Why is Barr being so dense!

Wow. All I can say is WOW. It's like he is deliberatly trying to ruin the party.
 
he likes that CIA power and control thing.....watch out...so did papa Bush and baby boy Bush. That, "Cowboy Wannabe" Problem combined with PC issues...has been lethal to our youth.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
Ben2008 said:
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.
Click to expand...

That might make sense if Barr had any chance of winning.
 
It's only two more people though, both of whom belong to national contenders.

Though they fall into generalized pairs, though, far left and far right. Some sort of merger should be in place, but that isn't reason to abandon a chance for publicity.

I mean, think about it in market terms. If Bob Barr is truly the best candidate, he would naturally rise to the top (yes, I know this doesn't apply to the major parties, but the thirds are a bit different in this sense). This shows a lack of confidence in his own ability.
 
I found out last night Chuck Baldwin is on the Iowa ballot so I'm just exited that i can vote for someone i actually like, Bob Barr to me was the lesser "evil" I cant understand why would anyone vote for the dushbag if Baldwin is on their ballot :p
 
Ben2008 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Isn't this the same type of BS that the 2 major parties use as an excuse for why they won't debate a 3rd party?

Perhaps we should walk our talk.
 
New York For Paul said:
the election will be over in weeks and candidates can start planning for 2012
Click to expand...

This is SO frustrating. We are NOT going to win this from the top down. Haven't you heard Ron Paul say that multiple times? If we stand a chance, it's going to have to be from the bottom on up.
 
Bob Barr has cost the Lib party more than one new member.;) I'm not very happy with Baldwin on the War on Drugs or Internet issues.
 
I never liked BB. I don't trust him... especially after these bad decisions. Can they be called deliberate actions to lower his vote %s?

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.

IMO, the CP is dangerous to the USA and dangerous to religion because there is too much overlap consistently proposed between God and state. Any politician that talks about imposing personal freedom prohibitions has to be rejected for the sake of Liberty because freedom is the unique trait that allows so much success in our nation. The state wants to be our god and that would be a bad, so lets not blend the two together voluntarily. The state is way too big now and the fiat/fed must be abolished ASAP after it's replaced with the sound money specified in the U.S. Constitution.
 
Grimnir Wotansvolk said:
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!
Click to expand...

I've voted Libertarian for President in the past 3 elections, and I really want to do so again, but Barr makes it impossible- he's such as asshole!

What happened to the Libertarian Party that nominated good men like Harry Browne?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bradley in DC
Zogby: Barr 3.7%, Nader 1.0%, McKinney 0.6%
Replies
15
Views
390
jmdrake
jmdrake
R
Is BARR sending MIXED MESSAGES???
Replies
0
Views
396
RonpaulSupporter7777
R
Bradley in DC
Nader, Barr muscle onto the Nov. ballots
Replies
0
Views
93
Bradley in DC
Bradley in DC
Bradley in DC
‘At least 15′ on Colorado presidential ballot
Replies
1
Views
116
zach
zach
S
Paul turned down McCain - AP
Replies
0
Views
141
slacker921
S
Back
Top