PDA

View Full Version : Barr Campaign is in Debt!




Kludge
11-14-2008, 01:53 PM
Thank God November 4th has passed. Hate the damned fool, and couldn't help but chuckle that his campaign is now in enough debt for them to send another opportunistic mailer (I don't recall them actually sending a concession email -- but I suppose they weren't as aware of their debt then)...



***"After a tough legal battle and vigorous grass roots organizing, we were able to get on the ballots of 45 states . . . more than any other independent or third party candidate, a feat that required the collection of hundreds of thousands of signatures, countless hours of work, and more than a few legal battles. Frankly, these challenges cost more than what we were able to spend on broadcast advertising.

And today as we wrap up our campaign I need to clear up a few financial obligations of the campaign. And, we face many thousands in expenses for compliance with federal election regulations.

Your gift of $25, $50, $100 or more will help us clean up our debts and fund accounting and legal expenses still to come. This is essential to enable us to keep fighting for Liberty for America! *snip*

Thanks for your help in keeping Liberty alive.

Sincerely,

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/img/barr-signature.jpg
Bob Barr" ***



Y'know, I hate the situation third parties are in. There's nowhere in which freedom of ideas and speech is supressed as much as U.S. courtrooms where third parties desperately try to fight oppressive and shameful anti-Change laws. But enough of the gloom, the Barr campaign is in debt. :D

Agent CSL
11-14-2008, 01:57 PM
Won't give them a dime.

heavenlyboy34
11-14-2008, 01:59 PM
As long as he doesn't take the LP with him, he can sink in bankruptcy for all I care. :D

LT for the Truth
11-14-2008, 02:18 PM
Maybe he can get a Bailout. Holla at Kash- n-Kary

tonesforjonesbones
11-14-2008, 02:26 PM
I think they all do it...even komrade obama is sending those things out crying poor mouth . tones

brandon
11-14-2008, 02:31 PM
Put a Ron Paul slim jim in the return envelope and send it back! (seriously)

slacker921
11-14-2008, 02:31 PM
I assumed as much when they were sending out e-mails trying to sell bumper stickers and yard signs just a day or two before the election... oi..

Kotin
11-14-2008, 02:35 PM
why in god's name would a third party ticket ever go into debt?!



FAIL!

mediahasyou
11-14-2008, 02:37 PM
priceless.

pacelli
11-14-2008, 02:37 PM
I assumed as much when they were sending out e-mails trying to sell bumper stickers and yard signs just a day or two before the election... oi..

I gave them $10 when they were begging for money & offering a free bumper sticker to anyone who donated $10. Still haven't gotten it.

They can take the $30,000 they paid for Terra Eclipse IT services in June 08 and shove it up their collective campaign ass.

LibertyEagle
11-14-2008, 02:52 PM
Put a Ron Paul slim jim in the return envelope and send it back! (seriously)

:D

Cowlesy
11-14-2008, 02:55 PM
I think they all do it...even komrade obama is sending those things out crying poor mouth . tones

Except Ron Paul

Uriel999
11-14-2008, 03:58 PM
Except Ron Paul

Hell, getting Ron Paul to actually SPEND money was a problem during the campaign. And damn with all the money we gave him, shitty commercials. He should have just aired a couple youtube videos...*sigh*

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 04:47 PM
Yeah, the *evil* Barr. :rolleyes:

Kludge
11-14-2008, 05:05 PM
Yeah, the *evil* Barr. :rolleyes:

Who said anything about being evil?

He was a conservative (not that there's anything wrong with that) who ran in the Libertarian Party. The delegates compromised their principles for him and his final vote tally was pathetic. His campaign was ended with debt, he created animosity among RP supporters and hired two of the biggest assholes I know (If I ever see Shane Cory's name involved with a campaign, they've lost my support without being given a case). The Barr campaign failed terribly -- we can only hope the LP goes back to picking "radicals" if they seek to grow. Ruwart '12!

Cowlesy
11-14-2008, 05:06 PM
Perhaps his mustache will help him raise the funds

Kludge
11-14-2008, 05:07 PM
Perhaps his mustache will help him raise the funds

No more free mustache rides...? :(

No1ButPaul08
11-14-2008, 05:15 PM
maybe if they hadn't spent $18,000 on an AC unit they wouldn't be having this problem

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 05:17 PM
Who said anything about being evil?

He was a conservative (not that there's anything wrong with that) who ran in the Libertarian Party. The delegates compromised their principles for him and his final vote tally was pathetic. His campaign was ended with debt, he created animosity among RP supporters and hired two of the biggest assholes I know (If I ever see Shane Cory's name involved with a campaign, they've lost my support without being given a case). The Barr campaign failed terribly -- we can only hope the LP goes back to picking "radicals" if they seek to grow. Ruwart '12!

