Barr, Nader On Very Slow Pace

With about half of today’s projected 140M votes counted, independent Ralph Nader has about 350K votes and Libertarian Bob Barr has 300K. If this pace holds, Barr would finish with a disappointing 600K (barely over 0.4%), and Nader would get a surprisingly low 700K. Both were polling at 1% on election eve.

80 Responses to “Barr, Nader On Very Slow Pace”

  1. rj Says:

    Sigh…

    ...how do I make a formal call to the Libertarian Party to just disband and from hereon just practice entryism?

  2. ken Says:

    So much for the Libertarian Reform Caucus wonder campaign of glitz and mis-representing Libertarianism that would get 5 MM votes.

    This guy is doing like Badnarik, and neither like browne who ran a straight Libertarian campaign until the pragmatist’s screwed him the second time around.

    Conversely, states like Florida that ignore the LNC have been doing great..

  3. rj Says:

    “This guy is doing like Badnarik, and neither like browne who ran a straight Libertarian campaign until the pragmatist’s screwed him the second time around.”

    Browne failed too. He performed just as well as Badnarik and Barr.

    It’s pretty clear the country has rejected us and always will. We need to accept that reality.

  4. rj Says:

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2005/06/18/results-libertarian-presidential-campaigns/

  5. Tom Bryant Says:

    Brush up a bit on past LP races. A 600k finish would be the 2nd highest vote total in LP history, and represent a 50% growth from the last election cycle.

    Michigan has become better organized, and is on pace to have MORE THAN DOUBLE the votes than in 2004. That’s some great progress we made as a state.

    Look at your state, your county, and your precinct. Find a way to get more votes in 2012 than in 2008. If we all just try making small steps, we’ll move a lot faster.

    Joining the LP isn’t the answer. You have to get active. If you’re local chapter of the LP isn’t active, make it active. Start with letter writing campaigns, do some small house-to-house literature drops, and build up to running credible candidates for local office.

    If we continue to sit around and wait for Browne, Badnarik, or Barr to build up an entire national party around us – it will never happen.

  6. Bill Lussenheide Says:

    Chuck Baldwin is on pace for a RECORD SETTING CP performance of 190,000 plus.

    This outpaces Peroutka’s 143,630 in 2004, and is achieved while having to write in in California which probably cost Chuck Baldwin yet another 30,000 votes.

    Excellent performance that improved performance by 50% in just four years in a state by state comparison.

  7. Rob Says:

    Bill how do you think the pace will continue when Baldwin isn’t even on the Ballot in California? It’s a huge, late voting state.

    The CP results are a disaster. They were hoping for more with Ron Paul’s endorsement. There overall vote totals may squeak by with a slight increase.

    But they will not overtake any other party in terms of size, and in fact, will fall back another notch…in 2004 they outpolled Cobb/Green Party. They may end the night behind McKinney Green…in addition to losing to the LP and Nader again.

    Sorry, compared to what they hoped for with the Paul endorsement, with their target for outgrowing other 3rd parties….its a disaster.

    Maybe Baldwin won’t get actual less votes, but thats about it.

  8. Tom Bryant Says:

    Hmmm…how can the CP think they are getting only 190k votes when they have more registered voters than that in Nevada and California put together?

  9. disinter Says:

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/11/04/past-performance-is-no-guarantee-of-future-results/

  10. rj Says:

    “Look at your state, your county, and your precinct. Find a way to get more votes in 2012 than in 2008. If we all just try making small steps, we’ll move a lot faster.

    Joining the LP isn’t the answer. You have to get active. If you’re local chapter of the LP isn’t active, make it active. Start with letter writing campaigns, do some small house-to-house literature drops, and build up to running credible candidates for local office.”

    How do we win and actually get people elected that fit our beliefs? I don’t want pie in the sky, let’s all put on Guy Fawkes masks and prance around sidewalks. Provide me a probable staircase to that achievement.

  11. Glaivester Says:

    Hmmm…how can the CP think they are getting only 190k votes when they have more registered voters than that in Nevada and California put together?

    California voters are not going to be counted until the write-in votes get counted, which could be a few weeks if at all.

    Alan Keyes is a dirty thief, and those who supported him are also dirty thieves.

  12. disinter Says:

    Fuck the LP. Ballot initiatives are far more effective.

