Avens O’Brien writes:
“Look, I understand that we all have mild or strong personal preferences as far as which terrible person is “the lesser of two evils” in the presidential election. Some might even decide to vote that way. Your vote is your own, and frankly it’s just you and that ballot in the booth.
On a personal note, I’ll say I’m a bit unimpressed with a number of people who have:
– held or sought positions as Libertarians within our party structure (people who have been on the LNC/state boards)
– sought nomination/election as external candidates (like Congress, POTUS)
– or held leadership positions within less official party structures (caucuses, PACs, etc)
…who are currently *endorsing* either of the duopoly candidates for president.
I mean, it is their right to do so (though people in elected party positions should be aware of their fiduciary duties to the organization), but to me, it shows a lack of fortitude, less commitment to our principles, and conveys very short-term thinking.
Again, they can do what they want, however if any of these people proceed to seek election, nomination, or any form of leadership within the party in the coming years, please understand that they will not be earning my endorsement or my vote. They lost a fair bit of my respect through their actions.
I do not see the value in giving these people positions where they can speak for, or direct, the party or members within it, if they are so easily taken in by the lies of the duopoly, and so unwilling to stand against it.
This is a personal thing, I’m not saying the rest of you need to agree with this or follow it.
I will listen to an impassioned plea of “I made a mistake, I was duped” but frankly everybody I respect already knows better, and people seeking leadership positions should be able to withstand the pressure to endorse the duopoly. New people will be given the benefit of the doubt, but also I believe in seasoning, so it’s not like I’m endorsing them for leadership positions anyway.
It’s one of the things I most respected about @ChaseForLiberty in his Senate run, is his complete refusal to support one of the other candidates when he caused the runoff, despite overwhelming pressure from all sides and appealing incentives and offers to do so.
That’s leadership and fortitude, strength and principle.
Obviously everybody’s mileage may vary, but there’s my two cents. I’ve been doing LP activism for 22 years, and I’ll be doing LP activism 22 years from now. I try to give everybody more credit than they deserve, and the benefit of the doubt, but I also watch and learn and see people evolve and grow and earn my respect or disappoint me.
Just make sure it’s worth it, for you.”
— Avens O’Brien
There are only two Libertarians on my ballot, one of whom didn’t even provide any information for the voter’s guide. I plan on voting FOR both of them, and AGAINST every Republican on my ballot. Social issues matter, we can debate economics after defeating the fascist alt-right!
Avens is great.
Gave my vote to Chase Oliver today. But was there a campaign?? I don’t recall receiving one communication or solicitation from him, though I’m a lifetime member. LP appears to be going through the motions these days.
I got several text messages for Chase. Someone out there is trying.
I suspect we are of a similar age. I have been an LP member since 1974 but never a life member. I am getting nearly daily emails from the Chase Oliver campaign. I am even getting emails from the Mike ter Maat campaign. I don’t know what lists I must be on but I am surprised you have not been getting inundated with emails.
Always received LP News at correct address. I get e-mails , e.g. defend the guard , on regular basis from LP, and two or three from ter Matt, but never a communication from Oliver. With demise of LP News, have lost just about all news of candidates and doings in state parties. No wonder membership and revenue is down.
Avens is one of those long-time party activists (and one amazing photographer!) who doesn’t tend to say much, but when she does, it should be heeded.
“It’s one of the things I most respected about @ChaseForLiberty in his Senate run, is his complete refusal to support one of the other candidates when he caused the runoff, despite overwhelming pressure from all sides and appealing incentives and offers to do so.”
It’s one of the reasons that I believe that the national convention made a wise choice when they nominated him. IMO, our candidates should not bargain away their nominations to the other party candidates under our current voting system. Our candidates should state, “if you truly believe that you deserve our votes, then you should try to win them from me one by one. If you think our voting system makes third party candidates into “spoilers” then maybe we should consider trying alternative voting systems.”
Link to original: https://x.com/avensobrien/status/1848593519835025722