WWTBAM Bored

sunflower wrote:I really thought he'd do a little better than that this time around, due to the overall discontent, I figured 3 - 4% at least!! I know it's kind of a throw away vote and some people say that's a cop out. But I just cling to the hope that some day, a third party candidate can have a successful run!

sunflower wrote:As of yesterday he was still begging for money, trying to get to a total of $4 million raised during the campaign.

He got 1.12% of the vote in CT and 0.53% nationwide, last time I checked.

I really thought he'd do a little better than that this time around, due to the overall discontent, I figured 3 - 4% at least!! I know it's kind of a throw away vote and some people say that's a cop out. But I just cling to the hope that some day, a third party candidate can have a successful run!

silverscreenselect wrote:

sunflower wrote:I really thought he'd do a little better than that this time around, due to the overall discontent, I figured 3 - 4% at least!! I know it's kind of a throw away vote and some people say that's a cop out. But I just cling to the hope that some day, a third party candidate can have a successful run!

He had a successful run in 2000. He got what he wanted by costing Al Gore the presidency. The Libertarian candidate in Georgia might have a successful run for the Senate depending on the final vote tally by costing Saxby Chambliss his Senate seat.

Unless and until third parties get serious about actually trying to be a force for governing the country instead of a joke and occasional spoiler, that's all they can ever hope for.... irrelevance at best and electing candidates more opposed to your own views at worst.

I'm not sure what "get serious" means.

andrewjackson wrote: * 43 for State Senates
* 224 for State Houses
* 3 for Local Executives
* 28 for Local Legislatures
* 7 for Judge
* 12 for Sheriff or Constable
* 77 for Other Local Offices
* 562 Total LP candidates

I'm not sure what "get serious" means. We have principles and we run candidates for a wide range of offices.

silverscreenselect wrote:

andrewjackson wrote: * 43 for State Senates
* 224 for State Houses
* 3 for Local Executives
* 28 for Local Legislatures
* 7 for Judge
* 12 for Sheriff or Constable
* 77 for Other Local Offices
* 562 Total LP candidates

I'm not sure what "get serious" means. We have principles and we run candidates for a wide range of offices.

That's less than one person per Senate in each state and about four per House in each state. And I would guess that I could probably count the total number out of those 562 who had a realistic chance to win on the fingers of my hands and have a few fingers left over.

You'll get an occasional spoiler, and you'll get someone who gets invited to a debate and makes a pitch on television or the radio for those few questions he or she gets, but you don't get people with realistic chances of winning and you don't get even the beginning of a power base, not at the national, state or local level.

A Libertarian (or any third party) almost never has the resources to compete for President or Senator or even for the House of Representatives. They do have the resources to compete for State senate and house and for local campaigns if they make a concerted effort to pick their districts and their candidates carefully, to mass all their volunteer efforts in a few select locations and to run intelligent campaigns. If they do that, they start to win, here and there, and once a candidate is actually elected, it's easier to get a second and then a third.

The question really is do they want to actually help govern this country or do they just want to score points on talk radio or the college lecture circuit?

The Silver Lining

TJIC has the silver lining nailed for libertarians:
Let us not forget the good news from the election: one statist, speech limiting, freedom-agnostic candidate lost.

I'm kind of ambivalent this morning - I knew in advance that freedom was going to lose again in this election, no matter what the outcome.

If I am depressed this morning, it is more about propositions and side issues than about the President and Congress. Had this been a leftward shift in the county, I could have been satisfied that at least losses in freedom in one area might be substituted by gains in others (though for me personally, changes in economic freedom tend to have far more direct and immediate impact than changes in social freedoms).

But the only pattern I could see yesterday was not leftward but government-ward. In the same states where Democratic candidates won with economic interventionist messages, Constitutional bans on gay marriage also won by sizable majorities. In Arizona, gay marriage was banned, an initiative to limit future tax increases was defeated, an initiative to protect health care choice was defeated, an initiative to soften last year's anti-immigrant legislation was defeated, and a payday loan ban was confirmed. The voting in some way defies a traditional left-right explanation and is only consistent in that it was almost all the reverse of the libertarian position. And to make the results even more irrational, nearly the biggest defeat of any ballot initiative in Arizona was for a pay increase for state legislators -- the voters seem to like government but don't trust or respect the individuals employed there.

After the last Bush election, a number of leftish folks claimed they were moving to Canada or France or wherever. But that's the problem for libertarians in this country -- there is not place to run. Those who want to run away to a country with a more controlling government have 180 or so choices. Those of us who seek more freedom have approximately none.

andrewjackson wrote:Sometimes I wish I had all the answers and could be so sure of myself.