Comment: You clearly don;t comprehend what I said.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Grant You. (see in situ)

You clearly don;t comprehend what I said.

Because you stated that I want the cream of the crop to elect the leaders. You showed with that a total miscomprehension of what I was suggesting.

I am MUCH more radical than that. I want them to BE THE LEADERS!

If you understood what I said you would see that it is a procedure for getting the best of libertarian ideas implemented by a broad base of people despite their disagreement on lesser items (in my opinion, the main thing that holds back the BROAD IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MAIN LIBERTARIAN IDEAS).

I'll state "the plan" more simply.

1) Get a good administrator in place who can make sure "the plan" can happen.

2) Survey people who want to be part of an efective Libertarian party (of whatever name) to find the 5 or 10 main points they see as vital for the party to achieve.

3) Invite Membership from people who want those 5 or 10 things and will put their money where their mouths are.

4) Make sure elections are as difficult to corrupt as possible.

5) FOR LEADERS; propose only those people who have the best records in attaining and maintaining the 5 or 10 points discovered by the survey.

6) Make sure that the main points are clearly and unambiguously known to membership and available to the rest of the world by publication on a website and any other method that might work.

6) make sure that any public utterances that do not agree with the will of the membership (as expressed in the main points as surveyed) are actionable. The utterer aligns with what his people require of him or relinguishes his party post. The membership is also able to refute what he said as not being what they wanted.

If you think that is the GOP, then I'd be interested to know your answer to the following: why did they create new rules not agreed by the majority at a conference to shut out the most popular libertarian in the country form even speaking to their public?