Will the Libertarian Party Field A Candidate Against Presidential Candidate Rand Paul?

[FrankRep]

Uh, yeah. They're true motivation is to continue to build their party. Just like the GOP and Dems. Whether the candidate is worthy of my consideration remains to be seen, but IMO, the more choices, the better.

So the Libertarian Party is choosing Party over Principle?

 

[Carlybee]

I read and re-read all of Carlybee's posts from this morning and I don't see any where she misconstrued anything that Rand said about pot-smokers (or even referenced anything that Rand said about pot-smokers). Is this another reading comp issue?

Thanks...I think they are just trying to derail the thread because they don't want any amount of credence given to the LP. Now whether the LP earns the credence is another matter but wishing for only one party to exist seems almost totalitarian to me.

 

[cajuncocoa]

So the Libertarian Party is choosing Party over Principle?

Newsflash: all parties do.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

Uh, yeah. They're true motivation is to continue to build their party. Just like the GOP and Dems. Whether the candidate is worthy of my consideration remains to be seen, but IMO, the more choices, the better.

You stating this made me think for a minute, and I think it is an interesting observation. I have done tabling events at community events, county fairs, etc for the GOP more times than I can count in both NJ and SC. Just this year alone, we have done 5 events. As I sit here and think of it, I really can't recall many events where I have seen the LP out there. I don't ever recall having anyone knock on my door from the LP either.

 

[Carlybee]

You stating this made me think for a minute, and I think it is an interesting observation. I have done tabling events at community events, county fairs, etc for the GOP more times than I can count in both NJ and SC. Just this year alone, we have done 5 events. As I sit here and think of it, I really can't recall many events where I have seen the LP out there. I don't ever recall having anyone knock on my door from the LP either.

Maybe they don't have a big presence in those particular states?

 

[LibertyEagle]

Thanks...I think they are just trying to derail the thread because they don't want any amount of credence given to the LP. Now whether the LP earns the credence is another matter but wishing for only one party to exist seems almost totalitarian to me.

No one is advocating for one party. You knew that though. Personally, I wish there were no political parties at all. But, here in the real world, as untasteful as it is, the only 2 that get news or in the debates are the Rs and the Ds. If you want to get someone elected, pick one, and use them as a tool.

 

[speciallyblend]

So the question is: Will the Libertarian Party "Stand With Rand" to get a liberty-minded candidate in office or not? If not, the true motivations of the Libertarian Party will be revealed.

no it justs means we will not support rand paul who ignores individual rights,liberty and freedom for state rights.

If rand wanted our vote he wouldn't pander the right wings nuts and pro drug war mongers which he is clearly doing. Rand paul doesn't want my vote or need my vote by his stance for the faield drug war by dence sitting like romney. He clearly states that he supports state rightsover individualrights. Rand doesn't want my vote. frank rep you can try to twist it. i is like saying becuase you didn't vote d r r you are letting the gop lose. BS the gop clealry wants to lose.

 

[speciallyblend]

Yet another inaccurate statement and smear about Rand. Huge surprise.

The neat thing is that you don't have the corner on what is libertarian and what is not. Neat how that works, isn't it?

are you denying that rand paul supports state rights over individual rights? rand fence sitting on the drug war. He is basically saying he supports state rights and imprisoning,jailing and fining individuals for choosing to use something safer then aspririn and many common foods by allowing states to do what they want. by supporting state rights over individual rights. he is doing exactly that. He would support the texas state gov taking kids from parents for using something safer then alcohol. he is saying states have a right to make folks criminals for using something safer then legal items.

Clearly rand paul doesn't want me as a delegate or supporter. fine by me don't epxct me to vote for the lesser of 2 evils, rand still being an evil by his lip service.

sorry i call bs on rands position. i can no longer buy in to what he is saying on the drug war. Clearly rand paul is trying to bs fence sit on this and i am not buying along with many others. It will be my job to inform the majority voter base in colorado of these fence sitting bs positions.

I didn't put him there Rand Paul did himself. If you cannot see why folks are up in arms and i am not the only one. Then rand deserves to lose. Ron Paul 2016 more likely i willsupport Gary johnson or someone outside of the gopsince rand was my only option and no longer will be.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

Maybe they don't have a big presence in those particular states?

What about in your area. Do you see them out often at community events, malls, etc? What about door knocking, have you ever had them come by?

 

[Carlybee]

What about in your area. Do you see them out often at community events, malls, etc? What about door knocking, have you ever had them come by?

I live in a city of several million so yes I have seen them at various events and there were people from the LP who registered GOP for the 2008 RP run who came to some of the same events I went to. I met a couple when I went to Debra Medina's delegate training. I haven't seen them at the door but I don't get many solicitors here. I wouldn't say I have noticed a huge presence but I haven't really looked for it either. My point is that I wouldn't expect a huge LP presence in areas that are traditionally very conservative or more rural...but I could be wrong.

 

[Smitty]

But, here in the real world,

"Here in the real world" is what we've got.

There's no reason to hope for improvement if you expectations are limited to what is available "here in the real world".

 

[Carlybee]

No one is advocating for one party. You knew that though. Personally, I wish there were no political parties at all. But, here in the real world, as untasteful as it is, the only 2 that get news or in the debates are the Rs and the Ds. If you want to get someone elected, pick one, and use them as a tool.

I reject the 2 party paradigm, whether realistic or not. To me voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil. That could change if liberty candidates are actually able to bring the GOP around and I have been cautiously optimistic with some of Rand's stances and with Justin Amash. Whether that trend continues remains to be seen. I am not much for compromising on important issues and I will not apologize for that. I also think that by pandering to certain groups you tend to alienate independents and swing voters.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

My point is that I wouldn't expect a huge LP presence in areas that are traditionally very conservative or more rural...but I could be wrong.