    It looks like Maine just vetoed a tax on drinks and insurance, Mass just decriminalized marijuana, and Michigan voted to legalize medical marijuana… ALL via ballot initiatives.

  13. disinter Says:

    And 4 tax increases were voted down in CO:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/023826.html

  14. Cody Quirk Says:

    Hey Rob, we just passed Peroutka’s 2004 vote total.

    http://news.aol.com/elections/2008/president#presResults

    BTW, Baldwin is in 3rd place in Utah.

    Why do state & federal candidates for the LP get more votes then Barr?
    Texas, Mass., & Kansas being examples.

  15. Jim Peterson Says:

    I agree on ballot initiatives.

    Does anyone know if the LP vote made a difference in any state that McCain barely lost?

  16. disinter Says:

    Why do state & federal candidates for the LP get more votes then Barr?
    Texas, Mass., & Kansas being examples.

    In Texas they get 20-30%, but only because they are running in 2-way races.

  17. disinter Says:

    Does anyone know if the LP vote made a difference in any state that McCain barely lost?

    Ron Paul did:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/023825.html

  18. disinter Says:

    “Barr/Root can get 5, 10, maybe even 20 million votes.” – Eric Dondero

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/05/26/libertarian-party-2nd-ballot-results/#comment-620078

  19. ken Says:

    No, rj, what counts is percent of the vote. bBrowne got .5% and in 2000 and 2004 both LP candidates were fighting staff that were trying to sink them, along with the LRC precursors on LNC. Barr got the LP faithful, and probably lost as many as he brought in from his right-wing fans.

    More to the point, extrapolating from states that did best, the LP could get 1-2MM votes easy based on organization, but it’s depending on candidate charisma and geeky tweaks by pragmatists who hate local organizing because it screws up their power structure. what you have over that is new people your bringing into the LP, and that’s beyond any candidate without local organization at this time.

    disinter is quite right on initiatives.Ddirect democracy is the real mission of a political party and of the LP an original key tactic, again torpedoed by the pragmatists. Thios is including their attack on the 2004 platform, designed in part for that purpose.

    Barr and LRC measured themselves by 5 MM votes however.

  20. disinter Says:

    Looks like the LP made the difference in quite a few TX races:

    http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_state.htm?x=0&y=36882&id=265

  21. disinter Says:

    Good summary here:

    http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=3678

  22. Michael Seebeck Says:

    CNN Has the following totals at 90% reporting: Nader 609K, Barr 460K, Baldwin 167K, McKinney 127K, Paul 17.7K.

    Dondero got zero, as usual.

  23. George Dance Says:

    Does anyone know if the LP vote made a difference in any state that McCain barely lost?

    I haven’t crosscheced these figures, but they’re going around:

    Check it out, at 100% counted
    ——North Carolina——
    Obama 49.8% 2,101,986 votes
    McCain 49.6% 2,089,826 votes
    Barr 0.6% 25,181 votes
    ——Indiana——
    Obama 49.9% 1,352,356 votes
    McCain 49% 1,329,370 votes
    Barr 1.1% 28,982 votes

    http://www.dailypaul.com/node/71810

  24. Scott Says:

    So Paul 2.1% in Montana is the highest state percentage for any 3rd party candidate.

    Imagine if he’d really engaged in a 3rd party campaign. Paul’s cold reception by the hardline GOP undercut just how much popular support he had—there are plenty of citizens who supported Paul but wouldn’t or couldn’t register GOP in order to vote for him. And that’s assuming that the GOP primary process can even be fully trusted.

    This country needs both right-wing and left wing democratic populist parties that actually represent the people.

  25. Pollster Says:

    @ George Dance

    http://westernstandard.blogs.com/shotgun/2008/11/north-carolina.html

    Tuesday, November 04, 2008
    North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, Montana, and the impact of Bob Barr and Ron Paul
    Tonight, Indiana, and North Carolina look to go blue for president-elect Barack Obama. And in both of these states Bob Barr’s vote total made the difference. Missouri looks like it will go McCain, but Barr’s vote total still made it closer than it had to be. Meanwhile, Ron Paul appears to be making a difference in Montana, although, within the last fifteen minutes, McCain’s numbers have eclipsed Obama’s (Obama had a slight lead until just now).

