Hey Libertarians, Think This Was Good?

[thanatos144]

I dont see why the Republicans should adopt more libertarian things???? They should go with the party they are most like and that would be democrats....I am not blaming Liberaltarins for Romney's loss....Romney did that all by himself. Lets face it he sucked balls. Yet I am not sorry I voted for him cause sucky or not he WAS THE ONLY ONE that could beat Obama. I would have voted Ron fucking Paul if he was the nominee and we all know I find him to be a lying sack of shit. Maybe next time we dont allow democrats via the Media to manipulate our choice.....Also it would be a good idea to investigate how these election are even done cause if your cant trust your election then we already lost our freedoms.

 

[sitarro]

I voted for libertarian candidates for judges and anything else except state Senator and of course President. I saw Gary Johnson in the debates on cable.....even by some miracle, if this sad sack would have been elected.....or the other sad sack....the 77 year old Paul.......Congress would have destroyed either of them. Why do we only hear from Libertarians when it's time to vote for President...... they need to get some people in Congress or it's a waste of time and effort.

This election was about a lot more than President.....it was more about the Supreme Court and now Libertarians, osama will be picking at least 2......thanks...... at least you guys made your point with 1 percent of the vote.....osama is shaking.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

It's no secret. In my area former republican Virgil Goode persuaded a lot of republicans to throw away their votes for a stupid pie/sky lies. The dirty little secret is that "tarians" were infiltrated by dirty tricks democrats and the true believer huffers thought they were casting a vote to change the world. All in all it was a win win for democrats.

Sucks that your guys have such a shitty product, dunnit?

Sucks that you chose Obama!

The GOP did that. When they nominated a candidate as shitty as Romney they ensured an Obama victory. It's not libertarians fault that your party isn't worth voting for.

 

[dblack]

I doubt that actually.

Regardless, that's a demographic that I think would be expendable. I don't really think there's enough true neocons that would actually vote for the black guy, to matter.

I do agree with this.

I wouldn't bet either way. In any case, what we're talking about, in my opinion, is a badly needed re-alignment of the parties. As it sits, both parties are really fighting over control of the same ideological territory. They're both authoritarian corporatists and only disagree on the particulars (principally, who gets to be in charge). Neither party credibly defends individual rights or limited government. That's not too surprising; parties successful in controlling government generally like more government. But they are leaving a larger and larger demographic unrepresented (those of us who do want to see government constitutionally constrained).

I think one of the parties will adjust to pick up this demographic, and I'm still not sure which one will succeed. Republicans have made the most obvious efforts to attract libertarians, but in the end they are authoritarians and will never embrace real freedom. I think the Democrats offer a more hospitable mindset ultimately. Libertarianism is mostly a liberal point of view. But to do that Democrats must come to recognize that social engineering is a corruption of government - and that will be a big leap.

 

[Paulie]

I voted for libertarian candidates for judges and anything else except state Senator and of course President. I saw Gary Johnson in the debates on cable.....even by some miracle, if this sad sack would have been elected.....or the other sad sack....the 77 year old Paul.......Congress would have destroyed either of them. Why do we only hear from Libertarians when it's time to vote for President...... they need to get some people in Congress or it's a waste of time and effort.

This election was about a lot more than President.....it was more about the Supreme Court and now Libertarians, osama will be picking at least 2......thanks...... at least you guys made your point with 1 percent of the vote.....osama is shaking.

I don't know about your district but mine always throws up a really good libertarian to challenge Lobiondo.

 

[Paulie]

Regardless, that's a demographic that I think would be expendable. I don't really think there's enough true neocons that would actually vote for the black guy, to matter.

I do agree with this.

I wouldn't bet either way. In any case, what we're talking about, in my opinion, is a badly needed re-alignment of the parties. As it sits, both parties are really fighting over control of the same ideological territory. They're both authoritarian corporatists and only disagree on the particulars (principally, who gets to be in charge). Neither party credibly defends individual rights or limited government. That's not too surprising; parties successful in controlling government generally like more government. But they are leaving a larger and larger demographic unrepresented (those of us who do want to see government constitutionally constrained).

I think one of the parties will adjust to pick up this demographic, and I'm still not sure which one will succeed. Republicans have made the most obvious efforts to attract libertarians, but ultimately they are authoritarians and will never embrace real freedom. I think the Democrats offer a more hospitable mindset ultimately. Libertarianism is mostly a liberal point of view. But to do that Democrats must come to recognize that social engineering is a corruption of government - and that will be a big leap.

The problem is that libertarians sit further right economically than most other republicans/conservatives. We would cut things that even a typical conservative wouldn't. No one is more fiscally restrained than libertarians, and that scares away democrats the same way our foreign policy scares away republicans.

 

[thanatos144]

Sucks that your guys have such a shitty product, dunnit?

Sucks that you chose Obama!

The GOP did that. When they nominated a candidate as shitty as Romney they ensured an Obama victory. It's not libertarians fault that your party isn't worth voting for.

Now that complete bullshit....Especially coming from a libertarian....How many libertarians are there elected to senate or congress????We have people like West honorable men of quality who do you guys have????? You cant even say the Pauls cause both of them are republicans.

 

[Paulie]

I do agree with this.

I wouldn't bet either way. In any case, what we're talking about, in my opinion, is a badly needed re-alignment of the parties. As it sits, both parties are really fighting over control of the same ideological territory. They're both authoritarian corporatists and only disagree on the particulars (principally, who gets to be in charge). Neither party credibly defends individual rights or limited government. That's not too surprising; parties successful in controlling government generally like more government. But they are leaving a larger and larger demographic unrepresented (those of us who do want to see government constitutionally constrained).

I think one of the parties will adjust to pick up this demographic, and I'm still not sure which one will succeed. Republicans have made the most obvious efforts to attract libertarians, but ultimately they are authoritarians and will never embrace real freedom. I think the Democrats offer a more hospitable mindset ultimately. Libertarianism is mostly a liberal point of view. But to do that Democrats must come to recognize that social engineering is a corruption of government - and that will be a big leap.

The problem is that libertarians sit further right economically than most other republicans/conservatives. We would cut things that even a typical conservative wouldn't. No one is more fiscally restrained than libertarians, and that scares away democrats the same way our foreign policy scares away republicans.

And I'm totally willing to compromise on these issues to get something better.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Hey Libertarians, Think This Was Good?

I have no problem with it at all. Would seem stupid for us to go out voting for Republicans when you don't represent our beliefs.

 

[Katzndogz]

I'm fine with it.

As soon as the GOP decides it's ready to accept some of our positions into their platform, I'll more than willing to consider them again.

They locked out both Dr. Paul and Santorum of the RNC, just to project the illusion of universal support for Vinnie Vitalis.

The GOP can suck a big fat chili dog.

Let's figure this right now...

Romney lost women and minorities, and I'm sure a huge chunk of the youth vote.

Paul would have gotten all the Romney votes, especially the ABO vote, plus a lot of Romney's lost demographics...the people who were begging for someone better than Obama and didn't get that in Romney.

Yeah...Paul would have won.

The mistake in in thinking Paul would have gotten all of the Romney votes. Those who voted for Romney had the opportunity to vote for Paul and they didn't. This mistake the Paul folks make is in not recognizing how truly odious republicans think Paul is.

 

[g5000]

I find it strange that a left wing fringe organization like Daily Kos would criticize or make fun of another fringe organization for sticking to their principles.

Very interesting. That says a lot about Kos.

.

 

[dblack]

I do agree with this.

I wouldn't bet either way. In any case, what we're talking about, in my opinion, is a badly needed re-alignment of the parties. As it sits, both parties are really fighting over control of the same ideological territory. They're both authoritarian corporatists and only disagree on the particulars (principally, who gets to be in charge). Neither party credibly defends individual rights or limited government. That's not too surprising; parties successful in controlling government generally like more government. But they are leaving a larger and larger demographic unrepresented (those of us who do want to see government constitutionally constrained).

I think one of the parties will adjust to pick up this demographic, and I'm still not sure which one will succeed. Republicans have made the most obvious efforts to attract libertarians, but ultimately they are authoritarians and will never embrace real freedom. I think the Democrats offer a more hospitable mindset ultimately. Libertarianism is mostly a liberal point of view. But to do that Democrats must come to recognize that social engineering is a corruption of government - and that will be a big leap.

The problem is that libertarians sit further right economically than most other republicans/conservatives. We would cut things that even a typical conservative wouldn't. No one is more fiscally restrained than libertarians, and that scares away democrats the same way our foreign policy scares away republicans.

It's almost always inaccurate to place libertarian views on the left/right line. The Nolan Chart does a much better job of mapping us, recognizing that libertarians are neither "far left" or "far right", and that liberty is something both parties could embrace if they jettisoned their authoritarian convictions.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Sucks that you chose Obama!

The GOP did that. When they nominated a candidate as shitty as Romney they ensured an Obama victory. It's not libertarians fault that your party isn't worth voting for.

Now that complete bullshit....Especially coming from a libertarian....How many libertarians are there elected to senate or congress????We have people like West honorable men of quality who do you guys have????? You cant even say the Pauls cause both of them are republicans.

I'm not a libertarian. The GOP isn't worth voting for. They stab their constituents in the back all the time, why do people republicans keep voting for that?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I voted for libertarian candidates for judges and anything else except state Senator and of course President. I saw Gary Johnson in the debates on cable.....even by some miracle, if this sad sack would have been elected.....or the other sad sack....the 77 year old Paul.......Congress would have destroyed either of them. Why do we only hear from Libertarians when it's time to vote for President...... they need to get some people in Congress or it's a waste of time and effort.

This election was about a lot more than President.....it was more about the Supreme Court and now Libertarians, osama will be picking at least 2......thanks...... at least you guys made your point with 1 percent of the vote.....osama is shaking.

The party of personal responsibility in action.

 

[Paulie]

They locked out both Dr. Paul and Santorum of the RNC, just to project the illusion of universal support for Vinnie Vitalis.

The GOP can suck a big fat chili dog.

Let's figure this right now...

Romney lost women and minorities, and I'm sure a huge chunk of the youth vote.

Paul would have gotten all the Romney votes, especially the ABO vote, plus a lot of Romney's lost demographics...the people who were begging for someone better than Obama and didn't get that in Romney.

Yeah...Paul would have won.

The mistake in in thinking Paul would have gotten all of the Romney votes. Those who voted for Romney had the opportunity to vote for Paul and they didn't. This mistake the Paul folks make is in not recognizing how truly odious republicans think Paul is.

This is short sighted. First of all, what chance did they have to vote for Paul? Where was he on the ballot?

Second, of course the Romney voters would vote for Paul...he wasn't Obama.

Let's be honest...most of you retards voted against Obama, not FOR Romney.

 

[thanatos144]

People need to realize Libertarians Hate the republican party....They see every bad thing that happens in this country as ether Republicans fault or Republicans getting taught a lesson......Even Obama is Republicans getting whats coming to them.....They dont even see Obama as much of a threat as ANY republican thats not a Paul. Most of them are just old style democrats anyway. Especially the Neoconfederate ones.

 

[thanatos144]

Let's figure this right now...

Romney lost women and minorities, and I'm sure a huge chunk of the youth vote.

Paul would have gotten all the Romney votes, especially the ABO vote, plus a lot of Romney's lost demographics...the people who were begging for someone better than Obama and didn't get that in Romney.

Yeah...Paul would have won.

The mistake in in thinking Paul would have gotten all of the Romney votes. Those who voted for Romney had the opportunity to vote for Paul and they didn't. This mistake the Paul folks make is in not recognizing how truly odious republicans think Paul is.

This is short sighted. First of all, what chance did they have to vote for Paul? Where was he on the ballot?

Second, of course the Romney voters would vote for Paul...he wasn't Obama.

Let's be honest...most of you retards voted against Obama, not FOR Romney.

There is no grand conspiracy by Republicans to keep Paul out of power.....Paul is doing that all by himself.

 

[Paulie]

People need to realize Libertarians Hate the republican party....They see every bad thing that happens in this country as ether Republicans fault or Republicans getting taught a lesson......Even Obama is Republicans getting whats coming to them.....They dont even see Obama as much of a threat as ANY republican thats not a Paul. Most of them are just old style democrats anyway. Especially the Neoconfederate ones.

Your level of critical thought process is probably a huge reason why you're only working in a convenience store at this point in your life.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Regardless, that's a demographic that I think would be expendable. I don't really think there's enough true neocons that would actually vote for the black guy, to matter.

I do agree with this.

I wouldn't bet either way. In any case, what we're talking about, in my opinion, is a badly needed re-alignment of the parties. As it sits, both parties are really fighting over control of the same ideological territory. They're both authoritarian corporatists and only disagree on the particulars (principally, who gets to be in charge). Neither party credibly defends individual rights or limited government. That's not too surprising; parties successful in controlling government generally like more government. But they are leaving a larger and larger demographic unrepresented (those of us who do want to see government constitutionally constrained).

I think one of the parties will adjust to pick up this demographic, and I'm still not sure which one will succeed. Republicans have made the most obvious efforts to attract libertarians, but in the end they are authoritarians and will never embrace real freedom. I think the Democrats offer a more hospitable mindset ultimately. Libertarianism is mostly a liberal point of view. But to do that Democrats must come to recognize that social engineering is a corruption of government - and that will be a big leap.

I don't think either party will adjust. I see no evidence of it, at any rate. I suspect 2016 will bring another Republican nominee from the Dole/McCain/Romney wing of the party, and the Democrats will probably be looking at Hillary or somebody identical at any rate.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Sucks that you chose Obama!

The GOP did that. When they nominated a candidate as shitty as Romney they ensured an Obama victory. It's not libertarians fault that your party isn't worth voting for.

Now that complete bullshit....Especially coming from a libertarian....How many libertarians are there elected to senate or congress????We have people like West honorable men of quality who do you guys have????? You cant even say the Pauls cause both of them are republicans.

West lost.