Posted on 11/08/2006 2:27:12 PM PST by quidnunc
New York – Glum Republicans might turn their attention to the Libertarian Party to vent their anger. Libertarians are a generally Republican-leaning constituency, but over the last few years, their discontent has grown plain. It isn't just the war, which some libertarians supported, but the corruption and insider dealing, and particularly the massive expansion of spending. Mr Bush's much-vaunted prescription drug benefit for seniors, they fume, has opened up another gaping hole in America's fiscal situation, while the only issue that really seemed to energise congress was passing special laws to keep a brain-damaged woman on life support.
In two of the seats where control looks likely to switch, Missouri and Montana, the Libertarian party pulled more votes than the Democratic margin of victory. Considerably more, in Montana. If the Libertarian party hadn't been on the ballot, and the three percent of voters who pulled the "Libertarian" lever had broken only moderately Republican, Mr Burns would now be in office.
Does this mean that the libertarians are becoming a force in national elections, much as Ralph Nader managed to cost Al Gore a victory in 2000? Hope springs eternal among third-party afficionadoes, but the nature of the American electoral system, which directly elects representatives in a first-past-the-post system, makes it nearly impossible for third parties to gain traction. The last time it happened was in the 1850's, when the Whig party dissolved over internal disputes about slavery, opening the way for the emerging Republican party to put Abraham Lincoln in office. And acting as a spoiler is dubiously effective at achieving one's goals. In theory, it could pull the Repubicans towards the Libertarians, but in practice, it may just elect Democrats, pushing the nation's economic policy leftwards.
(Excerpt) Read more at economist.com ...
Stan Jones, the Losertarian running in Montana didn't even know which office he was running for.
He was on the ballot as a candidate for senator (to drastically reduce state government) but his campaign Web site said he was running for governor and he said that he would pardon anyone convicted under laws he considered unjust.
And a conservative third-party candidate running on a pro-trains platform cost Allen the election in VA.
Allen's terrible campaign didn't help matters.
I don't know how much these scumbags actually cost Republicans since I believe most of them came from the Democrat party in the first place. In any event, the rats will certainly be helping them, covertly and behind the scenes, if they believe the effort will deprive the GOP of some votes.
What a great liberal title... "Libertarians Emerge as a Force (Losertarians deep-six the GOP)"
Nothing like blaming the Libertarians for the Republicans not following principle enough.
If these "L" candidates weren't on ballots in every state, maybe Libertarians wouldn't vote at all, and so the only real affect they have is on the propositions, not the candidates. From comments I've read on F.R., that seems a real possibility.
Yep.
Let's all ignore the massive spending done by this administration. Let's ignore the immigration concerns.
It's the libertarians fault.
cookoocookoo
Losertarians cost Talent his seat in MO ..so is Rush a Libertarian? Claire McCaskill thought Rush helped her out nicely and thanked him for doing so. ;)
Just like some GOP types will help greens or independents in states where the Dems are popular.
The Libertarains lost big time as their sacrament(marijuana) went down to big defeats in two state referendums.
1. They're too insignificant to have an impact on anything
2. They're more closely aligned with the Democrats anyway (that's why they're called "liberaltarians")
3. They stole enough votes from GOP candidates to impact the election
See any flaws in that logic?
REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
posted by Jim Robinson
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/721810/posts
I am no fan of Libertarians, never have been. If they helped cause this, then they are the ones who will also have to live with the results.
Good news. Do you know which states Dane?
I think conservatives made our presence felt in the arena of ballot proposals. We certainly won a few here in Michigan.
You mean since Republicans didn't shrink government we should keep voting for them?
One thing though, I have noticed about libertarians I have known personally is that very few seem to want to talk about much beyond making "medicinal" marjiuana legal.
Libertarians handed the dhimmicrats and terrorists a victory. I hope they are really please with themselves.
For the record, I voted Republican, but it is rediculous to blame libertarians for Republican losses. That blame goes to nobody else but the Republicans themselves. Between the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, exploding deficits, runaway spending, the Federal Marriage Amendment, etc., how could they really expect that many libertarians to vote for them? The only reason I can think of (my reason for voting GOP) is that the Democrats would probably be worse. That's hardly enough to justify expecting big-time support from a part of your base you've completely neglected.
If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals–if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.
Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to insure that we don’t each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are travelling the same path. ~Ronald Reagan
thanks for posting that, it's a great reminder.
Colorado and Nevada.
South Dakota was one
Not in Alaska. A lot of Rs went Libertarian for a while then gave up on that. The Greens, though, would all be Ds if there were no Green Party.
Ronald Reagan -- America needs another like him.
You're a fan of the Economist now? LOL
Phoey. I don't buy it. This is like blaming someone else in the race for being faster. Maybe if the Republicans were what they say they are, it wouldn't have been a problem.
This next 2 years will be living he!!.
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/721810/posts
Libertarians running as third-party candidates have no chance of being elected to any national office.
The only thing can they can do is act as spoilers for the GOP.