    With 99 per cent of precincts reporting in Indiana, Obama has 49.9 per cent of the vote to McCain’s 49. Bob Barr has 1.1 per cent.

    With 100 per cent of precincts reporting in North Carolina, Obama has 49.8 per cent to McCain’s 49.6. Bob Barr has 0.6 per cent.

    With 99 per cent of precincts reporting in Missouri, McCain has 49.4 per cent to Obama’s 49.3. Bob Barr has 0.4 per cent.

    In Montana, with 74 per cent of precincts reporting, McCain is leading with 49.6 per cent to Obama’s 47.2. Ron Paul, who didn’t run an official campaign at all, and tried to get his name removed from the ballot, is sitting on 2.1 per cent of the vote (Barr has 0.3 per cent).

    Barr is stuck at 0.4%, 478k, on AP - http://hosted.ap.org/specials/election_night_2008/election_map_premium/index.html?SITE=MASPDELN. He and his team blew it. The LP may never recover.

    I hope that Dondero (the most obnoxious, idiotic, treacherous weasel on here) is never seen at a Libertarian event again.

  26. Pollster Says:

    The LP.org results page is not being updated – http://www.lp.org/2008-presidential-results.

    Is Redpath ashamed of Barr’s performance? He should be as it is virtually identical to Harry Browne’s result in 2000 – just under 500,000 votes but a lower vote share.

    It is time for the libertarian wing of the LP to take the party back from neo-con parasites who stole the nomination – Barr, Root and Redpath out!

  27. jim Says:

    Like usual, people have a hard-on for Barr.

    Clearly this was an overall bad year for third parties as many viewed this as one of teh most important elections in history. You can also judge that by Naders poor numbers.

    The fact that Barr almost received as much as Nader is very good. Nader consistently polled higher in almost every poll and usually does decent every year. His very low showing is an indication of the poor year all around.

    Please don’t let facts ruin your chubbies for Barr though.

    This was an all around success for the LP. TOtal votes don’t matter. .6 or 1% is irrelevant and doesn’t make a success. Media exposure and party growth is how this campaign should be measured. And there has been a great amount of growth from what I have seen. And Barr also did a great job of media exposure.

    So please, radicals you may stay in the BTP and the rest of us will continue to elect candidates who will move this party forward. You can stay and hope for a candidate who will legalize kiddie porn.

  28. Pollster Says:

    Sorry, Jim but Barr’s votes reflect a poor campaign. FEC records show that Barr spent far more on limos and high salaries for his team (especially Cory) than advertising. When Barr did get media coverage, he often put across a conservative, rather than libertarian, message (e.g. on immigration and the drug war in Latin America).

    This is 2000 all over again. Just substitute Russ Verney and Shane Cory for Perry Willis and Jim Babka. Big salaries and expenses, no advertising, same result. What a waste of donors’ hard earned cash!

  29. Stewart Flood Says:

    Well said, Jim.

    Obviously every party wants to present the outcome in a manner that looks positive. The goal for many of us who supported Bob was for exactly what you mentioned: extensive media exposure and party growth.

    This was clearly a devisive election. The democrats and republicans fought a dirty campaign, while cooperatively destroying our economic and political freedom. Bob and Wayne did an excellent job of presenting the true picture and should be thanked for it. The trolls who complain about their campaign are not looking at the true picture.

    We need to all sit back, take a vacation, and get started on 2009 local elections—TOMORROW

    Stewart Flood
    LNC Region 4 Representative

  30. Clark Says:

    ....hopefully someday some LP leader(s) with sense and decency will realize that ONLY by creating our own media outlet(s) will true libertarian ideas ‘get out’..

    ...absent this we will continue to be defined by fucking ignoramus/criminal republicrats…by kneel boor…ruse fucking limbaaaaaaaa…shill o’lielly…etc. republifucks galore…

    ...honest ‘libertarianism’ is still worse than a mystery to most/all people…we have been almost completely besmirched..

    ...there is a gold mine of possibilities…but only if ‘we’ explain/define ourselves…when these rotten republicrat fucks define/explain us we will continue to be rejected/laughed at…

    ...fuck paying dunder0s for signature collecting, etc…GET A/SOME MEDIA OUTLET AND REALLY MAKE SOME NOISE!..

    ...(maybe firstly, get rid of the republican fucks in the party ‘leadership!’)

    ...and have a good day!..

