When will the Libertarians gain power?

[eric82oslo]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

On the other hand, one of the Koch brothers was one of their earliest presidential candidates. Nationwide, I would guess that close to two out of three Libertarians are previous Republicans, while only one out of three previously considered themselves Democrats. That's amongst those who previously identified with one of the major parties of course.

[Bigby]

Libertarianism is not a viable ideology in the real world.

I agree that pure Libertarianism is really far away from being realistic and appliable to the real world in which people actually live (pure libertarianism is borderline anarchistic in my view), however a light version of it, including only the best and brightest of their ideas, is not I would argue. Rand Paul and Shenna Bellows are both very far from being true libertarians, yet they've both cleverly embraced many libertarian ideas. And yet they're both very different from one another. The great thing with the Libertarian party is that it brings fresh ideas to the table, something the country sorely needs politically speaking. Libertarians, other third party candidates and independents will finally be the ones bringing an end to political gridlock and obstructionism I believe, even if we might still be a decade or two away from that actually happening.

I'd also argue that pure liberalism or pure conservatism are not realistically viable either. A Libertarian President would have to be at least semi-moderate.

[KCDem]

Never haha

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Libertarianism is not a viable ideology in the real world.

Now that I think of it, I guess you're right, I'm going to burn my Ron Paul books and support Hillary Clinton.  Thanks for waking me up!

[IceSpear]

Libertarianism is not a viable ideology in the real world.

Now that I think of it, I guess you're right, I'm going to burn my Ron Paul books and support Hillary Clinton.  Thanks for waking me up!

Congrats on seeing the light.

[Emperor Charles V]

As a libertarian (with a small "l") I say we have a much better chance of gaining power by increasing our influence in the GOP instead of creating our petty little party that has no chance of electing a dogcatcher. Even in 2012 when the Libertarians ran a popular two-term Governor and the Republicans ran a boring candidate whose stance on foreign policy and civil liberties turned off many liberty-minded folk, the Libertarian Party failed to even break one percent of the vote. That has to say something. Duverger's Law is just that strong. Look at 1992 where a popular multi-billionaire with a ton of money to spend on his campaign failed to win even a single state.

I believe Johnson made a huge mistake IMO by running for President. He should've ran for the Senate instead. He would have no problem winning the GOP nomination and capitalizing on his popularity as governor and appealing to ticket-splitting Obama voters who voted for Martinez in 2012, I think he would've beaten Heinrich and won the open seat. I know he was trying to "spread the message of the liberty movement" but I think he would've had a much better chance of doing that in congress (when people say "libertarian" in the U.S. most of them think of the Pauls before Johnson).  And believe me, his ego has A LOT to do with his quixotic presidential run. Hopefully after coming in a distant third again in 2016, Johnson would give up on the hopeless Libertarian Party and rejoin the GOP and either try to unseat Heinrich (this is possible if Hillary or another Democrat wins in 2016 as 2018 will likely be a GOP sweep again, and he is probably the only NM Republican after Martinez who said before she has no intention of leaving the state who can beat him) or even run for governor again (he is eligible for another two terms as it's been more than 4 years since he's been governor).

[Slander and/or Libel]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

[Rockefeller GOP]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

[IceSpear]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

[Rockefeller GOP]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

Let's say that's true.  Do you really see it continuing?  I certainly can't see the GOP becoming any MORE socially conservative.  Most younger Republicans support things like ending the war on drugs, legalizing gay marriage, etc.  I don't see a lot of evidence that an increasingly diversifying Democratic Party will suddenly quit preaching economic populism.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

When the Liberty Movement (the Ron Paul influenced moderates, not the hardcore Murray Rothbard ideologues) take over the GOP in the 2030s.

[IceSpear]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

Let's say that's true.  Do you really see it continuing?  I certainly can't see the GOP becoming any MORE socially conservative.  Most younger Republicans support things like ending the war on drugs, legalizing gay marriage, etc.  I don't see a lot of evidence that an increasingly diversifying Democratic Party will suddenly quit preaching economic populism.

Do you think it's not true? Just asking out of curiosity.

[DS0816]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

Back in 2009, Bill Maher had it correct: "Democrats…are 'The New Republicans!'"

@ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPDhQAeMYmI

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

They will, but they will be libertarian socialists!

[Rockefeller GOP]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

Let's say that's true.  Do you really see it continuing?  I certainly can't see the GOP becoming any MORE socially conservative.  Most younger Republicans support things like ending the war on drugs, legalizing gay marriage, etc.  I don't see a lot of evidence that an increasingly diversifying Democratic Party will suddenly quit preaching economic populism.

Do you think it's not true? Just asking out of curiosity.

I think it's true as a whole, but I think it's WELL "overplayed" as a meme.  Also, I'd say there are more far-left Democrats now than the '60s or '70s.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

The Libertarians might get past 5% in an election one year but the Republicans will get their sh*t together and fix themselves.

OK, please. The Libertarian movement is not derived out of the Republican Party, that will never be the case. They are explicitly running against the republicans on 50-60% of issues.

But those 50-60% of issues, to Libertarians, carry about 5% of the weight of things they care about. The 40-50% of things they agree with the GOP about is about 95% of what's important to them. Libertarians are Republicans who are liberal on social issues, but don't actually care enough about social issues to vote on them.

Spot on.  Plus I'll add that (at least as of now, looking at polls of young Democrats and young Republicans) it seems a lot more likely the GOP moves in a socially liberal direction than it is likely the Democrats move in a fiscally conservative one.

The Democrats have already become way more fiscally conservative since the 60s/70s.

Let's say that's true.  Do you really see it continuing?  I certainly can't see the GOP becoming any MORE socially conservative.  Most younger Republicans support things like ending the war on drugs, legalizing gay marriage, etc.  I don't see a lot of evidence that an increasingly diversifying Democratic Party will suddenly quit preaching economic populism.

Do you think it's not true? Just asking out of curiosity.

I think it's true as a whole, but I think it's WELL "overplayed" as a meme.  Also, I'd say there are more far-left Democrats now than the '60s or '70s.

I read something for a paper earlier today wherein Lyndon Johnson agreed to sell famine-ridden India grain under the condition that they put more efforts toward family planning. Both parties had presidents that, according to the author, were quite supportive of battling worldwide population growth until the advent of Reagan, who I think it would be fair to call the first "pro-life" president since issues of birth control and abortion came to the forefront in the mid-20th century. In today's world, Democrats have struggled to secure even government funding towards contraception. In the same vein, I posit (and I believe that a number of disappointed liberals here would agree with me) that Democrats were forced to scale back their goals for pet projects such as universal healthcare in ways that would surprise and disappoint liberal Democrats of the 1960's. The Democratic scope of possible accomplishment has been significantly reduced from its height in the 1960's, though I'd say it's fair to state that the Republicans are in a similar position, but for opposite reasons.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It's remotely possible that if some issue were to irrevocably fracture one of the current two main parties that the Libertarian Party would be able to become the nucleus one of the factions would coalesce around, but the chance of that happening, the Libertarian Party still being around when it happens, and it being used for that purpose, is so small that for all practical purposes, I voted never.

[KCDem]

Never and that's glorious news!

[Grumpier Than Thou]

lmfao