He's become more of a moderate in my view. A lot of RP supporters are a bunch of morons too(Yeah, I said it), the Campaign for Liberty wasn't exactly the nicest bunch, and we failed because nobody got behind one party. Everyone knew that Barr will lose, it was to grow the party, but I guess nobody cares about the LP.

What I have to say about this is fuck everyone. I'm tired of this god damn movement. It's too circuitous, we can't all support one party or man. All except for Ron Paul. Truth Warrior is right, politics is a sociopathic cult. I rather just secede.

There are assholes in this movement too, if you didn't know.

HOLLYWOOD
11-14-2008, 05:17 PM
Maybe Bob Barr can sell some of his Classified CIA secrets to the Mossad. Ahhhhhhh, that's too far, he can just go over and get his check from AIPAC or the Israeli Embassy/Consulate in Atlanta. :rolleyes:

Barr lost all credibility with his FAILED Mike Huckabee gimmicks.

Conservative Christian
11-14-2008, 05:24 PM
He was a conservative (not that there's anything wrong with that) who ran in the Libertarian Party. The delegates compromised their principles for him and his final vote tally was pathetic. His campaign was ended with debt, he created animosity among RP supporters and hired two of the biggest assholes I know (If I ever see Shane Cory's name involved with a campaign, they've lost my support without being given a case). The Barr campaign failed terribly -- we can only hope the LP goes back to picking "radicals" if they seek to grow. Ruwart '12!

I'm not a Barr supporter, but he got a lot more votes than Badnarik did in 2004.

Barr got about 510,000 votes this election, while Badnarik only received about 397,000 four years ago.

Barr's total also surpasses both of Harry Browne's final tallies in 1996 and 2000.

I believe Barr's total is the all-time record for an LP presidential candidate.

nate895
11-14-2008, 05:31 PM
I'm not a Barr supporter, but he got a lot more votes than Badnarik did in 2004.

Barr got about 510,000 votes this election, while Badnarik only received about 397,000 four years ago.

Barr's total also surpasses both of Harry Browne's final tallies in 1996 and 2000.

I believe Barr's total is the all-time record for an LP presidential candidate.

Ed Clark holds that record.

Kludge
11-14-2008, 05:31 PM
1972: John Hospers and Theodora Nathan
2,691 popular votes (0.003%); 1 electoral vote;

1976: Roger MacBride and David Bergland
173,011 popular votes (0.21%)

1980: Ed Clark and David Koch
921,299 popular votes (1.1%)

1984: David Bergland and James A. Lewis
228,705 popular votes (0.25%)

1988: Ron Paul and Andre Marrou
432,179 popular votes (0.47%)

1992: Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord
291,627 popular votes (0.28%)

1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)


As far as %, Barr was pretty mediocre, and a disappointment considering he was supposed to reach out to different ideologies.

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 05:36 PM
1972: John Hospers and Theodora Nathan
2,691 popular votes (0.003%); 1 electoral vote;

1976: Roger MacBride and David Bergland
173,011 popular votes (0.21%)

1980: Ed Clark and David Koch
921,299 popular votes (1.1%)

1984: David Bergland and James A. Lewis
228,705 popular votes (0.25%)

1988: Ron Paul and Andre Marrou
432,179 popular votes (0.47%)

1992: Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord
291,627 popular votes (0.28%)

1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)


As far as %, Barr was pretty mediocre, and a disappointment considering he was supposed to reach out to different ideologies.


We had our own civil war, a "Change" candidate, and a "Maverick" this election season. No shit Barr lost by a great amount.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 05:40 PM
i think it is up to the georgia republican party to pay off his debt, not libertarians, since the bob barr campaign was a product of the georgia republican party.

Kludge
11-14-2008, 05:41 PM
We had our own civil war, a "Change" candidate, and a "Maverick" this election season. No shit Barr lost by a great amount.

Please... Obama and McCain hardly have any differences except for their party name and perceived stance on the war and healthcare.

Former Libertarian voters aren't shallow. They check out candidates and their positions on real issues. Votes were lost to apathy after Barr's failures during the campaign or switched to Baldwin due to his campaign's attacks on Ron Paul and failure to attend RP's press conference.

Barr didn't just lose the election, he lost a lot of peoples' confidence in the Libertarian Party.

jeepndesert
11-14-2008, 05:47 PM
He's become more of a moderate in my view. A lot of RP supporters are a bunch of morons too(Yeah, I said it), the Campaign for Liberty wasn't exactly the nicest bunch, and we failed because nobody got behind one party. Everyone knew that Barr will lose, it was to grow the party, but I guess nobody cares about the LP.

What I have to say about this is fuck everyone. I'm tired of this god damn movement. It's too circuitous, we can't all support one party or man. All except for Ron Paul. Truth Warrior is right, politics is a sociopathic cult. I rather just secede.

