Skip to main content

Yes we did that.

And I can live with it.  Hell, I'm pretty damn proud of the impact.

Comments

tom said…
I am fine with being a "spoiler" too.

What bothers me is the twisted logic that assholes like Dr. Richard Swier use to arrive at this conclusion:

They start with the assumption that we don't get to choose. Our votes do not belong to us--but to the candidate that they wanted to win.

Then they compound this folly by torturing the math until it appears to support their belief.

Does he really believe that the 16647 votes for Jill Stein and Roseanne Barr would have gone to Mitt Romney if they had not been on the ballot?

Does he seriously believe that every Libertarian would have voted for Mitt Romney if Gary Johnson had not run?
November 8, 2012 at 1:05 AM
The Last Ephor said…
I'm questioning whether the message is going to be received. The libertarian party is no stronger than it was with this result. The GOP will likely see the Johnson voters as ideologues who cannot be brought into the fold. The GOP will go through the self-examination that naturally follows such a loss but I'm not convinced they're going to accept that the answer (IMNHO) is social liberal and fiscal conservative. Rather I fear they're going to go back to exactly the opposite. Social Conservative and fiscal liberal.
November 8, 2012 at 10:39 AM
Anonymous said…

I think the GOP is tone deaf to the Libertarian message. They will pander to the black and hispanic vote. I think they heard that one.
November 8, 2012 at 10:57 AM
Steven H. Newton said…
I think you miss my point: I intend for the Libertarian Party to try and pry away the individuals within the GOP who are socially tolerant and fiscally conservative.

I could care less what the party does, and in fact would prefer it to remain hostile to libertarians.
November 8, 2012 at 11:36 AM
tom said…
Don't confuse your messages. this one is directed at the media and election pundits, and it is that the Libertarian Party is no longer a factor that can be safely ignored.

We have an impact on the outcome of elections.
November 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM
delacrat said…
"I think the GOP is tone deaf to the Libertarian message. They will pander to the black and hispanic vote. I think they heard that one." - Anonymous@10:57 AM

Why do you think appealing "to the black and hispanic vote", ...pandering ???
November 8, 2012 at 2:59 PM
The Last Ephor said…
Steve: got it. Do you think you/they can peel away enough GOP voters to gain enough momentum? The way I see it, the Tea Party is ideologically very close to libertarian if not Libertarian. I do think may of them are not as socially liberal.

My fear is that they will peel away enough to create one majority and two minority/rump parties which guarantees liberalism forever.
November 8, 2012 at 3:36 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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...
70 comments
Read more

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 ...
31 comments
Read more

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 — ...
44 comments
Read more