PDA

View Full Version : If New Hampshire is so pro-liberty, why doesn't it vote that way?




emazur
11-19-2008, 06:17 PM
2008 Primary Election results:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21660914
Ron Paul came in 5th, and I believe New Hampshire is the only state where Giuliani came ahead of Paul. Elsewhere in the US, Paul defeated McCain in Alaska, Montana, and Nevada, and in Iowa, Maine, North Dakota, and Utah there was a 3% or less difference between McCain and Paul

2008 Presidential Election results for the Libertarian Party:
http://www.bobbarr.com/2008/11/14/bob-barr-wayne-allyn-root-2008-presidential-election-results/
New Hampshire was on the bottom tier, and Indiana easily showed the most support

So if they have no sales tax, no income tax, lax gun laws, strong property rights, etc., what the hell is wrong with them when it comes to voting to keep these rights?

BTW, if anyone is interested in seeing how all 24 candidates did in the presidential election, check this out:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/president/allcandidates/

gls
11-19-2008, 07:07 PM
New Hampshire has a tradition of limited government. Unfortunately, by and large, there is nothing special about the current state electorate. It is the same unthinking ignorant mass that would be found anywhere else in the country.

As far as the primary, McCain won because he conducted dozens of 'town hall' meetings in the weeks leading up to it (as well as secured most of the major newspaper endorsements). Mitt Romney did well because he also made a ton of public appearances, had a large ground operation, and ran slick TV ads non-stop. Ditto for Giuliani. In addition to the media love fest that peaked around primary day, Huckabee played rock concerts in the park and campaigned with Curt Shilling and Chuck Norris. I guess my point is that Paul wasn't really playing to win when everyone else was.

As far as the Barr/Root results, there were two Libertarians on the ballot (the other being Phillies/Bennet). Also, they counted Ron Paul write-ins and he got over a 1000 of them (see here (http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081112/NEWS01/811120365)).

The fact is that the outlook is bleak nationwide. But in New Hampshire there are hundreds of pro-liberty activists who are working at the local and state level to make a difference, and soon I'm planning to join them. It's a kind of synergy I don't think I'll be able to find anywhere else.

emazur
11-19-2008, 08:13 PM
Thanks for the answer, but even if you added the Phillies + Paul + Baldwin tallies into the Barr/Root tally that's still less than 2000 more votes for liberty. I hope you are successful at least at the state and local level, or else I foresee a lot change I wouldn't want to believe in.
And as far as Paul's campaigning goes, he was still able to capture 2.2% in Montana in the presidential election:
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-11-05/ron-pauls-election-results/
well ahead of other 3rd party candidates, despite having ended his campaign months before (the only reason I knew he was on the ballot there was b/c of the internet). That speaks a great deal on the awareness of pro-liberty in Montana, and doesn't reflect well on New Hampshire's awareness.

gls
11-19-2008, 08:23 PM
And as far as Paul's campaigning goes, he was still able to capture 2.2% in Montana in the presidential election:
http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-11-05/ron-pauls-election-results/
well ahead of other 3rd party candidates, despite having ended his campaign months before (the only reason I knew he was on the ballot there was b/c of the internet). That speaks a great deal on the awareness of pro-liberty in Montana, and doesn't reflect well on New Hampshire's awareness.

You are comparing apples to oranges. Paul was on the general election ballot in Montana but not in New Hampshire. I don't see how that "speaks" to anything.

tonesforjonesbones
11-19-2008, 10:12 PM
Ron Paul ...whoever was running his campaign ran no ads, I never heard ONE ad in my town...we , our meet up group , paid to run ads the day before the election...that is it. i really don't think Ron Paul had ANY intention of winning. he just wanted to create a movement, I actually read somewhere that what's his name, kent snyder , contacted Ron paul and encouraged him to run just to beef up his liberty pac...and they NEVER expected him to catch on like he did and they were caught offguard..and it's surprising how well he did do considering it started as a marketing campaign for the Liberty Pac. tones

Theocrat
11-19-2008, 11:15 PM
I have a friend who used to live in New Hampshire, and she told me that the emigration of liberals from Massachusetts has greatly affected the political climate of NH. These liberals moved from Massachusetts mainly because of the high taxes there, and it was more affordable for them to live in NH while commuting to work in Massachusetts. As they became more comfortable in NH, they began to get involved with the political structure of the state until it's become what it is today. That was her take on the loss of liberty qualities in the once "Live Free or Die" State.

nickcoons
11-19-2008, 11:57 PM
But in New Hampshire there are hundreds of pro-liberty activists who are working at the local and state level to make a difference, and soon I'm planning to join them. It's a kind of synergy I don't think I'll be able to find anywhere else.

If you want freedom activists, move to Arizona, home of the "Ron Paul REVOLUTION" (the logo was originally created and used by Ernest Hancock (http://www.ernesthancock.com/) in his run for Secretary of State in 2006). We have a fairly active Libertarian community in Phoenix, and we had US Congressional candidates on the ballot this year for every district, as well as for many other positions, and sometimes in cases where there the major party candidate was unopposed by the other major party.

emazur
11-20-2008, 12:23 AM
You are comparing apples to oranges. Paul was on the general election ballot in Montana but not in New Hampshire. I don't see how that "speaks" to anything.

Even if Paul wasn't on the NH ballot (I would not have written him in if I lived there), residents still had the option to vote for either Barr or Phillies or even Nader, all of whom would be much better than the big 2. But the combined total of the 3 third party candidates who were on the ballot was only .9%
http://www.wmur.com/politics/feature.html
IMO it does say something that Montana voters were looking for (and actively put on the ballot) another contender, while New Hampshire voters were not looking for liberty in either the primaries or the general election, and the Live Free or Die slogan didn't hold up so well.
But you're right, it's not quite a fair comparison unless Paul was printed on the NH general ballot as well. To size up NH in a more direct way, we'd have to see how Ron Paul did as a write in candidate in the other states besides LA and MT (and arguably besides California since he was an authorized write in candidate there, giving voters more of an incentive to write him in).