Libertarian Thread

[Leinad]

Yeah, I also think Enduro gets it right, except the part about beating Trump or Clinton.

Could any of them beat Trump or Clinton in a fair election? Of course. But with the Spoiler Effect looming in everyone's mind, forcing people to vote for the "lesser of two evils," and a complete media blackout of third party candidates, with barely any coverage on the mainstream media and a lack of debate access...none of them have much chance to actually win.

Best case scenario they move the needle--I'm afraid we'd be naive to hope for any more, unless they make the debates fair and abolish the FPTP electoral system, replacing it with IRV for single-winner races and some form of PR (not simple party-list, either STV or MMP) for anything that can be multi-winner.

[Leinad]

I agree with your analysis, ElectionsGuy, but that poll is silly. No way Johnson did better than McAfee. Also...how does "other" work in that regard? Do those people think Stossel won?

Basically, I'd vote for any of these guys over any of the 5 major-partiers easily. But the party needs someone who has the best chance to get to 15% in the polls (not that it's all that likely, but I think Johnson got to 11% in a Monmouth poll vs. Clinton and Trump). As far as credentials, Johnson's by far the most serious. But he's also by far the most awkward--both as a speaker and on some matters of policy. Eliminate prior history and McAfee's by far the best--but I doubt he could escape the ghost of Belize in the General. Maybe I'm cynical--I'd love a President McAfee should the stars align in just the absurd and unlikely way to let that happen, and I think he has the best chance of wiping the floor with Trump and Clinton should he make a debate, but I just don't think he could escape his questionable past. Petersen looks 12, and sounds like he's trying to sell me a product instead of an ideology.

I'm still undecided on who to support, so it's a good thing my support doesn't matter! I like all three of them, and I could see all three of them being an effective salesman of the ideology this fall, in different ways, and successfully poaching different types of swing voters. But I'm honestly not sure who would do the best in the general. I still think it's Johnson on resume alone, but I'm less and less sure.

I can think of one person who would have a good shot at 15%, and checks the boxes on resume, charisma, and knowledge of the ideology. But he's 80-years-old and retired from politics.

[Leinad]

I can guarantee McAfee didn't murder anyone.  Belize's corrupt government wanted a $2 million donation bribe from McAfee and he refused, then the raided his property and shot his dog.  He, understandably, got the hell out of there.

Doesn't matter whether he did or not, if he wins the nomination and enough pigs fly to get him in contention to win, the only story related to McAfee the media would run would be about Belize.

His "penny plan" idea is a joke

Yeah, I'm not sure about that one. Does he really think cutting 1% a year is enough? Presumably he's thinking at least 1%, with some things being much more, but the way he messages it now it sounds far too moderate.

He also leans somewhat conservative on many of his issues

Well, personally I agree with him regarding abortion, although I hope that's the only "social issue" he leans conservative on.

As far as electability is concerned, leaning conservative would help him get disaffected conservatarian/tea party Cruz voters who find Trump too big-government. I doubt he would get many disaffected Bernie voters, however. Although I'm not sure how much the other two could, either.

he sounds like he reads basic libertarian talking points and regurgitates them to the audience.

Yeah, his messaging is a bit bland. This is something that should be worked on should he win the nomination, although he should work on it himself before the LNC debate.

[Leinad]

Austin Petersen may be a LP candidate who could attract former Cruz supporters, but I believe he will alienate mainstream LP voters.

No, I don't think he would alienate too many Libertarians, but he might alienate potential Democrat/Bernie crossover or "mainstream" (i.e. "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" but not at all libertarian) crossover.

Libertarian should be rooting for Donald Trump to secure the nomination, here's why.

1. Ted Cruz can't be trusted, even if he promises the libertarian platform in the Oval Office, he lies.
2. Donald Trump's independant run would ruin all the momentum we've been building.
3. All of our momentum going forward depends on Trump alienating republican voters, one could argue that Cruz would alienate Trump voters, but do we want them, and Trump's independant run would get those voters.

I actually have come to agree with that, mostly due to #3, but #2 is also a great point. I think Cruz would be a bit better a president that Trump, and both would be better than Clinton--but due to the fact that the Republican Party seems, to me at least, incapable of uniting their bitterly divided factions to win, I'm not sure if the difference of a Trump presidency and a Cruz presidency really matters.

An interesting development in the race is the growing McAfee/Petersen friendship, and their coordinated attacks against Johnson. On McAfee's Facebook, he calls Johnson the "past" of the party and claims that "Gary must know that he cannot win," while at the same time calling Petersen the "future" of the party. Petersen, meanwhile, is posting attacks against Johnson ("Gary Johnson is immature") while writing out a detailed defense of McAfee regarding his Belize adventures: "I feel the need to defend my friend here. He was only accused, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. He was accused by a corrupt government who was trying to extort him. I have quickly grown to like him, and even trust him a little."

An endorsement pact between Petersen and McAfee, whereby they promise to endorse one another should one drop out before the other during balloting at the LNC, could significantly increase both of their chances.

That's fascinating, and yeah, it could hurt Johnson's chances in Orlando. But I still think Johnson has a large base of pragmatic support that won't go away (due to the fact that he, you know, was Governor of an actual state for 8 years longer than everyone else combined) while some people probably view Petersen as too conservative, or too young, while some people as well probably are wary of McAfee's past (I'm not in that camp personally, but I'm scared it might hurt his electability).

Hey, Sparkey, what's your current prediction of how the delegates at the convention will vote? While it may not make Independent Political Report like the last one did, it would still be interesting to see what you think.