Imagine Yourself in 2006

[Rob]

For those of you who have been part of the libertarian movement for awhile, imagine that it's 2006.

I tell you that in 2008, a libertarian will get about 20% of the vote in about half a dozen states.

What would your reaction have been?

[derekjohnson]

I am with you...I had a Badnarik sign in my yard in the fall of '04, and watched him pull about 0.5%. Now I have a Paul sign and am praying he will take the libertarian offer and run this fall. If he could get 5-10% in the general election it could be the start of somethign huge. Unlike Perot, who had no platform and only offered an different option than the current party system, Paul offers a platform and message that the party could build around.

[Paulitical Correctness]

In 2006 I didn't know the difference between a democrat and a republican.

[nullvalu]

In 2006 I was just learning what a libertarian was. In 2004 I voted for Badnarick, but I think you could consider that more of a protest vote. Now I'm really glad I voted for him.

[MGreen]

In 2006, I was thinking, "I hope the Democratic nominee isn't too bad."

[Enzo]

In 2006 I didn't know the difference between a democrat and a republican.

I still don't know the difference...

[Cleaner44]

Good new perspective.

[Goldwater Conservative]

Thank you. People need to keep things in perspective. If nothing else, we've proven we're not just 1% and probably not just 5% of the GOP base, but 10% in many states. That's more than enough to make the establishment a little uncomfortable. They have no idea what this means for their November prospects or for the future of the party, especially since Paul performs even more strongly, usually about 20%, among young people, who are the future of the party and the country.

[billjarrett]

In 2006, I never paid much attention to the term libertarian, wasn't even 100% sure what it meant.

I was however looking at my party thinking what the hell happened..

[JonathanR]

Its exactly this perspective why I am simply amazed with what Ron Paul has done.

Some of these guys think they have it bad here. I busted my butt for Harry Browne and Michael Badnarik to see them get 0.5% nationwide and ZERO, ZILCH, NOTTA media coverage. Ron Paul is a superstar compared to those guys. If the new supporters can keep perspective and remain interested in freedom minded candidates, then this is a major leap forward. MAJOR.

[jcbraithwaite7]

In 2006 I was a neo-con who bought all the crap that mainstream media fed me. I voted party line and thought that Cindy Sheehan was a bitch and The Dixie Chicks were unpatirotic. I thought my father-in-law was clueless because he hated Bill O'Reilly. I hated katie Couric because I thought she was part of the "liberal media" The only thing that hasn't changed is I still hate Katie Couric... but now she is just part of "The Media" and not "Liberal Media"... oh and I bought a Dixie Chicks cd to make up for my ignorance.

[OptionsTrader]

In 2003, people like the Dixie Chicks were "unpatriotic" to even question the upcoming war, much less speak out against the coming invasion.

In 2008, it is stylish to be against the Iraq war, but it is "kooky" to advocate that we stay out of the internal affairs of other countries, such as Pakistan and Iran that will probably be invaded no matter what non-Paul candidate may win.

One man was speaking out against the upcoming invasion in 2002 when Clinton was pimping the war with the Bushes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLV7zDhKzDY