PDA

View Full Version : The need for a strong Libertarian Party candidate in 2020




givemeliberty2010
03-15-2017, 11:57 AM
I will not change my belief that the Liberty Movement should focus on state and congressional offices first and only spend a little time on the 2020 presidential race. But I will admit this seems a little harder (and that is beyond how immensely hard it already was). Most Liberty Movement candidates will run as Republicans, but the many independents and liberals who supported Ron Paul and Rand Paul probably want nothing to do with the Republicans right now. And it will probably be difficult to tell how much any Liberty Movement candidate is willing to break with Trump anyway.

I think one plan that might help is to try to trip up both Trump and the far left with a strong Libertarian Party candidate in 2020. It would be awesome if we can get the candidate into the debates. I have some hope that the recent legal controversy will make the debate threshold a little more realistic in 2020. Then the candidate could campaign to take electoral votes usually thought secure by both the Republican and Democrats. This strategy might work best if the Democrats nominate someone from the far left instead of a more centrist option. If this were especially successful, the LP nominee could keep both presidential candidates from 270 electoral votes and send the election to the House of Representatives for only the third time in history. The last time this happened led to one of the major political realignments in American history.

This is far-fetched, and this plan should not take away from any strong contender for lower office. But this may help to draw distinctions for candidates in races for all levels of government. Despite the past failings of the party, it might be helpful to have candidates running as Libertarians for a short time until they can influence either of the major parties.

PierzStyx
03-15-2017, 12:06 PM
Honestly, and I feel dirty saying this, but if the LP wants to win, or have a very strong showing, they need to nominate Austin Petersen. I don't think he is even a real libertarian, his rejection of the NAP and insistence on the idea that the government needs to force some things to happen make him a minarchist in my eyes. But he is smart, well-spoken, has a strong personality, and serious, everything you want in a Presidential Candidate. I am still convinced the LP would have made a much stronger showing if he had been nominated over Johnson.

opal
03-15-2017, 12:09 PM
Anyone but Johnson.. really

TheTexan
03-15-2017, 12:34 PM
Anyone but Johnson.. really

The LP would indeed benefit if they nominated someone who wasn't a pothead.

But this is the LP we're talking about.

merkelstan
03-15-2017, 12:53 PM
The sharpest talking guy i know is Tom Woods - doubt he's interested in politics though.

fisharmor
03-15-2017, 12:54 PM
They had like five strong candidates last time.
And they chose Johnson.

Honestly, and I feel dirty saying this, but if the LP wants to win, or have a very strong showing, they need to nominate Austin Petersen. I don't think he is even a real libertarian, his rejection of the NAP and insistence on the idea that the government needs to force some things to happen make him a minarchist in my eyes. But he is smart, well-spoken, has a strong personality, and serious, everything you want in a Presidential Candidate. I am still convinced the LP would have made a much stronger showing if he had been nominated over Johnson.
You forgot that he's well dressed and good looking with great hair.
Probably the three most important things for a POTUS candidate.

You're not going to find a candidate who can't name something to make the government force to happen - even Ron Paul has some things he won't let go.
But if Petersen had won the candidacy I might have voted. Hell, I would have tried to convince a lot of people to vote for him, too.
I certainly wouldn't have called all his supporters retards, like I did with Johnson.

givemeliberty2010
03-15-2017, 02:11 PM
I was actually rather pleased with Johnson's 3.3 percent. I doubt anyone else could have done significantly better. Of course, I hope the LP chooses someone other than Johnson next time. Maybe Petersen will run again. However, the LP should get someone who can compete in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, or at least in the Democrat-leaning swing states of Nevada, Colorado and Virginia. On the other hand the candidate should also be able to do well in Arizona, Missouri and North Carolina, and that might be Petersen.