There are assholes in this movement too, if you didn't know.

if bob barr kept his mustache off the top of the libertarian party ticket, mary ruwart could have rallied the base and united the ron paul movement. that vote total would have broken the record with more than 1M votes (if the numbers aren't made up by diebold anyway).

no, instead he recruited delegates from the republican party (my dad knows people who were recruited at republican party meetings in georgia).

bob barr fractured the support with his stupidity and ron paul snub. his history fractured the campaign from the very beginning.

you don't nominate a johnny come lately at the top of the ticket. more than likely it is a sabotage on some level.

nate895
11-14-2008, 05:55 PM
if bob barr kept his mustache off the top of the libertarian party ticket, mary ruwart could have rallied the base and united the ron paul movement. that vote total would have broken the record with more than 1M votes (if the numbers aren't made up by diebold anyway).

no, instead he recruited delegates from the republican party (my dad knows people who were recruited at republican party meetings in georgia).

bob barr fractured the support with his stupidity and ron paul snub. his history fractured the campaign from the very beginning.

you don't nominate a johnny come lately at the top of the ticket. more than likely it is a sabotage on some level.

Mary Ruwart would have further alienated the Libertarians from the average voter with her radical stance on child porn. Mary Ruwart is an unknown left libertarian professor from Colorado, not exactly the kind of person the average joe could rally behind.

Conservative Christian
11-14-2008, 05:58 PM
1972: John Hospers and Theodora Nathan
2,691 popular votes (0.003%); 1 electoral vote;

1976: Roger MacBride and David Bergland
173,011 popular votes (0.21%)

1980: Ed Clark and David Koch
921,299 popular votes (1.1%)

1984: David Bergland and James A. Lewis
228,705 popular votes (0.25%)

1988: Ron Paul and Andre Marrou
432,179 popular votes (0.47%)

1992: Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord
291,627 popular votes (0.28%)

1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)


As far as %, Barr was pretty mediocre, and a disappointment considering he was supposed to reach out to different ideologies.

LP candidates ALWAYS try to reach out to different ideologies, so that's not really relevant.

Based on your own figures, Barr is the second highest vote-getter in LP history, and only three men in LP history have received a higher percentage of the overall vote.

Barr would've received even more votes, if he hadn't backstabbed Ron Paul.

Also, some of your numbers are wrong. According to CBS News, Barr received almost 510,000 votes:

http://election.cbsnews.com/election2008/president.shtml


.

Kludge
11-14-2008, 06:48 PM
Also, some of your numbers are wrong. According to CBS News, Barr received almost 510,000 votes

Aye, absentee ballots are still being counted, IIRC. Shouldn't be more than 15k addition once all done. I mention Barr trying to reach out to other ideologies because he was far more conservative than usual LP nominees. That Barr didn't gain significantly more votes for that, I believe, shows that he alienated a lot of the LP's libertarian base.




Regarding Ruwart's (who is more conservative than liberal) stance on child porn, that was manufactured by Wayne Allyn Root with help from Richard Viguerie.

nate895
11-14-2008, 06:51 PM
Regarding Ruwart's (who is more conservative than liberal) stance on child porn, that was manufactured by Wayne Allyn Root with help from Richard Viguerie.

It was in one of her books. It still would have been ammunition regardless if it was true or not.

Matt Collins
11-14-2008, 06:56 PM
No more free mustache rides...? :(


Perhaps his mustache will help him raise the funds


http://decaffeinated.org/images/mostyle.gif

Matt Collins
11-14-2008, 06:59 PM
Maybe he can get a Bailout. Holla at Kash- n-Kary


i think it is up to the georgia republican party to pay off his debt, not libertarians, since the bob barr campaign was a product of the georgia republican party.
Actually it wouldn't suprise me if either the RNC or the DNC tried to pay off Barr to throw his support behind one of the other candidates to help win the Georgia race given the gravity of the election war that is ongoing.

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 07:24 PM
Please... Obama and McCain hardly have any differences except for their party name and perceived stance on the war and healthcare.

Former Libertarian voters aren't shallow. They check out candidates and their positions on real issues. Votes were lost to apathy after Barr's failures during the campaign or switched to Baldwin due to his campaign's attacks on Ron Paul and failure to attend RP's press conference.

Barr didn't just lose the election, he lost a lot of peoples' confidence in the Libertarian Party.

So? It was an attempt to bring in new people. Just because the candidate isn't as "radical" that doesn't mean it's bad. What are you going to do? Keep the trend of the same voters? In my view, we should get a few not so "radical" libertarians and while doing that, get more newer people involved in the LP, and then educate them further and turn them into more "radical" libertarians. In my view, everyone failed. You old LP people failed by not listening to this idea and not caring about bringing new people in. Gradualism is tough, but it can be done.

Since you fools wanted to fail and next election you'll get .5-.4% of the vote, AGAIN! We might as well fight to secede. That will show those cocksuckers in D.C. and the rest of the U.S. how pissed off we are.

We all failed, don't point your fucking fingers.

libertarian4321
11-14-2008, 07:34 PM
Perhaps his mustache will help him raise the funds

Mustache rides: $10?

