The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: In my opinion

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: How good of a candidate he is (see in situ)

In my opinion

our "potential" is better preserved, by preserving our integrity and only voting for NAP adherent candidates.

If you are of the opinion that you can actually fix this system by voting in the "right people" then you are sadly mistaken.

The only use politics has for the libertarian message is as an educational tool, a platform we can use to spread our ideas.

It is better to not water down our message, and not to promote candidates that are philosophically inconsistent with our message.

If we are to educate, we should spread our ideas in their purest form, not dilute them.

It is better not to vote at all, then to promote deviation from the philosophy of liberty, promoting these deviations are much more harmful.

"How good of a candidate he is not the question"

Really, it is not important how much of a libertarian he is?

If the LP nominee was Bob Barr again, would you have us vote for him?

If the LP nominated a neoconservative, who was only slightly better than the Republican or Democratic nominee by a fraction of an inch, wold you urge us to vote for them?

Here's a good question:

If we had the choice of picking from three candidates,

1. who would kill 5 people

2. who would kill 10 people

3. who would kill 15 people

Would you tell us to vote for person number one, as opposed to not voting at all, and not endorsing any of the criminals?

This is just a gauge, it will help me to understand you a little better.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at

"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard