PDA

View Full Version : Bob Barr barely cracked Harry Browne's vote totals




RevolutionSD
11-07-2008, 07:01 PM
Browne 1996 485,000 votes
Barr 2008 489,000 votes

Higher vote turnout this year too.

What was that about watering down the message to get more people to vote for libertarian candidates?

Jeremy
11-07-2008, 07:04 PM
Browne and RP are the LP's 2 most popular candidates. Some comparison. ._.

RevolutionSD
11-07-2008, 07:06 PM
Browne and RP are the LP's 2 most popular candidates. Some comparison. ._.

And Ed Clark had over 900,000 votes as a libertarian in 1980 going against "the great" Ronald Reagan.

Face it Barr sucks.

ClockwiseSpark
11-07-2008, 07:14 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Bob_Barr-2008.jpg/479px-Bob_Barr-2008.jpg

Who wants a mustache ride?

mczerone
11-07-2008, 07:28 PM
I was hoping Barr would pull more. But he didn't. If the LP wants to improve, they shouldn't nominate him again. Keep him in the organization, don't ostracize him. But don't let recent converts take the lead position.

SWATH
11-07-2008, 07:37 PM
Oh yeah that's because Barr is a douche.

jmlfod87
11-07-2008, 07:43 PM
he screwed up and the LP screwed up. Move on. We had a great year for libertarianism without the LP fielding a candidate. Remember that guy Ron Paul who ran and inspired all those people?

rockandrollsouls
11-07-2008, 07:58 PM
I didn't vote for Barr, I'm a registered libertarian, and I don't think he screwed the party up. He didn't do anything to contradict the platform, and those of you talking trash are just talking heads. Get your head out of your ass and run for office yourself if you think you're so much better. I don't see you making an effort.

RonPaulFanInGA
11-07-2008, 08:00 PM
Barr didn't screw anything up. Like he really would have gotten that magical 5% of the vote nationally had he just attended Ron Paul's third-party press conference. Please.

brandon
11-07-2008, 08:05 PM
He barely even beat Badnarik. Badnarik got about 400,000 votes, and is thought of as one of the least popular LP candidates.

Brassmouth
11-07-2008, 08:07 PM
Browne 1996 485,000 votes
Barr 2008 489,000 votes

Higher vote turnout this year too.

What was that about watering down the message to get more people to vote for libertarian candidates?

Remind me how many votes that imbecile Baldwin got?

brandon
11-07-2008, 08:09 PM
Remind me how many votes that imbecile Baldwin got?

The comparison is pointless. The CP lacks the party infrastructure that the LP has. He only had ballot access in half as many states as Barr.

rajibo
11-07-2008, 08:15 PM
Meh. It doesn't matter. The total of all third party votes was far more underwhelming than I'd thought it would be.

I thought we made progress changing minds the past year and a half, but in the end, only evil gets the vote.:(

Brassmouth
11-07-2008, 08:19 PM
The comparison is pointless.

Sure. :rolleyes:


The total of all third party votes was far more underwhelming than I'd thought it would be.

Me too. I suppose we have the Paris Hilton of politics, Barack Obama, to blame for that.

justinc.1089
11-07-2008, 11:05 PM
Yeah its frustrating. I don't think the third parties have the money to run a realistic presidential campaign. I mean how much money did the Libertarian and Constitution party spend anyway, and how much did Obama and McCain? I'm betting they outspent third parties by like a hundred times over. Plus they MUST get into the debates- period. Go to jail if thats what it takes, at least you will get publicity, and the public, well a little tiny portion, will think "hmm, why won't they just let them in the debate?" And third they must come up with a good argument against the "Well we have no choice but to vote for the lesser of the two evils" argument people always think.

Personally if I was serious about running as a third party candidate, which I probably never would be, if they wouldn't let me in the debate I would go anyway, get on the stage anyway, get drug off by police, and go to jail protesting the violation of freedom of speech. I would get 10 times the amount of publicity any third party candidate has got before, and probably more votes too, while sitting in jail unable to campaign because I simply did at least step onto a presidential debate stage.

