Does voting for libertarian candidates take votes away from Republicans?

[Howard_Roark]

I felt kind of guilty for voting 100% for Republicans in the 2008 election since there were several libertarian candidates on the ballot in Austin. Before the election, I went online and looked up the list of libertarians in office, it was totally underwhelming and clear to me that this was a 2 party system and that like Ron Paul I think the greatest impact will be had from within the Republican Party, thats not saying I wouldent like a 3 party system but we just don't have that now.

[Kludge]

100 - 1 = 99

Yes.

(unless you didn't intend to otherwise vote Republican)

Voting for the best candidate is okay for a protest vote when you hate the Big 2 candidates enough not to care, but voting GOP/dem is most pragmatic.

[pcosmar]

We have a ONE party system. D/R is a false choice. Same results with either.
Voting "3rd" party is the only choice.

[ItsTime]

No it doesnt. You cant take away votes.

[nayjevin]

No, it takes SEATS away from Republicans. That's almost always a good thing :) edit: or democrats, for that matter

[ItsTime]

There is not a vote until you vote. If you vote for Lib then there never was a vote for Rep. You can not go and vote minus one for the Rep you can only vote positively.

[Howard_Roark]

No, it takes SEATS away from Republicans. That's almost always a good thing :)

If it means they help elect liberal socialist democrats? How can you say that? Just because GWB is a big gov republican doesnt mean that most Republicans arent still fiscally conservative.

[A. Havnes]

Voting third party takes votes away from both isles of the two-party system and gives them to said third party candidate, much in the same way that voting Republican takes votes from Democrats.

[Howard_Roark]

Voting third party takes votes away from both isles of the two-party system and gives them to said third party candidate, much in the same way that voting Republican takes votes from Democrats.

Not if the majority of voters for the libertarians would have voted republican, or the majority of voters for green party would have voted democrat.

[pcosmar]

If it means they help elect liberal socialist democrats? How can you say that? Just because GWB is a big gov republican doesnt mean that most Republicans arent still fiscally conservative.

Bullshit.
Look at voting records. Look at what WAS NOT done when they had majority power.

Take a good look here.
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=FinalWarn05-3

[Kludge]

Let's take the 2008 presidential election for example.

I doubt any LP/CP/GP/CPUSA/PP/write-in etc. voters expected anything except for their protest to be made known, and/or perhaps for their party to receive automatic ballot access next cycle.

Then you take someone like Tones who preferred McCain over Obama and thus voted for McCain. It's a valid position, and if you do prefer one disliked candidate over another, I don't see any major fault in voting McCain/Obama, except perhaps that it detracts from the % vote of third parties.

[The_Orlonater]

In my area, it was all Greens.

[dgr]

It depends upon in which state you live and if it is a primary or general election.
The lesser of the 2 evils has been the choice offered since 2000.
In 2008 you saw a revolt from this only in the GOP.
You will never get democrats to split away from the democratic party in enough numbers to support a 3rd party. The green party is part of the democratic party
just as libertarian party got gop votes.
Is lesser of two evils really the same as who will do the most harm, when we now know that in the last election, it was over by the primary. Because both candidates were for the same issues that had previously divided and showed some distinction between them.
In NC the state turned from red to blue, entirely bassed on the vote for Bob Barr and the write in vote.
Obama got 49.70% McCain got 49.38% Barr got .60% and write-in got .32%
the write -in vote alone going for McCain would have made it a tie Both would have had 49.70%
The Barr vote going to McCain would have made it Mccain 49.98% Obama49.70% , then the write-in .32% decieded the election.
The Barr vote was 25,722 the write in 13,942 or 0.92 % so less than one percent of the vote deceided the election out of 4,354,569 votes
But the real story is the turn out was 60.53% and despite what you read about it
the number of total registered voters actually declined in NC and they were all gop.
the presidential race was the only one that was this close but then can less than one percent be any closer.
So it depends on how you look at it and the reason you are voting
at this time 3rd party is not an option the only time they have come close is both Clinton elections and that 20% was GOP votes going to Periot and gave Clinton the Whie House both times. For all of you younger voters out there Bill Clinton only got 42% of the vote the first time he ran.

[johnrocks]

I don't think so, my vote belongs to me, not to some party. Had it been no one except Obama and McCain on the ballot, I would not have even voted.

[gls]

Even if there's no Libertarian on the ballot, I'm not going to vote for a Republican who supports big government. I'll skip over the race before I do that.

[dgr]

I must be confused,
I thought the issue was what to do for now , when faced with superior numbers on both sides
should you chose sides when your vote could make the differenc
or vote for neither when you vote will decide the winner
3rd party, independent, write in what ever you call it
these are the deciding votes in the 51- 49 political world that for now exist

[angelatc]

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." -- John Quincy Adams

The GOP candidate has to earn my vote.

[mediahasyou]

TW is banned so im going to have to do this:
;)
http://www.voluntaryist.com/articles/103.php

[forsmant]

My votes always count as minus 1.

[forsmant]

TW is banned so im going to have to do this:
;)
http://www.voluntaryist.com/articles/103.php

You must post the actual article as well as the link.

[JdotRdot]

the New American compiled a list of all reps detailing who voted for what...obviously voting Republican is way better than voting Democrat in most cases
http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_110-4.pdf

the bad part is; most republicans only adhere to the constitution 50% of the times or less...Ron Paul of course was the one & only person with 100% compliance

voting libertarian sadly is a waste of time & would better be spent on a republican vote...even the bad ones
lets not forget that politics is empirical (derived from experiment and observation rather than theory)
sure it'd be nice to have a true libertarian in there, but the truth is it ain't gonna happen...deal in truths for the time being, the general public isn't with us in this fight yet & they are the ones you need to be targeting

[Met Income]

If you vote for GOP, nothing will ever change. Your economic and personal freedoms will decrease, not increase. Dems and Repubs just disagree on a few social issues in order to play political ping pong and to embolden the core of their bases against each other. But make no mistake, they are both trying to centralize power to use against you.

Don't settle, don't ever settle.

[Kludge]

Don't settle, don't ever settle.

Write yourself in every election for every office!