| |
  
|
||||||||||
Libertarians' "Pragmatic Choice" Sure Worked Well
Submitted by DC on Tue, 11/04/2008 - 23:18
Diluting the message did wonders! Could anyone else possibly have done worse? Even some of our trolls could have arguably done better in this election year had they been on the ballot in 47 states. Good thing they didn't nominate a principled constitutionalist -- that may have offended some voters. » |
|
|||||||||
The Daily Paul is a community website with no official affiliation with Ron Paul or his Presidential Committee. The content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original poster, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site IMMEDIATELY. For more, read the Full Disclaimer
© 2007 - 2011 by The Daily Paul. Not paid for by, nor officially affiliated in any way with Ron Paul. | General Site Disclaimer | DMCA Disclaimer | Advertise here
Dr Mary Ruwart
Ruwart would have probably gotten endorsed by Ron Paul waay earlier than Baldwin was. she could have had some money bombs and also gotten all the C4L $ instead of the guys that run for the Congress. her votes could have easily passed 1 million. just imagine the RP activists campaigning for her...she could have done great.
------
want Liberty in your lifetime? visit
http://freestateproject.org
------
Conspiracy theory addicts destroy our movement from within.
Let Reason triumph over unreason.
Worthless
The Libertarian Party has been worthless for as long as I can remember. Ron Paul learned his lesson in '88.
If the Libertarian Party were ever going to get traction, this was the year to do it. All that the Libertarian Party had going for it previously was ballot access. The Ron Paul Revolution delivered a big and enthusiastic grass roots base that was eager to work and contribute money. The Libertarians squandered that by nominating an abrasive neocon who lost no time in insulting and alienating the Ron Paul movement.
If there is a future for the cause of liberty in the American political system, it is in the Republican Party. The neocon faction of the GOP is all that remains. It is decimated, aging, and demoralized. The party infrastructure is up for grabs. You young people particularly need to grab for it.
You must have damnesia then
The LP asked Paul to be our nominee before Denver. He declined.
Had he walked in the door at Denver and asked, he would have had it on the first ballot in a laughfest vote.
This was not the year for LP to gain traction. No year will be until the party builds the political machinery to do so, and the lack of it is its biggest failing. The LP leadership fails to understand that simple point.
The GOP is joining the Whigs as afterthoughts. Yesterday was just the repudiation by a majority, and the slide is downhill into the grave from here.
That's true--the sick joke
That's true--the sick joke that was Barr/Root wouldn't have happened if Ron Paul had run on your party ticket. The LP can't be blamed for that.
Just the stubborn refusal to do anything about the ticket after the fact. Is there no mechanism for a recall of a candidate? Suppose the LP had accidentally been outfoxed by convention politics and two members of the Aryan Nation had been nominated? Would they have been left in place?
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
The only places I've found, so far, where Barr's presence may
have, at least in theory, made a difference are in Indiana and North Carolina. The vote there (Indiana) is:
Obama: 1,367,264
McCain: 1,341,101
--------------------------------
Difference: 26,163
Barr: 29,186
In North Carolina:
Obama: 2,110,322
McCain: 2,098,452
-------------------------------
Difference: 11,870
Barr: 25,288
(Missouri is another possibility as well, but McCain is ahead there.)
I say "at least in theory" because it presupposes that Barr's vote, in his absence, would have fallen overwhelmingly for McCain......that also assumes that those people would still have been motivated enough to make the journey to the polls to cast a vote for a lesser-of-two-evils experience.......assumptions that are admittedly less than proven.
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
Nope. Barr had no impact anywhere.
That assumes he would "take" votes from a candidate, which is an absurd proposition to begin with.
As for Indiana, the late raw numbers surge in the urban counties in the Dunes area (Lake, Porter, LaPorte, and Starke) went 60-70% Obama, and came in late because of the Time Zone differences, and that put Obama over the top.
I was tracking that all night and called IN for Obama 3 hours before the networks did based on that simple fact alone, while the corporate media was busy blathering about how IN was too close to call.
Barr is short.
Short guys do odd things. Ask Tom Cruise.
He's also ugly.
And his mother dresses him funny.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Bob Barr did himself in...
By disrespecting Dr. Paul by not showing up for the press conference.
Bob Barr is a douchebag.
That's why I didn't vote Barr
It was a big mistake for the Libertarian party to nominate Barr.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
“Liberty without learning is always in peril... and learning without liberty is always in vain”
- John Fitzgerald Kennedy
=====================================
"The greatest mystery of all is truth." - Me, 2009
Tell us something we don't know.
And a lot of us in Denver warned this would happen.
Agreed, but the problems with the Barr Campaign go
much deeper than just that one incident.
The fact that he never recovered from it proves he did not have the proper campaign organization and machine to be able to approach anything near electoral victory in any sense of the word.
But on that note, not one of the other contenders for the LP nomination, save Root, would have built or even thought to build, such a campaign machine. I thought Barr would have known to do as much. I guess not.
And Mary Ruwart or Steve Kubby
would have done better?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!
