Libertarian Discussion Thread

[Northern Davincia]

Should the Libertarian Party run Bill Weld for 2020?

After he openly admitted to supporting Hillary Clinton over Gary Johnson? It's a terrible idea.
Petersen, on the other hand, is my ideal selection.

[Idzequitch]

Should the Libertarian Party run Bill Weld for 2020?

After he openly admitted to supporting Hillary Clinton over Gary Johnson? It's a terrible idea.
Petersen, on the other hand, is my ideal selection.

Personally, I don't see him having a wide enough appeal. I don't think most self-identified Democrats would be willing to vote for him.

[USS Monitor]

After he openly admitted to supporting Hillary Clinton over Gary Johnson? It's a terrible idea.
Petersen, on the other hand, is my ideal selection.

Personally, I don't see him having a wide enough appeal. I don't think most self-identified Democrats would be willing to vote for him.

Most self-identified Democrats aren't going to vote Libertarian no matter who runs -- unless Bernie Sanders has a sudden urge to join the LP.

[Major-Tom]

Should the Libertarian Party run Bill Weld for 2020?

After he openly admitted to supporting Hillary Clinton over Gary Johnson? It's a terrible idea.
Petersen, on the other hand, is my ideal selection.

Petersen got no experience, he should run for the House in Missouri.

Bill Weld? Yeah, I support him. For real. He ain't a dogmatic libertarian, but hes intelligent, sensible, and could run on a GOP ticket as well. He was also a good governor.

[Idzequitch]

Personally, I don't see him having a wide enough appeal. I don't think most self-identified Democrats would be willing to vote for him.

Most self-identified Democrats aren't going to vote Libertarian no matter who runs -- unless Bernie Sanders has a sudden urge to join the LP.

Perhaps I should say leftists then? The thing with Johnson, despite his faults, is that he had a certain appeal to both left and right, as witnessed by the fact that you and me, despite some political differences, voted for the same guy.

Petersen strikes me as Republican lite. Sure he's got a few social leanings toward the left, but I don't think it's enough to draw anyone from that side of things. I seem to remember you saying yourself that you wouldn't vote for him had he gotten the LP nomination.

[Major-Tom]

Most self-identified Democrats aren't going to vote Libertarian no matter who runs -- unless Bernie Sanders has a sudden urge to join the LP.

Perhaps I should say leftists then? The thing with Johnson, despite his faults, is that he had a certain appeal to both left and right, as witnessed by the fact that you and me, despite some political differences, voted for the same guy.

Petersen strikes me as Republican lite. Sure he's got a few social leanings toward the left, but I don't think it's enough to draw anyone from that side of things. I seem to remember you saying yourself that you wouldn't vote for him had he gotten the LP nomination.

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

[Idzequitch]

Perhaps I should say leftists then? The thing with Johnson, despite his faults, is that he had a certain appeal to both left and right, as witnessed by the fact that you and me, despite some political differences, voted for the same guy.

Petersen strikes me as Republican lite. Sure he's got a few social leanings toward the left, but I don't think it's enough to draw anyone from that side of things. I seem to remember you saying yourself that you wouldn't vote for him had he gotten the LP nomination.

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

I'm not looking for dogmatic. I'm not a dogmatic Libertarian myself. If we choose Republican Lite, there aren't enough right wingers to carry us past the Democratic candidate, but if we choose Democratic Lite, there aren't enoughleft wingers to carry us past the Republicna candidate. I'm not concerned with dogma, but I do think the LP needs someone who appeals to both sides if they want to even pretend to have a chance of winning.

[USS Monitor]

Most self-identified Democrats aren't going to vote Libertarian no matter who runs -- unless Bernie Sanders has a sudden urge to join the LP.

Perhaps I should say leftists then? The thing with Johnson, despite his faults, is that he had a certain appeal to both left and right, as witnessed by the fact that you and me, despite some political differences, voted for the same guy.

Petersen strikes me as Republican lite. Sure he's got a few social leanings toward the left, but I don't think it's enough to draw anyone from that side of things. I seem to remember you saying yourself that you wouldn't vote for him had he gotten the LP nomination.

