Is this the year of the Libertarian Party?

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Again, CONGRESS writes laws, not the President.

You simply don't understand how our government works.

And, you simply don't know how to make a coherent point.

If Louisiana wants to put in place a 30-day waiting period on abortion, should it be allowed?

Now, if New York wants to put a 30-day waiting period on the purchase of any firearm, should it be allowed?

Are you going to be an inconsistent hypocrite, like you have been proved to be, or are you going to finally get the point?

 

[g5000]

The Derp wants someone thousands of miles away deciding what food you should eat, what health care you should receive, how fast you should drive, how many guns you can own.

He literally wants someone thousands of miles away making life and death decisions for you because he believes you are incapable of doing that for yourselves.

Madness. Sheer madness.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

When people advocating for the Libertarian Party repeatedly tell me to effectively ignore their party platform, I don't need much more than that to reach the conclusion that the Libertarian Party is where it is for some very good reasons.

How is that any different than the GOP and it's members or the DNC and its members. Are you lock-step in line with the DNC platform?

 

[g5000]

Yeah. Let's give Donald Trump and the GOP total control over your lives.

I am sure the Emperor thinks that is a terrific idea.

 

[g5000]

When people advocating for the Libertarian Party repeatedly tell me to effectively ignore their party platform, I don't need much more than that to reach the conclusion that the Libertarian Party is where it is for some very good reasons.

How is that any different than the GOP and it's members or the DNC and its members. Are you lock-step in line with the DNC platform?

If you differ from the party platform, what difference does that make.

The DNC is pushing the platform agenda, not yours.

Just so with the Libertarian Party. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with every part of their platform. You are not in charge. They are. And that is what they are pushing.

My support for a party depends on whether their agenda outweighs mine.

The Libertarian Party is way off course from where I stand, and so I cannot support it.

I like the Republican Party platform, but the ACTIONS of the Republican Party are nowhere close to their words. That is why I de-registered from that party recently.

 

[g5000]

"Big Pharma".

"Big Oil."

"Wall Street".

"The One Percent."

That is who owns our central government. Just ask any liberal.

And that is who The Derp thinks should be running our lives for us.


It's amazing to me their heads don't explode from cognitive dissonance.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm telling you because the anti-abortion people are not going to vote for pro-choice candidates, and the Libertarians are not going to run anti-abortion candidates.

No, you're "telling me" because I pointed out that you were blathering on regarding subject matter you clearly know nothing about and now you're attempting to change the subject in the hopes that it will distract from that fact.

You clearly know nothing about libertarians or libertarianism so either spend the time and effort to educate yourself or continue to provide further evidence of your ignorance and lots of laughs for those that have.

You're trying to tell us that Libertarians are anti-abortion and pro-abortion all at the same time.

Yeah because unlike you partisan drones, libertarians don't operate using a centrally controlled hive mind, they can actually think for themselves and form their own opinions instead of having some party boss wanker do it for them.

You can't be for and against abortion rights at the same time.

Yes individuals that share the same core principles and self identify as libertarians can and do have opposing opinions on the question of abortion.

I realize differences of opinion are impossible in the Borg collective you inhabit but that doesn't mean it isn't a reality outside of it.

I'm just telling you that a Libertarian Party candidate who is not anti-abortion will not get more than the tiniest fraction of the anti-abortion vote,

which means, as I pointed out in my orginal post, that the Libertarian Party has little if any opportunity to make inroads into the core constituency (aka the majority) of Republican Party members, or, into the ranks of pro-life Independents.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If you differ from the party platform, what difference does that make.

The DNC is pushing the platform agenda, not yours.

Just so with the Libertarian Party. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with every part of their platform. You are not in charge. They are. And that is what they are pushing.

My support for a party depends on whether their agenda outweighs mine.

The Libertarian Party is way off course from where I stand, and so I cannot support it.

I like the Republican Party platform, but the ACTIONS of the Republican Party are nowhere close to their words. That is why I de-registered from that party recently.

I get what you are saying and I agree with your thought process. You pick the party/candidate that most closely aligns with your ideal. The LP put a joke of a candidate on the presidential ticket, thereby losing my support. The LP does have many problems to overcome before any substantial portion of the vote will give them a serious look, but one or both of the other parties could make the LP irrelevant if they would adopt the liberty-first spirit of the LP platform.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I'm just telling you that a Libertarian Party candidate who is not anti-abortion will not get more than the tiniest fraction of the anti-abortion vote,

which means, as I pointed out in my orginal post, that the Libertarian Party has little if any opportunity to make inroads into the core constituency (aka the majority) of Republican Party members, or, into the ranks of pro-life Independents.

But, it could take some of the pro-choice independents and pro-capitalist democrats (if there are any left), could it not?

 

[NYcarbineer]

When people advocating for the Libertarian Party repeatedly tell me to effectively ignore their party platform, I don't need much more than that to reach the conclusion that the Libertarian Party is where it is for some very good reasons.

How is that any different than the GOP and it's members or the DNC and its members. Are you lock-step in line with the DNC platform?

I suggest you go back to my original post and directly deal with that,

having to do with how the Libertarians get both Republican and Democrat votes based on Libertarian party positions.

...without telling me that I should vote Libertarian because the Libertarians are anything I want them to be.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm just telling you that a Libertarian Party candidate who is not anti-abortion will not get more than the tiniest fraction of the anti-abortion vote,

which means, as I pointed out in my orginal post, that the Libertarian Party has little if any opportunity to make inroads into the core constituency (aka the majority) of Republican Party members, or, into the ranks of pro-life Independents.

But, it could take some of the pro-choice independents and pro-capitalist democrats (if there are any left), could it not?

That's how the LP gets its annual 5% already lol.

 

[g5000]

If you differ from the party platform, what difference does that make.

The DNC is pushing the platform agenda, not yours.

Just so with the Libertarian Party. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with every part of their platform. You are not in charge. They are. And that is what they are pushing.

My support for a party depends on whether their agenda outweighs mine.

The Libertarian Party is way off course from where I stand, and so I cannot support it.

I like the Republican Party platform, but the ACTIONS of the Republican Party are nowhere close to their words. That is why I de-registered from that party recently.

I get what you are saying and I agree with your thought process. You pick the party/candidate that most closely aligns with your ideal. The LP put a joke of a candidate on the presidential ticket, thereby losing my support. The LP does have many problems to overcome before any will give them a serious look, but one or both of the other parties could make the LP irrelevant if they would adopt the liberty-first spirit of the LP platform.

I think Libertarians delude themselves. They believe a majority of Americans are Libertarians but just don't know it.

This is intellectual laziness. They haven't done the work to sell the product, but believe everyone buys it.

An example of this is their political "test". You know the one. Instead of a spectrum line, they have a grid box.

They ask generic questions, and if you answer "yes", you're a Libertarian.

"Do you like ice cream? Then you are a Libertarian!"

It's not quite that bad, but close. It gives them the false illusion that there are a lot of Libertarians out there.

On that test, they never ask SPECIFICS.

"I believe all drugs, including crack cocaine, should be legal."

"I believe the FAA should be abolished and replaced with an airline industry-run organization."

"I believe the FDA should be abolished and replaced with a drug industry-run organization."

"I believe the Federal Reserve should be abolished and replaced with a banking industry-run organization our monetary system should be run by Congress."


If they did that, they would see more accurate numbers. And their numbers would fall off a cliff.

They have a lot of hard selling to do, and don't want to do the hard uphill trudge. So they gather together and wave their Don't Tread On Me Flags, and sell each other copper rounds, and delude themselves that the other 97 percent of Americans are closeted Libertarians.

 

[Thinker101]

If you differ from the party platform, what difference does that make.

The DNC is pushing the platform agenda, not yours.

Just so with the Libertarian Party. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with every part of their platform. You are not in charge. They are. And that is what they are pushing.

My support for a party depends on whether their agenda outweighs mine.