Well NJ is hardly conservative, most everyone knows that. And my area in SC is probably one of the most libertarian districts in the country, surely in the South - we have Tom Davis as our State Senator and Mark Sanford as our Congressman. I find it odd that if a party wants to grow and have some influence that they don't do a lot (if any) traditional means of growing a party. I know they exist down here, as they do run candidates for office (as they did in NJ), but it's almost as they exist on paper more so than an actual physical presence.

I found a registration number of 330,811 from January 2013, according to Ballot Access News. Does anyone know where we can find some historical data on their party registration. I was actually surprised at how low that number is (there are around 177 million registered voters in the US, so the LP is about 0.01% of all registered voters). Sometimes I think folks like us spend more time talking about the LP than it is worth talking about.

 

[Carlybee]

Well NJ is hardly conservative, most everyone knows that. And my area in SC is probably one of the most libertarian districts in the country, surely in the South - we have Tom Davis as our State Senator and Mark Sanford as our Congressman. I find it odd that if a party wants to grow and have some influence that they don't do a lot (if any) traditional means of growing a party. I know they exist down here, as they do run candidates for office (as they did in NJ), but it's almost as they exist on paper more so than an actual physical presence.

I found a registration number of 330,811 from January 2013, according to Ballot Access News. Does anyone know where we can find some historical data on their party registration. I was actually surprised at how low that number is (there are around 177 million registered voters in the US, so the LP is about 0.01% of all registered voters). Sometimes I think folks like us spend more time talking about the LP than it is worth talking about.

Well you will have to consult with someone actually involved with the party. Not my week to keep tabs on them. However it does seem like you take pains to squash any talk about them. It doesn't bother me..I've thought of joining them before but being independent is starting to sound more and more attractive to me than belonging to any party.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I reject the 2 party paradigm, whether realistic or not. To me voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil.

One does not equal the other.

We are a two party system, and with some rare exceptions we have always been a two party system going back to the founding of our country. A lot of that has to do with how we hold our elections (winner take all) and the makeup of our legislative bodies (majority party control). If we had a parliamentary system, things would be different I suppose.

But just because we have a two party system does not mean you are required to vote for the "lesser of two evils". For one, the primary process gives people from all wings of the party the opportunity to compete for the ballot spot in the general election. Massie, Rand, Amash and others have all got to where they are today by competing in and winning primary contests. So the opportunities lie in the primaries. Then when the general election comes, if one is not pleased with the choices, they can abstain. Sure there may be minor party candidates on the ballot for emotional voters who need to "feel good" about their vote. But personally, with very rare exceptions (only one in recent memory) I prefer to abstain rather than vote for a minor party candidate, as I believe that my vote for them is an endorsement of their folly.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

Well you will have to consult with someone actually involved with the party. Not my week to keep tabs on them. However it does seem like you take pains to squash any talk about them. It doesn't bother me..I've thought of joining them before but being independent is starting to sound more and more attractive to me than belonging to any party.

Actually, I believe that talking about them is a good thing, because it gives people opportunity to see what a colossal failure they are as a political party. Hopefully, then people will be less likely to waste their valuable time and money on their efforts.

 

[Carlybee]

One does not equal the other.

We are a two party system, and with some rare exceptions we have always been a two party system going back to the founding of our country. A lot of that has to do with how we hold our elections (winner take all) and the makeup of our legislative bodies (majority party control). If we had a parliamentary system, things would be different I suppose.

But just because we have a two party system does not mean you are required to vote for the "lesser of two evils". For one, the primary process gives people from all wings of the party the opportunity to compete for the ballot spot in the general election. Massie, Rand, Amash and others have all got to where they are today by competing in and winning primary contests. So the opportunities lie in the primaries. Then when the general election comes, if one is not pleased with the choices, they can abstain. Sure there may be minor party candidates on the ballot for emotional voters who need to "feel good" about their vote. But personally, with very rare exceptions (only one in recent memory) I prefer to abstain rather than vote for a minor party candidate, as I believe that my vote for them is an endorsement of their folly.

Yes I am aware of how the primary process works as well as being aware of how the GOP behaved in the last primary process. Which is why I support a paradigm change, however, that certainly won't happen overnight. It it were up to me the GOP would split into 2 parties...the one who respects and upholds the Constitution and the other one that would reflect the majority in there now who obviously do not.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

Yes I am aware of how the primary process works as well as being aware of how the GOP behaved in the last primary process. Which is why I support a paradigm change, however, that certainly won't happen overnight. It it were up to me the GOP would split into 2 parties...the one who respects and upholds the Constitution and the other one that would reflect the majority in there now who obviously do not.

A split is something that has been considered in discussions by activists. The problem with a split is that it would hand the Democrats the majority control of almost every legislative body in the country.

 

[Carlybee]

A split is something that has been considered in discussions by activists. The problem with a split is that it would hand the Democrats the majority control of almost every legislative body in the country.

I don't disagree...it just makes me throw up in my mouth a little to think I am in the same party as Lindsey Graham and John McCain among many others like them.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I don't disagree...it just makes me throw up in my mouth a little to think I am in the same party as Lindsey Graham and John McCain among many others like them.

Understandable. The funny thing is that they have better voting records (using an average of the JBS and Freedomworks scorecards) than every single Democrat. So as bad as they are, it could be worse.

Just to illustrate, the JBS cumulative scorecard has McCain at 64% and Graham at 63% - not good scores at all. But the highest Dem is Heitkamp at 40%, and she is an anomaly as most of the Dems are at 25% or less.