Funny how they call themselves “#3” when they have never accomplished anything ever.

On:

Foreign Interventionism – they’re very different;

War on Drugs – Extremely different;

On Taxes – World’s apart;

On ending the Current Wars – major differences;

Even on “federalism” – Barr allows for many unconstitutional functions of the federal government.

Barr and Paul are VERY different.

Here’s Woolsey on votes, “Candidates like Ruwart are not going to attract this broader group of Paul voters because they won’t hear about her.”

Even if this “broader group” might vote for Barr as our nominee, will they stay in the Libertarian camp in 2012? Fleeting support is all that it would be.

A principled candidate (like Ruwart or Kubby) would get support that “stays”.

FORGET the fleeting nature of Barr! It has virtually no value, except for the proverbial “15 minutes of fame”.

This only serves to make the “fleetingly famous” feel better.

May 18th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
I caucused for Ron Paul. I’m not a groupy. I didn’t follow him anywhere.
I understand his campain is over. I am a mature man. Old enough to be a Viet Nam vet.

“”“”I would never vote for Barr. I see nothing about him similar to Paul.
I don’t understand how anyone could compare Barr to Paul.”“””
(***)

Thanks W.G., it’s what I’ve said for months too !

Baldwin is closer to Paul. Baldwin will get part of the Paul supporters and Ruwart,Kubby,Smith or Burns would get a larger portion of them than Barr.

Ha. I think children are natural Libs – among their first words are typically ‘no!’ and ‘mine!’. Unfortunately the socialization process is too often corrupted into a ‘don’t question authority’ process :-/

I believe 10% to 20% of the American voters are libertarian.

I have a feeling that nearly 100% of people are born Libertarian, but become programmed/brainwashed into worshiping the state.

Kinda like being born gay but staying in the closet all your life out of fear that someone might think you are different or “uncooperative” with society. People have been taught that nonconformity is a bad thing. So it doesn’t matter if you talk to every single voter in the US and explain to them what the LP is about, they will still vote Republicrat.

be afraid, watch tv, consume, obey, shut up, be happy

What an insult to humanity.

/*

I agree about ‘superficial impression’, but I think it will be more along the lines of “states’ rights, more-right-winger-than-mccain” rather than peace and constitution…

By far, the best candidate to do this would be Ron Paul.

The next best would be a candidate exactly like Ron Paul.
We don’t have anyone close.

Anyway, I think it is important that our nominee tone down
the Libertarian partisianship. Paul remains a Republican,
has endorsed some Republicans running for federal office,
and is encouraging his supporters to get involved in the
Republican Party organizations.

The current attacks on Barr, that he is too close to Republicans,
is not the right way to go.

As for message, it is important to judge what attracted voters to
Paul.

It is a mistake to focus on the “groupies.” The people who would
travel from various states and attend mulitple speaches. These are
the same people that dominate the meetups. They probably make up
many of the volunteers.

Many of those people still believe that Paul will win the Republican
nomination. When he doesn’t, and doesn’t endorse anyone in
November, maybe we will have a short at some of those 100k votes.
Maybe some will volunteer or contribute to our candidate. But, we
will have to compete with Baldwin, with people planing to write Paul
in, writing his name accross a paper ballot, etc.

The actual people we need to be looking for is those who voted for
Paul, said that they would vote for Paul (but didn’t,) or had a favorable
impression of Paul.

There is a lot of evidence that Paul’s broader support was based upon
his opposition to the Iraq War combined with his support for smaller
government.

You know, I think Barr’s message “Out of Iraq, cut goverment spending,
constituional rights, and defend our borders,” touches on all the themes
popular with Paul voters.

Candidates like Ruwart are not going to attract this broader group
of Paul voters because they won’t hear about her.

As for the Paul groupies, they will certainly hear about her. And
there will be plenty of Baldwin supporters pointing out her more
controversial positions. You know, she is nothing like Paul. She
opposes the Constitution, being an anarchist, she supports child
pornography, she will let to mexicans take us over… Of course,
Barr will be slammed for his bad record in Congress. (And that
he is a CIA agent still working for the international bankers conspiracy.)

But I really think the best chance for Barr, especially, but probably
the others as well, is not the die hard Paulites. It is rather those
that were active, but realize the campaign is over. And those who
who just voted for Paul and where never activists.

I am glad that at least Bob Barr is so far defeating the fascist/stalinist criminal Ralph Nader. Come on Gravel and Baldwin!

But, of course, by libertarian I mean a set of general attitudes about
the proper role of government. Fiscally convervative and socially liberal? We can describe it in various ways. But that is the general
idea.

Of course, I make no claim that they feel some sort of affinity
for any simple principle, much less something like the nonagression
“axiom.” Or, that they believe that all of their political positions should
be deduced from any principle. Much less that one.

I am not very interested in trying to convince people to become Rand/
Rothbard libertarians. I am interesting in building a political movement
that is pro-peace and personal liberty without becing anti-capitalist.
I am interested in building a political movement that is pro market economy without being devoted to the enforcement of traditional moral
values or occupying the middle east for 100 years.

What Nolan describes as a “soft” libertarian is probably exactly in the
middle of where the movement needs to be.

What Nolan describes as a solid libertairan is on the fringes.

I find Barr imperfect, but acceptable. He is running on libertarian positions on issues covering all three legs of the stool. He is not running on expanding government or restricting liberty anywhere relative to the
status quo.

“Solid” libertarian simply means calling for larger changes in more areas.

Well. it is foolhardy to campaign on more than a handful of issues. Sadly,
voters have limited attention.

And fewer voters will support or find credible more extreme changes in any area.

You all admit this. Just as Nolan said in 1996. It is better to get 1/2% for
abolishing the income tax than 1% for cutting income tax rates in half.

Just as Nolan said again that he would rather get fewer votes for a “solid libertarian” than a “soft” libertarian. (1% is 1/2 of 2%.)

To me, as long as the candidate is any sort of libertarian at all, the more votes the better. The only problem is if the candidate is not a libertarian.
Or is campaigning on positions on issues that increase the size of goverment or reduce personal liberty.

I measure success as more attention and more votes. (And even more “positives” from people who end up voting for another candidate
for strategic reasons.)

I consider the, “if we can’t win, so what if we get only half as many votes” to be foolish.

Anyway, I think Ruwart will get the attention and votes somewhere between Browne and Badnarik. So, we are looking at .5%. 1%
would be a miracle.

I think Barr will get between more like 2%. 5% would be a miracle.

So, choosing Ruwart is at best sacrificing 50% of the votes. It could be
90% of the potential votes. And, the attention, and the numbers of people who prefer the libertarian, but don’t vote for them because they
can’t win… Barr will do much better.

The fundamental problem is that Ruwart will be ignored. Barr will
get attention for a libertarian message.

The sort of details of this message, that is, the distinctions between the
candidates… most people won’t know. Most voters will have only a
superficial understanding of Barr. Get out of Iraq, cut government spending, protect the Constitituion… if we are lucky. And they will
have never heard of Ruwart.

Thank you so much for your kind and warm comments on my analysis of Barr’s presidential prospects. I appreciate them.

I just hope that Barr’s campaign fizzles before it reaches the convention floor. But I’m not naive to believe this will happen. Barr will get some support; I’m just not inclined to believe in his so-called concern for civil liberties and that crap he talks about.

Besides, his talk of “limited government” reminds me of one of those wind-up dolls that say silly, childlike things. lol

Anyhoo…..

Ron Paul back-stabbing “Eric Dondero” ?

LOL

(spit)

Shame on you.

Kent

http://www.Baldwin2008.com