It makes no sense to think you are a serious presidential candidate and act like one but then not be doing whatever it takes to get into debates. Third party candidates should be protesting that if they're actually serious. I wonder if they're actually more into making a point than actually progressing their parties....

Imperial
11-07-2008, 11:49 PM
Barr is still pulling in a few more votes. It probably will be at about 500,000. Baldwin also has MANY more votes coming I'd say, where he was a write-in in Texas. Of course, he won't beat barr. I wouldn't say Barr lost so much as the establishment won though.

Think about it: We have Obama and Palin playing mirrors reflecting an image of different demographics of the population, as well as McCain and Biden. McCain and Obama managed to associate all that was wrong with the world on the other. People were 'too scared' of socialism or 'too scared' of a new foreign war or more Bush to vote third party.

People are afraid of wasting their vote, even for lower offices. They vote straight party ticket. They fear the other side as the end all and be all, a logical fallacy of though(either/or fallacy). In this respect, 1984's nightmare scenario is coming. However, the people are closing their ears. I honestly think it would be worse if Paul had not run. Still, Aldous Huxley's Brave New World is also realistic; in it, the people willingly lose their liberty and grasp of reality.

So, we really are swimming against the tide. The fact the 3rd Party vote this year is so insignificant shows this. In addition, until this year debates were viewed by less and less people since 1980 as political discourse simplified. This year, the people embraced a maverick and change. Ratings jumped through the roof. Since 92, vote totals have progressively decreased over time. Perot threw a gauntlet and plucked a nerve. The duopoly has been consolidating ever since. Only a bottom up effort can succeed.

But I digress. Simply put, if we assume people disgusted with Barr voted for other third parties, we still didn't win. We are swimming upstream, but we must not falter.

RevolutionSD
11-08-2008, 12:14 AM
I didn't vote for Barr, I'm a registered libertarian, and I don't think he screwed the party up. He didn't do anything to contradict the platform, and those of you talking trash are just talking heads. Get your head out of your ass and run for office yourself if you think you're so much better. I don't see you making an effort.

Since when has running for office given us 1 ounce more freedom?
Libertarians have been trying that for decades and failed miserably.

It's time for some civil disobedience. Forget politics, it's a lost cause.

james1906
11-09-2008, 08:34 PM
Barr didn't screw anything up. Like he really would have gotten that magical 5% of the vote nationally had he just attended Ron Paul's third-party press conference. Please.

He would have had mine had he attended.

MRoCkEd
11-09-2008, 08:41 PM
I was supporting him for the nomination because I thought he would garner more votes for the LP..
so much for that.

SnappleLlama
11-09-2008, 08:41 PM
Yes he...can?

Kludge
11-09-2008, 08:42 PM
The Constitution Party has only existed since 1992 and took nearly 200,000 votes this year... Just throwing that out there... -- though if you factor in population growth, Barr still would have received less votes.

(Baldwin received 6,000 votes less than the CP's 1996 [1992 and 2000] candidate, Howard Phillips.)

Marshall
11-10-2008, 03:40 AM
I didn't vote for Barr, I'm a registered libertarian, and I don't think he screwed the party up. He didn't do anything to contradict the platform, and those of you talking trash are just talking heads. Get your head out of your ass and run for office yourself if you think you're so much better. I don't see you making an effort.

I'm also a registered libertarian, aside from my brief bout of Republic registration to vote for Ron Paul, and I didn't vote for Barr. Amongst all the statist bullshit the man spewed, support for the financial sector bailout made me stay home on the 4th instead of vote for his ass.

demolama
11-10-2008, 08:15 AM
As a registered Libertarian I found myself refusing to vote of Barr. I'd never vote for a Neocon Lite and to do so would only send a message that the LP members would rather have Neocon Lite than true libertarians.... no thanks... More Brownes... less Barrs

TonySutton
11-10-2008, 12:01 PM
Ron Paul got a larger percentage of votes in 1988 than Barr did in 2008.