Superfluous Man
03-15-2017, 02:21 PM
both Trump and the far left

Redundant.

opal
03-15-2017, 02:25 PM
McAfee - cybersecurity - the one with the best grasp on it both foreign and domestic

dean.engelhardt
03-15-2017, 02:33 PM
I will not change my belief that the Liberty Movement should focus on state and congressional offices first and only spend a little time on the 2020 presidential race. But I will admit this seems a little harder (and that is beyond how immensely hard it already was). Most Liberty Movement candidates will run as Republicans, but the many independents and liberals who supported Ron Paul and Rand Paul probably want nothing to do with the Republicans right now. And it will probably be difficult to tell how much any Liberty Movement candidate is willing to break with Trump anyway.

I think one plan that might help is to try to trip up both Trump and the far left with a strong Libertarian Party candidate in 2020. It would be awesome if we can get the candidate into the debates. I have some hope that the recent legal controversy will make the debate threshold a little more realistic in 2020. Then the candidate could campaign to take electoral votes usually thought secure by both the Republican and Democrats. This strategy might work best if the Democrats nominate someone from the far left instead of a more centrist option. If this were especially successful, the LP nominee could keep both presidential candidates from 270 electoral votes and send the election to the House of Representatives for only the third time in history. The last time this happened led to one of the major political realignments in American history.

This is far-fetched, and this plan should not take away from any strong contender for lower office. But this may help to draw distinctions for candidates in races for all levels of government. Despite the past failings of the party, it might be helpful to have candidates running as Libertarians for a short time until they can influence either of the major parties.

If the race is Trump v Elizabeth Warren v a decent LP candidate, I could see no one getting to 270. I agree that having a Liberty Movement candidate in the debates will only help down ballot candidates.

undergroundrr
03-15-2017, 02:47 PM
I was actually rather pleased with Johnson's 3.3 percent. I doubt anyone else could have done significantly better.

Yes. The LP way outperformed any previous election results. I have the same objections to Johnson as everybody else, but it's hard to complain about how the LP could have gotten more votes with a different candidate when they broke all previous records.

I'd be okay with a Petersen/McAfee double bill. If Petersen refines his communication skills before next time, he can be very effective. I didn't think the petulant kid persona he was sporting in 2016 was too great.

Really, I found the whole LP batch pretty spasmodic and/or eccentric last time, including of course Johnson. I'm still waiting for somebody principled and charismatic to come out of nowhere. Somebody on the level of a Badnarik or Browne, but it's getting tough to believe such a thing exists. A strong female candidate in the Pres or VP slot would be ideal politically. Tonie Nathan still has the distinction of being the first woman to get an electoral vote. There is a great opportunity in 2020 if the right person steps forward and captures the nomination.

fisharmor
03-15-2017, 02:50 PM
The LP could have run a vial of bubonic plague and broken 3% in that field.

TheTexan
03-15-2017, 02:56 PM
I might have voted.

+rep thanks for thinking about voting. Maybe next time!

oyarde
03-15-2017, 03:56 PM
I predict the libertarian party cannot field a strong candidate and will get a lower percentage of the vote than they got with johnson . And , that tells you everything you need to know .

William Tell
03-15-2017, 03:58 PM
Anyone but Johnson.. really

William Weld/Bob Barr 2020 thank you for your endorsement of their ticket :D

RonZeplin
03-15-2017, 04:55 PM
Chuck Baldwin/Austin Petersen?

undergroundrr
03-15-2017, 05:02 PM
Chuck Baldwin/Austin Petersen?

Sounds nice. But I'd love to see some relatively big name media figures like Stossel/Napolitano. It really needs to be somebody who knows how to get MSM attention.

opal
03-16-2017, 09:38 AM
William Weld/Bob Barr 2020 thank you for your endorsement of their ticket :D

*puts ketchup on her crow*

my bad

I'd vote for dead people first

tod evans
03-16-2017, 10:11 AM
McAfee - cybersecurity - the one with the best grasp on it both foreign and domestic

'Twas my choice last go-round...(After Rand dropped out)

At least he has lumps.......