  31. Clark Says:

    ...and fuck you miserable bob barf idiots…GO BACK TO YOUR STINKING REPUBLICANS…GET OUT, YOU MISERABLE REPUBLICAN EMBARRASSMENTS!!

  32. rj Says:

    “No, rj, what counts is percent of the vote. bBrowne got .5% and in 2000 and 2004 both LP candidates were fighting staff that were trying to sink them, along with the LRC precursors on LNC. Barr got the LP faithful, and probably lost as many as he brought in from his right-wing fans.”

    Bullsh*t. You think if you got the candidate you got in, the vote count would be 0.39% instead of 0.38%? Oh f*cking wow, 0.01%, what a huge difference!

    Just disband the damn thing. I’ll no longer give a dime to it.

  33. Found in Yonkers Says:

    I am proud I voted for Ralph Nader, I voted with my conscience. I think what these alternative parties need to do is to start getting members to run for local offices. What need are local bases if the Repub/Dem monopoly is to be challenged seriously. Instead of complaining people here need to see where she/he can run for office to help support our progressive ideas.

  34. Pollster Says:

    “The goal for many of us who supported Bob was for exactly what you mentioned: extensive media exposure and party growth.”

    Please back up that claim with evidence. What was the net growth in party membership from the convention until the election?

    How many members have resigned or not renewed their membership since the convention?

  35. rj Says:

    At the very least, the radical libertarians and the reformist libertarians need to split in two. It’s my hope that the reformist libertarians leave the Libertarian Party altogether because I believe that name is tainted, just let the radicals keep it.

  36. Aristotle Says:

    The biggest problem with the Libertarians not attracting votes this election is that the current financial crisis was in large brought on by Libertarian policies of Greenspan. This just isn’t a deregulation/less government election cycle.

  37. Craig M. Says:

    Kudos to Andy Horning, the LP candidate for Governor in Indiana. His total was at 2% the whole night and in the debates he was a strict constitutionalist. I appreciate him taking the time to provide the state with a constitutional choice. As for the nationwide race, I was shocked that the percentage received by the third parties was much lower than I had projected. I thought 4% of the population was able to see that the two major candidates were both advocating strong federal control. Apparently, that is the way they prefer government to operate.

  38. Roscoe Says:

    In Pa. the LP candidate for Treasurer got 170,000 votes (3%) with no campaign while Barr got 20,000. Something tells me the money spent on presidential runs would be better spent on down-ticket races where vote totals just might be high enough to end the endless ballot access problems.

  39. rj Says:

    “In Pa. the LP candidate for Treasurer got 170,000 votes (3%) with no campaign while Barr got 20,000. Something tells me the money spent on presidential runs would be better spent on down-ticket races where vote totals just might be high enough to end the endless ballot access problems.”

    It’s always been that way in North Carolina since the 1980s. Barr got 0.4% here. The senate nominee Chris Cole got 3.2%. There has always been far more support for the state Libertarians than the presidential ticket.

  40. David in Akron Says:

    Summit County Ohio:

    Ralph Nader. . . . . . . . . . 1,696 .64
    WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 939 .35
    Bob Barr (LIB). . . . . . . . . 767 .29
    Chuck Baldwin (CON) . . . . . . . 456 .17
    Cynthia McKinney (GRE) . . . . . . 315 .12
    Richard Duncan. . . . . . . . . 93 .03
    Brian Moore (SOC). . . . . . . . 70 .03

  41. Pollster Says:

    Aristotle, Alan Greenspan did not implement libertarian financial policies. I suggest that you visit Mises.org for a true libertarian explanation of the banking crisis.

  42. Thomas M. Sipos Says:

    Andy: “The biggest problem with the Libertarians not attracting votes this election …

    This election? As opposed to which other election?

    jim: ” Clearly this was an overall bad year for third parties as many viewed this as one of teh most important elections in history.”

    This year? As opposed to which other year? Which election is not “overall bad” for third parties? Which election is not “one of the most important elections in history”?

    Wake up and smell the coffee. The LP will never be a major party. Sorry. The LP is an educational institution.

    Yet I give no credit to Barr/Root for their educational efforts. They got media face time mostly because they were running on the LP, which made them human interest pieces. ANY LP presidential and vp candidates would have gotten about the same amount of TV time. (And would have come across as less buffoonish than Root.)

