Why is Barr being so dense!

[silverhawks]

It's pretty obvious that Barr operates according to one agenda - his own.

The thing that Ron Paul had going for him was his integrity, honesty and his obvious dedication to serving the public, as well as a genuine desire to educate and enlighten people.

By comparison, Barr comes across as a used-car salesman who you wouldn't trust with lunch money.

 

[beerista]

...we strict, Misesian libertarians need the representation!

And you're getting this representation from Barr???

 

[bojo68]

It makes perfect sense for him not to attend. A candidate should not debate people that are very much lower in the polls than he is. That only popularizes them and gives them an opportunity to take votes away from him. It doesn't make political sense. It would only make sense for Barr to debate someone with roughly equal support, such as Nader, or someone with greater support. For the same reason, it wouldn't make good political sense for McCain and Obama to debate Barr voluntarily, because it would hurt McCain and Obama.

Well it might not make political sense, but it damn sure makes moral and intellectual sense, that obviously many of these candidates don't possess. Personally, I think that any candidate that subscribes to the above lack or reasoning deserves NO votes, period.

 

[Brassmouth]

And you're getting this representation from Barr???

Yes. Your point?

 

[demolama]

I do want the LP to gain ground with voter education (the Liberty message) and reach 5% for ballot access in future elections.

Therefore, I'll have to vote for the Libertarian candidate(s). (unfortunately that happens to be Bob Barr. Bob Barr does not have to worry about winning the 2008 election ...and neither do we.

My biggest fear is that we do something for this reason the LP might take it as "we like more candidates like Barr and less like Browne." Last thing I want is to turn the LP into the Republican Lite Party. That's what the CP is for.

 

[Brassmouth]

My biggest fear is that we do something for this reason the LP might take it as "we like more candidates like Barr and less like Browne." Last thing I want is to turn the LP into the Republican Lite Party. That's what the CP is for.

Barr was purely for name recognition, imo. I'm sure next year they'll nominate someone less controversial.

 

[libertarian4321]

Barr was purely for name recognition, imo. I'm sure next year they'll nominate someone less controversial.

Next time, the real Libertarians like myself will be back (unless the Republican Party changes) and will get the party back on track.

 

[georgiaboy]

Barr was purely for name recognition, imo. I'm sure next year they'll nominate someone less controversial.

How's his name recognition helping in the polls this year compared to 2004, other election cycles, for the LP?

From what I can gather, as much as we may not like it, his and the LP strategy may just be paying off.

 

[Gaius1981]

It makes perfect sense for him not to attend. A candidate should not debate people that are very much lower in the polls than he is. That only popularizes them and gives them an opportunity to take votes away from him. It doesn't make political sense. It would only make sense for Barr to debate someone with roughly equal support, such as Nader, or someone with greater support. For the same reason, it wouldn't make good political sense for McCain and Obama to debate Barr voluntarily, because it would hurt McCain and Obama.

I absolutely agree with this logic.

 

[Charles Wilson]

Why is Barr being so dense!

Well it is most likely genetics but I think he had to work at it to get this bad. Can't blame that on his ancesters :o)

 

[D.H.]

Did he not want to be on the stage with the other two due to Cynthia McKinney? Not insulting her supporters, but people think she's WAY out in left field to put it politely. I actually support truthers BTW, but politicians have to watch what they say. She has said too many controversial things in public.

Apparently she got on the news recently claiming 5000 people were killed by the DOD during Katrina. And their bodies were hidden.... I didn't even bother to watch this....The comments were interesting though.

http://beltwayblips.com/video/cynthia_mckinney_reveals_5_000_executed/

What if she starts on this at a DEBATE? That may be why he is distancing himself to avoid a televised disaster.

 

[Truth Warrior]

McKinney is a loon.

http://www.congressionalbadboys.com/McKinney.htm

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Barr was purely for name recognition, imo. I'm sure next year they'll nominate someone less controversial.

It's a shame. They screwed up the best election year they would have ever had.

 

[[email protected]]

Perhaps just because he IS so dense?

My thoughts exactly.

 

[kombayn]

God fucking damnit.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/726125.html

"Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr said he has a scheduling conflict, but debate organizers say he wanted to appear only with Nader."

There is a gaping philosophical maw between Chuck Baldwin and McKinney/Nader that needs to be filled. Bob is an asshole, but we strict, Misesian libertarians need the representation!

Are you surprised at all? His campaign manager that helped the Perot campaign has screwed his whole chances to begin with. It's just bad campaign management, hopefully the delegates next year nominate a real Presidential candidate with real libertarian principals.

 

[Alawn]

How's his name recognition helping in the polls this year compared to 2004, other election cycles, for the LP?

From what I can gather, as much as we may not like it, his and the LP strategy may just be paying off.

I think most of that is purely because Ron Paul made it more popular to be libertarian. I wouldn't have voted for Barr or any other LP otherwise.

 

[Brassmouth]

It makes perfect sense for him not to attend. A candidate should not debate people that are very much lower in the polls than he is. That only popularizes them and gives them an opportunity to take votes away from him. It doesn't make political sense. It would only make sense for Barr to debate someone with roughly equal support, such as Nader, or someone with greater support. For the same reason, it wouldn't make good political sense for McCain and Obama to debate Barr voluntarily, because it would hurt McCain and Obama.

Absolutely correct.

From what I can gather, as much as we may not like it, his and the LP strategy may just be paying off.

Why wouldn't a rational libertarian like it? Bob Barr is doing fantastic things to spread the liberty message.

It's a shame. They screwed up the best election year they would have ever had.

I daresay you'll be eating your words soon enough. I predict the LP will have a stellar turnout this year.

 

[mitty]

It's a shame. They screwed up the best election year they would have ever had.

i agree. you can have both name recognition and libertarian credibility. for some reason the party ignored this fact. the party knows barr is a joke and will hurt the party. they will make the necessary corrections in 2012.