Why don't "libertarians" support the libertarian candidate?

[Oddball]

The GObP/pubs want to create the very nation that the pilgrims fled and the rw's are helping them to do that.

Project much, tovarich?

 

[PredFan]

Think what you want to. I'm voting for the best person for POTUS that actually has a chance. My vote is certainly not going to be wasted.

I got tired of wasting my vote on (R) butt pipes who talk like libertarians before the election and govern like socialist democratics (like Chimpola) after taking office.

I hear ya. We are all tired of that nonsense.

You want to play the evil of two lessers, then you'll get the evil you deserve.

I'll let you in on a little secret; you can vote third party 100 times, and you will still get the exact same evil I get.

Besides that, your one, single (1) vote isn't going to tip the election one way or another, so why sell out?

I'm don't concider it selling out at all. My beliefs are unchanged.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Oddball

In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

You need to take heed of your own sig line.

 

[PredFan]

Excuses. I'll be voting Johnson, and I really don't care that he has no chance the win. I think if you don't vote for who you think is the best person to be president-that that's the real way to waste your vote. If anybody's a "real" Libertarian-they'd vote for somebody who has Libertarian beliefs-and not Romney.

Exactly. The 'tell' in my opinion is the focus on "conservative" rather than "libertarian". Real libertarianism isn't "conservative" - it's radically liberal.

Exactly.

The lame excuse that

But people like myself had to vote for the most conservative candidate we feel can beat Obama.

is just that. Lame.

As is the "lesser of two evils" excuse. If you for the lesser of two evils, you still end up with evil.

Obviously, spineless rw's will go whatever way the wind is blowing rather than stand up for the beliefs they say they hold.

Are there any rw's here who will stand up for their true beliefs?

BTW, not too hard to see why we will never have a third party.

Piss off idiot, you aren't fooling anyone. You simply want more L.P. voters to dilute Romney voters, and you're too stupid to know that it won't happen.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I'm don't concider it selling out at all.

Mental masturbation at its best.

 

[Oddball]

Oddball

In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

You need to take heed of your own sig line.

You need to shove it up you commie ass.

 

[Oddball]

I'll let you in on a little secret; you can vote third party 100 times, and you will still get the exact same evil I get.

All that proves is that your one, single (1) vote doesn't really make a difference in the overall scheme, so going with the "one who can win" is nothing more than selling out.

Besides that, your one, single (1) vote isn't going to tip the election one way or another, so why sell out?

I'm don't concider it selling out at all. My beliefs are unchanged.

If you vote for someone whose policies go against your beliefs (like Chimpola), under the tragically flawed premise that his brand of socialism is going to be any better a deal, then you are selling out....Hate to break it to ya.

 

[konradv]

I don't see how it's anymore "peace and love beads" than libertarianism.

Second-grader straw man argument, not worth the effort to rebut.

It was YOUR argument. YOU brought up "peace and love beads".

It's been around a lot longer than my idea, but no country has ever installed a libertarian government. Why is that?!?!

Um, yes it has...In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

Now slavery is a libertarian ideal?!?!

 

[Oddball]

I don't see how it's anymore "peace and love beads" than libertarianism.

Second-grader straw man argument, not worth the effort to rebut.

It was YOUR argument. YOU brought up "peace and love beads".

I'm not the one who makes outrageous claims like "universal coverage" and "every child will get educated" (for example) as socialist Utopians like you do....Yours is indeed the ideology of everything being peace and love beads, if only the proles turn their lives over to the vastly better judgement of the political class.

It's been around a lot longer than my idea, but no country has ever installed a libertarian government. Why is that?!?!

Um, yes it has...In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

Now slavery is a libertarian ideal?!?!

Slavery was one of those sainted "compromises" all you wankers hold in such high esteem when others go along with you...But when it's in terms of how the nation in general operated for over 150 years, it's a poison pill!...Priceless!...

 

[PredFan]

I'll let you in on a little secret; you can vote third party 100 times, and you will still get the exact same evil I get.

All that proves is that your one, single (1) vote doesn't really make a difference in the overall scheme, so going with the "one who can win" is nothing more than selling out.

Besides that, your one, single (1) vote isn't going to tip the election one way or another, so why sell out?

I'm don't concider it selling out at all. My beliefs are unchanged.

If you vote for someone whose policies go against your beliefs (like Chimpola), under the tragically flawed premise that his brand of socialism is going to be any better a deal, then you are selling out....Hate to break it to ya.

No, my beliefs remain the same. Obama is the anti-thesis of everything Libertarians believe in. He must go. You can fight a battle by being either offensive or defensive. I am chosing to go on offense. That isn't selling out.

 

[Oddball]

I'll let you in on a little secret; you can vote third party 100 times, and you will still get the exact same evil I get.

All that proves is that your one, single (1) vote doesn't really make a difference in the overall scheme, so going with the "one who can win" is nothing more than selling out.

I'm don't concider it selling out at all. My beliefs are unchanged.

If you vote for someone whose policies go against your beliefs (like Chimpola), under the tragically flawed premise that his brand of socialism is going to be any better a deal, then you are selling out....Hate to break it to ya.

No, my beliefs remain the same. Obama is the anti-thesis of everything Libertarians believe in. He must go. You can fight a battle by being either offensive or defensive. I am chosing to go on offense. That isn't selling out.

Romney ain't much better.....My bar for "better" is set a lot higher than yours.

If you're fighting to not lose, rather than to win, then you are in fact fighting a defensive battle.

 

[konradv]

Second-grader straw man argument, not worth the effort to rebut.

It was YOUR argument. YOU brought up "peace and love beads".

I'm not the one who makes outrageous claims like "universal coverage" and "every child will get educated" (for example) as socialist Utopians like you do....Yours is indeed the ideology of everything being peace and love beads, if only the proles turn their lives over to the vastly better judgement of the political class.

It's been around a lot longer than my idea, but no country has ever installed a libertarian government. Why is that?!?!

Um, yes it has...In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

Now slavery is a libertarian ideal?!?!

Slavery was one of those sainted "compromises" all you wankers hold in such high esteem when others go along with you...But when it's in terms of how the nation in general operated for over 150 years, it's a poison pill!...Priceless!...

Strawman argument: I wasn't at the Constitutional Convention, so any compromise made was the product of the "libertarians" you say founded the country.

 

[amrchaos]

I've noticed that on this board that those who say they are Libertarian don't seem to support the Libertarian candidate, Gary Johnson. Watching him on Jon Stewart reminded me to ask why. It also reminded me that would make a much better candidate than the Crazy Uncle of the Republican Party.

It should be obvious but if you don't support him, there's not much chance he'll get anywhere close to winning. Of course, there's no chance he'll win if you do support him but why whine that you want a third party and then not actually support the candidate?

Libertarians have a better chance of winning if they support libertarians.

But our Modern Libertarians are a bunch o whining cowards that do not vote their conscience. So fearful of the left, they will throw their vote to McCain regardless of the fact that McCain is barely a Republican himself.

A long time ago, our forefathers defined what Libertarians meant through their actions and deeds. How sad I feel for them! Those that claim to carry the hall marks of liberty are no more than cowardly right wing intellectuals and loud mouth inepts!

Our modern libetarians is a public and political joke. Always asking others to support their candidates, yet to punked out to vote for them themselves.

Of course their are a few brave ones--but their number is so few that we can consider them a statistical anamoly!!

 

[Oddball]

It was YOUR argument. YOU brought up "peace and love beads".

I'm not the one who makes outrageous claims like "universal coverage" and "every child will get educated" (for example) as socialist Utopians like you do....Yours is indeed the ideology of everything being peace and love beads, if only the proles turn their lives over to the vastly better judgement of the political class.

Um, yes it has...In America from its inception until the onset of the Progressive Era.

Now slavery is a libertarian ideal?!?!

Slavery was one of those sainted "compromises" all you wankers hold in such high esteem when others go along with you...But when it's in terms of how the nation in general operated for over 150 years, it's a poison pill!...Priceless!...

Strawman argument: I wasn't at the Constitutional Convention, so any compromise made was the product of the "libertarians" you say founded the country.

Not a straw man argument at all.

Yours is the philosophy that claims to value compromise so much (well, at least insofar as everyone else compromising with you is concerned), yet are pointing to one of the very few flaws in the original republic -arrived upon by compromise- as your extremely flimsy pretext to claim that a libertarian society never ever existed in America.

Sorry to break it to ya but perfection cannot ever be an option, your collectivist Utopian dreams notwithstanding.

 

[konradv]

I'm not the one who makes outrageous claims like "universal coverage" and "every child will get educated" (for example) as socialist Utopians like you do....Yours is indeed the ideology of everything being peace and love beads, if only the proles turn their lives over to the vastly better judgement of the political class.

Slavery was one of those sainted "compromises" all you wankers hold in such high esteem when others go along with you...But when it's in terms of how the nation in general operated for over 150 years, it's a poison pill!...Priceless!...

Strawman argument: I wasn't at the Constitutional Convention, so any compromise made was the product of the "libertarians" you say founded the country.

Not a straw man argument at all.

Yours is the philosophy that claims to value compromise so much (well, at least insofar as everyone else compromising with you is concerned), yet are pointing to one of the very few flaws in the original republic -arrived upon by compromise- as your extremely flimsy pretext to claim that a libertarian society never ever existed in America.

Sorry to break it to ya but perfection cannot ever be an option, your collectivist Utopian dreams notwithstanding.

It's a strawman because you're telling me what my philosophy is in an attempt to force me to defend a construct of your making. It would seem that your only way out of this is to defend both libertarianism and slavery.

GOOD LUCK!!!

 

[dblack]

You're misinterpreting my thesis. We'd be turning the process over to the people.

I agree actually. It should be up to the people to decide which campaigns they want to finance.

 

[PredFan]

All that proves is that your one, single (1) vote doesn't really make a difference in the overall scheme, so going with the "one who can win" is nothing more than selling out.


If you vote for someone whose policies go against your beliefs (like Chimpola), under the tragically flawed premise that his brand of socialism is going to be any better a deal, then you are selling out....Hate to break it to ya.

No, my beliefs remain the same. Obama is the anti-thesis of everything Libertarians believe in. He must go. You can fight a battle by being either offensive or defensive. I am chosing to go on offense. That isn't selling out.

Romney ain't much better.....My bar for "better" is set a lot higher than yours.

If you're fighting to not lose, rather than to win, then you are in fact fighting a defensive battle.

I stand corrected. I am in fact on the defensive.

It is true that saying Romney is better is a stretch, but Romney will do the one thing that Obama won't, Romney will put conservatives on the SCOTUS, Obama will put liberals. That alone is worthy of my vote.

 

[dblack]

I'm don't concider it selling out at all. My beliefs are unchanged.

But they remain silent. In one of the most important way we can express our opinions on government, you misleadingly support a candidate who doesn't represent your views. That doesn't lead to the change we seek. It leads away from it.

 

[Oddball]

I stand corrected. I am in fact on the defensive.

It is true that saying Romney is better is a stretch, but Romney will do the one thing that Obama won't, Romney will put conservatives on the SCOTUS, Obama will put liberals. That alone is worthy of my vote.

Really?

You mean like O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter?

Never mind.

 

[PredFan]

Libertarians have a better chance of winning if they support libertarians.[/B]

A better chance yes, still less than a snowball's chance in hell.

But our Modern Libertarians are a bunch o whining cowards that do not vote their conscience.[/B]

Bull shit. My conscience says get rid of Obama. I am not a coward because i have stood my ground against democrats, republicans, and libertarians over my choices. Calling me a coward is easy to do, it's the last refuge of the lazy mind.

So fearful of the left, they will throw their vote to McCain regardless of the fact that McCain is barely a Republican himself.[/B]

McCain was/is barely a Republican, Obama was decidedly NOT a Republican. Not too difficult a choice there if you stop to actually think about it.

A long time ago, our forefathers defined what Libertarians meant through their actions and deeds. How sad I feel for them! Those that claim to carry the hall marks of liberty are no more than cowardly right wing intellectuals and loud mouth inepts![/B]

Our modern libetarians is a public and political joke. Always asking others to support their candidates, yet to punked out to vote for them themselves. [/B]

Such a simplistic view, so tailored to support your lame argument instead of being based in any truth what so ever. Ironic that you call others a joke.

Of course their are a few brave ones--but their number is so few that we can consider them a statistical anamoly!!

I imagine you count yourself in that number.