- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Libertarian party
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:36 am to Statsattack
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:36 am to Statsattack
The actual party is retarded.
0
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:43 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
No need to extort taxpayers into believing theyll never win if they leave the GOP.
The overwhelming majority of Republicans legislators and the president are losing big league now. No need to abandon the party. These last 6 months should show you that not only are Democrats bald faced liars but so are the GOP. They do not have the will or desire to to follow up on any of their big promises.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:48 am to Statsattack
I would strongly suggest listening to The Tom Woods Show, Part of the Problem with Dave Smith, The Jason Stapleton Program, The Fifth Column, The Ancap Barbershop, Anarchast, Corbett Report, The Scott Norton Show, The Rubin Report (classical liberal), Freedomain Radio with Stefan Molyneux, Lions of Liberty and of course The Ron Paul LIberty Report. The are all in my weekly rotation of kickass libertarian/classical liberalism/anti-war/anti-fed/ non-aggression principle diet
Posted on 7/8/17 at 8:52 am to Statsattack
It is a waste of time. I tried it. Donated money, went to a few meetings.
What you will quickly find is that people who align with these views simply don't have extra time in their lives to do what is needed to make it an opposition party. Everyone works, and works a lot.
There is lots of turnover and the constant two party wins discourage everyone.
PS - I don't care what anyone tells you, Gary Johnson was not a Libertarian. LOL
What you will quickly find is that people who align with these views simply don't have extra time in their lives to do what is needed to make it an opposition party. Everyone works, and works a lot.
There is lots of turnover and the constant two party wins discourage everyone.
PS - I don't care what anyone tells you, Gary Johnson was not a Libertarian. LOL
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:41 am to Statsattack
I've been a member for decades. The only disadvantage is closed primaries. But anybody can vote in the general and that's the one that counts.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:43 am to Zach
What are some specific things your party (the Libertarian Party) had done to actually advance libertarianism since you joined?
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:46 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
What are some specific things your party (the Libertarian Party) had done to actually advance libertarianism since you joined?
The Libertarians major achievement has been to move some GOP political figures toward libertarian philosophy. That's why the GOP is not going along with a bill that = Obamacare Light.
The major problem with the party now is the vacuum of leadership following the death of Harry Browne. Their recent candidates were not libertarians, they were opportunists. It's much the same with the Green Party. Their candidates going back to Ralph Nadar didn't care about the environment. They were just leftists.
This post was edited on 7/8/17 at 10:48 am
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:51 am to Zach
quote:
The Libertarians major achievement has been to move some GOP political figures toward libertarian philosophy. That's why the GOP is not going along with a bill that = Obamacare Light.
I don't see any evidence that it's the "Libertarian Party" that is responsible for such a thing, though.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 10:57 am to Y.A. Tittle
If you just want to talk about the candidates since Browne then none of the Libertarians have any influence. But the members of the party who don't run for President have had a big influence. Charles Murray would be a good example.
Years ago when the party was under Browne they influenced WFB. In his last years he made a big shift. It caused quite a stir when he came out in favor of drug legalization, something conservative Republicans have long opposed.
People like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are going to create more GOP candidates with a libertarian bent. The big advantage Paul and Cruz have is consistency of position as opposed to political expediency. So, they come out looking a lot more principled than a typical Congressman who changes his opinions with the polling data.
Years ago when the party was under Browne they influenced WFB. In his last years he made a big shift. It caused quite a stir when he came out in favor of drug legalization, something conservative Republicans have long opposed.
People like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are going to create more GOP candidates with a libertarian bent. The big advantage Paul and Cruz have is consistency of position as opposed to political expediency. So, they come out looking a lot more principled than a typical Congressman who changes his opinions with the polling data.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:02 am to Zach
quote:
People like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are going to create more GOP candidates with a libertarian bent. The big advantage Paul and Cruz have is consistency of position as opposed to political expediency. So, they come out looking a lot more principled than a typical Congressman who changes his opinions with the polling data.
Maybeeeee, you could argue Paul, to some extent, but I would not say, generally speaking that they are the RESULT OF the Libertarian Party. Cruz certainly is not.
I'm not, of course, trying to assert that neither have been influenced by libertarian (small 'l') philosophy.
ETA, And I'm not sure how what you're saying here is not an argument in favor of my position earlier in the thread - that the Libertarian Party, is ultimately not the best vehicle to advance libertarianism.
