Could a libertarian-leaning Republican support Obama?

[SPC]

I'm wondering about this because a friend of mine is a liberal-to-libertarian Republican, but he plans on voting for Obama. Have any thoughts about this?

[Alcon]

I'm personally willing to cast a ballot for someone of a different ideology if I feel they will do a superior job to the other candidate.

[NDN]

I'm wondering about this because a friend of mine is a liberal-to-libertarian Republican, but he plans on voting for Obama. Have any thoughts about this?

Yes, they could. Granted, he is in favor of raising taxes and more spending on health and education. However, if you look at what the Republicans have done the past few years, they're clearly not fiscally Conservative by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, they've basically supported the same sorts of measures -- it's just that their plans are far worse (see the Medicare pork bill) and under-funded.

Obama would at least be fiscally responsible as President in addition to being socially liberal. And his foreign policy is vastly more reasonable than the belligerent, pre-emptive shoot-first-and-ask-question later garbage we've had the past 6+ years. So supporting him seems like a no-brainer.

[NDN]

While he is certainly not a match to the libertarian ideology, he has some kind of aura of optimism and competence that most libertarians seem to lack.  Whether or not he actually is competent is a whole other issue, as well as the reverse with some libertarians.

Fezzy, none of the big GOP candidates are a match for the libertarian ideology. Both parties are for big government at this point. Our choices are between a party that's offering a modest increase in social spending, and a party that's offering more intrusion in our private lives, wiretaps, more troops overseas, and oh yeah more domestic spending -- but not on anything like healthcare (that would be socialist).

[Edited for SouthPark]

[SPC]

Fezzy, none of the GOP candidates are a match for the libertarian ideology.

Apparently, you haven't heard of Paul?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

AndrewBerger does.

[NDN]

Fezzy, none of the GOP candidates are a match for the libertarian ideology.

Apparently, you haven't heard of Paul?

Ok, none of the big candidates are a match. Although Paul isn't that socially libertarian IMO, since he's a conservative christian who would basically just leave everything to the states.

[NDN]

I didn't say any of the current GOP candidates were a match.  It seems like you're just looking for a battle so you can spout your junk about the GOP being a big-government party.  That is nonsense.  Neither George W. Bush nor his Religious Right are the entire party.  History has proven that the GOP is opposed to big government and one presidency does not change that.  I certainly agree that big-government Republicans have apparently hijacked the party in recent times, but I believe it will return to its roots when people remember why they aren't Democrats.  Ron Paul is the closest to that old ideology and is a step in the right direction for the party, but he's obviously not perfect.  He is, however, a much better match for the libertarian ideology than Obama.  Obama is left-wing economically and favors a larger federal government that mandates its ideology without consent of the governed.  For example, forcing legalized abortion on the country is just as bad as forcing illegalized abortion on the country.  States and their citizens should decide their own laws, not the federal government.  A Texas governor should not mandate his views onto Massachusetts while an Illinois senator should not mandate his onto Mississippi.  When I no longer have hope for a return to small government policies within the Republican Party, I will leave it, but until then I still believe it will naturally return to what it was meant to be.  Anyway...I'm now done defending myself and my party from an attack on something I didn't say.

First off, let me start off by saying I never said you claimed that the Republicans are match for libertarianism. I was simply responding to your comment by pointing out that although Obama is for big government, so are pretty much all the Republicans aside from Ron Paul. And he barely counts because he's so marginalized within his party.

Secondly, while they are certainly not the entire GOP the Religious Right, Neo-Conservatives and pro-Bush factions of the GOP have obviously been controlling your party's agenda with an iron fist the past 6+ years. The former two groups have progressively gained more control since the 1980's. The old Rockefeller Moderate/Business Conservative wing of the party has increasingly stopped being as relevant.

Third, while some might feel that various issues should be decided on a state-basis, the fact is that with few exceptions the Republican party as a whole has rejected states rights. Just look at the Terry Schiavo incident, the opposition to Medical Marijuana, the proposed Gay Marriage Amendment, etc. for proof of that. The Republican Party really only favors states rights when it's convenient for them, again just like the Democrats.

Lastly, no history has not "proven" the GOP is a party opposed to big government. In practice, the past 25+ years they party has favored huge increases in government spending. Reagan for example oversaw massive increases in subsidies to big business, as did President Bush and the GOP congress. The Republican Party might be more hostile to social welfare programs than the Democrats, but they are in practice just as prone to big spending as their opponents. And given the massive Deficits of the Reagan and Bush II years, I would say that they're less fiscally responsible than them too.

[DownWithTheLeft]

As one, I say Thompson/Paul/Tancredo are the only choices.  I like Paul's politics I just find the man himself reprehensible

[NDN]

As one, I say Thompson/Paul/Tancredo are the only choices.  I like Paul's politics I just find the man himself reprehensible

What do you hate so much about him?

[John Dibble]

I'm personally willing to cast a ballot for someone of a different ideology if I feel they will do a superior job to the other candidate.

^^^^

Obama does have his upsides in my eyes - he seems to be more willing to compromise, for instance.

[Gabu]

As one, I say Thompson/Paul/Tancredo are the only choices.  I like Paul's politics I just find the man himself reprehensible

You're not libertarian-leaning in the least.  I'm sorry, but that's just a fact.

Anyway, regarding the question at hand, given that both your friend and AndrewBerger are both supporting Obama, I'm guessing the answer is... yes, given that those two people do indeed exist.

[MaC]

Although I don't care for Obama's veiws, I appreciate that he appears (don't know much about him) to be more honest about his goals and intents than other candidates (Hillary, Edwards, ect.)