The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania - Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the LPPa forum. 
Feel free to join the discussions.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: I Don't Think the Libertarian Candidates are Libertarian...  (Read 1714 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tck13
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 40


« on: May 27, 2008, 12:15:33 am »

I don't get it.

Bob Barr, Ron Paul, and Mike Gravel just don't seem like Libertarians.  They are Conservatives and Liberal who want smaller Government with Liberal and Conservative Philosophies.  I guess it's not all bad - maybe something is better than nothing?

As a budding Libertarian I'm not sure I want to vote for any of these candidates as they just don't seem to be real Libertarians.  Am I wrong?

« Last Edit: May 27, 2008, 05:21:53 pm by Tck13 » Logged
djahn
Administrator
Newbie
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 153


« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2008, 09:11:51 am »


Let me ask the question that begs answering then.  Which one of the candidates would have been best to hitch our wagon to and why?

David Jahn
Logged

David Jahn
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2008, 10:47:02 am »

Bob Barr certainly is not the answer. The guy is a staunch social conservative.
Logged
Tck13
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 40


« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2008, 05:22:48 pm »

Bob Barr certainly is not the answer. The guy is a staunch social conservative.

That's what bothers me about Paul as well.  He is very socially conservative.  Seems like more of the same to me.
Logged
klapton
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 137



« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2008, 09:04:41 pm »

Bob Barr certainly is not the answer. The guy is a staunch social conservative.

That's what bothers me about Paul as well.  He is very socially conservative.  Seems like more of the same to me.
Not really.  He just spent much of his adult life delivering babies, and his conscience won't allow him to support abortion.  I've never heard any kind of bible-thumping or the like from him.
Logged
bergie72
smf LPPa Members
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


brianb_1972@hotmail.com luzernelp@yahoo.com
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2008, 09:49:30 pm »

Isn't it up to the State LP parties to put their candidate on the ballot? 

If the LPPA was ...  disatisfied, shall we say, with the nominee put up at the National Convention, couldn't we collect signatures for another set of candidates for the Prez/VP spots.

Just putting the idea out there for discussion....
Logged
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2008, 11:53:56 pm »

Even so, it doesn't change the fact that Barr was picked at the national convention making me feel like an idiot for bothering to come back to the party only for it to go Republican Lite.
Logged
bergie72
smf LPPa Members
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


brianb_1972@hotmail.com luzernelp@yahoo.com
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2008, 02:38:11 pm »

I'm not crazy about it either.  But this may actually be a good thing, in a way.

With someone who already has some name recognition in the Presidential slot, it could give us a little more clout in getting the Libertarian brand out in the public.  The more people that hear about the LP and actually listen, the more we can grow the party, and get more people elected to office.

Of course, this is all in theory, and from the e-mails I've gotten from the "Discussion" board, having Barr as the nominee is pi$$ing off a lot of people, so what happens with them is totally up in the air.  I know I'll be listening closely to what Barr has to say in the upcoming months. 

My vote is going to be 'undecided' throught the summer, I imagine, unless one of the candidates says something amazing that says, "Hey -- pick me!!", which I don't see happening anytime soon.
Logged
klapton
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 137



« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2008, 03:39:30 pm »

My vote is going to be 'undecided' throught the summer, I imagine, unless one of the candidates says something amazing that says, "Hey -- pick me!!", which I don't see happening anytime soon.
"I'm the 'change' guy!"

"nuh-uh, I am!"

"I'm ready on day one!"

"nuh-uh, I am!"

"I think GWB is dumb!"

"nuh-uh, I do!"

/sigh... 

This comprehensive election coverage provided by SNN, the Sheeple News Network (tm)
Logged
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2008, 03:40:22 pm »

How are we going to get the "Libertarian brand" out there when a social conservative is our spokesman? How is anyone with a brain ever going to trust us? I will admit that Mr. Barr would make a great Republican, a far cry better than today's Republican Party, but he IS NOT a libertarian. What just happened to the Libertarian Party is that we sold out our values to do better in the election, IF we do better.

I'd like to hear what Mr. D. Jahn has to say about this. He was at the convention.
Logged
djahn
Administrator
Newbie
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 153


« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2008, 10:19:59 pm »

How are we going to get the "Libertarian brand" out there when a social conservative is our spokesman? How is anyone with a brain ever going to trust us? I will admit that Mr. Barr would make a great Republican, a far cry better than today's Republican Party, but he IS NOT a libertarian. What just happened to the Libertarian Party is that we sold out our values to do better in the election, IF we do better.

I'd like to hear what Mr. D. Jahn has to say about this. He was at the convention.

I'm short on time right now, so I can't write at length the way I would like. 

Since I came to the party in 2000, I notice that the party has fractured every time we nominate a candidate for president.  In 2000, folks thought Harry Brown was at the center of corruption charges.  In 2004, the delegates wanted to reverse their votes when they learned that Badnarik was a state citizen without a drivers license, etc.  This year is no different.

I can tell you we listened to all of the candidates, and none of them were perfect.  The delegates made their choice. 

Some folks insist on hitching our wagon to a non-compromising candidate even if they won't get out of the barnyard.  What a disservice to this nation.  Instead of focusing on getting libertarians elected, we insist on shocking the electorate with our principled views. The end result is the major parties continue to run our liberties and our country into the ground.  It is time for us to mature.  We may have reached the point where libs would prefer to get some people elected.