Oh, the horror...

The_Orlonater
11-14-2008, 07:37 PM
What the hell is with the facial hair prejudice?

ihsv
11-14-2008, 07:40 PM
If a candidate can't keep his own campaign debt-free, that doesn't bode well for how he would handle the national budget if elected POTUS.

He should make a phone call or two to his buddies in the CIA and see what they can drum up for him. Gotta be a black project somewhere they can siphon a few bucks out of.

Conservative Christian
11-14-2008, 07:56 PM
Aye, absentee ballots are still being counted, IIRC. Shouldn't be more than 15k addition once all done. I mention Barr trying to reach out to other ideologies because he was far more conservative than usual LP nominees. That Barr didn't gain significantly more votes for that, I believe, shows that he alienated a lot of the LP's libertarian base. Regarding Ruwart's (who is more conservative than liberal) stance on child porn, that was manufactured by Wayne Allyn Root with help from Richard Viguerie.

Actually, Barr received over 28% more votes than Badnarik did in 2004, and his percentage of the overall vote was also greater than Badnarik's.

Judging by the numbers, Barr didn't hurt the Libertarian Party at all. Nor did he really help it. His overall percentage of the vote is right in line with Ron Paul's in 1988.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that not many conservatives are going to vote Libertarian, in light of the LP platform's position in favor of open borders. A position that aligns the LP with the New World Order.

RideTheDirt
11-15-2008, 01:08 AM
1972: John Hospers and Theodora Nathan
2,691 popular votes (0.003%); 1 electoral vote;

1976: Roger MacBride and David Bergland
173,011 popular votes (0.21%)

1980: Ed Clark and David Koch
921,299 popular votes (1.1%)

1984: David Bergland and James A. Lewis
228,705 popular votes (0.25%)

1988: Ron Paul and Andre Marrou
432,179 popular votes (0.47%)

1992: Andre Marrou and Nancy Lord
291,627 popular votes (0.28%)

1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)


As far as %, Barr was pretty mediocre, and a disappointment considering he was supposed to reach out to different ideologies.
hahahahahahahahahahaha!
Paul got a higher percentage!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

AdamT
11-15-2008, 01:11 AM
Put a Ron Paul slim jim in the return envelope and send it back! (seriously)

LOL I can't tell you how many times I did that when McCain would send mailers.

FindLiberty
11-15-2008, 01:12 AM
This black hole funding situation is the reason I suggested that Bob Barr head up the cia in the new Obama administration.

jeepndesert
11-15-2008, 11:57 AM
Ed Clark holds that record.

Mary Ruwart would have broken that record.

jeepndesert
11-15-2008, 12:01 PM
So?

yes, and that is why you are spending all your time arguing with people who didn't vote for bob barr who normally would vote libertarian. 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

jeepndesert
11-15-2008, 12:07 PM
Barr's total also surpasses both of Harry Browne's final tallies in 1996 and 2000.

harry browne had a higher percentage of the votes than cia bob barr.

the million ron paul votes would have gone to mary ruwart and would have more than doubled the bob barr vote totals because mary ruwart wouldn't have lost a large number of loyal libertarian votes either.

running bob barr was the dumbest thing the libertarian party has ever done. rob kampia is a pot head and steve dasbach acted like the democrat he use to be. of course i don't blame all the delegates, just the hired republican delegation from georgia and california.

The_Orlonater
11-15-2008, 08:44 PM
yes, and that is why you are spending all your time arguing with people who didn't vote for bob barr who normally would vote libertarian. 1 step forward, 2 steps back.

Cool, you cut off what else I said.

Doesn't matter I don't care anymore. Good luck trying to build up the GOP. ;)

Conservative Christian
11-15-2008, 08:49 PM
harry browne had a higher percentage of the votes than cia bob barr.

2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)

Since when is .36% higher than .40%?! I would strenuously suggest you brush up on your basic arithmetic. ;)


the million ron paul votes would have gone to mary ruwart and would have more than doubled the bob barr vote totals because mary ruwart wouldn't have lost a large number of loyal libertarian votes either.

running bob barr was the dumbest thing the libertarian party has ever done. rob kampia is a pot head and steve dasbach acted like the democrat he use to be. of course i don't blame all the delegates, just the hired republican delegation from georgia and california.

SHEER SPECULATION on your part. Even IF you were correct, the LP STILL would've LOST by TENS OF MILLIONS of votes.

So your little numbers game is totally irrelevant. :D

Kludge
11-15-2008, 08:54 PM
2000: Harry Browne and Art Olivier
384,431 popular votes (0.36%)

2004: Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna
397,265 popular votes (0.34%)

2008: Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root
500,045 popular votes (0.40%)

Since when is .36% higher than .40%?! I would strenuously suggest you brush up on your basic arithmetic. ;)

1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

Conservative Christian
11-15-2008, 09:01 PM
1996: Harry Browne and Jo Jorgensen
485,798 popular votes (0.50%)

That was 1996, which would be LESS relevant than Browne's MOST RECENT 2000 showing.