Seriously now, Barr did as well as expected, and he got INFINITELY more media exposure and attention from the MSM to bring our message to the voters than ever before, and certainly more than Ruwart or Kubby would have. They wouldn't have even been visible yesterday. (think the socialist tickets)
In all honesty, the vote count wouldn't have been much different either way. When people are scared crapless into voting AGAINST someone, it's hard to get them to bolt - no matter who you are. Look how tough it was for Perot, and he had a relatively unlimited budget. He had to buy his way in with infomercials. Without that, we'd never have seen much out of him either.
The game is rigged. And the LP does NOT have the organization or membership strength to pull off more than what we got. Face reality. It's simply a numbers game.
Wrong premise.
Ruwart or Kubby would have run to market the party and build it, not run to glorify themselves the way Barr did. IOW, they would be doing exactly what a third-party candidate who knows they won't win should do.
All that media exposure got Barr an extra 0.1% over Badnarik, who as an unknown purist raised about the same amount of cash. The 0.1% is well below the scaled differences in percentages of overall voters from 2004, so the relative levels of actual votes should have been more than a 90K vote gain. It should have been about triple that. That means Barr was a flop.
Why, Yes
No one, but no one, could have been less effective than Barr. Thanks for nothing, Bob.
_______________________________________________
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels
_____________________________
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels
Let's face it Bob Barr was easy to dislike but here's the stats
Past LP presidential candidate's performances are as follows:
(I missed a few I couldn't find)
2008 - Bob Barr - 487,137 votes (with 97% of precincts counted)
2004 - Badnarik - 397,265
1996 - Harry Browne - 485,759
At the nominating convention in Washington, DC, best-selling author Harry Browne receives nomination. He wins 485,759 votes in the general election, the second-best showing in party history.
1988 - Ron Paul - 430,000 +
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec00/libertari...
So, since it says Harry Browne got 485,759 and that this was "the second-best showing in party history", that means Bob Barr's 487,137 was either the best ever performance or he was second best. (I couldn't find who had the best performance.)
And he even did better than RP did in 1988. Were you aware of these past LP stats when you made your comment?
fight4liberty
In a year when there was an
In a year when there was an outcry for Third Parties, getting only 1300 more votes than Harry Browne in '96 is pathetic.
Also figure population statistics of each year into the votes if you want an accurate picture. I'm betting if you index it that way, Ron Paul and Browne both substantially outdid Barr in their day.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Ed Clark, 1980, 921,128
Ed Clark, 1980, 921,128 votes.
Could we get some analysis?
Perhaps a bit more than just stating something?
Nope.
His only asset was that he had an established record as a veteran US Congressman.
However, that record was a bad record, from a constitutionalist standpoint.
The Patriot Act, in this movement, is a scarlet letter.
That was all he needed to lose.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Barr's campaign
made some mistakes, as did McBama's also. Ruwart's campaign would also have made mistakes. She would have raised even less than Barr plus have no name recognition. The Palin VP choice was effective is ensuring many libertarian leaning Republicans who would otherwise have voted for Barr. The woman factor would not have helped Ruwart with Palin. If McCain had selected
Liebermann, Bloomberg or Ridge, Barr would have got 15% plus (as Gingrich indicated), but not pro-choice/abortion Ruwart etc.
Nope.
Palin swayed exactly one person: Eric Dondero.
The woman factor would have helped Ruwart with her PHD and surgeon credentials over a hockey mom who graduated a 4-year program in sports journalism in 6 years.
Ruwart is also a best-selling author and is highly photogenic. Barr is not, and his best side is from behind.
Mary Ruwart would have done
Mary Ruwart would have done better. Barr sucked graveyard dust considering his ballot access and access to the mainstream media.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Simply stating something doesn't make it true.
Perhaps you could give us some reasons WHY? and WHERE? Ruwart would have done better?
She would have been 100% ignored by the MSM. Barr was not ignored.
You haven't read the 350
You haven't read the 350 negative posts I've written on Barr over the past six months?
You're right though--the media liked him...because he was a Washington insider. Which doesn't help him with this crowd.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
i just send them this e...
the libertarian party is a big disappointment.
i supported michael badnarik last election because he IS a good and committed man.
he strongly suggested that ALL third parties get behind dr. ron paul.
and he was right!
bob barr was and is a DISGRACE to the libertarian party.
how could you all be so ignorant as to nominate him?
no wonder you did so POORLY!!!
Ron Paul is My President
ps ( i actually voted for michael peroutka)
Ron Paul is My President
Maybe one of these days you learn...
...to read.
As I have posted ample times here before, Barr was not a nominee by the whole party. He got the nominee on the SIXTH ballot by ELEVEN votes.
Don't go blaming the whole LP for the actions of a few Reform Caucus chowderheads.
They Should Probably Disband
They've remained irrelevant, and at this point you have to feel at this point they will never get off the ground.
________________________________________________
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels
_____________________________
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it." -- Joseph Goebbels
They lost everything by choosing Barr.
You can say what you want, but Third Parties exist for one purpose only: to field candidates for President. The rest is window dressing.
The Libertarians lost most of their core supporters this election. I was one of them. Now I will only support a new party, or the Constitution Party.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
Sorry, no.
Third parties exist to move public policy in the direction consistent with their ideals. Ask the Socialists, because they've been very successful at it over the decades without electing anyone President on their ticket.