Skip to main content

Everything (of course) is bigger in Texas ...

... including the Libertarian Party.

I am reminded of a Cold War era joke: Seeking to impress and intimidate the Americans, the Soviet politburo orders one gross of three-foot-long condoms from a company in Texas. The Texians fill the order, packing the condoms in a crate marked "medium."

There are 173 Lone Star Libertarians running for office this election season.

One way you can tell that the LPT is doing well is by the fund-raising numbers:

The Libertarian Party of Texas (LPT) has reported $81,765.81 in contributions for the first six months of 2008. That is up from $54,204.57 for the first six months of 2007, and $55,454.24 for the first six months of 2006.


Equally important, however, is the urgent requests of Texas Republicans that Libertarians get out of their races, as reported in the Austin-American Statesman:

The Libertarian Party of Texas is not ready to be king, but it expects to be kingmaker — or spoiler, depending upon your point of view — in the state's most competitive legislative races this fall.

The state's perennial third party, hoping to draft behind the momentum of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul's failed presidential run, counts Central Texas as its stronghold in the Lone Star State.

"It used to be nobody looked at us; now they are looking at us," said Pat Dixon, the party's state chairman and a Lago Vista City Council member. "We can swing votes. We're going to be a factor in more races."

Even before Paul's emergence on the national stage, Libertarians were kingmakers at the local levels. In 2004, Libertarians were credited with helping Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, beat Republican incumbent Jack Stick. The Libertarian candidate received 2,390 votes; the margin of victory was only 569 votes in the north Travis County district.

By the Libertarian Party's count, its candidates in 2008 have a "high" probability of being a deciding factor in four state House races and a "medium" possibility in four more.

In some election cycles, a handful of House races might not matter much in the bigger picture. This year, however, the control of the House — and House Speaker Tom Craddick's hold on the leadership — are in play. A few seats could make a difference.

In 2006, Central Texas was the Libertarian Party's highest performing region in statewide races (averaging 5 percent of the vote or better). Party officials credit the region's entrepreneurial and tolerant bent, plus the party's local efforts in fielding candidates for races ranging from the courthouse to the state house....

"Our preference is that Libertarians, by Election Day, will come back home and seek to find common ground with Republicans," said Joe Gimenez, a Travis County GOP spokesman.


LPT Chair Dixon also emphasized a critical point, not just in Texas:

Dixon acknowledges that Libertarians need more candidates who raise money and actively campaign as opposed to being just "paper candidates."


[By the way, if you think this is just hype, pay attention to the note of peevish desperation at The Texian Online, a noted conservative blog:

The LP is threatening to knock out some of the best Republicans in the Lege. -- that should be the last thing a small government liberty minded voter should want.


Note for the Texas GOP: you don't own votes or offices in a republic, you have to earn them every time.]

Here are the most competitive Libertarian candidates in Texas, according to Austin paper:

Lillian Simmons, House District 52.

William Collins, House District 78

Todd Litteken, House District 96

Gene Freeman, House District 106

Alan Duesterhoft, House District 17

Paul Bryan, House District 11

Lenard Nelson, House District 32

Brandon Parsons, House District 107

For a complete list of LPT candidates, go here.

[Note 2: The Lone Texian is especially worried about Simmons, Litteken, Duesterhoft, and Parsons.]

[h/t Last Free Voice for the initial information on this piece]

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...