All your post proves is that Browne LOST GROUND between 1996 and 2000, and he's a TRUE BLUE libertarian.

So much for the LP trying to blame their poor showing on Barr, when Harry "TRUE BLUE" Browne LOST GROUND in 2000.

I'd be much obliged if you guys would start posting something RELEVANT. :D

Kludge
11-15-2008, 09:06 PM
So much for the LP trying to blame their poor showing on Barr

You're misconstruing the argument. It isn't that Barr is being blamed for the low % of the LP in the G.E. this year, it's that Barr and his campaign promised record-breaking numbers. Especially pre-LNC, Barr supporters often claimed that his conservative leanings would allow the LP to branch out and bring in huge numbers of disillusioned voters, which obviously didn't happen.

Barr had a poor showing considering how confident they were during the campaign and how many assurances were made before the G.E. campaign.

klamath
11-15-2008, 09:13 PM
harry browne had a higher percentage of the votes than cia bob barr.

the million ron paul votes would have gone to mary ruwart and would have more than doubled the bob barr vote totals because mary ruwart wouldn't have lost a large number of loyal libertarian votes either.

running bob barr was the dumbest thing the libertarian party has ever done. rob kampia is a pot head and steve dasbach acted like the democrat he use to be. of course i don't blame all the delegates, just the hired republican delegation from georgia and california.

Million minus 1 for sure. I can do without the "it is ok to have sex with kids candidate".

slacker921
11-15-2008, 09:46 PM
....the million ron paul votes would have gone to mary ruwart and would have more than doubled the bob barr vote totals because mary ruwart wouldn't have lost a large number of loyal libertarian votes either.

Ruwart would have been a non-event. She wouldn't have been on the news outlets and wouldn't have had all the articles in major papers that Barr was able to get. She wouldn't have raised much more money.. the Paul votes would still have been split between "write in", Baldwin, Obama, and McCain... because Ron Paul would not have endorsed her early enough to do any good (because he would have waited to see if he was allowed to speak at the RNC..).

In the end she probably would have gotten the same .25% - .5% vote that the Libertarians typically get largely from people voting a "protest" vote.

Barr screwed up in a HUGE way by pissing away the Ron Paul vote, but in the end he failed to win the average voter and that's far more important. Pissing away 500,000 votes is not such a big deal when you need 40,000,000.

Kludge
11-15-2008, 09:51 PM
Pissing away 500,000 votes is not such a big deal when you need 40,000,000.

It is when 1% (and 2,3,4, etc) gets the LP automatic ballot access on a few states. By the time a third party finished trying to get ballot access, it has already spent much of its time and money.

Paul supporters + a few months to grab others may have taken that coveted 1%.

Conservative Christian
11-15-2008, 10:40 PM
It is when 1% (and 2,3,4, etc) gets the LP automatic ballot access on a few states. By the time a third party finished trying to get ballot access, it has already spent much of its time and money.

Paul supporters + a few months to grab others may have taken that coveted 1%.

Quit crying over spilled milk! :rolleyes:

Barr GOT automatic ballot access for 2012 in my state! He did BETTER than the last TWO LP presidential campaigns, including Harry "True Blue" Browne, whose 2000 showing was PATHETIC.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that very few mainstream Conservatives, Republicans and Christians were going to vote LP---when McCain, the RNC and the lamestream news media had them all scared to death of "The Great Satan" Obama.

Barr performed EXACTLY as I expected. Anybody expecting much out of ANY third party in such a bitterly contested race between the Democrats and Repubs, was quite simply naive.

Anybody with a functional IQ above plant life should have known that the mainstream Repubs/Conservatives/Christians were going to FLOCK to McCain, purely out of sheer dread of Obama and a mindless "lesser of two evils" philosophy.

Kludge
11-15-2008, 10:47 PM
:rolleyes: Barr and his pre-LNC supporters failed to pull through. The overall sentiments regarding Barr's campaign will affect the outcome of the next LNC. It needs to be known that bringing in marginal amounts of new voters (depending on your interpretation of the results) is not worth sacrificing principles. Delegates in particular need to know this. I know a few who sacrificed their beliefs because they thought Barr would (as assured) bring the LP into the mainstream or at least take a significant number of votes. This cannot happen again. Libertarians had to hold their nose to vote for an insignificant party. There's no need for that.

Conservatives ought to either work in the GOP or form their own third party if they're that interested in political ineffectiveness. The same goes for Gravel, whose appearance in the LP debates was offensive.


Quit crying over spilled milk! :rolleyes:

Barr GOT automatic ballot access for 2012 in my state! He did BETTER than the last TWO LP presidential campaigns, including Harry "True Blue" Browne, whose 2000 showing was PATHETIC.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that very few mainstream Conservatives, Republicans and Christians were going to vote LP---when McCain, the RNC and the lamestream news media had them all scared to death of "The Great Satan" Obama.

