Skip to comments.
Will Wisconsin Be Red or Blue in 2004?(Badnarik Supporting Kerry?)
Badnarik Campaign ^
| Badnarik Campaign
Posted on 10/16/2004 11:17:59 AM PDT by 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.
TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: badnarik; libertarianparty; lp; sorelosertarians
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
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.
1
posted on
10/16/2004 11:17:59 AM PDT
by
K1avg
To: K1avg
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.
2
posted on
10/16/2004 11:20:51 AM PDT
by
Dr Snide
(vis pacem, para bellum - Prepare for war if you want peace)
To: K1avg
Badnarik will get about 0.4% of the vote so I am not concerned.
3
posted on
10/16/2004 11:21:40 AM PDT
by
RockinRight
(John Kerry is the wrong candidate, for the wrong country, at the wrong time)
To: K1avg
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.
To: K1avg
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.
5
posted on
10/16/2004 11:23:31 AM PDT
by
sinkspur
("I swim with the alligators in the fevered swamps of traditionalism. " Cardinal Fanfani)
To: K1avg
Who the hell is Badnarik ? This clown couldn't throw the election to anyone, what does he have, 40 supporters ?
To: K1avg
7
posted on
10/16/2004 11:25:18 AM PDT
by
counterpunch
(The CouNTeRPuNcH Collection - www.counterpunch.us)
To: K1avg; OrthodoxPresbyterian
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.
8
posted on
10/16/2004 11:33:38 AM PDT
by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proudly Supporting BUSH/CHENEY 2004!)
To: John Lenin
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...
9
posted on
10/16/2004 11:35:26 AM PDT
by
counterpunch
(The CouNTeRPuNcH Collection - www.counterpunch.us)
To: K1avg; Admin Moderator; Sidebar Moderator
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.
10
posted on
10/16/2004 11:36:33 AM PDT
by
K1avg
(A severed foot is the ultimate stocking stuffer.)
To: Republican Wildcat
Commies are red,
Libertarians are blue,
D-rats are orange,
I'll stick with you.
11
posted on
10/16/2004 11:36:33 AM PDT
by
zygoat
To: K1avg
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.
12
posted on
10/16/2004 11:40:43 AM PDT
by
McGavin999
(If Kerry can't deal with the "Republican Attack Machine" how is he going to deal with Al Qaeda)
To: All
they can support whomever they wish, we have the most powerful liberterian supporting BUSH.... Bortz...and he has a mircophone!!!
To: K1avg
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.
14
posted on
10/16/2004 11:48:07 AM PDT
by
Mr. Mojo
To: K1avg
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.
15
posted on
10/16/2004 11:49:05 AM PDT
by
Mr. Mojo
To: K1avg
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).
16
posted on
10/16/2004 12:22:17 PM PDT
by
Nataku X
(Live near a liberal college? Want to demoralize Dems? FRmail me to join in Operation Reverse Moby!)
To: K1avg
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?
17
posted on
10/16/2004 1:25:35 PM PDT
by
gcruse
(http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
To: xzins; counterpunch
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.
18
posted on
10/16/2004 2:11:28 PM PDT
by
OrthodoxPresbyterian
(We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty)
To: K1avg
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.
Comment #20 Removed by Moderator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson