
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #41 on: December 27, 2002, 05:12:23 am »

Here is an author, Vermont state Rep. Frank Mazur, who writes that New Hampshire is better than Vermont for economic policy as he follows in the footsteps of Milton Friedman who evaluated "a study done by a Dartmouth College professor comparing New Hampshire to Vermont from 1940-1974." by doing his own analysis of NH vs VT today.
Yes, you read correctly, he is a Vermont politician stating this!

   http://home.adelphia.net/~frankmazur/nh_vs_vt.htm
Logged
. . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtue --The U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address

MLiq

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
  • Delaware!
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #42 on: December 30, 2002, 08:18:33 am »

zxcv makes a good point, Boston area people don't move to NH because they want to make their commute longer, they move their to avoid taxes.   The people who move there are probably on our side more than the average Bostoner.  

I understand that for those of you who are outdoorsmen the west is great but for us urban professionals, that does not cut it and it never will.  On the other hand, why can't you hunt and shoot just as well in NH or DE or VT or ME?  

I also agree that it is better to be surrounded by states that are opposite to us, and populous.  When people start hearing about FSP more after we move there, we will get a huge influx of Libertarians from NYC, Boston, other places once they see that it is for real.  People in states that are already fairly small government won't care enough to support us and move.
Logged

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #43 on: December 30, 2002, 04:47:11 pm »

Quote
On the other hand, why can't you hunt and shoot just as well in NH or DE or VT or ME?  

Something tells me you're not a hunter, MLiq.   ;)

Although I understand hunting in Maine is pretty good. But nothing (except maybe Alaska and Africa!) beats hunting in the west.

I don't know if it's actually better to have an opposite culture state nearby. Even though folks from Massachusetts might like the low taxes, that doesn't necessarily mean they are not statist. They just want someone else to pay for the government!  :(

I think most Nevadans would say their state has become more statist since the Californians started arriving. At least that's the impression I get from reading Vin Suprynowicz's stuff.
Logged

alecmuller

  • FSP Participant
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
Re:The case for New Hampshire
« Reply #44 on: January 28, 2003, 01:26:20 pm »

What happened to this thread?  I started out as a NH fan and recently shifted to WY, but after reading all this I don't know what to think.

I completely agree with what people have said regarding native support - that it's tough to measure, and perhaps the one thing that could be more important than population.  Unfortunately, I haven't seen as much in the way of rational, unemotional discussion of measurement criteria as I'd hoped.

Personally, I don't hold a lot of stock in election numbers (parties varry too much from state to state; for example, I'd probably take an WY Democrat over a NY Republican more often than not) or subjective descriptions of individualist character.  I care about how strong a government each state has, not how it got it or what its critters call call themselves, or how their constituents claim to view themselves.  I would sincerely like to hear rational discussion from people who disagree with me on this.

For those who do agree with the idea that the existing government (or lack of it) and the laws already in place are the best measure of native character, what can you tell me about your favorite states regarding the strength of their governments?

How much money do they steal from you? (this one's rhetorical, we can all find the answers from the state data page)

How many laws do they have restricting business and personal freedom, how harsh are they, and how well do they enforce them? (this one is hard to answer, and by it's nature more subjective than would be ideal)  How much impact does the state government have on your daily life? (subjective, but helpful for figuring out which specific laws to look at)

How many total pages of laws are in the state register? (could you actually read it if you wanted to?  the federal register, for instance, is more than 40,000 pages and would take nearly a year to read at 8 hours a day, and even then I'm pretty sure I wouldn't understand it.)  Are the laws actually understandable, or do they look like they were never intended to be read or understood by anyone except lawyers?

So I'm asking you all:

Do you agree with my measuring assumption? (the existing government is the best indicator of the native culture)
How does your state do based on my criteria?
What other criteria for the strength/intrusiveness of the existing state governments are important to you?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 12   Go Up