Liberty Is Not Popular

[VIDEODROME]

Random thought:

Should Libertarianism have gone after the Democrat side? That's not exactly small government, but is there more to work with from the Civil Liberties and Anti-War crowd? Admitedly to do that, the candidate would have to be Pro-Safety Net or something, yet could certainly be critical of corporate favoritism.

Just interesting to think of when Bernie Sanders seems to be picking up that kind of vote.

Oh well, I can't see Rand suddenly switching, but someone else from the Libertarian Party could try that.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Random thought:

Should Libertarianism have gone after the Democrat side? That's not exactly small government, but is there more to work with from the Civil Liberties and Anti-War crowd? Admitedly to do that, the candidate would have to be Pro-Safety Net or something, yet could certainly be critical of corporate favoritism.

Just interesting to think of when Bernie Sanders seems to be picking up that kind of vote.

Oh well, I can't see Rand suddenly switching, but someone else from the Libertarian Party could try that.

It depends on which issues you think are most important.

I think economic issues outweigh foreign policy issues, with social issues a very distant third.

However, if you value foreign policy issues or social issues highest, the Democratic Party might seem like a better route.

Though, to tell you the truth, I think the Dems' reputation as an anti-war party is even more of a joke than the GOP's reputation as a small government party.

All the Dems really care about is welfare and militant social liberalism (not tolerance, mind you, just the mirror image of social conservatism).

 

[Keith and stuff]

Random thought:

Should Libertarianism have gone after the Democrat side? That's not exactly small government, but is there more to work with from the Civil Liberties and Anti-War crowd? Admitedly to do that, the candidate would have to be Pro-Safety Net or something, yet could certainly be critical of corporate favoritism.

Just interesting to think of when Bernie Sanders seems to be picking up that kind of vote.

Oh well, I can't see Rand suddenly switching, but someone else from the Libertarian Party could try that.

Folks are trying it in New Hampshire, perhaps the only place. So far, one person that tried it was elected as a state representative three times. Other people have been elected 1 time as a state representative, including two current representatives. When you are outed, it is hard to win in the Democratic primary. That seems to be the biggest challenge. Since I'm sure New Hampshire will be the place where this strategy is at the forefront forever, I'll keep you updated.

 

[jllundqu]

As is often said around here. Only in times of great distress do people yearn to be free. When the masses are being spoonfed junk and MSM... kept warm and comfy by the .gov... no one cares. Apathy wins out. As that cycle moves from apathy into bondage (as it always does)... then and only then will that God-given spark ignite once more and free men and women will once again rise to the occasion. That time has not yet come.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Random thought:

Should Libertarianism have gone after the Democrat side? That's not exactly small government, but is there more to work with from the Civil Liberties and Anti-War crowd? Admitedly to do that, the candidate would have to be Pro-Safety Net or something, yet could certainly be critical of corporate favoritism.

Just interesting to think of when Bernie Sanders seems to be picking up that kind of vote.

Oh well, I can't see Rand suddenly switching, but someone else from the Libertarian Party could try that.

I don't know. Whenever I come across leftists, they are as pro war as Republicans.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Rand lost when he attacked the Confederate flag.

Haha...no.

 

[Anti Federalist]

//

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

I don't know. Whenever I come across leftists, they are as pro war as Republicans.

Unless it's a Republican war, that is.

 

[Anti Federalist]

And we see how that worked out.

Valuable lesson learned.

The OP is correct: freedom is not popular.

Oh sure, there may be narrow bands of support for freedom to engage in whatever particular flavor of vice that suits you: smoking dope, buggery, killing your unborn children, guns, "free expression, whatever.

But "across the board", broad based freedom, economically sound monetary and fiscal policy along with non-interventionism?

Pfff, you got better chance of seeing God, than electing a president in favor of that.

So we'd like to think.

But the author just spent the previous thirty paragraphs convincing us that is not the case.

And it isn't.

Freedom is not popular, nor does it beat in the breast of every human being.

Most people don't care, and only want to be fed and entertained and boss around their fellow man.

Until that situation is addressed, and addressed in a harsh and realistic manner, those few of us who do care, will be ignored, mocked, ridiculed and dragged off into tyranny with all the rest of the masses of bleating, hopeless humanity.

I stand by this.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I wonder if the social conservatives and libertarians could team up somehow to kill the neocons. Get a candidate that's really laissez faire, toes the social conservative line, but quietly opposes foreign intervention.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I wonder if the social conservatives and libertarians could team up somehow to kill the neocons. Get a candidate that's really laissez faire, toes the social conservative line, but quietly opposes foreign intervention.

...so, Rand Paul?

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

I wonder if the social conservatives and libertarians could team up somehow to kill the neocons. Get a candidate that's really laissez faire, toes the social conservative line, but quietly opposes foreign intervention.

Well, it depends on how "quietly" you want them to oppose foreign intervention. The Constitution Party candidates would generally fit that mold though.

 

[statist slayer]

I would contend that libertarianism -- or more appropriately, classical liberalism -- hasn't been popular since the 1920s, since the evisceration of the Coolidge Republicans by Hoover/FDR/the Fed's artificial economic catastrophe, and the demise of the Liberal Party in Britain at the hands of redistributionists. Most people are statists because they feel entitled to other peoples' money and are stupid and afraid, and the modern political parties reflect their moronic beliefs.

 

[Christian Liberty]

...so, Rand Paul?

Basically, but I'm wondering if he'd have more success if he toed the socially conservative line more, like vocally supporting laws against same-sex marriage and outright identifying abortion as murder and things like that. Although Rand Paul is already pretty much trying to do what I mentioned and its not working Seems like you can't win with the warmongers.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Basically, but I'm wondering if he'd have more success if he toed the socially conservative line more, like vocally supporting laws against same-sex marriage and outright identifying abortion as murder and things like that. Although Rand Paul is already pretty much trying to do what I mentioned and its not working Seems like you can't win with the warmongers.

Yes he would have done better if he did that. I have no doubt about it. But then again, do you want one of those social warriors as president? I don't...whether it's a leftist social warrior or a right wing social warrior.

 

[idiom]

In this thread, people who think freedom and liberty can exist without freewill, and that one can be justly punished for crimes committed by someone else.

 

[nobody's_hero]

I think if he can't win it this time around, we ought to kick the tent post down on the way out of the GOP.

It's been over a century in this country since a major party went extinct. While I would have probably preferred that the democrats go first, I'll take what I can get.

 

[bandwidth]

Agree with Peace&Freedom here, with an addition: A minority can bring about a revolution, but it needs extra-ordinary circumstances and/or the minority should set aside their internal differences and unite.

 

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx