Last updated on December 9, 2025
Regional Alternate Ben Weir has called for censuring the LP’s Ohio affiliate . Their alleged offense, according to Mr. Weir, is running a candidate for Governor when there is a Republican in the race. Weir’s position was denounced by LNC Regional Representative Keith Thompson, who maintains that Libertarians should always run candidates. We quote the correspondence:
From: Ben Weir <ben….@lp.org>
Sent: Monday, December 8, 2025 9:45:05 AM
To: LNC Board <lncb…@lp.org>
Subject: Call for Censure of the Libertarian Party of Ohio
To the Members of the Libertarian National Committee,
I am writing to formally call for the censure of the Libertarian Party of Ohio for actions that obstruct real-world liberty in our lifetime.
By running a competing gubernatorial candidate against Vivek Ramaswamy… a former Libertarian Party National Member and the most significant opportunity for mass-scale deregulation and dismantling of the administrative state in modern politics… LP Ohio is choosing symbolism over impact.
This is not a typical partisan race. Vivek represents a rare convergence of public influence and an explicit commitment to tearing down the regulatory regime. Undermining that effort does not advance liberty in practice… it weakens it.
Whatever one’s views on party purity, the real-world effect of this decision is to increase the likelihood of an establishment, pro-regulation victory. If the Libertarian Party is serious about being a vehicle for actual freedom… not just protest… this kind of strategic obstruction cannot go unchecked.
Censure is necessary to set a clear boundary: affiliates cannot sabotage the most meaningful deregulation opportunity of this generation while operating under the LP banner.
Respectfully,
Ben Weir
Region 6 Alternate
—————–
Ben Ohio has to get 3% in the gubernatorial election to retain ballot access that just cost over a million dollars.
Dustin Nanna
Region 3 Representative
——————
From: Ben Weir <ben….@lp.org>>
Subject: Re: Call for Censure of the Libertarian Party of Ohio
Do they have the volunteer base to sustain ballot access without spending a million dollars?
Is it solely based on gubernatorial votes? Or can they go all in with another election that will help them retain it?
—————–
To: Ben Weir
Are local races partisan in Ohio?
Andrew Watkins
At Large | Libertarian National Committee
—————
From: Dustin Nanna
Depends on the jurisdiction. Yes, for anything countywide and above. Yes, for some places even hyperlocally depending on their local charters.
Dustin Nanna
Region 3 Representative
—————-
From: Austin Martin <austin…@lp.org>
Sent: Monday, December 8, 2025 10:31 AM
To: Dustin Nanna <dustin…@lp.org>; Andrew Watkins <andrew….@lp.org>; Ben Weir <ben….@lp.org>; LNC Board <lncb…@lp.org>
Subject: Re: Call for Censure of the Libertarian Party of Ohio
Ballot access spending is stupid and counterproductive.
The ballot access laws are meant to demonstrate party size and relevance, not to be spoofed with money to make up for a lack of popularity.
If you don’t have the bodies, you don’t deserve to be on the ballot.
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
Lp.org/martindonor
——————-
From: Keith Thompson
Re: Call for Censure of the Libertarian Party of Ohio
I find the notion that we should pull a Libertarian from the ballot in order to aid our political opponents to be incredibly offensive.
The Libertarian Party exists to both push libertarian ideas and to run Libertarian candidates – these are complimentary goals. We do not exist to help Democrats and Republicans.
Vivek may say he favors lowering property tax rates.
Mike Mains calls for an end to property taxes.
Vivek calls for expanding ICE, ramping up mass deportations, and using the military as a police force.
The Libertarian Party has resolved multiple times to condemn such actions. We do not support the initiation of violence. The Libertarian Party supports immigration reform and stands against the criminalization of crossing national borders – we do not support using the United States Military to go after folks for entering the country.
Vivek suggested treating drugs as an act of war, and supported sending troops Mexico without permission – essentially a military invasion of Mexico.
Libertarians call for an end to the war on drugs, not turning it into a literal war. How in the world can we claim to be the premiere anti-war Party if drop-out to help pro-war candidates? How could we condemn President Trump’s illegal actions in Venezuela while swooning for a candidate that would do the same to Mexico?
I’m unaware of a specific resolution or plank regarding the Posse Comitatus Act, but I would hope that Libertarians oppose using the U.S. military as a domestic police force. We want to reduce or eliminate the power of the state, and demilitarize police, not deploy the military as a domestic police force.
I don’t claim that Vivek is bad on every issue. There are many old party candidates with whom we have overlap. Vivek has voiced support for deregulation and lower taxes. Those are good stances, but that does not justify betraying our Party.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called for an end to warrantless mass surveillance, has condemned the Patriot Act, and has called for an end to the war on drugs. Zohran Mamdani has called for the full decriminalization of drugs, treating substance abuse as a health issue and not a criminal issue. Mamdani supports ending no-knock raids and ending qualified immunity.