The Libertarian Party is way off course from where I stand, and so I cannot support it.

I like the Republican Party platform, but the ACTIONS of the Republican Party are nowhere close to their words. That is why I de-registered from that party recently.

I get what you are saying and I agree with your thought process. You pick the party/candidate that most closely aligns with your ideal. The LP put a joke of a candidate on the presidential ticket, thereby losing my support. The LP does have many problems to overcome before any will give them a serious look, but one or both of the other parties could make the LP irrelevant if they would adopt the liberty-first spirit of the LP platform.

I think Libertarians delude themselves. They believe a majority of Americans are Libertarians but just don't know it.

This is intellectual laziness. They haven't done the work to sell the product, but believe everyone buys it.

An example of this is their political "test". You know the one. Instead of a spectrum line, they have a grid box.

They ask generic questions, and if you answer "yes", you're a Libertarian.

"Do you like ice cream? Then you are a Libertarian!"

It's not quite that bad, but close. It gives them the false illusion that there are a lot of Libertarians out there.

On that test, they never ask SPECIFICS.

"I believe all drugs, including crack cocaine, should be legal."

If they did that, they would see more accurate numbers. And their numbers would fall off a cliff.

They have a lot of hard selling to do, and don't want to do the hard uphill trudge. So they gather together and wave their Don't Tread On Me Flags, and sell each other copper rounds, and delude themselves that the other 97 percent of Americans are closeted Libertarians.

That sounds a lot like liberals.

 

[g5000]

If you differ from the party platform, what difference does that make.

The DNC is pushing the platform agenda, not yours.

Just so with the Libertarian Party. It doesn't matter if you don't agree with every part of their platform. You are not in charge. They are. And that is what they are pushing.

My support for a party depends on whether their agenda outweighs mine.

The Libertarian Party is way off course from where I stand, and so I cannot support it.

I like the Republican Party platform, but the ACTIONS of the Republican Party are nowhere close to their words. That is why I de-registered from that party recently.

I get what you are saying and I agree with your thought process. You pick the party/candidate that most closely aligns with your ideal. The LP put a joke of a candidate on the presidential ticket, thereby losing my support. The LP does have many problems to overcome before any will give them a serious look, but one or both of the other parties could make the LP irrelevant if they would adopt the liberty-first spirit of the LP platform.

I think Libertarians delude themselves. They believe a majority of Americans are Libertarians but just don't know it.

This is intellectual laziness. They haven't done the work to sell the product, but believe everyone buys it.

An example of this is their political "test". You know the one. Instead of a spectrum line, they have a grid box.

They ask generic questions, and if you answer "yes", you're a Libertarian.

"Do you like ice cream? Then you are a Libertarian!"

It's not quite that bad, but close. It gives them the false illusion that there are a lot of Libertarians out there.

On that test, they never ask SPECIFICS.

"I believe all drugs, including crack cocaine, should be legal."

If they did that, they would see more accurate numbers. And their numbers would fall off a cliff.

They have a lot of hard selling to do, and don't want to do the hard uphill trudge. So they gather together and wave their Don't Tread On Me Flags, and sell each other copper rounds, and delude themselves that the other 97 percent of Americans are closeted Libertarians.

That sounds a lot like liberals.

There are some people on this forum who think they are Libertarians when in fact they are more closely aligned in their thinking with the Green Party.

There is actually quite a bit of crossover between Libertarians and Greens.

I added some more example survey questions to my post since you quoted it. Examples which are strictly Libertarian, and as diametrically opposed to liberalism as it gets.

To wit:

"I believe the FAA should be abolished and replaced with an airline industry-run organization."

"I believe the FDA should be abolished and replaced with a drug industry-run organization."

"I believe the Federal Reserve should be abolished and replaced with a banking industry-run organization our monetary system should be run by Congress."

 

[g5000]

It's always struck me as funny that Libertarians want our federal agencies to be abolished and industry to regulate itself. For example, they want the FDA to be abolished and leave it to the food and drug industries to regulate themselves. Because that worked out so well in the past...

