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.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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


I heard a joke once that went along the lines of "What is the difference between China and the USA? China has one party and we have two."

Anyone who has been playing the game of trying to push their way into the republican party realize that party politics is far more powerful than the general election nonsense. When a candidate gets put forward for your party, all things equal, he has a 50% chance of getting the office. With the very few people involved in party politics, you realize your involvement in the republican party magnifies your role in government by orders of magnitude.

So here is where my criticism of the libertarian party comes in. We have a first-past-the-post system here in america, and that guarantees that no matter what there will be only two parties. Parties really are just containers, they are not actual political viewpoints. Therefore it is much easier to gut and fill a party with new viewpoints than it is to foist up another party.

When I ran for precinct committee person, out of the 9 slots in my district, I was one of two people running. I ran for alternate delegate, and had it not been for the central committee shutting down the convention, I would have won that easily.

Basically, what I am saying is if all those libertarians dropped the libertarian party, and joined the republican party, they would have the numbers to easily be able to convert it into the party that matches their viewpoint, and achieve the ultimate goal: have libertarian minded politicians take seats in government and reshape the US government into a more libertarian government.

Unfortunately the lofty goal of trying to push forward a third party has blinded many to both the fact that such an ideal is unlikely to be achieved, and really it doesn't win the true objective of changing the course of this country.

The complete destruction of the libertarian party would be ironically the best hope for liberty in america.

tasmlab's picture

It's not just us at DP, nearly all of our high-profile...

I'm not sure if this helps answer your question and I don't mean it as an attack or being nasty...

But most of the high-profile-ish libertarians that have public spotlight and are considered intellectual authorities (or at least intellectual leaders) don't seem to want to have much to do with the LP.

These are the folks that wake up passion, nothing we find coming out of the LP.

Such as:

- Ron Paul: draws thousands, makes us teary eyed when he speaks, inspires people to get revolution tattoos
- Tom Woods and Peter Schiff dazzle us with their economic intelligence and make us laugh
- Jesse Ventura makes us nervous with his plain speaking
- Justin Amash and Rand Paul actually win elections
- Stefan Molyneux somehow put Rothbard together with Rand and applied it to the family, and then somehow gets people to listen to him banter in his car for 2,000 hours.
- Lew Rockwell has a website that has to be visited daily
- Stossel has a TV show
- Kokesh waves guns and dope in front of the man
- Julie Borowski will embarrass herself to no end to make a point
- Who am I forgetting?

None of these people, for example, really seem to mention the LP.

You guys have Gary Johnson which is good, but you also had Bob Barr.

These are just speaking of people, but I mean it as an indicator to explain the lack of apparent offering.

On the other side of libertarianism we have the Koch brothers funding Cato and Reason Foundation for 40 years and yet when it comes to electoral politics they become the dark side of the GOP. If they are in the LP, we haven't seen it recently.

So, I guess my final response is that the LP is boring and uninspiring.

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

tasmlab's picture

Disclosure: I did vote for you

Last election, I voted for LP president (GJ) and a LP candidate for my local house. And I left the rest of the ballot blank. My only hope was to have the LP totals one vote higher for publicity's sake.

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football

Love this response! Lmao!

This comment especially good "Stefan Molyneux somehow put Rothbard together with Rand and applied it to the family, and then somehow gets people to listen to him banter in his car for 2,000 hours."


Yes, please BUY this wonderful libertarian BOOK! We all must know the History of Freedom! Buy it today!

"The System of Liberty: Themes in the History of Classical Liberalism" ...by author George Smith --
Buy it Here: http://www.amazon.com/dp/05211820

Libertarian Party is Essential

There is no doubt that the LP has some major issues. There is a lot of infighting simply because many (not all) libertarians stick to their principles. The philosophy of libertarianism or objectivism sets parameters in which to analyze the world in which we live in. For example, libertarianism doesn't say that welfare is wrong, but instead that people's property must be protected; you can't offer welfare without first confiscating someones wealth. Libertarians are not for or against abortion, but instead are for the protection of life; the question then is who's life and what is life. The philosophy allows us to determine what is right and wrong and how to live our lives.