This post was edited on 7/8/17 at 11:05 am
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:09 am to Y.A. Tittle
i still think using the DEMs and not the GOP is a potentially insidious trick
the DEMs are having a mini-civil war right now between the progs (Pelosi's crew) and Tim Ryan (more traditional, moderate, "blue dog"/union DEMs). it's THEORETICALLY possible that if 2018 and/or maybe 2020 go badly if they keep going hard left, more moderate options open to the DEMs
progs primarily focus their progressive beliefs on the social side, which falls in line with Libertarian-esque beliefs. you just have to become quasi-Libertarian on economic issues and sell jobs (especially to the demos the DEMs have forgotten). if you can figure out a good formula that appeals to that economic base, it could work
the main reason why teh DEM label is important are the auto-voting blocs. it may just be regional. i think it could work in a place like LA where the DEM candidate automatically gets all the black vote. all you have to do is peel away some economic conservatives and you could form a coalition to win races
the DEMs are having a mini-civil war right now between the progs (Pelosi's crew) and Tim Ryan (more traditional, moderate, "blue dog"/union DEMs). it's THEORETICALLY possible that if 2018 and/or maybe 2020 go badly if they keep going hard left, more moderate options open to the DEMs
progs primarily focus their progressive beliefs on the social side, which falls in line with Libertarian-esque beliefs. you just have to become quasi-Libertarian on economic issues and sell jobs (especially to the demos the DEMs have forgotten). if you can figure out a good formula that appeals to that economic base, it could work
the main reason why teh DEM label is important are the auto-voting blocs. it may just be regional. i think it could work in a place like LA where the DEM candidate automatically gets all the black vote. all you have to do is peel away some economic conservatives and you could form a coalition to win races
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:17 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
ETA, And I'm not sure how what you're saying here is not an argument in favor of my position earlier in the thread - that the Libertarian Party, is ultimately not the best vehicle to advance libertarianism.
They're not mutually exclusive. The philosophy can be advanced by 'L' and 'l'. My position is that there is no reason for people like me to NOT register with the party.
The republicans pay more attention if there are 10M registered Libertarians than if there are 10.
And since the only closed primary is for President you can vote in any election except that 1 that happens every four years. Then, in the general a thinking Libertarian just looks at the polls in his state. If it's close, vote GOP. If it's a lock for one candidate then vote Libertarian.
Hell, I can't remember the last time La. was a swing state going into the general. It may have been JFK vs. Nixon.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:19 am to Zach
quote:
Hell, I can't remember the last time La. was a swing state going into the general. It may have been JFK vs. Nixon.
1992? Clinton won LA, right?
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:20 am to SlowFlowPro
Clinton was way ahead in La. during both runs. We were not a swing state.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:20 am to SlowFlowPro
10-15 years ago, you might have had a point. I think the dems are too far over the edge at this point, though.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:22 am to Y.A. Tittle
i anticipate that it's going to swing back, though
but, that's why i said maybe regional. nationally it's going to be difficult b/c they're so "coast heavy"
i mean on the local level, take your DEM strong holds like BR/NOla. just throw out a "DEM" who can appeal to the white/middle-upper class
as long as you coordinate it and provide enough "wink wink" symbolism, with our jungle primary i could see it working
but, that's why i said maybe regional. nationally it's going to be difficult b/c they're so "coast heavy"
i mean on the local level, take your DEM strong holds like BR/NOla. just throw out a "DEM" who can appeal to the white/middle-upper class
as long as you coordinate it and provide enough "wink wink" symbolism, with our jungle primary i could see it working
Posted on 7/8/17 at 11:55 am to SlowFlowPro
It's not so much that La. voters were liberal when Clinton ran. He was a centrist and a good ole boy from a neighboring state.
But today the Dem party is way to the left of where they were then.
But today the Dem party is way to the left of where they were then.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 12:53 pm to Zach
I am against the 2 party system. South Park put it best when it was a turd vs a duesche.
Posted on 7/8/17 at 12:54 pm to Statsattack
with SMD voting, 2 parties just naturally emerge
to get more parties we'd have to adopt national/regional Parliamentary rule/voting
*ETA: even then you kind of get "2-sided factions" and it doesn't change THAT much
to get more parties we'd have to adopt national/regional Parliamentary rule/voting
*ETA: even then you kind of get "2-sided factions" and it doesn't change THAT much
This post was edited on 7/8/17 at 12:55 pm
Posted on 7/8/17 at 12:55 pm to Statsattack
Here's your fedora
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News