The Greens though almost gave Allen a win in Virginia. I think the Green candidate pulled about 26,000 votes. It works both ways. The Greens had to live with helping Bush beat Gore in Florida in 2000. The Libertarians have to live with helping the Dems capture the Senate.
So what are we seeking to do now?
Blame others for engineering our loss, like the Democrats mewled and puked about Ralph Nader?
NEWSFLASH!: People who are not Republicans, like, say, registered Liberatarians, or Independents (registered or unregistered) don't owe us Republicans ONE DAMNED THING.
They have not joined us. They do not belong to us. We have no right to expect their vote. We have, in fact, no right to expect anything other than that, as members of opposing parties (or individual opponents) they will try to undermine and defeat us. That is their RIGHT.
If we want to win, we have to PERSUADE them that we're the better option. We failed to do that last night, completely. That's why we lost. If we don't persuade them next time, we'll lose again. And we'll keep repeating the lesson of getting ourselves "Thumped" (to use a Bushism) until we DO learn it.
Conservatives are the Republican core, but they are by no means enough to win Congress or the White House. The margin of victory lies in persuading others - people who are NOT registered Republicans - people who are suspicious of us, our party and our agenda - to come out and vote for us anyway, perhaps as the lesser of two evils, perhaps because we actually manage to inspire them to trust us.
Either way, it is pathetic of us to spend one moment whining, crying, mewling and puking about people who are A DIFFERENT PARTY "stabbing us in the back". they didn't stab us in the back; they stabbed us in the chest, in a sword fight, which they had the RIGHT to fight, because they're NOT Republicans and they owe us NOTHING.
To win, we have to persuade them not to fight us.
Just like the Dems had to persuade the Greens to come home.
Another whiner thread about Libertarians. The GOP created their own destruction.
If you think I'm going to wade through that turgid screed you're nuts.
I have a new tagline. ;)
Colorado Amendment 44: Legalize Marijuana
Yes 557,758
No 819,579
Nevada Question 7: Legalize Marijuana
Yes 252,776
No 320,854
South Dakota Initiative 4: Allow Medical Marijuana
Yes 157,945
No 173,184
Wow, those are some massive defeats. ROTFL Dane is such a dork. The real analysis is that the initiatives are gaining ground and a few more years will see these votes flipped.
Thanks for the ping. I really have to run, but I will say that this goes back to what I was saying about people being dumb. And while you're never going to cure dumbness, it is worth taking a look at some of the complaints about expanded government in order to get back in winning form for '08. I have no doubt that with Pence in a leadership role, this will happen. I'll pick this up tommorrow.
Sorry, I don't buy it.
If ANY candidate needs Losertarian or Greenhorn Party support to win, they deserve to lose.
Al Gore lost Florida because of Ralph Nader and a bunch of confused Palm Beach County Jewish voters who punched Pat Buchanan's name.
But if Al Gore had carried his own home state, he would have won anyway. So the Greenies and Clueless Jews shouldn't be blamed for the Robot's rejection by the Volunteer State.
Talent and Burns were the incumbents. If the Losertarian candidates had not been on the ballot, who knows what those dope-smokers would have done.
Republicans should not be going on a witchhunt for Losertarians, the MSM, talk show hosts, Ouija Boards or Voodoo Dolls as blame targets for this disaster.
Just look in the mirror. A Party with no real platform, no ideas, and led by a sorry bunch of old tired farts like Kennedy and Sheets and Searchlight and Mikulski just kicked our butts.
It's like blaming Ears for the 1992 disaster. Fact is that an incumbent President who had a 90% approval ratings after waxing Saddam in six weeks couldn't reach 40% on Election Day. GHWB wiped out that Harvard Twit in 1988 by pledging no new taxes and he folded two years later. That's on him (although I still think those that voted for Perot blew it).
GWB accepted the blame. He may have lost and he may be attacked for two years by bitter Republicans and Conservatives, but he did man up. The only Clinton who would ever "man up" wears a crusty pantsuit.
Careful, the Bushbots won’t tolerate dissent.
Nope. There were a couple thousand write-in votes but that was well below the margin that Webb currently holds. It almost broke the other way...the Green candidate pulled over 26,000 votes. Since you can reasonably assume that most of those would've been Webb votes had she not been on the ballot, if the Green hadn't run, Webb would have taken Virginia by a full percentage point or more instead of the .31% (7400 votes) he's currently leading by, and this race would be over.
Libertarians had an impact in Missouri and Montana, but not in Virginia.
}:-)4
Without these political terrorists we would be looking at 52-48 tonight.
The real analysis is that the initiatives are gaining ground and a few more years will see these votes flipped.
Will someone tell me why conservatives would vote for a libertarian since they are for open borders?
Why do people think Libertarians would ever vote Republican? They are anti-war, anti-defence and pro-drug. They are not wayward Republican voters. They are not Republican voters at all.
I should have been more clear - my whole post was sarcasm. I hear people constantly bashing libertarians with these fallacious arguments, and it gets on my nerves.
He cost us the GOP candidate.
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.