Being that the philosophy revolves around our natural rights (God-given rights if you prefer) of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then it becomes extremely hard to support either the Democratic or the Republican Parties. Each violates the philosophy of libertarianism/objectivism in different ways.

I supported Ron Paul because his beliefs are in line with that of libertarians. But even his views differ to greatly from that of normal Republicans. He doesn't believe in using the Federal Government to impose his personal beliefs because they do violate not only the constitution but also the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

So if there are more libertarians in the Republican Party, there is no doubt that I and many other libertarians will support them. But don't ever expect us to support someone like Cucinelli (or whatever his name was in Virginia).

Being part of a party doesn't

Being part of a party doesn't mean that you have to support them or the candidates. Also, what makes a normal republican just depends on who is in the party. Parties have nothing to do with philosophies, other than being a container for them, and you can easily rewrite the party if you have the majority. This is why I think the destruction of the libertarian party is essential, those libertarians need to join a party that actually has an effect on government instead of being a great place to spin your wheels and talk about philosophy.

Those who like and understand

Those who like and understand the movie, "The Matrix" will understand that the Libertarian Party is Zion and anyone who runs under that title is Neo, RP included. It's a method of control for people (the systemic anomaly's) who dislike govt, keep us in one pasture so to speak. Ever wonder why nothing ever changes?

Listen to what the Architect says...


I dont go posting news on

I dont go posting news on libertarian party, but im not opposed to them or other folks who who have a "message" i agree with.......and i do notice that which you speak.....all i can say, if those folks wanna get something off their chest in a "respectful" manner, thats their perogative, if its a RESPECTFUL opinion of theirs, i will not comment i will not "vote", but i will not agree with them, i will not defend the libertarian party as i dont know much about them, but i will the defend their rights as with others to be " a part of the conversation" as long as their goal is not chaos, subversion, lying, or "winning", something i associate deeply with the two/one party THAT is what riles me up about them, and i am very strongly opinionated about that, in my thoughts i mean not shouting from the rooftops, so know that there are READERS out their who DO notice that, and DO disagree, and is comfortable enough to believe that others are of like mind, and it doesnt need to be said, no minds have been changed, and i have a healthy respect for those who view it that way by coming to it on their own as opposed to thinking that way because thats what someone else said,.....not to knock a thoughtfull post mind you....but allowing ANYONE who WANTS to be CONSIDERED for nomination BASED on what they can bring, and then folks voting for them BASED on what they want brought, should be childs play, especially seing as the opposite essentially and basically forces you to choose either one of two parties, even if you dont WANT either, not without TRUE AND JUST AND IMMENSE FUCKING CHANGE to either party.......you can not alliviate the SPREAD of corruption, you have to damn cure the whole thing, otherwise it starts to spread again, or at least, that is how i view it, i dont know if you know but i have major trust issues with government or a more precisely what they represent today.....the "system" is not built to be just, that is why i will support well thought out endevours to plug this "hole in the bottle" that patches up the access for corruptions, and if that should be a pledge and person I BELIEVE, who belongs to an upcoming party, and just as long as i like the "message" and conviction of the party, yeah.....major luck to em, for our sakes aswell as theirs

Many paths, many opportunities, that is just one

I've voted for the LP

I've voted for the LP candidate in the last couple of presidential elections. In 2008, he didn't do so well. That's okay. The growing RP movement and wave of libertarianism meant that the LP candidate would do much better in 2012, right? Well, I voted for him, along with 1% of the country. 1%. That's just sad. The sad reality is that the LP doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning a major election. Sure, if both of the paid for candidates suck, then vote for the LP guy... but if somehow a decent GOP or Democrat sneaks through, then vote for that guy. At least he/she has a shot of winning something and making a difference.

30 years as a Libertarian, now Republican LD Chairman

I was registered Libertarian for more than 30 years because I believed that the Libertarians were/are the Republican Party that my father and grandfather believed in. The Party of Coolidge - not the Party of Lincoln - or Nixon or Bush etc... Being a quick study it only took 15 years to realize the Libertarians were indeed that party in principle but were ineffectual. They preferred debating the definition of libertarian utopia to winning elections and halting the descent into distopia. Being a man of principle (i.e. a stubborn SOB) it took me another 15 years to take the advise to register as a commie big government war mongering progressive (read Republican) and work within the Party to bring it back to its roots. My wife and children were shocked but I did it for Dr. Paul.

I am now a Republican Precinct Committeeman and the Party Chairman for my legislative district. I have learned that the bulk of Republicans are like minded. But that the Party has no use for its grass roots. The Constitutional Conservative values are shared by Libertarian and Republican grassroots alike - - but are just as ineffectual in both Parties!

The upper echelons - National, State, and County Party are more concerned with personalities, and personal friendships and allegiances than principle. Because they are just people. And those people value those relationships. Most are not evil. Some are, but most just value relationships over ideology.

The Republicans are just as ineffectual as the Libertarians, but for different reasons. The Libertarian party will eat its young over a intellectual debate over nuances of liberty. The Republican Party will eat its young to defend the good old boys club.

They believe wholeheartedly in the ideas but will sacrifice those ideals for personalities and personal power.

I have talked with many Republican Leaders (now that I'm one of them) who I cannot find a real and sincerely held political or philosophical difference. But they would sacrifice their children to Baal rather than question the opinions of their party leaders or their friends.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties are a cult of personality. The libertarians are a cult of theory. They are all ineffectual cults. Both the Republicans and the Libertarians are ineffectual at effecting change to reflect the views of their grass roots members. The democrats have alienated most of their members pandering to extremest elements within their party just as the Republicans have alienated most of their members pandering to the extremists of the democrats. The Banksters have captured both parties, and the leadership of both admit it in private.

All this to say - don't disparage the libertarians. In the grand scheme they are just as screwed up but for a different reason. Democrats burn their children for Moloch, Republicans for Minerva, Libertarians for Sophia.

But all Parties represent the failed aspirations of men and the inability to work outside of personal favors and relationships.

It is time for an effectual 3rd party - which is like saying it is time for another virgin birth and to believe that mankind can overcome its lowest nature by wishful thinking and good feelings - or its time to remember why the second amendment was written into the Constitution.

Parties are bad - OK?

Well, for one thing, why did they name the party "Libertarian".

Few people can spell it and almost nobody outside of the libertarian movement knows what it means. I never had the chance to ask Dave Nolan why he didn't use the name "Liberty Party". Also, the LP suffers from the same problems as the Democrats and Republicans. That is, there are too many RINOs in the LP.

Let us face it, the system will NEVER be fixed as long as the central bankers follow the guidelines of the Talmud; i.e., cheat EVERYBODY, including your fellow bankers; only, not as much. If the public knew what is in the Talmud they would run every Talmudic Jew out of the country, or worse.

"Mr. Fallin, you are an anti-semite."

"If that means I oppose people who believe it is God's will that I can lie, cheat, steal, torture and kill anyone who does not share my belief system and even some that do, then you are correct."

We call it the Libertarian Party...

...so Jewish voters who agree with Ron Paul's ideas will have someone to vote for who isn't supported by anti-Semites,

And because we know Aryan nations high school drop outs won't be able to spell it so they can't email us.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


SteveMT's picture

Three months here, GALTSGULCH and you are already up to speed.

Bravo! You want to know why? It's called lies and deception. What's in a name like libertarian you ask? Nothing. The same nothing that is in the name republican or democrat. People can say anything that they want, but they have to prove it, especially in the case of someone saying that they are a libertarian. The left-right paradigm is too small these days. There are many more sides than just two for this paradigm. No one gets a free pass if they are libertarian just because they say that they are. No one gets a free pass if their last name is Paul either, which has been part of the struggle on the DP for the past few years. Even if their first name is Ron, everything that they say is tested against everything we know to be true. Everyone is put to the test.

It's not the party that's the

It's not the party that's the problem, it's that they have no chance to win. So that's why Justin Amash, Ron Paul and Rand Paul are Republicans.

That's nice for them

Until they start lying about Libertarians in order to ingratiate themselves with the GOP establishment

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


Boy you are a peach aren't

Boy you are a peach aren't ya?

Oh let me raise my hand one more time.

That word contempt stirred a memory of mine. 2012 election primaries...Ron Paul on the ticket...Kansas rally for Paul featuring prominent local libertarians like Tom Woods and some LP members...a call to register just 10% of the 40K registered Libertarians to support Paul statewide... one month later... Paul loses by huge margin with less than the 2-3K votes needed...Rick Santorum wins big... Gary Johnson receives 1% of the vote in the general....yippee!

As a side note I talked to several of my LP friends days befor and after the primary (people that made phone calls for the campaign), turns out they declined to register Republican for a short time to vote for the good Dr. One didn't even show up at the caucus to speak for the campaign as promised. One sited that he didn't want to lose his highly coveted district coordinator position He struggles right now to replace himself. This is the seed of a party hack. The LP hacks are worse than RP or DP hacks. At least the later two have some success to hack for. Don't be a party hack. Support liberty wherever it rises!

What have you done for us lately?

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

Ha! Yes, we've figured it

Ha! Yes, we've figured it out...the LP is lazy. That's what it is. They hate the Republican Party (which is the roots of the LP) but instead of getting off their arses, and putting in a little sweat, they say " I'll just wait for everyone else to join the LP so I don't have to do any work". That's what it is. They don't want to work for their Liberty. They want someone else to give it to them.

Poor little whiners

I've given the Paul's around $2000, canvassed for Ron Paul and two local Ron Paul Republicans, blogged in defense of Ron Paul, and re registered to vote for Ron Paul in a primary.

So when he repeats lies about anyone, especially a candidate I am supporting, he loses stature.

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


Why did you hide the original source of this article?

Did you turn the original text to white? Or did you post then edit?

Deception will not go unnoticed here.

(edit) Nevermind - seems to be a coding problem. Sorry for the accusation.

Tweeting occasionally as himself @cudnoski on the twitter.

I've been a small 'l' libertarian since long before I joined up


Tweeting occasionally as himself @cudnoski on the twitter.

The LP is worthless

Put me down under "unbridled and raging contempt."

I will have nothing to do with them. As far as I'm concerned, they don't exist.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

Sounds like

a story behind your sentiments.

Not meaning to pry, but would you care to elaborate?

If they don't exist...

... Will you still tell lies about them?

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


Why should we be encouraged by the LP?

What have they done to advance liberty lately?

Some of you need to step into political reality if you think an empty vessel is going to save you.

Here's an something to get you started though. Who is the most famous and successful libertarian today and what does he say about using energy to advance a third party run.

Clue: His name is on the website and he retired a Republican.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

Ayn Rand's...

...name is on this website?

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor


political reality?

Is that what you really want? Here you go: you will never reduce the size of government through political action.

"It may be a hundred years before a computer beats humans at Go - maybe even longer. If a reasonably intelligent person learned to play Go, in a few months he could beat all existing computer programs." - Piet Hut

What does that have to do with winning elections?

You know what politics is right?

Here is a political reality for you: You will never win running in the current Libertarian Party.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
www.yaliberty.org - Young Americans for Liberty
www.ivaw.org/operation-recovery - Stop Deploying Traumatized Troops

not the goal

The LP was not founded to win elections. It was founded to spread the ideas of liberty.

"It may be a hundred years before a computer beats humans at Go - maybe even longer. If a reasonably intelligent person learned to play Go, in a few months he could beat all existing computer programs." - Piet Hut


they why bother being a 'party' at all? You made no sense with that comment.

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