Libertarians wrote in Paul? on Lib ticket? How much did this cost?

1)I may be wrong,but I believe the GOP only recently changed their primary rules that one must be Repub to vote.
2)Independents at the last minute who were not Repub and could not vote,probably decided to write in RP anyway,as at least a statement of support.
3)While I know the info was available [i switched from dem to repub back in Nov.],many people,and I'm told independents specifically,were under the wrong impression. They simply thought it was as in past-they could vote GOP as an independent.

So,no name slinging and stupidity remarks,or claims of ego sticking to party lines. This process has been confusing at best. Unfortunate? yes. Deliberate? doubtful.

All these fractions is what really hurt the repub party and got away from RP's message. Imagine if all the LP, CP, Reform, many others would have stayed in the GOP and pushed for more people like Ron Paul instead of letting McCain look alikes take over the party. Why spread out the Ron Paul voters in all these smaller groups and ensure someone like Ron Paul will never get elected?

y should have all got behind Paul. But they were to stubborn and stupid.
They let their ego's get in the way even though electing Ron Paul would bring them so much closer to their political aspirations than any thing else.
So they dug in their heels and said screw it we rather lose the country than to jump ship even if it saves our country and makes it better than before.
What a bunch of jerks!

And I'll tell you why.

1. He was almost certified by the LPCA Executive Committee for the ballot but in the end was not.
2. The LPCA Presidential Primary is advisory only and has no bearing on what happens in Denver in May or in San Diego in two weeks. We nominated nobody.
3. The current batch of LP Presidential candidates are unimpressive.
4. A lot of LP members in CA "jumped ship" to go GOP to vote Paul and then jumped back. Some of us did not. In my case it was because I am directly involved in the LPCA at the state level and therefore could not per our bylaws. Plus, I will not vote GOP in general if I can help it. Dr. Paul is the lone exception. My local Congressman is a neocon, good-old-boy-network corrupt Republican. I do not suffer fools like that at all.

Becky's implied premise that this is wrong or bad is false. Most Libertarians got fed up with the GOP years ago, which is why they left, for exactly the reasons you all are seeing now. Welcome to the show, nice of you to finally see what we've seen for a long time. We knew well in advance that some L's not jumping ship would have no to little imapct on yesterday's vote, mainly because of how CA's vote is distributed among the congressional districts. We were correct. It would not have made any difference, especially since we saw a McCain win coming based on his pro-amnesty stance and the GOP's overall stance in this state. Remember out here in the Twilight Zone, Republicans start at the middle and go to the middle-left, Democrats start at the middle-left and go to Berzerkley, the Greens are on the far extreme left over the Pacific near Wake Island, and the Libertarians and AIP/CPers own the middle to the right.

"Welcome to 2008: The Year of Ron Paul!"

Why didn't these people change their party affiliation to Rep to vote for RP? So many others did.

And seriously, if this happened in California...did it happen in the other closed primary states, and by how much? Was it really just an oversight or did they refuse to leave their party to vote on a different ballot for allegiance sake?

For Liberty!
Becky Blauvelt

Not all state LP's do this, but in CA they could NOT legally have him on the ballot, due to their own by-laws.

Why all those LPers didn't switch to the Republican Party is beyond me. This makes it so much more confusing, and waters down the vote.

Although die-hard LPers do have a lot at stake in their Party, so I guess that is why; as well if there is not enough turnout, I think the FEC can remove a Third Party from future ballots.

I may be a vegetarian, but I'll defend to the death my right to eat pork!

In many states, nominations are the exclusive concern of a given party, and therefore partisan Libertarians would be barred from participating in a Republican primary. This appears to be the case in both the California Republic and the State of Montana. These write-in voes for the "unnamed candidate" cost us nothing as they would not have been permitted to participate with their Republican neighbors.

I expect that Ms Smith does not consider this to be a loss at all, as she has publicly stated that as the Libertarian candidate she would step aside for Dr Paul if Republicans demonstrated the good sense and character to nominate him. As that appears to be less and less likely, Plan B starts to look more probable, to wit: Libertarian and Constitution partisans can draft The Good Doctor for President, tack on their respective Veep suggestions, and forge a mutual non-aggression pact to place Dr Paul and candidate X on 50 state ballots as the LP, the CP, the Reform, or an independent ticket.

This COULD lead to a Paul victory in the general election, but with different Veeps attached to the ticket, a loss for THEM. For example, California electors et al cast their votes for President Paul & Vice President Smith, while Georgia et al cast theirs for President Paul & Vice President Peroutka. Meanwhile, Illinois et al cast theirs for President Clinton and Vice President Obama, and Arkansas et al cast theirs for President McCain and Vice President Huckabee. We just might see a President Paul with a Vice President Obama or Vice President Elmer. (One shudders to think..)

Viva Agora!
Professor Bernardo de la Paz
www.citizenduquesne.org