  43. Sobriquet Says:

    “Ballot initiatives are far more effective.”

    Very true.

  44. Sobriquet Says:

    “In Pa. the LP candidate for Treasurer got 170,000 votes (3%) with no campaign while Barr got 20,000. Something tells me the money spent on presidential runs would be better spent on down-ticket races where vote totals just might be high enough to end the endless ballot access problems.”

    That’s a really interesting point.

  45. disinter Says:

    Ralph Nader: 644,101 (.53%)
    Bob Barr: 481,858 (.40%)
    Chuck Baldwin: 172,135 (.14%)

    Ironic that this year, of all years, the Libertarians decided to become Republicans, rejecting their libertarian platform and a libertarian nominee. Barr did get the most MSM coverage of any LP presidential candidate in history.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/023828.html

  46. paul Says:

    2008
    Nader 0.52% Independent
    Barr 0.40% Libertarian
    Baldwin 0.14% Constitution
    McKinney 0.11% Green

    2004
    Nader 0.38% Independent
    Badnarik 0.32% Libertarian
    Peroutka 0.12% Constitution
    Cobb 0.10% Green

    ———————————————

    2000
    Nader 2.73% Green
    Buchanan 0.43% Reform
    Browne 0.36% Libertarian
    Phillips 0.11% Constitution

    1996
    Perot 8.40% Reform
    Nader 0.71% Green
    Browne 0.50% Libertarian
    Phillips 0.19% Constitution

    1992
    Perot 18.91% Independent
    Marrou 0.28% Libertarian
    Gritz 0.10% Populist
    Fulani 0.07% New Alliance
    [Phillips 0.04%] 7th place, including him since the CP is still active

  47. paul Says:

    1988
    Paul 0.47%

    Thus, Barr came in (in percentage terms) behind Ron Paul 1988 and Harry Browne 1996, as well as Ed Clark 1980.

  48. Shane Cory's unemployment check Says:

    Flood, you haven’t killed yourself yet? You should. jim, get a job and stop fucking your sister.

  49. TERRY SOMEBODY Says:

    Barr did good considering the serious competition from the Constitution Party that earlier LP candidates never faced.

    Factor in the Ron Paul defection and Barr’s numbers are about what you’d expect.

    Those radicals who think the party should be about “educating voters” should consider what they wish to educate voters on.

    Kiddie porn? Anarchy? Conspiracy theories?

    A moderate libertarianism is the only libertarianism with any future.

  50. MPM Says:

    While the LP would have done several times better if Ron Paul had decided to become the nominee, this election has convinced me that the LP needs to focus on lower level races to have any relevancy. In other words, let’s just run one statewide candidate once in a while to gain ballot access, and mostly run for local office and a few state legislature positions. Some democrats told me on election day we ought to build from the bottom up if we want to gain relevancy, and I agree, I mean just look at what the Vermont Progressive Party has done. I think there are too many inflated egos in the LP (hence the runs for higher office) and an obsession with gaining automatic ballot access (which is justified, but the number of times we try to achieve it is overkill). In VA for instance, 4 years ago we almost won the Virginia Beach mayoral election in a three way, partisan race. My good friend Matt Beato almost won a City Council seat in Williamsburg and ought to get it a year and a half from now if he decides to run again. Also I have plans to try to convince a couple of independent Chesterfield County Supervisors (in a partisan Board) to come over to the LP. This is some of the basic common sense party building we need to do. On the presidential level, I wouldn’t be upset if the LP got behind a solid generic third party candidate next time around (perhaps from the Modern Whigs???) Let’s stop bickering over how many Ayn Rand books our nominees should have read and focus on running like hell on the local level! If you can’t get at least one volunteer at half the precincts on election day, that probably shows you’re running for too high an office – we just don’t have the resources.

  51. Richard G. Says:

    The real problem is that the Barr campaign did as every third party candidate does, they start advertising a month or two ahead of the election. If the LP is to succeed, they must generate enough funds to target one or two states in TV spots 6-9 months before the election. The other parties, in this election, had already been advertising for over 2 years. Name recognition and giving the public time to investigate our views is what is needed. Wayne Root realized this eons ago. Go ROOT 2012!!

  52. djl Says:

    Terry,

    What’s moderate or Libertarian about the guy who wrote the federal DOMA and tried to get Wicca banned from the military?

    I really think this schism in the Libertarian Party is permanent. If the LP has decided that they’re going to go this route and embrace fiscal conservatism at the expense of social libertarianism, I’m out the door for good. I’ve voted for every single Libertarian I can since I turned 18. Until this year.

    I know what people are going to say – good riddance, go try to legalize kiddie porn – but if the LP is serious about getting candidates elected, that’s exactly the sort of thing they need to not do. And if they’re not serious about getting people elected, what the hell’s the point?

  53. Pollster Says:

    “Those radicals who think the party should be about “educating voters” should consider what they wish to educate voters on.

    Kiddie porn? Anarchy? Conspiracy theories?

    A moderate libertarianism is the only libertarianism with any future.”

    Ah, the old straw man argument. I would not support a pro-kiddie porn conspiracy theorist. What is moderate libertarianism – Barr’s conservativism or Brink Lindsay’s liberal-tarianism? We might as well give up if selling out to the Republicrat statists is the only option.

    You need a credible candidate who deliver a principled libertarian message in an effective way to our target audiences. My choice would be a libertarian celebrity like Penn Gillette, a hardcore Objectivist with a proven track record of getting solid libertarian arguments on the drug war, global warming scam and others across to a national audience.

    Penn’s response to Terry would the title of his series – Bullshit!!

  54. Carl Says:

    rj is correct.

    The LP brand is already Ruwartian. I should have let the radicals keep the party.

    But a Republicans-on-drugs moderate libertarian lite party also has little future.

    The future is an upper-left party. Somebody needs to stand up and scream that deficits are regressive, that government encourages excessive leverage which destabilzes the economy, that excessive regulatory overhead encourages merger-mania. Let the Republican fight welfare for the poor. Fighting welfare for the rich is the job of a new party.

  55. Scott Says:

    Anyone else surprised Baldwin only got 173,259? What happened to the McCain hating conservatives? Did they stay home or just swallow their rage and vote GOP?

  56. Craig M. Says:

    MPM points out a good example of the bottom-up approach. I did not know until two weeks ago that the Progressives in Vermont had six members in the legislature.

  57. paul Says:

    The future is an upper-left party. Somebody needs to stand up and scream that deficits are regressive, that government encourages excessive leverage which destabilzes the economy, that excessive regulatory overhead encourages merger-mania. Let the Republican fight welfare for the poor. Fighting welfare for the rich is the job of a new party.

    So how’s progress? It sounds like a good idea…

  58. Carl Says:

    Paul:

    Progress is slow. Focusing on the underlying ideas now. Party building later.

    Which leads me to write something more productive:

    What can libertarians do if the LP is not the answer?

    One answer is street theatre a la bureaucrash. THis is WAY more efficient than building a party in order to get listed in a voter’s guide that few read.

    A more important answer is: stop socialized medicine! Socialized medicine is the biggest danger from an Obama administration. Once the middle class is on yet another entitlement, rolling the state will be well nigh impossible.

    We need to stop the threat by non-electoral means, since the threat is immediate. This means resorting to counter-economics. We need to discover and promote more efficient health insurance and medicine. This is a tall order, and nearly impossible to do in the time remaining. But there is a sliver of a chance. There is an awful lot of anecdotal evidence for various dietary and complementary medicine modalities that needs to be sorted through and given proper testing. Replacing double-blind with a market like sorting system may be able to get answers fast and cheap.

  59. Old Whig Says:

    Baldwin more than doubled Peroutka’s total in Kentucky.

    O.W.

  60. paul Says:

    I like street theater.

    I was thinking of starting Democrats Against Democracy (an anti-ballot access group, putting out press releases under that name) and Republicans Against the Republic, dedicated to making the Bush family America’s official royal family and renaming the country Bushi Amerika.

    I don’t have any ready street theater ideas with health care and gun confiscation (another Obama Nation threat), but I’m open to ideas. I like what you did with the bailout.

  61. paul Says:

    What happened to the McCain hating conservatives?

    Palin

  62. paul Says:

    Oh, and Obamademonization.

  63. Pollster Says:

    What should we do about Barr, Verney, Cory and the rest of the highly paid parasites who wasted the LP activists’ money?

  64. Robert Capozzi Says:

    Carl: The LP brand is already Ruwartian.