Barr performed EXACTLY as I expected. Anybody expecting much out of ANY third party in such a bitterly contested race between the Democrats and Repubs, was quite simply naive.

Anybody with a functional IQ above plant life should have known that the mainstream Repubs/Conservatives/Christians were going to FLOCK to McCain, purely out of sheer dread of Obama and a mindless "lesser of two evils" philosophy.


You're misconstruing the argument. It isn't that Barr is being blamed for the low % of the LP in the G.E. this year, it's that Barr and his campaign promised record-breaking numbers. Especially pre-LNC, Barr supporters often claimed that his conservative leanings would allow the LP to branch out and bring in huge numbers of disillusioned voters, which obviously didn't happen.

Barr had a poor showing considering how confident they were during the campaign and how many assurances were made before the G.E. campaign.

Conservative Christian
11-15-2008, 11:30 PM
:rolleyes: Barr and his pre-LNC supporters failed to pull through. The overall sentiments regarding Barr's campaign will affect the outcome of the next LNC. It needs to be known that bringing in marginal amounts of new voters (depending on your interpretation of the results) is not worth sacrificing principles. Delegates in particular need to know this. I know a few who sacrificed their beliefs because they thought Barr would (as assured) bring the LP into the mainstream or at least take a significant number of votes. This cannot happen again. Libertarians had to hold their nose to vote for an insignificant party. There's no need for that.

Conservatives ought to either work in the GOP or form their own third party if they're that interested in political ineffectiveness. The same goes for Gravel, whose appearance in the LP debates was offensive.

Quit trying to blame Barr for the USUAL lackluster LP presidential results.

Barr did NOTICEABLY BETTER than Harry "True Blue" Browne's PATHETIC 2000 showing.

As far as gaining ballot access for 2012, 2008 was apparently a RECORD year for the LP. Certainly MUCH better than "True Blue" Browne's dismal results in 2000.


One of the core victories for the Libertarian Party in 2008 was the retention of ballot access status in eight states across the United States.

http://www.lp.org/blogs/andrew-davis/the-time-is-now

Don't blame conservatives for the fact that LIBERTARIANS voted for and approved Barr's candidacy.

Ruwart would've been an ABSOLUTE DISASTER, from a votes, ballot access and fund-raising perspective.

Kludge
11-15-2008, 11:35 PM
Quit trying to blame Barr for the USUAL lackluster LP presidential results.

I'm done talking to you. You're set on arguing a strawman you created. I've stated twice that the argument isn't that Barr pulled lower-than usual numbers. If you'd like to argue your own case on something which hasn't been brought up, I'm afraid that you'll have to talk to yourself less subtly henceforth.

Conservative Christian
11-15-2008, 11:57 PM
I'm done talking to you. You're set on arguing a strawman you created. I've stated twice that the argument isn't that Barr pulled lower-than usual numbers. If you'd like to argue your own case on something which hasn't been brought up, I'm afraid that you'll have to talk to yourself less subtly henceforth.

You're the only one setting up straw men---i.e. Barr and Conservatives---in a failed attempt to blame them for perceived LP shortcomings this election.

Thankfully, the national LP is a lot more upbeat than the "Sore Losers" club.

According to the national LP website, 2008 was a record year for retaining ballot access, and an excellent year for both new members and fund raising.

So if you wish to keep pointing fingers of blame and complaining about the glass being half-empty, by all means feel free. :D

jeepndesert
11-16-2008, 12:53 PM
Don't blame conservatives for the fact that LIBERTARIANS voted for and approved Barr's candidacy.

Ruwart would've been an ABSOLUTE DISASTER, from a votes, ballot access and fund-raising perspective.

Ruwart wouldn't have been in campaign debt and would have raised more than Harry Browne, which was more than Bob Barr, thanks to the Ron Paul movement. People would have volunteered to work on the campaign. People would have freely donated to the campaign.

In fact, a Mary Ruwart would have raised $1,000,000 rather than the $10,000 Bob Barr was able raise with a money bomb because Mary Ruwart was a trusted champion of Liberty, like Ron Paul. It would have energized the campaign to where the media couldn't completely ignore it.

Mary Ruwart would have gotten over 1M votes and beat Ralph Nader because she would have united the Ron Paul movement, with or without the press, because there is the Internet and because she is a true champion of liberty, like Ron Paul.

I didn't campaign for Bob Barr on the Internet because everyone was quick to point out he was CIA and voted for the Patriot Act, among other things. He was no Ron Paul. He had a negative history.

Mary Ruwart does not have a negative history. She is a Ron Paul. She is a champion for liberty.

Then, there was the Ron Paul snub. And as it was expected back in the 90s, it was confirmed that Bob Barr was either a complete retard or was out to prevent the Libertarian Party from growing significantly at the expense of the GOP.

jeepndesert
11-16-2008, 01:00 PM
Quit crying over spilled milk! :rolleyes:

Barr GOT automatic ballot access for 2012 in my state! He did BETTER than the last TWO LP presidential campaigns, including Harry "True Blue" Browne, whose 2000 showing was PATHETIC.

