24 votes

A gauge of Daily Paul aversion toward the Libertarian Party.

I have been surprised with how unpopular the Libertarian Party seems to be here at the Daily Paul.

Very surprised.

So, I guess I should take my lumps and find out where I'm wrong...
If you dislike the Libertarian Party, please tell us why.

Be specific. Is it the platform? The idea of a third party? The people associated with it?

Hold nothing back.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

if voting is truly

anonymous how could you know that? Or anybody for that matter?

Good for them

Sarvis wasn't a real libertarian. His proposals were nonsense. In addition, he took money from a liberal just to get on the ballot. Where was his principles? He knew what they were up to and he was complicit. I really don't understand the defense of that guy. What happened is a travesty in VA. Mcaullife? You have got to be kidding me.

You are a parrot and an ignorant one

Anyone can read the LP platform

Anyone can read the 3 papers Sarvis co authored on the Mercatis website critical of regulation and spending

I listened to him for the last 4 days of the campaign. He didn't use jargon but he only talked another endin regulation in business and the drug war.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

Okay

Whatever you say buddy. Your agenda is clear and I am sorry to say, irrelevant. good luck with your mission to nowhere.

I trust Ron Paul

His idea to fuse Libertarianism into the RNC at the grassroots level has been a BRILLIANT strategy.

Why stop now? Can you imagine if we DOUBLE our agents within the Republican machinery at the state level as compared to where we are at now?

We would have more control than the Republican establishment.

When you see a plan working, stick with it!

Personally, I am chomping at the bit for 2015.

And I see Rand Paul doing exactly what he should be doing. Reaching out to Evangelicals, working on his public speaking, refining his image; Ron built the foundation and Rand is going with it.

And no, it's not about Rand or even Ron...It's about us! It's our time to win over the Republican party, to regain what was lost under the Bushes.

Just stop lies and smears

To achieve these ends then

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

You got it right

Jungle

Abolish all parties

There's supposed to be equal opportunity for all. Vote based on what the person has done and believes then guage his words with his actions and actual voting record. First round in office for an unknown will always be taking a chance. Don't give a second chance to someone who hasn't lived up to his words.
My aversion is really to group think, to classifying individuals into categories that always end up failing what they are said to represent.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

It's a Party

The LP is a political party--for members, by members. The California party has one, count him, one, paid employee. The rest is volunteer. We've been kicked off the ballot by a "top two" law, making competition even more difficult.

In 2008, when I attended the various conventions as a delegate, the parking lot was full of Ron Paul bumper-stickers.

The Revolution logo was created by an LP member (and candidate for party office), and many of us, here, are members. We nominated Ron Paul before anybody else.

If you think the dominant parties were unfair and played dirty with Ron Paul supporters, you can imagine why libertarians might prefer a party that plays fair.

People who get involved in the LP do so because they know that ignoring politics doesn't make it go away.

We members have many of the same flaws as the dominant party members, but as a party, we are very welcoming and tolerant of diverse opinions and great ideas, and you can almost always get support from some people just on principle--in other words, you really have to wear out your welcome to be shut out of a debate. You don't even have to be 18 to join. Please join us.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

Depends what you mean by

Depends what you mean by unpopular.

I'll never send the LP a check or volunteer for the party but I've been active for decades in the ballot box. Given a choice I vote LP with much greater frequency than anything else. I was a Carla Howell fan here in Mass, sent her and others money directly.

Don't need the party mechanism to vote for or contribute to a candidate. Keep your hotel function room balloons, call centers, direct mail pieces and email blasts. As a corp vp of marketing, I know that personal decisions (which is what voting for an LP or Ron Paul-type candidate is!) are made through the personal messaging, one-to-one, 'warm' communications.

10-15 million more voters need to believe in non-interventionism (liberty) at home and abroad to change America. Minds changed on Syria. Minds changing on privacy. "Printing money" is part of the dialogue. Win minds through focus, strategy.

Talk is cheap. The two parties that have enough power so that

their actions may be judged talk a good game; their actions plainly are not good for anyone caring to notice. Is that a problem of a specific party or parties or a problem of people with power?

LP can talk a GREAT Game with little worry of being found out as BS artists, on the whole, since they have had essentially no power with which to create a record of actions.

PATRIOT ACT; who could be against that?

Libertarian Party; who among those that really care about LIBERTY could be opposed to a party with a name like that?

Is being ruled by people that occupy the high seats in a TOP DOWN STRUCTURE with a form of LIBERTY in their organizations name less onerous, less authoritarian than being ruled by another TDS without a form of LIBERTY in its' name?

If the people who established a very effective authoritarian control scheme which hid itself from being seen for what it is by creating two parties in feigned opposition detected a potential threat from some people catching on to the sham; what would be a cheap and easy defense against that threat ever becoming a serious challenge to the PTB status quo?

Very convenient name in the same way the PATRIOT ACT is conveniently named.

We are currently in PARTY HELL. It is not any specific party/parties that are the problem or the solution. Parties are a vehicle favored by those that wish to rule over others.

To escape PARTY HELL we current have no option but to use the vehicle of the PARTY System to gain enough power to first re-establish INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY and then destroy the vehicles like PARTIES that make subverting LIBERTY easy.

If one must play the PARTY game to have any hope of ending the PARTY GAME, that subverted LIBERTY, how best to go about playing that game?

Create a party from scratch or take control of an existing party?

Creating a party from scratch to become anything useful in a reasonable time frame is impossible in the current environment.

In going the route of Taking Over/Subverting(from the view of those currently occupying the high seats) an existing party is it better to go after a party with no power and no legitimacy in the eyes of those that sleep walk to the polls or one with both power and legitimacy.

