The Republican Liberty Caucus has been the great recipient of the educational efforts of the Libertarian Party in the past few years. We’ve seen this really materialize in a few bigger states like Texas, and most especially Florida. In FL for instance, the LP barely exists any more, having split into 3 () different factions. But the real libertarian activity is within the FL RLC.

So, the LP is failing electorally is not really a failure. The RLC is just benefiting and carrying the libertarian football across the finish line.

Everytime the LP runs a less than serious candidate, 2 things happen: we commit a fraud on the voters, who are expecting that the people on the ballot are committed and qualified, and we usually get not only less than serious candidates, but just plain bad and embarrassing candidates running as a result.

Frankly, I was a bad candidate in 2000. I ran just like a typical libertarian: little community involvement ( I had just moved to town ), no campaign apparatus in place, spending my own money, talked about the wrong things ( like federal issues while running for a state level office) , etc. The difference is that I was no paper candidate. I had 10,000 3 folds printed and gave away every one by hand. I also took out a half page ad in the local paper.

I got savaged by the LP platform in public in front of 500 people, which did not help, but I ran to help the LP and “educate people” about the LP philosophy. Never occurred to me at the time that voters dont give a shit about the libertarian philosophy.

for all that the offical result was 2.6% in a 3 way for 600+ bucks invested. I’m glad I ran after all that.

It’s also worth noting that at NO time did I get any help with anything despite sending out 2 fundraising/help letters to the 80 or so registered Libertarians in the county.

I think we need to focus on having candidates who do run campaigns, even if it means we don’t fill the ballot. And perhaps some of the better candidates who run for state-wide office would do better to run in local races instead, where they can more easily engage in retail politics on a small budget.

That said, several years ago, the Dallas Morning News bought the local paper here in Riverside, California, and it has been much less sympathetic to Libertarian candidates or issues since then.

My city did a segment on the Reps/Dems for every race in the city of well over 100,000. An independent candidate got up in arms and pestered the city to interview all candidates. The city complied and called up all the candidates. Out of roughly 15 third party candidates in various races, only myself and the independent accepted the interview.

In 2006, another city invited all candidates to do a 2.5 minute interview as part of a panel. Of the third party candidates: 1 Libertarian turned it down, 1 Green never replied, 1 Constitution Party sent in a letter about why he hates insurance companies, and one other Libertarian, myself, attended.

Two points here…

1. I don’t blame the media at all for not covering third parties here. We don’t show up. I guess we prefer to not show up so that we can blame “the media” for our failures.

2. As a paper candidate, you still have to take the race seriously. Your attitude reflects on the party. When 20 Libertarians blow off interviews, and 1 Libertarian is taking it seriously, he looks like the oddball. The impression is that the LP is just a joke.

So where in your ariticle here you seem to have the impression that the Libertarian candidates badly failed to make ourselves and our issues relevant, you’re actually basing this on the distorted results obtained by the DMN’s very selective filtering process. Based on your banner above which says that you strive to provide fair and accurate coverage of third party politics in America, if you had met with us personally as the DMN did, you would’ve gotten a completely different impression.
.

Robert M. Pritchett
Libertarian candidate for State Rep. district 100

Is it just me, or does the media seem to kinda group the entire LP “bunch” into the “kook” category? The LP has great examples in Carla Howell, Michael Badnarik, Ed Thompson, Richard Mack, Bob Smither now…and yet it’s overshadowed by guys who are “paper challengers.”

This almost makes me want to run a countywide campaign or something in 2008. There’s a reason the RLC thrives in Texas: it’s because of examples such as the one the DMN gave.

And yes, the DMN is owned by Belo, but realistically, if Badnarik were to have opted for a gubernatorial contest instead of Congress, I bet all 5 candidates would be debating this fall.

Wes Benedict did a great job in stuffing the ballots, but the LP needs a candidate screening process. Ballot access is too expensive to be wasting it on guys who are just “paper pushers [challengers].”