Makes my point about we libertarians being the kingmakers

[Bradley in DC]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100202182.html?hpid=topnews

In the past two election cycles, including his 2006 loss, Republicans were hurt because many of their "ideologically pure" voters stayed home, Ehrlich said. And he cited a particular challenge to winning contests in Maryland. "If Republicans are sentenced to 15 percent of the African American vote in this state, we'll never win another statewide election ever," he said.

[torchbearer]

I warned them. Now they will suffer until they come our way.

[Bradley in DC]

I warned them. Now they will suffer until they come our way.

It's good to see some of them getting it--and the WashPost publishing it!

[specsaregood]

I warned them. Now they will suffer until they come our way.

And at the same time you have mccain saying he is working to remake the GOP in his image. :eek:

[Matt Collins]

The Cato Institute did a study in 2006 about libertarian voters.

As of 2006 13% of the entire electorate in US can be broadly defined as libertarian. This is growing because in 1999 this number was closer to 9%

The study also discovered that libertarians are more likely to vote than the rest of the electorate at large. And when they vote they overwhelmingly vote Republican, but not always. In fact libertarians are a major swing vote.

2000 - Bush got 72% of libertarians while Gore received 20% of libertarians (remember Bush was running on a platform of low taxes, humble foreign policy, etc).

2004 - Bush received 59% of libertarians and Kerry received 38% of them. That is a massive swing, and a larger swing than most voter blocs.

In 2006 the congressional elections 59% of the voting libertarians voted Republican and 36% for the Dems. That = 24% swing away from Republicans towards Dems. In 2006 the libertarian vote helped give Congress back to Democrats.

Most Republicans in Congress who lost in 2006 were "big spending / big government" Republicans.

The National Taxpayer Union (NTU) says big spenders = big losers. Why? Because of the 20 incumbents in 2006 Congressional elections who lost, 18 of them had below-average NTU ratings.


Also of note that the average libertarian is exceptionally younger than the average voters.


Libertarians are winning voting bloc and this is evidenced partly by the fact that 80% of the Republican Liberty Caucus endorsements won their elections.


we're young, we vote, we win. Libertarians are clearly important to the Republican Party. The GOP needs to reach out to libertarians (Ron Paul supporters) if it wants to continue to win elections.


SOURCES:

http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6715 (http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6715)
http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=948&org_name=NTUF (http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=948&org_name=NTUF)
http://www.rlc.org/2008/06/15/introduction-to-the-rlc/ (http://www.rlc.org/2008/06/15/introduction-to-the-rlc/)

[lx43]

The GOP needs to think about what will happen if libertarians abandon them in mass during an election. It would be next to impossible for them to regain power.

[Austin]

The Cato Institute did a study in 2006 about libertarian voters.

As of 2006 13% of the entire electorate in US can be broadly defined as libertarian. This is growing because in 1999 this number was closer to 9%

The study also discovered that libertarians are more likely to vote than the rest of the electorate at large. And when they vote they overwhelmingly vote Republican, but not always. In fact libertarians are a major swing vote.

2000 - Bush got 72% of libertarians while Gore received 20% of libertarians (remember Bush was running on a platform of low taxes, humble foreign policy, etc).

2004 - Bush received 59% of libertarians and Kerry received 38% of them. That is a massive swing, and a larger swing than most voter blocs.

In 2006 the congressional elections 59% of the voting libertarians voted Republican and 36% for the Dems. That = 24% swing away from Republicans towards Dems. In 2006 the libertarian vote helped give Congress back to Democrats.

Most Republicans in Congress who lost in 2006 were "big spending / big government" Republicans.

The National Taxpayer Union (NTU) says big spenders = big losers. Why? Because of the 20 incumbents in 2006 Congressional elections who lost, 18 of them had below-average NTU ratings.


Also of note that the average libertarian is exceptionally younger than the average voters.


Libertarians are winning voting bloc and this is evidenced partly by the fact that 80% of the Republican Liberty Caucus endorsements won their elections.


we're young, we vote, we win. Libertarians are clearly important to the Republican Party. The GOP needs to reach out to libertarians (Ron Paul supporters) if it wants to continue to win elections.


SOURCES:

http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6715 (http://cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6715)
http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=948&org_name=NTUF (http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=948&org_name=NTUF)
http://www.rlc.org/2008/06/15/introduction-to-the-rlc/ (http://www.rlc.org/2008/06/15/introduction-to-the-rlc/)

Great post Matt, thanks.

[Bradley in DC]

The Cato Institute did a study in 2006 about libertarian voters.

Yes, I referenced and linked to the study in my For Liberty review. Your post helps explain what I posited there, thanks.

[nobody's_hero]

Libertarians made headway here in Georgia during the last senate race. I believe it was 2.4% of the vote that forced a runoff. We had hoped that it would have been enough to make Saxby Chambliss sweat a bit, but considering that Republicans typically do better as a minority, it is hard to tell if his behavior now is due to the close-call, or if he has nothing to lose now by supporting true-conservative principles. Actually, I haven't heard much from him at all since the election. Maybe he's too scared to do anything—a hidden blessing, perhaps.

The problem with Georgia election rules is that the libertarians could not be included in the runoff (obviously, the results would have been the same, forcing yet another runoff, and being rather pointless); I've heard the process has roots back to the days of Jim Crow laws.

The system does have benefits, though.

It allows libertarians to have some effect, albeit a minor one, on what would otherwise be a winner-take-all election.

[cheapseats]

The GOP needs to think about what will happen if libertarians abandon them in mass during an election. It would be next to impossible for them to regain power.

Why does the GOP need to think about what will happen if lower-case libertarians abandon them en masse, when lower-case libertarians never DO abandon the party that systematically screws them over?

[Matt Collins]

Remember the gap between McCain and Obama in North Carolina was smaller than the votes that Bob Bar received; Obama took NC because of it.

[cheapseats]

Remember the gap between McCain and Obama in North Carolina was smaller than the votes that Bob Bar received; Obama took NC because of it.

If you don't give us the TARP money, the financial sector will collapse.

If we don't have the Patriot Act, bogeyman terrorists will blow us up in our sleep.

If Ireland wouldn't sign the Lisbon Treaty, there'd be OTHER hell to pay.

Fear mongering is fear mongering. Principles are principles. Same Old is Same Old.