    Me: Can’t quite buy that one. The LP brand is perhaps Hyundai’s 20 years ago…largely unknown. I STILL get “Libertarian? Is that Lyndon Larouche? Socialist?”

    I’d say the slate’s still largely clean, with some blemishes. If Tom Brokaw respectfully mentions Libertarians on Meet the Press in late October, it CAN’T be that bad.

  65. Craig Says:

    Why do state & federal candidates for the LP get more votes then Barr?
    Texas, Mass., & Kansas being examples.

    Because people want their vote for president to “count”, and they knew Barr had no chance, but they knew less about lower races, or expected the incumbents to win easily. Also, many libertarians couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Barr, given his past record.

    The biggest problem with the Libertarians not attracting votes this election is that the current financial crisis was in large brought on by Libertarian policies of Greenspan.

    Nice try, but there’s nothing libertarian about a federal central bank inflating a supply of paper money and manipulating interest rates. Libertarians want sound money, beyond the control of governments and their central banks, and interest rates determined on the free market.

  66. Brian Holtz Says:

    “ANY LP presidential and vp candidates would have gotten about the same amount of TV time.”

    LOL. My YouTube playlist of Barr national TV appearances is 50 long and it doesn’t even include the last two months: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=3E88B5A97A94D08C

    How many such TV appearances did Badnarik have in 2004? Did he even get five?

  67. DebbieKat Says:

    I’ve heard it mentioned on here several times about ballot initiatives… Please everyone support the National Initiative! ni4d dot us. Gravel is right. This is the only way we will have any power to take back our country. Having initiatives will also avoid estranging people who have strong party leanings because these initiatives may or may not agree with the principles of one or more parties… Who’s on board?

  68. Cody Quirk Says:

    Because people want their vote for president to “count”, and they knew Barr had no chance, but they knew less about lower races, or expected the incumbents to win easily. Also, many libertarians couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Barr, given his past record.

    = Correct!

    Anyone else surprised Baldwin only got 173,259? What happened to the McCain hating conservatives? Did they stay home or just swallow their rage and vote GOP?

    = With how they demonized Obama, I’m not suprised that most stuck with McCain.

    Yet we did much better this year then 2004, despite the ballot access problems- in fact, this is probably our best presidential showing ever!

    ...For now.

  69. paul Says:

    Second best. Phillips had 0.19% in 1996, Baldwin got 0.14% this time.

    Scroll up to my 11 AM.

  70. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Brag, brag, brag. Speculate about double digit totals.

    Repent, repent, repent? ——-Not a chance!

  71. MPM Says:

    DebbieKat,

    Sorry, but Libertarians want less laws, not more. (Direct) Democracy is terrible, however a well balanced Republic is excellent.

    Did Gravel set or tie a record for number of separate national party nominations sought? Keyes had two but Gravel had three in the same year; talk about politically homeless.

  72. TERRY SOMEBODY Says:

    ....What’s moderate or Libertarian about the guy who wrote the federal DOMA and tried to get Wicca banned from the military?...

    The LP will never grow if we don’t accept defections from other parties… past warts and all.

    ......a Republicans-on-drugs moderate libertarian lite party also has little future. The future is an upper-left party…..

    I disagree. I’d like a dollar for every talking head I saw on CNN last night who said that “America remains a center right country”... despite the election returns.

    And I would support Penn Gillette. A libertarian celebrity is the answer in today’s American Idol election cycles.

    The Marijuana ballot initiative in Mass must give us some encouragment. I’m not sure why California didn’t allow gay marriage.

  73. Tom Blanton Says:

    It’s been a while since I visited Third Party Watch. It’s like entering the twilight zone.

    Did I really read someone writing about the “libertarian policies of Alan Greenspan”?

    Are reformers still whining about radicals destroying the LP when there are no radicals running for office or working at LPHQ, and very little radical representation on the LNC?

    Finally, are there still people who are delusional enough to believe that any third party candidate can win an election in Amerika?

    Perhaps TPW is some sort of bizarro world version of the twilight zone.

  74. DebbieKat Says:

    “DebbieKat,

    Sorry, but Libertarians want less laws, not more. (Direct) Democracy is terrible, however a well balanced Republic is excellent.

    Did Gravel set or tie a record for number of separate national party nominations sought? Keyes had two but Gravel had three in the same year; talk about politically homeless.”