Brian4Liberty
03-16-2017, 10:16 AM
William Weld/Bob Barr 2020 thank you for your endorsement of their ticket :D

Let me be the first to say it: Lindsey Graham. His discontent with the GOP and Trump are obvious. He can bring in GOP voters. He can raise money from wealthy donors. He is well known, and the media will go crazy with it. It would be a very high profile campaign. He will be LGBT and pot friendly. McMullin, who also gained some fame as a POTUS candidate can be VP. That would solidify the Romney camp support.

William Tell
03-16-2017, 10:20 AM
Let me be the first to say it: Lindsey Graham. His discontent with the GOP and Trump are obvious. He can bring in GOP voters. He can raise money from wealthy donors. He is well known, and the media will go crazy with it. It would be a very high profile campaign. He will be LGBT and pot friendly. McMullin, who also gained some fame as a POTUS candidate can be VP. That would solidify the Romney camp support. Add Karl Rove to that ticket and you have some real credibility.

PierzStyx
03-16-2017, 12:12 PM
They had like five strong candidates last time.
And they chose Johnson.

You forgot that he's well dressed and good looking with great hair.
Probably the three most important things for a POTUS candidate.

You're not going to find a candidate who can't name something to make the government force to happen - even Ron Paul has some things he won't let go.
But if Petersen had won the candidacy I might have voted. Hell, I would have tried to convince a lot of people to vote for him, too.
I certainly wouldn't have called all his supporters retards, like I did with Johnson.

For me, the difference between Ron Paul and Austin Petersen is that I think Paul really does want to transition to an all voluntary government and if given power he would work towards that goal. Petersen doesn't and wouldn't. He would absolutely shrink the government because his ideal government is smaller than the one we have now, but I don't think he would try and move us towards a government that follows the NAP itself or holds non-compulsion as a goal.

You're right about Petersen though. He really does have great hair. And if he had been the nominee I am positive that more Republicans would have voted for him. I believe that the LP might have even been able to make a bigger impact everywhere but especially in some of the bubble states like Utah, where the third party candidate, who was more traditionally Republican than Trump, took 23% of the vote.

Superfluous Man
03-16-2017, 01:18 PM
It really doesn't matter.

Maybe if Amash were the candidate I'd care. But otherwise, the only relevance of the LP presidential candidate will be to provide more fodder for mocking the LP.

opal
03-16-2017, 01:50 PM
sometimes, the sarcasm in this forum is astounding - Lindsey Graham.. I about peed myself

Brian4Liberty
03-16-2017, 02:57 PM
I believe that the LP might have even been able to make a bigger impact everywhere but especially in some of the bubble states like Utah, where the third party candidate, who was more traditionally Republican than Trump, took 23% of the vote.

There we go. More support for McMullin! Might be able to break LP records in Utah with him on the ticket.

specsaregood
03-16-2017, 03:10 PM
McAfee - cybersecurity - the one with the best grasp on it both foreign and domestic

and multiple prostitutes say he paid them to poop on his face.

opal
03-16-2017, 03:13 PM
and multiple prostitutes say he paid them to poop on his face.

I think this falls into to categories.. wait 3

1 - ewww
2 - his body, his choice and
3 - I missed this tidbit during the campaign

specsaregood
03-16-2017, 03:15 PM
I think this falls into to categories.. wait 3

1 - ewww
2 - his body, his choice and
3 - I missed this tidbit during the campaign

yeah, they had a documentary on him all ready to go and smear the hell out of him in case he was nominated. its on Netflix now though.

not.your.average.joe
03-16-2017, 03:36 PM
The sharpest talking guy i know is Tom Woods - doubt he's interested in politics though.

I wish Tom Woods would run - he knows his stance well, he's got his podcast, his books, and a consistent history to back him up. Add to that he'd probably get a Ron Paul endorsement, and you've got a pretty strong candidate.
However, he's made clear that his priorities are with his family.