And yet the one sector of our economy which actually is self-regulated by the relevant industry, the Federal Reserve, is vehemently opposed by Libertarians! They consider The Fed to be a massive failure! They want our monetary system to be run by the government! Specifically, Congress.

I am amazed their heads don't explode from cognitive dissonance.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I think Libertarians delude themselves. They believe a majority of Americans are Libertarians but just don't know it.

This is intellectual laziness. They haven't done the work to sell the product, but believe everyone buys it.

An example of this is their political "test". You know the one. Instead of a spectrum line, they have a grid box.

They ask generic questions, and if you answer "yes", you're a Libertarian.

"Do you like ice cream? Then you are a Libertarian!"

It's not quite that bad, but close. It gives them the false illusion that there are a lot of Libertarians out there.

On that test, they never ask SPECIFICS.

"I believe all drugs, including crack cocaine, should be legal."

If they did that, they would see more accurate numbers. And their numbers would fall off a cliff.

They have a lot of hard selling to do, and don't want to do the hard uphill trudge. So they gather together and wave their Don't Tread On Me Flags, and sell each other copper rounds, and delude themselves that the other 97 percent of Americans are closeted Libertarians.

I agree that the LP is largely a pathetic excuse to not vote R or D. I agree that the LP has done a poor job of messaging and an even poorer job of selling the concept of the liberty-first principle.

I do believe that most people want liberty. When asked properly or given a chance to consider the alternatives, including non-government solutions, they will start to apply that liberty-first formula to all decisions.

Right v. Left does not address the real issues in government. More government power verses less is the real issue, but like kids at a circus, the establishment is able to distract the electorate from thinking about self-government and limited power in the hands of the state. They are kept busy deciding what type of tyranny they want (right or left), rather than what level of state control they want to surrender (authoritarian v. libertarian).

Again, that takes a whole lot more effort and education than the LP is willing or capable of giving. It also assumes that most people can think for themselves (they can't). A true Libertarian Party movement has to be a grass roots effort until it can reach critical mass.

 

[toobfreak]

Stossel: Is 2018 the Year of the Libertarian Party?

I've listened to Stossel and heard him make real good points, then he will turn right around and say something really stupid. The problem with Libertarians is that anything goes, they have no up or down, no right or wrong, just whatever you want to do. Be and Let Be. Intellectual Hippies. Their absence of principles is their principle.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

It's always struck me as funny that Libertarians want our federal agencies to be abolished and industry to regulate itself. For example, they want the FDA to be abolished and leave it to the food and drug industries to regulate themselves. Because that worked out so well in the past...

The UL is a great example of private industry regulating itself and keeping people safe. The FDA could easily be replaced by a similar organization. Other countries operate without an FDA. The cost of drugs and medications is so motherfucking high BECAUSE of the FDA, and it still does not prevent people from being harmed by bad drugs (see all the class-action suit advertisements on late-night TV).

And yet the one sector of our economy which actually is self-regulated by the relevant industry, the Federal Reserve, is vehemently opposed by Libertarians! They consider The Fed to be a massive failure! They want our monetary system to be run by the government! Specifically, Congress.

That's not the argument at all. It would take me too long to explain that, but can you imagine playing a game of monopoly where one player holds all the money at the beginning, and loans it to other players with interest? Remember, there is no other source of currency with which to trade. And, that does not even scratch the surface of the issues with the Fed.

 

[The Derp]

Lovers of strong central government never can. You lack the education.

So...what is an example of a strictly states-rights issue? That's what those opposed to central government can never seem to articulate.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I've listened to Stossel and heard him make real good points, then he will turn right around and say something really stupid. The problem with Libertarians is that anything goes, they have no up or down, no right or wrong, just whatever you want to do. Be and Let Be. Intellectual Hippies. Their absence of principles is their principle.

That's not true. The principle is to maximize liberty. The unwarranted or unjustified taking of one's liberty is the ultimate wrong. How could that be consistent with "anything goes"?