BINGO!! See, even the retard caucus can be rational at times.

Finally figuring out why your “caucus” is referred to as the Retard Caucus are ya?

This is another lesson that he will learn in time. Disagreements with allies come up all the time, and his manner of expressing those disagreements will burn bridges down the road. It will take a while for him to realize the benefit of disagreeing in a more mature way, much like it may take a young worker a while to learn the benefit of giving notice before quitting a job.

Mike’s heart is in the right direction. It just takes experience to learn some of the finer points.

Technically, I am not a member of the national LP, anyway, as I do advocate the initiation of force under some circumstances—as do 99+% of the American people. And this is a significant reason why the LP is going nowhere expensively. It is too exclusive to be a real political party.

If you don’t have enough members in the district, including members with decent contact lists, you end up with embarrassing rallies with few attendees.

Mike’s blogging at HoT may not be as good as some of the others, but we all have to start somewhere. Let’s not shoot him down while he’s still getting his wings. Constructive criticism is best,and even though he outwardly appears to reject that (common for his age), internally he is digesting all that information.

That Badnarik was in a three-way is the reason why many opted to support Smither instead. Smither’s race was somewhere between a two and three way contest. While there were only two candidates on the ballot, the write-in campaigns from the Republican side were strong.

I did a study on the difference between two and three way races that was published in the May 2001 edition of Liberty. For lower state house races in the 12 states studied, Libertarians did about 4 times better when in two-way vs. three way races. (I did not count other minor parties when determining what constitutes a two, vs three way.)

In a two way race, the Lesser of Two Evils dilemma goes away. You get around 10 percent for free just for being on the ballot due to protest votes.

Trying to dis a campaign for faring worse in a three-way contest than one in a two way contest is truly retarded.

(Now, it would have been reasonable to question making such a major national effort for a three-way congressional race in the first place.)

And to say that someone who got a few percent was screwed by someone who pulled in 40% just doesn’t make any sense either. That’s like Ralph Nader saying: “Damnit, Al Gore… if you had just dropped out and endorsed me, I could have won this thing! See what you did?”

Now if the write-in had gotten fewer votes than Smither you might have some ground to argue that it was stupid for them to run her. But Smither was no where even remotely close. Not even in the meaningless special election where he was the only non-Republican on the ballot.

The Texas LP issued a press release comparing this year’s results with those from the past. They broke it down, for measurement purposes, into 2-way and 3-way races.

http://www.tx.lp.org/release-20061108.shtml

Heck, Badnarik received someting like 16% of the vote as a paper candidate for state house back in 2000 or 2002… and then 2% or 3% in a 3-way race for the same seat.

Hmmm….

How long until he is “fired” from that position? What’s the over/under?

His immaturity and stupidity almost make his friend Allen Hacker look intelligent by comparison.

Like I hope you don’t think steve osborne’s(nothing against him, a good guy) is better then Ed Thompson and is more capable at winnable.