    I don’t have an issue with Direct Democracy if it’s done right. I’m not beholden to any specific ideology. I just want what will work best for us as a people overall. I don’t believe in being dogmatic. Someone on here mentioned that the ballot initiatives were working better than some of the third party tickets were doing with respect to elections. I agree with that assessment. Some ballot initiative processes DO need to be improved and Gravel’s national initiative takes this into account.

    How do you figure Gravel had 3 party runs this year? He first ran as a Democrat and then switched to Libertarian. KEYES had 3. Keyes started as a Republican, then Constitution, then Independent or whatever party he last ran as…

  75. Brian Holtz Says:

    LP radicals who ran for office this cycle include Hogarth, Knapp, Grow, Straus, Gatties. Blanton’s confusion is understandable, since there never seemed to be anything on their campaign sites as radical as what’s on the front page of mine.

    Radical representation on LNC is actually higher now than before Denver, so it’s pretty clear who here is living in the bizarro world.

  76. Clark Says:

    CRAIG WRITES: “Nice try, but there’s nothing libertarian about a federal central bank inflating a supply of paper money and manipulating interest rates. Libertarians want sound money, beyond the control of governments and their central banks, and interest rates determined on the free market.” (END)

    WTF???...apparently some/many ‘Libertarian’ monetary ignoramusses believe it is ‘Libertarian’ for corporate owner$ of fucking gold/silver mines to manipulate ‘money,’ ‘interest rates’ ‘the free (yeah right) market’ etc. ad goddamned nauseam as they see fit!...

    ...i apologize beforehand, but, WAKE THE FUCK UP YOU MAROON$!...HONESTLY LEARN/UNDERSTAND THE REALITY, ORIGIN, NATURE, etc., OF ‘MONEY’ IN THE PRESENT BEFORE YOU DUMMIES SPEW YOUR THEORIE$ FOR THE FUTURE

    ...read some alexander del mar, steve zarlenga, etc. you loud, theory-spewing, monetary illiterates..

    ...that felt good..have a good day!..

  77. The Democratic Republican Says:

    Too many radicals circle jerking in the LP draws attention to me fucking my grandpappy.

  78. Pollster Says:

    Holtz seems a rather sad and pathetic individual who cannot come to terms with the fact that Barr’s campaign bombed big time. He tries to divert attention on to others, such as Knapp, who was not even a LP candidate.

    Has Barr got past 500,000 votes yet? If not, when are we going to get an apology from Barr, Root, Verney, Cory and Gordon? This was a great an opportunity to take votes from a weak GOP ticket and the Barr campaign blew it.

    The garbage posted on the LP and Barr campaign webshites is an insult to the members’ and donors’ intelligence.

  79. Brian Holtz Says:

    LOL. I was the first to post an election-night article on TPW, IPR, or LFV pointing out that Barr’s totals were failing to meet expectations.

    I “divert” nothing—I was just correcting Tom Blanton’s ignorant claims that “there are no radicals running for office” and there is “very little radical representation on the LNC”. Now, I’ll correct your ignorant claim by pointing out that Tom Knapp was an LP candidate for Congress.

    For your intelligence to be insulted, you have to have some first.

  80. Clark Says:

    ....lol!!....i get a hoot out of the word ‘radical’ being thrown around by ‘Libertarian’ republicrats…

    ...i believe the word derives from a ?latin word for ‘root’..i believe ‘radish,’ derives from same..

    ...literally, a ‘political’ ‘radical’ is someone who gets at the root(s) of political issues/problems…

    ...alas, modern political fuck-heads, bob barf ‘Libertarians,’ etc. assorted richardheads galore have been brainwashed into turning this honestly noble term into a pejorative..

    ...(psssst..btw, methinks anyone deserved of the term ‘political radical’/radical ought to honestly understand what a fucking ‘dollar’ is…at least…after all, most political issues revolve around ‘dollars’..so some of you monetary ignoramusses who may fancy yourselves as ‘radical’ are really just ‘leaf-flailers’ too!...like, apparently, holtz, ‘the demopublican republicrat’, etc…)

    ..remember, foolish republicrat fucks trying to kill the ‘tree of evil’ will flail at the leaves—-the wise, noble, radical will strike at the root$...

    ..but have a good day!.

Leave a Reply