Yeah, that's fair. I thought Johnson and Weld were headed in the right direction, getting away from being Republican lite.

[Major-Tom]

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

I'm not looking for dogmatic. I'm not a dogmatic Libertarian myself. If we choose Republican Lite, there aren't enough right wingers to carry us past the Democratic candidate, but if we choose Democratic Lite, there aren't enoughleft wingers to carry us past the Republicna candidate. I'm not concerned with dogma, but I do think the LP needs someone who appeals to both sides if they want to even pretend to have a chance of winning.

I know.

Whos an ideal candidate for ya?

[Idzequitch]

I'm not looking for dogmatic. I'm not a dogmatic Libertarian myself. If we choose Republican Lite, there aren't enough right wingers to carry us past the Democratic candidate, but if we choose Democratic Lite, there aren't enoughleft wingers to carry us past the Republicna candidate. I'm not concerned with dogma, but I do think the LP needs someone who appeals to both sides if they want to even pretend to have a chance of winning.

I know.

Whos an ideal candidate for ya?

I'll be honest, I don't know. I'm new to this whole libertarian thing. By the time it became clear that Trump was going to take the GOP nomination (thus removing any chance I would vote Republican) it seemed clear that it was gonna be Petersen or Johnson for the LP, so they're the only ones I thoroughly researched. Feldman seemed interesting, but now he's dead. I think there would be a revolt if Weld got the nomination, and probably rightly so.

So at this point, I'm just gonna wait and see what happens. See who runs for it, and decide who's best at that point.

[USS Monitor]

I know.

Whos an ideal candidate for ya?

I'll be honest, I don't know. I'm new to this whole libertarian thing. By the time it became clear that Trump was going to take the GOP nomination (thus removing any chance I would vote Republican) it seemed clear that it was gonna be Petersen or Johnson for the LP, so they're the only ones I thoroughly researched. Feldman seemed interesting, but now he's dead. I think there would be a revolt if Weld got the nomination, and probably rightly so.

So at this point, I'm just gonna wait and see what happens. See who runs for it, and decide who's best at that point.

Feldman seemed like a cool guy. It's really a shame about him dying.

[Telconi]

I'd like to see an economic moderate, but extremely socially liberal candidate. The whole "privatize everything" idea turns a lot of folks off I think.

[PaNTuXIa]

Should the Libertarian Party run Bill Weld for 2020?

Bill Weld literally isn't a libertarian. He's a goddamn liberal. Fuck him.

[USS Monitor]

Should the Libertarian Party run Bill Weld for 2020?

Bill Weld literally isn't a libertarian. He's a goddamn liberal. Fuck him.

You espouse completely different views depending which puppet you're posting with, so I see no reason to take anything you say seriously.

[Corrian]

Gary Johnson was probably about the only time I'd vote Libertarian, until he did his epic failures. Still would have taken him over Trump of course.

If you guys elect the extreme branch of your party, well, I'll be moving away from the party entirely. Not that I ever was much of it, but I am not remotely hardcore Libertarian.

[Telconi]

Gary Johnson was probably about the only time I'd vote Libertarian, until he did his epic failures. Still would have taken him over Trump of course.

If you guys elect the extreme branch of your party, well, I'll be moving away from the party entirely. Not that I ever was much of it, but I am not remotely hardcore Libertarian.

What made Johnson uniquely good in your view?

[Zurkerx]

I know.

Whos an ideal candidate for ya?

I'll be honest, I don't know. I'm new to this whole libertarian thing. By the time it became clear that Trump was going to take the GOP nomination (thus removing any chance I would vote Republican) it seemed clear that it was gonna be Petersen or Johnson for the LP, so they're the only ones I thoroughly researched. Feldman seemed interesting, but now he's dead. I think there would be a revolt if Weld got the nomination, and probably rightly so.

So at this point, I'm just gonna wait and see what happens. See who runs for it, and decide who's best at that point.

I think really, the only way a Libertarian-lite gets in is if they run either in the Democratic or Republican Party. Of course, that would be reinforcing the two-party system but, it might the only way to get our ideas across.

[Northern Davincia]

I'll be honest, I don't know. I'm new to this whole libertarian thing. By the time it became clear that Trump was going to take the GOP nomination (thus removing any chance I would vote Republican) it seemed clear that it was gonna be Petersen or Johnson for the LP, so they're the only ones I thoroughly researched. Feldman seemed interesting, but now he's dead. I think there would be a revolt if Weld got the nomination, and probably rightly so.

So at this point, I'm just gonna wait and see what happens. See who runs for it, and decide who's best at that point.

I think really, the only way a Libertarian-lite gets in is if they run either in the Democratic or Republican Party. Of course, that would be reinforcing the two-party system but, it might the only way to get our ideas across.

A libertarian posing as a Democrat would get lynched by the progressives in an instant.

[Zurkerx]

I think really, the only way a Libertarian-lite gets in is if they run either in the Democratic or Republican Party. Of course, that would be reinforcing the two-party system but, it might the only way to get our ideas across.

A libertarian posing as a Democrat would get lynched by the progressives in an instant.

The irony in them lynching

Well, yes, that would happen but, it shouldn't stop them. They already go after moderate "Blue Dog" Democrats.

[Living Freedom Land]

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

The Libertarian Party is never going to win the presidency though, and as long as the FPTP system is in place they'll be hard pressed to even get a seat in the US House. The LP project should be more based on running candidates to point out the hypocrisy of the statist system, and to educate people on, and covert people to, the libertarian view.

I'm not entirely opposed to running former GOP politicians, but I think the trend has gone too far. It's been hit and miss. Ron Paul was great, and Gary Johnson was acceptable. But the wonderful clusterfucks that were Bob Barr and Bill Weld tend to go against the idea that former-GOP is the way to go. I really want to see a die-hard libertarian get the Presidential nomination next time around, regardless of whether or not they're a former GOP politician.

[Northern Davincia]

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

The Libertarian Party is never going to win the presidency though, and as long as the FPTP system is in place they'll be hard pressed to even get a seat in the US House. The LP project should be more based on running candidates to point out the hypocrisy of the statist system, and to educate people on, and covert people to, the libertarian view.

I'm not entirely opposed to running former GOP politicians, but I think the trend has gone too far. It's been hit and miss. Ron Paul was great, and Gary Johnson was acceptable. But the wonderful clusterfucks that were Bob Barr and Bill Weld tend to go against the idea that former-GOP is the way to go. I really want to see a die-hard libertarian get the Presidential nomination next time around, regardless of whether or not they're a former GOP politician.

They'd all be better off infiltrating the GOP altogether. The LP is going nowhere, and the reason why is because it can't organize efficiently whatsoever, and it has the worst of luck with candidates.

[The Liberated Territories]

You Libertarians don't need a dogmatic Libertarian, but instead, either a Republican lite, Libertarian lite, or maybe even a Democratic lite. If you wanna win, that is.

The Libertarian Party is never going to win the presidency though, and as long as the FPTP system is in place they'll be hard pressed to even get a seat in the US House. The LP project should be more based on running candidates to point out the hypocrisy of the statist system, and to educate people on, and covert people to, the libertarian view.

I'm not entirely opposed to running former GOP politicians, but I think the trend has gone too far. It's been hit and miss. Ron Paul was great, and Gary Johnson was acceptable. But the wonderful clusterfucks that were Bob Barr and Bill Weld tend to go against the idea that former-GOP is the way to go. I really want to see a die-hard libertarian get the Presidential nomination next time around, regardless of whether or not they're a former GOP politician.

That is a name I haven't seen in a while.

You do raise a good point. Bernie was considered a radical (although still a moderate in left wing terms) and managed to do quite successfully. Perhaps then we should be focusing on finding charismatic candidates, not necessarily the most moderate candidate. A candidate that can generate (even bad) controversy seems to be better than a candidate that generates no controversy at all, since it gets people talking about them.

[Vecherd]

I'm not entirely opposed to running former GOP politicians, but I think the trend has gone too far. It's been hit and miss. Ron Paul was great, and Gary Johnson was acceptable. But the wonderful clusterfucks that were Bob Barr and Bill Weld tend to go against the idea that former-GOP is the way to go. I really want to see a die-hard libertarian get the Presidential nomination next time around, regardless of whether or not they're a former GOP politician.

