Comments on: LP List Poll: Paul, Root, Phillies, and Kubby Win

by: applestoneoc

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:39:34 +0000

yahoo right red mail ocean kitchen busy right tree go

by: mma

Sun, 20 Jul 2008 22:07:00 +0000

I find this blog very interesting, i will be here everyday till now. Greetings

by: Kn@ppster

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 00:37:26 +0000

George has a legitimate complaint with LPHQ’s list rental and newsletter advertising policy.

Access at reasonable rates to the mailing list and LP News serve a vital function in a small party—not just for the candidates, but for the membership.

“Serious” Republican and Democratic candidates can reach primary voters through “mainstream media.” Third party candidates are generally ignored by the MSM … the main way for them to reach their party’s supporters, or for those supporters to learn about the candidates seeking the nomination, is through the party’s own internal communications channels.

There are workarounds, but why should there HAVE to be workarounds? It’s in the interest of the party for its candidates to receive equal access/maximum reasonable exposure so that the membership can make informed decisions. Reasonable fees for list rental and LP News advertising weed out the truly “marginal even at the third party level” candidates. Unreasonable fees, or just plain refusing to rent the list or sell the ads, harms the party.

by: Dan

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:45:50 +0000

George, I would have bitched at the LP lady who called me asking (and getting) a donation yesterday had I have known. Oh well.

by: Someone

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:08:20 +0000

My God, Phillies sure does whine a lot.

“No one knows who I am, and it is LP National’s fault.”

“These other piddly candidates shouldn’t be included. Sure WAR beats me among those polled, but he shouldn’t have even been included because he’s a poopy head.”

by: George Phillies

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 13:34:03 +0000

Steve,

I believe the interesting list of candidates would match the list of people who have filed with the FEC and are running as Libertarians. That includes Kubby, Smith, Jackson, Jingozian (at last report), Imperato (at last report), and myself, and the choice NOTA, but not (when last I checked) Root or Hess.

George

by: Andy

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:30:37 +0000

“I once ran a pretty popular MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) blog and at no point did I ever consider myself a ‘journalist’ while others who had MMA blogs often felt they were. They also often times got facts wrong.”

Which MMA blog did you run? I’m a huge MMA fan.

by: Tom Bryant

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 07:03:21 +0000

Am I the only one here who has had enough of Joey’s posts?

by: G.E. Smith the Capitalist Dove

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:15:04 +0000

I’d say journalism is in the eye of the beholder.

by: Jason Gatties

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 02:22:52 +0000

I like Stephen, but to call ANYONE who posts here a “journalist” is a stretch. Just a pet peeve of mine. I’m sure I’ll catch hell but to me, if you post on a blog, you’re a blogger…not a journalist.

I once ran a pretty popular MMA (Mixed Martial Arts) blog and at no point did I ever consider myself a “journalist” while others who had MMA blogs often felt they were. They also often times got facts wrong.

by: Stephen Gordon

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:10:13 +0000

George:

Who should be added or subtracted from this list of candidates?

Answer Count Percentage
No answer 0 0.00%
None of the above (1) 32 6.39%
George Phillies (2) 44 8.78%
Steve Kubby (3) 56 11.18%
Wayne Allyn Root (4) 31 6.19%
Barry Hess (5) 17 3.39%
Christine Smith (6) 12 2.40%
Daniel Imperato (7) 5 1.00%
Dave Hollist (8) 0 0.00%
John Finan (9) 0 0.00%
Robert Milnes (10) 0 0.00%
Alden Link (11) 2 0.40%
Bob Jackson (12) 3 0.60%
Mike Jingozian (13) 0 0.00%
undecided (14) 274 54.69%
Other (-oth-) 25 4.99%

by: Stephen Gordon

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:06:50 +0000

To clarify, thanks for updating this posting.

by: Stephen Gordon

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:05:20 +0000

Thanks, Austin.

by: George Phillies

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:03:27 +0000

The most important number in the poll, whose complete statistics may be seen at http://www.libertarianlists.com , is that a majority of those polled in the first poll had no idea who the Libertarian candidates for our nomination are. I believe this is related to the lp.org policy of not linking to their own party’s presidential candidates (they’ll sell espace for $5000, for which I could buy 10 million blogads impressions), their refusal to allow the Presidential candidates to rent their lists under the traditional secure conditions, and until very recently their refusal to sell ad space in LP News to Federal candidates paying hard money (They are now selling…for about 3 times what was charged in 2002, to about 40% of the audience).

Also, the poll never actually got around to presenting voters with a list of the actual candidates, as opposed to a list to which noncandidates and other alternatives were added, so the key question was not reached.

by: Austin Cassidy

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0000

I don’t usually significantly edit the posts of of bloggers on here, but I agree that the post doesn’t fully represent the facts of the matter. So I’m going to adjust the headline and conent and include a link to the original source material.

I apologize to anyone who may have gotten the wrong idea here. While the poll certainly contained some good news for Mr. Root, it was equally positive for the other three candidates. Opinion posts are one thing, but we need to be careful not to mix factual reporting with promoting any one candidate or cause over another.

Thanks everybody!