Mary Ruwart would have secured automatic ballot access. Not only that, she would have doubled Bob Barr's votes because Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters would actually have voted for Mary Ruwart.

I estimate more than 200,000 write-in votes for Ron Paul that would have gone to Mary Ruwart if she was the candidate. And that doesn't count the number of Libertarians who stayed home or voted for Nader or other candidates because Bob Barr was the ticket.

Only reason why Bob Barr got more votes than Harry Browne is because that many more people hated the other choices.

Bob Barr prevented a record-breaking year for the Libertarian Party.

Cowlesy
11-16-2008, 01:35 PM
Rounding errors for the win!---I think!

The_Orlonater
11-16-2008, 02:44 PM
Mary Ruwart would have secured automatic ballot access. Not only that, she would have doubled Bob Barr's votes because Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters would actually have voted for Mary Ruwart.

I estimate more than 200,000 write-in votes for Ron Paul that would have gone to Mary Ruwart if she was the candidate. And that doesn't count the number of Libertarians who stayed home or voted for Nader or other candidates because Bob Barr was the ticket.

Only reason why Bob Barr got more votes than Harry Browne is because that many more people hated the other choices.

Bob Barr prevented a record-breaking year for the Libertarian Party.

Even if every Paul supporter voted for Ruwart, we wouldn't have won. This year was about automatic ballot access, and bringing in new voters and supporters. We did a little bit of that, but since everyone hated Bob "Satan" Barr we were back to our usual measly status.

mport1
11-16-2008, 02:52 PM
Won't give them a dime.

+1

nickcoons
11-16-2008, 03:31 PM
In fact, a Mary Ruwart would have raised $1,000,000 rather than the $10,000 Bob Barr was able raise with a money bomb because Mary Ruwart was a trusted champion of Liberty, like Ron Paul. It would have energized the campaign to where the media couldn't completely ignore it.

And she would have received a solid endorsement from Ron Paul.

The_Orlonater
11-16-2008, 05:10 PM
I don't think she'd get that much media attention.

mitty
11-18-2008, 05:57 AM
bump

he supported government bailouts. he should be asking for one now

lol bob barr. the true champion of liberty

Kraig
11-18-2008, 08:09 AM
hahahaha


soooo glad I didn't vote for that loon

The_Orlonater
11-18-2008, 10:54 PM
bump

he supported government bailouts. he should be asking for one now

lol bob barr. the true champion of liberty

Lmfao, is this a joke? He supported bailouts. I have a few videos of him inveighing against the bailout.

Conservative Christian
11-19-2008, 04:12 AM
he supported government bailouts. he should be asking for one now

lol bob barr. the true champion of liberty

Your statement is false.

Bob Barr opposed the bailout:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5waL8brexY

Conservative Christian
11-19-2008, 04:24 AM
Mary Ruwart would have secured automatic ballot access. Not only that, she would have doubled Bob Barr's votes because Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters would actually have voted for Mary Ruwart.

I estimate more than 200,000 write-in votes for Ron Paul that would have gone to Mary Ruwart if she was the candidate. And that doesn't count the number of Libertarians who stayed home or voted for Nader or other candidates because Bob Barr was the ticket.

Only reason why Bob Barr got more votes than Harry Browne is because that many more people hated the other choices.

Bob Barr prevented a record-breaking year for the Libertarian Party.

Keep dreaming, little buddy. :D

Your assumptions and conjecture are meaningless.

Bob Barr STILL did better than Harry Browne in 2000, and Badnarik in 2004. Barr received more total votes, a larger percentage of the overall vote, and secured more ballot access for the next election---than either Browne or Badnarik.

Ruwart would've crashed and burned like the Hindenburg. :p

Kludge
11-19-2008, 11:52 AM
From an email sent just over an hour ago:

"We have a modest debt and about $50,000 in accounting and compliance-related expenses still to address." To make that more comprehensible, the campaign raised ~$1,000,000 total.

libertarian4321
11-19-2008, 06:16 PM
That was 1996, which would be LESS relevant than Browne's MOST RECENT 2000 showing.

Incorrect. The 2000 race was razor thin. Many Libertarians chose to vote for the "lesser evil" rather than vote Libertarian.

The '96 and '08 races were not close- hence, they are similar in that there was less reason to vote for the "lesser evil" since the outcome was pretty much known before the race.



I'd be much obliged if you guys would start posting something RELEVANT.

Here's something relevant.

This was the first time in almost 20 years that I didn't vote Libertarian.

The ONLY REASON I DIDN'T vote Libertarian was Bob Barr.

I would have voted for Ruwart, Badnarik, or Harry Browne's corpse if they had run as the LP candidate, but vote for an arrogant neocon ass like Bob Barr? Not a chance!