Lamp
03-16-2017, 05:18 PM
I wish Tom Woods would run - he knows his stance well, he's got his podcast, his books, and a consistent history to back him up. Add to that he'd probably get a Ron Paul endorsement, and you've got a pretty strong candidate.
However, he's made clear that his priorities are with his family.


I personally wish Andrew Napolitano would run.

PierzStyx
03-17-2017, 12:07 PM
There we go. More support for McMullin! Might be able to break LP records in Utah with him on the ticket.

As a Mormon by response is: Nooooooooooooooooo. Lets get someone who at least pretends to be a libertarian.

helmuth_hubener
03-17-2017, 12:47 PM
You're right about Petersen though. He really does have great hair. And if he had been the nominee I am positive that more Republicans would have voted for him.
Ha! You should get a job as a pundit for one of the news networks!

William Tell
03-17-2017, 12:58 PM
As a Mormon by response is: Nooooooooooooooooo. Lets get someone who at least pretends to be a libertarian.

Paul Ryan likes Ayn Rand...


:p

MallsRGood
03-18-2017, 03:05 AM
First priority; we need a "normal" person who doesn't embody all the negative stereotypes about libertarians.

...i.e. no one who drinks goat blood in pagan rituals, strips on live TV, is currently high, enjoys being shat upon by prostitutes, etc.

:rolleyes:

I know, high bar...

Some other criteria:
-not a publicly avowed anarchist
-modicum of charisma
-decent resume

helmuth_hubener
03-18-2017, 09:30 AM
First priority; we need a "normal" person who doesn't embody all the negative stereotypes about libertarians.

Some other criteria:
-not a publicly avowed anarchist
-modicum of charisma
-decent resume

So.... Badnarik again?

invisible
03-18-2017, 12:58 PM
The LP would indeed benefit if they nominated someone who wasn't a pothead.

But this is the LP we're talking about.

It wasn't that he was a pothead. The question was more one of, who would want to vote for a dick? After all, you wouldn't vote for a dick, would you? Lots of people were feeling the bern, and thought it felt good enough to vote really hard for him. But when people tried to feel the johnson, they realized that he was a really limp candidate.

invisible
03-18-2017, 01:03 PM
yeah, they had a documentary on him all ready to go and smear the hell out of him in case he was nominated. its on Netflix now though.

They were going to smear the hell out of him, with the poop? That would be a really dirty thing to do to him, I wonder if santorum is somehow involved.

PierzStyx
03-20-2017, 12:29 PM
Paul Ryan likes Ayn Rand...


:p

Sure he does. James Taggart is probably his hero. Or maybe Wesley Mouch.

Occam's Banana
03-22-2017, 05:15 AM
Yes. The LP way outperformed any previous election results. I have the same objections to Johnson as everybody else, but it's hard to complain about how the LP could have gotten more votes with a different candidate when they broke all previous records.

Conversely, with Trump and Hillary running for the Republicrats, it's hard to see how anyone who had a realistic shot at getting the LP nomination could have gotten fewer votes.

The LP had no chance of winning, but given the levels of disgust with those other two bozos, it was an opportunity (perhaps never to be had again) to put forward a consistently principled libertarian ticket that could capitalize on the opportunity to give a solid boost to the social visibility and social credibility of libertarianism.

Petersen might have done, with a good running mate. (Browne/Woods would have been ideal, if I may be permitted to indulge in fantasy.)

But instead, we got ... Johnson/Weld ... *uck* ...


The LP could have run a vial of bubonic plague and broken 3% in that field.

I said the same thing before the election (with regard to Johnson/Weld setting the record, rather than the 3% figure specifically).

Well, actually I said "bucket of warm spit," not "vial of bubonic plague," but ... you know ... *sigh* ...



Paul Ryan likes Ayn Rand...

Sure he does. James Taggart is probably his hero. Or maybe Wesley Mouch.

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice. :(

helmuth_hubener
03-22-2017, 08:08 AM
You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice. :(

Indeed, Pierz is on a roll, lately!