Poor Ralph Nader...

[sunflower]

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!

[peacock2121]

His ego must be bruised.

Being a non-factor has got to hurt.

[silverscreenselect]

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.

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

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!

I think that many people feel that he is partly responsible for Bush being in office for the past 8 years.

[PlacentiaSoccerMom]

Obama should be thanking Jeri Ryan for his win. Her divorce helped his career.

[andrewjackson]

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.

Libertarian Party results for 2008 (continually being updated):

http://www.lp.org/2008-general-election-results

The Libertarian Party had these candidates:

* 14 for US Senate
* 116 for US House
* 5 for State Governor
* 4 for State Lt. Governor
* 1 for State Treasurer
* 3 for State Attorney General
* 2 for State Auditor
* 21 for Other State Offices
* 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.

[dimmzy]

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

Well, Ross Perot actually had somewhat of a chance. I know several people who voted for him, in part because they were fed up. But he chose an amateur for vice president and didn't prep him for the debate. He lost votes then because people felt he was running as an ego trip...

Some people think the same of Ralph. He spoke at a local university here right after 2000 and the students who ferried him around said later that he wasn't very personable, didn't ask them any questions, was totally humorless and had poor grooming. If you're serious, then at least ACT like you belong in the tent.

[silverscreenselect]

* 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?

[andrewjackson]

* 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?

Well, I guess I'll take that. A mostly serious response that isn't just insults.

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

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

I thought of AJ when I read this from Coyote

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.

[silverscreenselect]

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

The two-party system in this country has been in place in more or less its current form since the Civil War. Third parties have come and gone; a couple have effected presidential elections and there's even been a senator or governor or two elected, but none of them have built a base.

I'd like to see a viable third party in this country, or even in any single state. It would only take a few seats for the party to have enormous influence. If one senator, Joe Lieberman, can twist the Democratic party around the way he has the last two years, imagine what would happen if there were three or four in a voting block.

If you look at what Obama's supporters did this election and what the Republicans have done in the past, you see people who are serious about winning elections. It's not all the glitz and glamor or the appeal of issues; it's about organizing, making phone calls, handing out literature, and pounding the pavement. I did some of that in my younger days and it's hard work and not much fun.... until the payoff comes.

You may know better than me, but have the LIbertarians or any third party ever showed a willingness to do this? And it's not a one time thing; you have to do it election after election. It shouldn't be too difficult to pick some good districts to run in, get good candidates who are actually serious about winning, get some volunteers and pound the bricks. If the Libertarians in Georgia marshalled their efforts towards getting a couple of state representatives elected rather than winning 3% of the vote in the Senate race, then they might have something concrete to show for their efforts.

You're not going to get this done in two years or four years, but maybe in ten or twenty you'll have some viable results. I know Libertarians are sincere in their beliefs, but are they willing to put their sweat equity where their mouths are?