Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)  (Read 8572 times)

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #15 on: November 26, 2002, 11:17:14 pm »

A bunch of yesses and a maybe.  (and yes, these are opinions here ;-)

Regarding the Craig letter, I was perplexed over Carla's poor showing.  Maybe that's a logical explanation.  It seems as though a few "libertarian dictator" types show up here and there.  Makes it tough for the LP for sure.

The subsequent conclusion: run libertarians as D's or R's.  I'm pretty sure I agree (at least in most cases).  

Regarding the most recent question, I've had similar thoughts about running as a Democrat (mind you, I have essentially zilch political experience - just one run for Congress) and using the 'old' Democrat / Classical Liberal approach.  Since there's plenty of Dems in the valley, that could provide some sort of opportunity.

However, whether that would work for the FSP I think would be highly dependant on which state we were in.  Ideally, we could get libertarians to win both the D and R primaries in every race.  Yeah, I'm dreamin.  Realistically, I think it'd be best to focus our partisan political efforts on getting one solid libertarian through the primary for the leading party in each race.  So whether we picked D or R would highly depend on the party.

Remember, legally only the candidate has to be registered to that party.  The activists don't.  Of course, in most cases, voting in the primary requires party registration, but that could be done shortly before the election...

Cheers.

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.

larry

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 250
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2002, 04:31:19 am »

folks,

a real sane guy wrote:

"We need a real flaming theocratic party where the Republicans can dump all the holier-than-thou control freaks".

yup, i wish i had time to post this wisdom to the Idaho site.

sane guy, standing in a jet engine (i'll get your name soon).

WE HAVE THAT IN IDAHO RIGHT NOW.  THE MORMONS ARE NOT A NEGATIVE, THEY ARE A BIG TIME POSITIVE, WITH ENEMIES BEING WHAT THEY ARE.

NO WAY LIBERTY COULD FIND MORE HOPE, AND BETTER ENEMIES, THAN IN IDAHO!!

LF

Logged
My pledge: Under no nation; under no Gawd.

craft_6

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 400
  • Constitutional Libertarian
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #17 on: November 27, 2002, 11:47:14 am »

I had a thought. In many of the Western states being considered by the FSP, the Democrat parties are very weak, I mean specifically Wyoming and Idaho, and, to a lesser extent, Montana. Would it not be easier for you folks to work with the Democrats on a state level, perhaps working to recreate a Jeffersonian Democratic party that could serve as a working model for the national party as a whole? Or is that just a ridiculous pipe dream on my part?

This is exactly what the Democrats need to do, if they ever hope to win again.  Returning to their Jefferson/Jackson roots, and stealing the small government vote away from the Republicans, would expose the hypocrisy of Republican candidates who are always for small tax cuts, but never for budget cuts of any kind.  Republicans are also vulnerable on issues of personal privacy, something many voters are concerned with.

A Democratic candidate could keep most of their social agenda and their professed concern for the environment, children, the poor, and the elderly, and still win handily, if they campaigned for a balanced budget, a five or ten percent spending cut, and tax cuts to match.  Republicans would have nothing to counter with, since they have talked about smaller government for decades, while never delivering.

Now if we could only get Democrats to realize that the environment, children, the poor, and the elderly are better off with less government, and that the 2nd Amendment is as important as the 1st.....
« Last Edit: November 27, 2002, 11:49:38 am by craft_6 »
Logged
Lighting the fires of Liberty, one heart at a time!
http://www.badnarik.org
Badnarik for President, 2004

phylinidaho

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Friend of the FSP
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2002, 07:58:01 am »


Remember, legally only the candidate has to be registered to that party.  The activists don't.  Of course, in most cases, voting in the primary requires party registration, but that could be done shortly before the election...


This is not true in Idaho. The candidate does not have to be registered to the party. (in fact, we don't register by party). The Libertarian candidate for Governor did not have the endorsement of the party. I believe he was a member of the party - registered through national - but Libs campaigned against him.

Any registered voter can vote in the primary of his choice (the ballots are printed in such a way that you choose at the polls, without the necessity of declaring your party).. Many of our most active Libertarians voted in the Republican Primary in this, the first time a third
party (Lib) appeared on the ballot.
Logged

Blayne

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #19 on: December 03, 2002, 02:55:56 am »

Good thread!

Unfortunately the few nutcases have stigmatized the Libertarian moniker in the minds of the majority.  So it's is best to work within the majority mindset and gently push the boundaries of their mindset so as not to alienate them with a big laundry list of demands as Libertarians have too often done in the past.

This would best be done within the Republican Party as many rank and file Republicans have Libertarian leanings. And the rest would not be so alarmed as they would by a large number of LPers making demands the see as extreme...

Blayne
Logged

varrin

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 999
  • THE air male
    • Varrin's FSP Info Page
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2002, 02:12:12 am »

The candidate does not have to be registered to the party. (in fact, we don't register by party).

Tres cool.  Another plus for Idaho...

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.

phylinidaho

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 161
  • Friend of the FSP
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2002, 04:19:14 pm »

Quote
[quote author=Blayne

Unfortunately the few nutcases have stigmatized the Libertarian moniker in the minds of the majority.  So it's is best to work within the majority mindset and gently push the boundaries of their mindset so as not to alienate them with a big laundry list of demands as Libertarians have too often done in the past.

