Will Wisconsin Be Red or Blue in 2004?(Badnarik Supporting Kerry?)

Badnarik Campaign ^ | Badnarik Campaign

[K1avg]

Will Wisconsin Be Red or Blue in 2004?

Many conservatives are unhappy with Bush's massive spending and his attacks on civil liberties. While these unhappy conservatives are probably not prepared to switch their vote to Kerry, many, if asked properly, would seriously consider switching their vote to Libertarian Michael Badnarik. So by helping Badnarik get more visibility, you can hurt Bush chances of winning battleground states like Wisconsin!

We will use 100% of your donations to run television and radio commercials (listed below) that specifically target conservative voters who might otherwise vote for Bush. We don't want Bush to win in Wisconsin anymore than you do. As a Kerry supporter, you may disagree with our message, but you win and we win when you donate to this project and get your friends to do likewise.

[K1avg]

This appears to me to be a thinly veiled attempt to hand Wisconsin to Kerry.

I'm sure I'll be massively flamed for this, but isn't it quite stupid for Libertarians to be so outrightly supporting the unabashedly big-government candidate, or has their social agenda taken that much precedence over their economic platform?

Either way, I doubt Badnarik will gain many votes by suggesting a vote for him is a vote for Kerry. Hell, I'd rather vote for Nader than Badnarik.

[Dr Snide]

If I remember right, in the 2002 Gov. race the Libertarian candidate (Tommy Thompson's brother) got around 10% of the vote which gave the election to the Dem. candidate. So it is not something to scoff at.

[RockinRight]

Badnarik will get about 0.4% of the vote so I am not concerned.

[Republican Wildcat]

Thinly veiled? It is pretty right in your face obvious.

It pretty much confirms a lot of people's suspicions about the true motives of Libertarians as well.

[sinkspur]

Bednarik was looking for a job when he won the Libertarian nomination. Momma said he could stay out past eleven, and even let him overnight a time or two.

The Losertarians are trying to make headlines, a splash or two on election day. They're hoping to get some traction by claiming they're the factor that beat Bush somewhere. Anywhere.

[John Lenin]

Who the hell is Badnarik ? This clown couldn't throw the election to anyone, what does he have, 40 supporters ?

[counterpunch]

Libertarian principles are good. The Libertarian Party is stupid.


 
 
Click for the entire CouNTeRPuNcH Collection

Political Parodies and more
www.counterpunch.us

[xzins]

It's not a thinly veiled attempt....it isn't veiled at all. He flat out says that he wants to hurt Bush in Wisconsin and throw it to Kerry.

What is thinly veiled is that these are thinly veiled LIBERALS.

I had no idea. Libertarians are nothing more than liberals.

[counterpunch]

I've seen a Libertarian Party debate before.
It was for the 2004 presidential candidate.

maybe my memory is clouded, but I swear it was held in a barn with picnic tables, bales of hay, and torches...
Anyways, it was the same sort of nonsense as the Democrat debates, but rather than being a competition for who can bash Bush the most, it was a competition for who was the most primitive.

On gay marriage, the various candidates took their turns supporting gay marriage to various levels, until the Alpha Libertarian, Badnarik himself I believe, approached the microphone (or bullhorn?) brimming with confidence to declare that government should get out of the marriage business completely, neither recognizing nor regulating them at all. The crowd went wild. I believe they even began throwing their own feces. Once again, my memory may be slightly distorted from the passage of time...

[K1avg]

This is the second decently-newsworthy topic (the first is now here) I've had moved to Bloggers & Personal.

No complaints, as I'm sure there's some decent reason for the move, but I am wondering what it is. What gives?

Why should a decent topic like this be moved when garbage one-line vanities are still allowed to propagate in News/Activism?

Response requested. TIA.

[zygoat]

Commies are red,
Libertarians are blue,
D-rats are orange,
I'll stick with you.

[McGavin999]

LOL, this tells you all you need to know. The guy is a Kerry supporter, has been all along, and has made a mockery of the principles he was supposed to be supporting.

[wvromania]

they can support whomever they wish, we have the most powerful liberterian supporting BUSH.... Bortz...and he has a mircophone!!!

[Mr. Mojo]

So by helping Badnarik get more visibility, you can hurt Bush chances of winning battleground states like Wisconsin!

Amazing. ....they're not even try to hide it anymore.

[Mr. Mojo]

I'm sure there's some decent reason for the move, but I am wondering what it is.

I'll be waiting for that same answer.

[Nataku X]

True libertarians (objectivists) are indeed more in line with conservative/Republican philosophy.

But big-L Libertarians are nothing like that... they're just pot smoking anti-war hippies who have a liberal stand on everything else. They're closer to anarchists (who support the abolishment of military and police forces).

[gcruse]

I'm sure I'll be massively flamed for this, but isn't it quite stupid for Libertarians to be so outrightly supporting the unabashedly big-government candidate, or has their social agenda taken that much precedence over their economic platform?

It's new of them to say so outright, but Libertarians votes come moreso at the expense of Bush than Kerry.  This is nothing surprising.   As far as big government candidates, one says he is, the other governs as one.  What's the difference?

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Burn down the village in order to save it. Lovely, just lovely.

I have no other comment.... counterpunch already summed it up nicely in #7.

[Sooth2222]

Many conservatives are unhappy with Bush's massive spending and his attacks on civil liberties.

By voting for even MORE massive spending, and MORE attacks on civil liberties??? Good grief! Wonder if Badnarik and the Wisconsinites ever read anything about libertarianism besides the legalization of drugs.

There is a libertarian wing to the Republican party, like Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) http://www.house.gov/paul/index.shtml who ran for President as a Libertarian in 1988.

And there are the "Volvo Republicans" of the Northeast. There can not, by definition, ever be a libertarian wing to the Democrat party.

But trying to throw the election to the Democrat-Socialists because the Republicans aren't conservative enough would be, IMO completely and totally insane!

IMO all the third party candidates including Nader will total about 2-3% total this cycle. I don't see Badnarik getting even close to 1% nationally.