I'm sure I'm not the only long time Libertarian who refused to hold his nose and vote for Bob Barr...

The only good news: I just saved $2,300 by switching away from the Libertarian Party (Bob Barr only- voted Libertarian for all down ballot candidates). I didn't send the Barr any money.

libertarian4321
11-19-2008, 06:26 PM
Barr received more total votes, a larger percentage of the overall vote, and secured more ballot access for the next election---than either Browne or Badnarik.


Also incorrect and irrelevant.

Ballot access rules vary by state, but in most states, the LP Pres. candidate has NEVER earned ballot access - either because it isn't possible or because the percentage of the vote is too low. In most states, we still have to get ballot access by filling out petitions.

Most states that DO allow future ballot access based on prior election results do so based on any candidate in a statewide election receiving a certain percentage of the vote. For example, in Texas, a candidate must receive 5% in a statewide election (2% for governor or Pres).

Obviously, no LP Presidential candidate has ever come close to that number- we win ballot access by getting 5+% in down ballot elections. Barr got 0.7% in Texas (one of his best states)- and ONLY because there were no other third party guys on the ballot (we usually have at least 3 third party candidates).

I don't know of any state that allows ballot access based on the piddling numbers that Barr pulled in- he was below 0.5% in almost every state.

Also, fyi, Barr was on the ballot in less states than any candidate since before 1992- that ain't impressive.

Barr was a bad candidate (he isn't libertarian) who ran a dismal campaign. Despite his "name recognition", he did about as well as the "generic" Libertarians in previous elections.

The LIBERTARIANS SOLD THEIR SOULS FOR NO REAL GAIN!

Someone explain to me how that is "good."

constituent
11-19-2008, 07:03 PM
Mary Ruwart would have further alienated the Libertarians from the average voter with her radical stance on child porn. Mary Ruwart is an unknown left libertarian professor from Colorado, not exactly the kind of person the average joe could rally behind.

...never was much of an average joe

dannno
11-19-2008, 07:11 PM
Does this officially make Bob Barr a neocon yet?

nobody's_hero
11-20-2008, 03:42 AM
How much were they paying Shane Corey and Russ Varney?

Firing those fools would have saved them some cash, and some face.

mitty
11-20-2008, 05:25 AM
Lmfao, is this a joke? He supported bailouts. I have a few videos of him inveighing against the bailout.

its pretty sad you are so in bed with this guy but apparently know nothing about him. there are all kinds of threads here that talk about how he said he thinks the government needs to do bailouts sometimes.

mitty
11-20-2008, 05:35 AM
Your statement is false.

Bob Barr opposed the bailout:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5waL8brexY

apparently barr is bipolar or schizophrenic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag-kkq_vKHA

or an arrogant liar neocon. no wonder his campaign loves bush so much

Conservative Christian
11-21-2008, 05:45 AM
Also, fyi, Barr was on the ballot in less states than any candidate since before 1992- that ain't impressive.

Which was the fault of the Libertarian Party itself, not Barr.

And I would say it IS impressive. Barr garnered MORE OVERALL VOTES and a LARGER PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL VOTE than both Browne in 2000 and Badnarik in 2004---even though he was on the ballot in FEWER STATES.

If the Libertarian Party rank-and-file would've got off their worthless duffs and gotten Barr ballot access in as many states as Browne and Badnarik had---Barr would've BEATEN THEIR TOTALS BY EVEN MORE!


Barr was a bad candidate (he isn't libertarian) who ran a dismal campaign. Despite his "name recognition", he did about as well as the "generic" Libertarians in previous elections.

Barr did BETTER than Browne in 2000 and Badnarik in 2004, even with the "dismal" campaign and ballot access in FEWER states.

The LP is dismal. Can't blame Barr for that.


The LIBERTARIANS SOLD THEIR SOULS FOR NO REAL GAIN!

They can't sell something they never had. :p

libertarian4321
11-21-2008, 08:10 AM
If the Libertarian Party rank-and-file would've got off their worthless duffs and gotten Barr ballot access in as many states as Browne and Badnarik had---Barr would've BEATEN THEIR TOTALS BY EVEN MORE!

You seem to think of them as separate and distinct. They are NOT.

Many Libertarians such as myself, who are normally significant financial backers of the LP simply did not open our wallets this year BECAUSE OF BARR.

Money equals ballot access.

Barr equals Libertarians closing their wallets.

Hence, Barr meant less money for ballot access efforts.

Get it?

He didn't just lose my vote, Barr caused me to sit the election out- no time, no money, and no vote.

Get enough Libertarians refusing to give their money, time, and vote, you get a tepid performance like we got from Barr- a "big name" candidate who only managed the fourth highest vote percentage.

Wasn't the "big name" guy, in a "ron Paul year" supposed to BLOW THE DOORS off previous totals? Instead, he finished a bit above average- because he was a neocon and an a-hole.