As a dedicated member of the Idaho Libertarian Party, it pains me to say this, but I believe you are right. For what it's worth, I "wrote in" Butch Otter (District One US Rep., R) for Governor, rather than vote for the nutcase running under the Libertarian name or either of the statists.
Logged

Robert H.

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1361
  • Jeffersonian
    • Devolution USA
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2003, 06:03:16 pm »

THUS
the state with the weakest LP may be a better candidate.
At least the state LP was not strong enough to screw up more than National already has.

I've often wondered about this idea, not necessarily in regard to standing up to the national LP, but in terms of how it would allow FSP'ers to enter a state and set up the most effective plan for attempting to build a majority there, as opposed to being pressured to conform to an existing organization that could marginalize (or just hinder) the movement with its own agenda.

Existing organizational infrastructure could be helpful in a number of ways as well (we'll have to work through some political vehicle, after all), but what concerns me most is being dominated right from the beginning.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2003, 09:18:40 pm by RobertH »
Logged

Dave Mincin

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2099
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #23 on: July 31, 2003, 08:43:08 pm »

Ok Joe, do your really want to start a bump game?  I mean how many threads have you bumped so far?  

Hey I want people to read my threads cause they are the most important?  Come on Joe this is serious business, not a game.

Shall we all play your game of bump the thread, what will the people who read these threads think of us if we follow your example?  Or is it simply that you are always right so no one else should say what they think?

Only what you say is important?  Come on Joe stop the games, if you have something to say, say it.

Shouldn't people who believe in Freedom be above a foolish game like bump the thread?  ::)
Logged
Please join us!
http://www.nhliberty.org/ New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.

" A leader knows that if he is generous with his time, his people will be generous with their effort."

Plug>>>>Realtor Lovejoy Real Estate!

Michelle

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 748
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #24 on: July 31, 2003, 08:57:41 pm »

Well, I think many of the past threads are still relevant too. What if I started bumping all of those? And then what if Emor started bumping a bunch of threads? And then Jim Maynard started bumping a bunch that he thought were still relevant. And then Hank started bumping the ones he thought were relevant (like he has done periodically). And then Karl decided to get in on it and start bumping threads too.

I think you get my drift. It would quickly degenerate into a war of bumping threads and people will get angry and frustrated to have their current conversations buried.

P.S. Double posting (the way you have done it, one after the other on a couple of different current threads) is equally frustrating because it requires responses to be double posted. Reposting something you have written in the past, when relevant, to a thread that is now current seems like better manners to me. Or, if you have something important to add to an old thread, I don't see anything wrong with that.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2003, 09:06:03 pm by Michelle »
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

Dave Mincin

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2099
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2003, 09:03:23 pm »

Well news flash Joe!  Lots of things that lots of folks have said are still revelant!  So in the interest of fairness are you proposing that everyone who think they have a relevant post that has been burried, play the bump game?
I mean if you can do it why shouldn't everyone else?  Or are you somehow better than the rest of us, because you know and we don't?

Sure your only doing it because of Michele and others!  

Hey if you have something to say, say it, but Joe please don't start this game of bump.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2003, 09:07:43 pm by marshrobert1 »
Logged
Please join us!
http://www.nhliberty.org/ New Hampshire Liberty Alliance.

" A leader knows that if he is generous with his time, his people will be generous with their effort."

Plug>>>>Realtor Lovejoy Real Estate!

wolverine307

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
  • I could have swore I left my clue here somewhere
Re:Some Disturbing Election Results (from a Libertarian perspective)
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2003, 09:34:49 pm »

Quote
Thus, when I brought up the LP concerns in the New Hampshire thread, I bumped most of the other LP threads. Why? Because I have no confidence that readers will click on the links and read those other threads. Why? Because they've not done so in the past and raised questions or made statements that showed they had not done so. Thus I re-post what I had written before. Or I re-write and re-explain what I had written before.

Some of you are capable of clicking on links and reading the archived material that backs up present statements. So many others are not. That concerns me since our readers here are to be activists, hopefully informed ones who can do their own research and who don't have to have stuff explained to them several times when archived material is readily available.

Joe:

As usual, I only speak for myself. I understand what you are saying and it must be frustrating for a professional politician (professional in outlook and seriousness of purpose) to have to correct a colleage over things like that. However, most of us are not professionals.

I have been active on these boards because I am unemployed, a condition that will hopefully correct itself next week sometimes, so I have been reading much of what you (and others whose views that I have come to respect) have been trying to say.

However, quite frankly, much of it comes across as debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Perhaps with the passage of time many of these points you (and others) bring up will mean something more to me.

You are a voluminous poster on these boards and I thank you for taking the time to do so, but not everybody has the time to sort through the sheer volume of material and remember the salient points.

Please bear in mind that you are dealing with folks at different levels of the politician timeline. We don't all have your experiences, nor necessarily put the same weight on the words that you do. You're at the calculus level and most of us are still in geometry.

From this neophytes perspective (I may be wrong, I frequently am) the ability of us to be able to get others to accept our agenda relies upon our ability to get people to trust us and our judgment.

So can we all just step back, take a deep breath, and remember that if we cannot get along here, how will we EVER get the public to accept us as serious people?

Now, can we all just get along and focus on the bigger picture?
Logged
NH>DE>SD>ID>WY>VT>ME>AK>MT>ND

Your mileage may vary.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up