These are strong libertarian positions – so should we condemn affiliates if they field candidates against AOC or Mamdani? OF COURSE NOT.
We should absolutely run our candidates against the old parties – in every race, every time. We should not use excuses to support our political opponents.
We should aim to always give people the choice of voting Libertarian.
The only wasted vote is when you enter the voting booth and there’s no candidate who shares your principles. Voting for the lesser evil is a truly wasted vote. “Overseer goodie” is a spook that keeps bad policy alive.
We are not Democrats and we are not Republicans.
People should not have to choose between fiscal responsibility and a police state, between ending the war on drugs and lower taxes, between LGBT rights and gun rights — only the Libertarian Party gives people the option to vote for all of their freedoms all of the time.
Ballot access is a huge reason we have influence; it is not a waste of resources. It is both our ballot access and our principles that give us prominence.
We should never suggest that a state should pull a candidate in order to help our political opponents and anyone who feels that way should resign.
In Liberty,
Keith Thompson
Splitting the vote is a legitimate strategy to keep the major parties more freedom oriented. In fact, it just about the most powerful thing that the LP can do under plurality voting.
Goodness how things have changed, and completely for the worse since I ran for Congress in Colorado’s CD-2. If the LP is to be a think-tank only, as Mr. Weir is seeming to suggest, why organize as a party at all? The censure notion of Mr. Weir is silver, at best. Full removal would be gold. He supposedly represents big “L” libertarians across the country, however advocates for Republicans and threatens local affiliates. A censure for OH is ridiculous and any national leader should recognize the necessity of putting Libertarian candidates in front of constituents and an absolute necessity.
On the other hand, Mr. Thompson deserves accolades for his response. Well stated.
Otto Dassing’s resolution to censure Ben Weir is absolutely gold.
J.M., could you supply Otto Dassing’s resolution?
I found it: https://groups.google.com/g/lnc-public/c/sXk7PMSwxA8
It’s telling that Weir is both so incompetent that he needs a LLM to write for him, and so stupid as to want the LNC to censor a state affiliate for actually doing what it is supposed to do for ballot access in running candidates.
He needs to resign from the LNC immediately and be replaced with a potted plant, since that would be a step up.
It might make sense for the LP of Ohio to not run a candidate for Governor if Vivek Ramaswamy was really a libertarian and had a long verifiable track record to back this up. I do not think this is the case. So given the lack of evidence for Vivek Ramaswamy’s libertarian credentials, I think that the LP of Ohio should run a candidate for Governor.
Also, in order for the LP of Ohio to remain a ballot qualified political party they have to get 3% of the vote for Governor. If they do not run a candidate for Governor they have no chance at getting 3% of the vote and they will lose recognized party status/ballot access. Regaining ballot status in Ohio is very difficult. Has Vivek Ramaswamy pledged to donate money for the Libertarian Party of Ohio to regain recognized party status if they do not run a candidate for Governor. If Vivek puts a large sum of money in a PAC, which he can’t take back, for the LP of Ohio to be able run a party status ballot access drive with for 2028 since not running a candidate for Governor would automatically mean that the LP of Ohio will lose its ballot status, then they can consider this as an option. Has Vivek Ramaswamy said that he will put up a large sum of money for the LP of Ohio for this purpose if they agree to not run a candidate for Governor?
Ben Weir should ask Vivek Ramaswamy if Vivek would promise to try to amend the Ohio definition of a political party, from 3% for President and Governor, to 3% for any statewide office. Most states with vote tests for ongoing status let any statewide office count. There is no reason why Ohio shouldn’t follow that model.
Maine once required the Green Party to poll 5% for Governor as the only way to remain on. The Green Party successfully got the law changed from a vote test for Governor, to a registration test, which the Democrats thought was a good deal for the Democratic Party.
Alaska once required the Alaskan Independence Party to poll 3% for Governor to maintain its status. The Republican Party didn’t want the AIP running for Governor, so Republicans in the legislature changed the retention law to a registration test.
If Vivek wants the LP to abain from the gubernatorial race, he rationally ought to follow those examples so that the LP of Ohio isn’t required to run for Governor to stay on the ballot.
Ohio can’t use a partisan voter registration test for recognized party ballot status because Ohio does not have partisan voter registration.
The law in Ohio could be changed to the vote test for ballof retention being changed to it applying for any statewide office and/or it could be set lower than 3%.
Keith Thompson is the Region 3 South representative, not the Secretary.
Also, Ben Weir’s email does not appear to be written by him, but by an LLM that he asked to write the email for him, which is shown by the fact that, at the end of Weir’s email on the thread, it has the line “Want me to make a more diplomatic or a sharper version too?” which would be expected from a LLM making what was prompted and then asking for any requests for possible changes to its output.