I'd like to see the pragmatic and the radical caucuses strike a deal that both parts has to be represented on their presidential tickets. The way Bill Weld was pushed through by Johnson was sad. Even if Weld did say his ass several times it was rather boring. Up until the recent revelations around Kokesh I would definitively have supported his candidature, but now its hard to say who should go for 2020, Petersen is a tool, but kinda interesting.

[Living Freedom Land]

The Libertarian Party is never going to win the presidency though, and as long as the FPTP system is in place they'll be hard pressed to even get a seat in the US House. The LP project should be more based on running candidates to point out the hypocrisy of the statist system, and to educate people on, and covert people to, the libertarian view.

I'm not entirely opposed to running former GOP politicians, but I think the trend has gone too far. It's been hit and miss. Ron Paul was great, and Gary Johnson was acceptable. But the wonderful clusterfucks that were Bob Barr and Bill Weld tend to go against the idea that former-GOP is the way to go. I really want to see a die-hard libertarian get the Presidential nomination next time around, regardless of whether or not they're a former GOP politician.

That is a name I haven't seen in a while.

You do raise a good point. Bernie was considered a radical (although still a moderate in left wing terms) and managed to do quite successfully. Perhaps then we should be focusing on finding charismatic candidates, not necessarily the most moderate candidate. A candidate that can generate (even bad) controversy seems to be better than a candidate that generates no controversy at all, since it gets people talking about them.

I'm back in town bro.

Ron Paul did well in rallying support but he was definitely not as moderate as Johnson. I think we need someone who can really capture hearts, and squishy-moderate rhetoric doesn't do that.

[Fanosolia]

Crap I knew if I waited the thread would move on. ... Eh, might as well try.

I'm going sound like a the biggest tumblrite or whatever left derogatory term you can think of, but you mean to say that's not happening?

Even ignoring whether if its fear mongering, or not and how that should be dealt with (I.e. Grassroots action or hardcoded law or some third thing...) what about in the cases where it clashes with the negative right of gun ownership?

Do racists own businesses? Sure, bigots of all sorts own businesses. Is it prevalent enough that it warrants the state shutting down the free market and mandating compulsory servitude towards business owners, hardly. As to how it relates to gun ownership, I'm not aware of any instance where gun ownership is negatively impacted by market bigotry. I'm sure it happens, but I know of two instances where gun ownership is negatively impacted by government bigotry. So basically, AFAIK, suppressing rights scorecard: Government - 2, Market - 0.

I comment about the market part below, but I'm curious about the two instances of government bigotry to gun ownership. I'm just surprised that you narrowed it down to just two.

I'm going sound like a the biggest tumblrite or whatever left derogatory term you can think of, but you mean to say that's not happening?

Even ignoring whether if its fear mongering, or not and how that should be dealt with (I.e. Grassroots action or hardcoded law or some third thing...) what about in the cases where it clashes with the negative right of gun ownership?

I'm not sure where you are going with the gun ownership thing, could you please explain?

I have no problem with grassroots action against bigotry, that's simply allowing those on the other side of the transaction to express their opinions too. Personally, if I am buying or selling, I'm simply going to look for the best deal possible and I don't care if I am dealing with a bigot, a Nazi, or even a liberal.

Yeah I did not explain that at all, so my bad . Mostly it stems from the fact that the state shouldn't disarm, or restrict the trade of arms based (at least sometimes) on the second amendment, but yet a private business owner can, seems strange to me. Especially when some guns right activists have pointed out how having protection for the vulnerable groups in society could be a plus. Maybe I'm misinterpreting in the way how the right to bare arms is a negative right, but there's my confusion on that.

Now I'll be fair and say that there are more "inclusive," or more realistically, more "amoral" (don't worry there are quotations for a reason) now than ever, so maybe the fear that there might be no place for a particular individual can't pay for a good, like something to protect them, is less of an issue. Maybe I've grown cynical as the have days gone by, and I'm just not sure if I can believe that. In truth, grassroots and "non-politics" movements give hope that intervention is less and less necessary, and I rather support doing more than praying the government does something right for once than not, but I am far from "ideologically pure".