Posted on 10/19/2012 11:53:15 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I have a lot of respect for my Libertarian friends, and they are frequently the first people I’d like to have a discussion with about a new policy or political controversy. I find most of them to be intelligent, thoughtful, well-read people. I also find that in large part Independents (including the Tea Party) often have much in common with the right when it comes to the issues of this particular election–economics and the over-reach of the Federal government.
But I do think that to actually vote for a 3rd party candidate in a tight general election (as this one) is to actually harm the chances of someone whose views are probably most similar to your own. A vote for a 3rd party actually makes a TWO point difference in terms of real numbers, from +1 to a -1 vote that could have been received by one of the main candidates. Let’s get practical—in a close election, a few thousand votes can make or break the entire Electoral College contribution of a state, which in turn can determine the winner of the election.
A recent Des Moines Register poll showed only a 1-point difference between Romney and Obama here in Iowa. And in both 2004 and 2008, “other” votes in Iowa made up…. 1 percent.
So by all means, make your case to anyone who will listen in the off-years and primary season! In fact, the last 2 election cycles, I’ve supported someone other than the eventual candidate at caucus time. But once the primaries are over, I think we do need to figure out which of the remaining candidates is closest in ideology to our own views.
As to Gary Johnson himself, I find myself agreeing with many–if not most–of his positions. I want education back at the local level. I absolutely believe that the 2nd Amendment has implications for the rest of the Bill of Rights. And he was right on when he reportedly said, “My next door neighbor’s two dogs have created more shovel-ready jobs than this current administration.”
My main personal concerns about any Libertarian candidate are the tendencies for fast change and the hesitancy to deploy the military. I frequently wonder if the drastic “fix-it-now” approaches of the Libertarian movement are the best approach. There are so many entrenched government programs and expenditures in place today that practically speaking, it’s going to take some time for states and individuals to adjust. My second concern is that a Libertarian president may put ideology ahead of national defense. In my opinion, there ARE times when we need to engage in combat, and I want a President who won’t hesitate to do that if it becomes necessary.
Even so, I can certainly respect the 3rd party vote—or even abstention—of someone who has deeply considered the issues and clearly done their homework.
But this election is not an apples-to-apples choice, but truly an apples-to-oranges choice between two very different ideologies. So I think those who chose to actually vote for Gary Johnson this particular election will actually be harming the chances of another candidate who isn’t as far off from their views as they might think.
Arithmetic absurdity.
If you are in a state where Romney has a chance of winning then every vote counts, and tactical concerns should trump long term ideals. Put another way - vote for the lesser of two evils! Vote Republican.
“The better approach for Libertarianism to gain traction would be to keep infiltrating the GOP...”
Libertarian is a philosophy, not a political party. Every year they run a Presidential candidate for one reason, publicity. ANY true political party will establish itself at the local level first. Can you site any example, in all the years of Libertarianism’s existence, of a city run by Libertarians which led to a state run by Libertarians?
Of course not. Governing is antithetical to Libertarianism. They have a Marxist (Groucho, that is) legislative agenda. “No matter what it is or who commenced it, I’m against it.”
Over the years I have voted libertarian or constitutional but only when the race was already decided. Am not a big fan of Romney but it is imperative that Obama be shown the door Nov6/Jan20. There is no other choice. If you don’t like Obama now just wait until he doesn’t have to worry about reelection.
I’m completely in favor of “hesitancy to deploy the military” if the rules of engagement envision anything other than unconditional victory.
This was a predictable outcome of allowing Obama to win.
There is no doubt in my mind that McCain would have nominated by accident Supreme Court Justices who would have been superior to Sotomayer and Kagan. We will be paying a price for that for the next thirty years.
If Romney wins, liberals may well look back on this time as a lost opportunity of incredible import. I fully expected Ginsburg to retire. If Romney gets to choose her replacement, our nation may well survive.
I believe that the major reason to vote GOP rather than third party is the effect that we will see regarding the Electoral College if Romney wins the election but doesn't get a simple majority of the votes. The movement to eliminate the Electoral College will get a great boost.
Today, the Electoral College is the only thing that prevents the liberals from winning the Presidency by stealing all the votes they need in California, Illinois, New York, and New Jersey. Voting third-party will provide justification to eliminate this important safeguard.
In that case is voting Republican for Bob Dole a "wasted vote"? Would you have voted for Clinton because not voting for a winning candidate is a "wasted vote"?
Moving back to the real 2012 world, that is exactly why I, as a libertarian, am voting against both Obama and Romney by voting for Gary Johnson. I don't let other people (polls) tell me how to vote. I don't follow the herd. I vote for the candidate I agree with, and if I lose, I lose.
As far as the tactical voting thing goes, the lesser of two evils, Republicans have been doing that since their last conservative presidential candidate, Reagan 30 years ago, and things have just gotten worse. Voting for the lesser of two evils gave us candidate McCain and President Obama.
Also, if McCain had won, there would have been no Tea Party.
Republicans would still be as left-wing socialist as they were during the 2008 election, when none of them saw anything wrong with RomneyCare, McCain’s Cap & Trade, etc.
lesser of two evils: a phrase originated by US Army in WWII. Not a Christian concept.
So I, along with other readers, reject the concept.
Take away Ron Paul's views on national defense and national security and I'd like him.
We still are always confronted with choices. There are only two political parties that can win. I'm a Wm F Buckley Republican--always vote for the most conservative--THAT CAN WIN.
The goal is to advance conservatism and that cannot be done voting "third party".
So you are voting for total abortion, total homosexuality, and totally open borders and for eliminating the border patrol and INS.
There are other options you know, you don’t have to become a radical leftist to not vote Obama/Romney.
” I disagree with the author’s assumption that Libertarianism is incompatible with a strong national defense. I see Libertarianism as being more directly opposed to nation-bulding, as well as avoiding international entanglement in agreements that don’t serve national self-interest.”
I used to think of myself as more of a libertarian than a Republican until 9/11/2001. Harry Brown’s response to going to Afghanistan changed that. I could understand disagreeing with some of the policies after we got there but his do nothing stance changed that.
The stance of one Libertarian politician doesn’t define Libertarian ideology as a whole.
I would vote for any of them for the simple reason that their opponents will vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker. Then work for a primary opponent next time around.
there will never be primary opponents against Obsitnick, Roraback, Bass and Tisei. Roraback could hold that seat for 25 years.
Then you certainly won’t ever elect a more conservative 3rd party candidate either. So do you want 4 more votes for Pelosi or not?
it is better if Esty the DEM beats Roraback the radical GOPer
it is a GOP seat
yep
we don’t need NARAL people electing the GOP Congressional leaders.
DEM Esty over Roraback. Elect a conservative Republican in 2014. At least a center-right Republican.
If you are sane then you cannot claim his/this party platform as conservative, freerepublic is not the place for pro-abortion and homosexual agenda promoters, and open borders people and candidates.
Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.