Facts that make up reality stubbornly resist efforts to ignore them; particularly if those efforts are on the basis of them being unfair.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

I agree and further. . .

Being a precinct person within the party gives you valuable accsess to fellow R's as you go door to door for the GOP cause. Before the 2012 election I did this BUT I did no plugs for Romney, only for area issues and good candidates (some were RLC plants). I tried to steer clear of talking about the presidential race, and just because Priebus got elected does not mean things aren't churning from within - as was brought up previously as a reason to quit. I have the time to do this and some don't - it feels as futile at times as storming the castle would be to Joan of Arc. Remember our efforts may be added unto - we are afterall gods hands and He lets us participate in the battle. Sorry to get religious on ya but there IS a bigger spiritual perspective to take!

But the question the Virginia smear campaign raises is

Are you taking over the GOP or is it taking over you?

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

Hold Nothing Back??

Do you REALLY mean that?

If so, please confirm.

Thank you.

"You are a den of vipers and thieves."

I mean to rout you out!

-Just because you are among us, does not make you with us

-The door is wide open, anything can slither in

I say what I mean...

and mean what I say.

Because the Big L still wants to use government as a cudgel

Little l is all about a clear plan to minimize the government interference. Yet the Big L doesn't vet their candidates to that standard. Sure a Ron Paul or similar comes along once in a while, but in the mean time Bob Barr and other less disciplined spenders are given a pass. Big L needed to be self critical as well as vocal in the legal challenges. Blowing to and fro with the winds of doctrine doesn't instill confidence. Honestly too late. The party officers are self serving and the party needs to re-brand under new management. Come on over.

Hey you so called little l's are the ones using

Government to keep big L's off the ballot.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

I voted for Gary Johnson last presidential election

but, to the best of my knowledge, he never followed up on his anti-trust lawsuit to allow third parties into the currently exclusive two-party national debates.

So there's one major turn-off to the Libertarian party right there.

He didn't sue to enable third

He didn't sue to enable third parties to be in national debates (which would be a very broad, general goal), he sued to specifically get into the 2012 national debates:

http://mobile.usnews.com/news/blogs/Ken-Walshs-Washington/20...

Since you know so much about the case

how did it turn out? Even if the debates had already passed, the lawsuit could have still gone forward to represent a symbolic (and possibly monetary) win for 3rd party candidates and set a precedent for future lawsuits.

If the case was not pursued, I certainly would like to know why.

Frankly, I know as much as

Frankly, I know as much as you do now. I would presume the case didn't go forward as they had no real standing? I just don't know. If I get ahold of Gary in a Google Hangout (he holds these all the time) maybe I'll ask him.

I'd really appreciate your doing that.

I posted a comment on his Facebook page asking about the lawsuit but neither he nor anyone from his staff responded to it.

If they are a third party

Why don't they act like they want to get elected? Show up for events, set up a webpage, give talks, whatever.

Maybe it is because they don't really want to rule. That's fine. But why run at all?

They did all those things in Virginia

Sarvis got a ton of free media, a newspaper endorsement. That's why you GOP people had to exclude him from debates and get the Paul's to - unsuccessfully - ask libertarians to vote for Ken. And spread lies about him.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

Just an observation, but...

Just an observation, but I noticed even the official website of the Libertarian party has changed their platform and principles list over the last couple of years to attract conservatives that lean Libertarian. The controversial principles have been tuned down very substantially from the original list I read 4 years ago. Libertarian hardliners should fix this fact or accept this new list as honest "party-line" principled voting Libertarians. Anyone else notice this?

http://www.lp.org/

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

honestly..

The lack of success. We are a new movement. We are not the Libertarian Party.

I personally get called Libertarian all the time but I make sure to say Im a little L Libertarian.

I believe it is better for us to work within the GOP and purge its ranks through success at the ballot box.

Until the Libertarian party can deliver real results, don't expect a movement to hop on board. I agree with the party on most issues but the lack of success turns me off.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

why not the DEMOCRATIC Party???

Well we all talk about joining the GOP and working within it to change it to become more freedom minded. Well the same should be done with the democrats. First the Democrats and Republicans are at an equal distance from the Libertarians. The only difference is that most libertarians give a bit more weight to the economic freedoms over the personal freedoms. I believe that is only because Americans have experienced decent economic freedom and their personal freedoms have long been restricted so we don't notice it as much. But with the advent of Obama destroying personal freedoms, you better bet that many Democrats will be looking for something better, and you can bet that it won't be the GOP.

Anyhow, just run as a Democrat if the chances are better to getting elected as a Democrat and then when it comes time to vote, well then vote as a liberty loving individual :)

believe it or not..

the GOP platform is closer aligned with Libertarian beliefs. I personally believe we should keep pushing what has been successful for us so far. We have greater allies in the GOP than the left.. Alan Grayson for instance threw us under the bus as soon as the party bosses gave him heat for being moderate.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Because we have some good

Because we have some good incumbents in the GOP. No, not a lot yet but they are in higher offices than the LP has.

When I say 'good' I mean like Ron Paul on almost all issues.

Thomas Massie, and Justin Amash are probably the best Congressmen. In Texas We have these incumbent State Reps that I would vote to reelect: David Simpson, Jonathan Stickland, Giovanni Capriglione, Matt Krause, and Steve Toth.

We are making progress. Of course if you can get elected as a Dem, Great!

But the people I mentioned have good records while at the same time being popular with those who elected them.

Not with the LP

Because i'm an Anarchist..

But.... If I ever did vote one day just for giggles it'd most definitely be for a 3rd party candidate.