This party split years ago into educational and political branches.  We are in the political branch.  That means our priority should be getting candidates elected who will take this country in a libertarian direction.  We arrived at this juncture in increments, and we will only succeed in reversing it in increments.

I'd like to see us put up a candidate who will get more than one percent of the vote, so people will take notice to our party and give our candidates more consideration in the coming years.  We don't need a candidate who is going to shout about legalizing heroin and crack or legalizing prostitution for example.  That may be the way we want to lead the country, but the electorate isn't ready to go there in one big leap.  We have to guide them there.  Let's push for legalizing marijuana.  Once we get that, the public might begin to see it our way and we can push for more.

All of the candidates had issues.  I believe the delegates felt that Bob Barr offered the greatest opportunity for our party.  They were concerned about Barr, but he addressed those concerns.

I want to give him the benefit of the doubt and see where it leads us.  Next year, we may say it was the best thing we ever did, or the worst, who knows.  I'm not one for whining.  I didn't whine in 2000 or 2004, and I'm not going to start now.  I don't look back, I look forward.  I'll back Barr as long as I'm able to tolerate the views he espouses from this day forward.  It is in his hands now.  It is up to him to keep us with him.  If he loses us, he is done, and I'm sure he knows that.  I haven't heard anything from him throughout the convention that turned me off.  I hope he keeps it that way.  After serving two years on the Libertarian National Committee, he should know how we think.

I hope that helps.

David Jahn
Logged

David Jahn
Tck13
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 40


« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2008, 10:41:09 pm »


Let me ask the question that begs answering then.  Which one of the candidates would have been best to hitch our wagon to and why?

David Jahn

I haven't been around long enough to know that much about the party but what about Ruwart or Kubby?  Ruwart seems to be very intelligent and carry the LP message well (from what I've seen). 

Aren't these two much better choices than Barr, Paul, or Gravel?  Or, did these candidates switch parties or get a Libertarian nod just to further the popularity of the party by sacrificing the party's message?

IMO, anyone that's going to be considered a candidate needs to be a great speaker and really pinpoint what's currently going on in politics plus have a good, imaginative PR campaign.

Watching Kubby and Ruwart on Youtube doesn't really portray anything exciting or anything that would hold my attention (not that they don't have a good message).

Why don't they or the party attract much attention?
Logged
Tck13
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 40


« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2008, 10:47:16 pm »

How are we going to get the "Libertarian brand" out there when a social conservative is our spokesman? How is anyone with a brain ever going to trust us? I will admit that Mr. Barr would make a great Republican, a far cry better than today's Republican Party, but he IS NOT a libertarian. What just happened to the Libertarian Party is that we sold out our values to do better in the election, IF we do better.

I'd like to hear what Mr. D. Jahn has to say about this. He was at the convention.

Some folks insist on hitching our wagon to a non-compromising candidate even if they won't get out of the barnyard.  What a disservice to this nation.  Instead of focusing on getting libertarians elected, we insist on shocking the electorate with our principled views. The end result is the major parties continue to run our liberties and our country into the ground.  It is time for us to mature.  We may have reached the point where libs would prefer to get some people elected.

This party split years ago into educational and political branches.  We are in the political branch.  That means our priority should be getting candidates elected who will take this country in a libertarian direction.  We arrived at this juncture in increments, and we will only succeed in reversing it in increments.

I'd like to see us put up a candidate who will get more than one percent of the vote, so people will take notice to our party and give our candidates more consideration in the coming years.  We don't need a candidate who is going to shout about legalizing heroin and crack or legalizing prostitution for example.  That may be the way we want to lead the country, but the electorate isn't ready to go there in one big leap.  We have to guide them there.  Let's push for legalizing marijuana.  Once we get that, the public might begin to see it our way and we can push for more.


David Jahn

Wow.  I really edited my previous post because I felt it was getting off topic and I was actually going to talk about much of the same thing.

The L party does seem extreme and distant because of its ideology and its message seems inconsistent (as evidenced by the splitting).  It can't be introduced that way (as you say).  It needs to start slow and very lightly to introduce people to the ideas.  It needs to take small steps from where the current Government is today to where it needs to go.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2008, 10:49:36 pm by Tck13 » Logged
foobar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 23


« Reply #13 on: May 31, 2008, 03:30:22 pm »

I don't get it.

Bob Barr, Ron Paul, and Mike Gravel just don't seem like Libertarians.  They are Conservatives and Liberal who want smaller Government with Liberal and Conservative Philosophies.  I guess it's not all bad - maybe something is better than nothing?

As a budding Libertarian I'm not sure I want to vote for any of these candidates as they just don't seem to be real Libertarians.  Am I wrong?


Well, we can be super picky and explain why these candidates aren't true libertarians and such, but any of them would do a far better job compared to Obama or McCain. Why? Barr & Paul both tackle key issues: government spending, free trade, and civil liberties. Even if that means voting for essentally another Republican, it's a far better plan than voting for another neo-conservative or socialist.
Logged
JohnKOTR
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 140


« Reply #14 on: May 31, 2008, 03:44:36 pm »

I will listen to what the man (Barr) has to say over the coming months. It had better be good.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.4 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com