Ron Paul Libertarian 431,750 0.5%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1988

Bob Barr Libertarian 500,045 0.4%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008

mczerone
11-10-2008, 01:29 PM
I'm also a registered libertarian, aside from my brief bout of Republic registration to vote for Ron Paul, and I didn't vote for Barr. Amongst all the statist bullshit the man spewed, support for the financial sector bailout made me stay home on the 4th instead of vote for his ass.

?

I don't contend your issues from the past with Barr, but he came out strong against the bailout - and railed against Bush, Obama and McCain for supporting the horrible legislation.

If he had supported the bailout, his percentage would have been 0.01% instead of the 0.4%

qh4dotcom
11-10-2008, 04:22 PM
If Barr had attended RP's press conference and so many people wouldn't have written RP's name on the ballot, I'm sure Barr would have gotten over 1,000,000 votes.

Ed Clark got the most votes because he spent a lot of his personal funds in his campaign...Barr should have done the same.

gls
11-10-2008, 04:43 PM
?

I don't contend your issues from the past with Barr, but he came out strong against the bailout - and railed against Bush, Obama and McCain for supporting the horrible legislation.

If he had supported the bailout, his percentage would have been 0.01% instead of the 0.4%

Perhaps he is referring to the initial Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac bailout, where Barr sent out a press release saying that "the government has to do something" and a later one where he called for giving the Federal Reserve greater oversight powers.


If Barr had attended RP's press conference and so many people wouldn't have written RP's name on the ballot, I'm sure Barr would have gotten over 1,000,000 votes.

Ed Clark got the most votes because he spent a lot of his personal funds in his campaign...Barr should have done the same.

Actually I believe that Clark's campaign was financed mostly by his billionaire running mate David Koch.

Peace&Freedom
11-10-2008, 06:44 PM
What the Barr totals show is that there is a 'roof' as to how many votes the LP candidate is going to get under the current system (and working with 1.3 million raised). It appears to be 400-500,000 votes or .4-.5% of the population. No matter who it is, a purist no one has heard of, a financial analyst, or an established elected official, without having funds comparable to the Democrat and Republican, or major debate presence, or daily mentions of the candidate by the major media and major polls, the candidate is not going to break through the .5% roof.

The way out of this box was shown by Paul this year, only he chose not to take it all the way to the election. The solution is, get a credible contender to run a principled, third party type race in the GOP or Democratic primaries, thereby getting the real attention and marque face-offs with the so-called "frontrunners" (Giuliani, et al), he would have been otherwise denied. Build a grassroots base through this visiibility and run grassroots fundraising blitzes (money bombs) to get the serious cash, thus circumventing the way the MSM blocks third party candidates from getting anywhere via blackout of regular coverage. Then, either win the major party nomination outright, or, withdraw from the primary race and retool the candidacy as an indy/3rd party election campaign.

Had Paul chosen the latter course in February, when he was already sitting on 5 million dollars, a 200,000 mailing list, a unified movement (both CP and LP factions behind him) and a network of hundreds of active meet-ups, he could have raised at least ten times as much through mid-year through new recruits to the grassroots, and entered the fall campaign with $50 million, a national organization---and almost surely, the 15% poll numbers needed to get into the dabates. THIS IS WHY MANY SUPPORTERS WERE SCREAMING FOR PAUL TO GO FOR IT THIRD PARTY.

If the movement wants a Gary Johnson or other person to be 'the Paul' in 2012, we really should talk him into committing to be (from day one) a candidate who WILL run third party if the GOP run doesn't work out, instead of dissipating the massive national network he may build up as Paul did this year. THEN we could finally see what a well-funded, deeply supported third party liberty candidate can do.