Will we ever have a Libertarian President?

toekramp

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2001
8,426
2
0
I've found that I agree with the Libertarian party on almost all fronts (except for allowing those that have committed a felony to vote), but the reality of voting for someone in this party seems like you may just be throwing away a vote. How long would it take for a party to gain enough strength to compete with Republicans and Democrats...

Review of Libertarian viewpoints:

Taxes & Spending: "Libertarians believe that if government's role were limited to protecting our lives, rights and property, then America would prosper and thrive as never before. Then the federal government could concentrate on protecting our Constitutional rights and defending us from foreign attack. A federal government that did only those two things, could do them better and at a small fraction of the cost."

Social Services Funding: "Let's get government out of the charity business."

Welfare: "The bulk of your welfare tax dollars goes to pay the handsome salaries of well-educated welfare workers. The poor get little from government welfare except meager handouts and a cycle of despair." "Private charities and groups do a better and more efficient job of helping the truly needy get back on their feet." "No one has the right to cover his losses at taxpayer expense -- and yet wealthy corporations demand exactly that. The federal government has bailed out railroads, banks, and other corporations with your tax dollars. This must stop!"

Security & Terrorism: "The Libertarian National Committee has voted to call for the repeal of the USA/Patriot Act, charging that it "sacrifices" the liberties of American citizens."

Foreign Affairs: "For about a year, we've been hearing how intensely George W. Bush wants to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Mr. Bush has made all sorts of accusations against Hussein, but offered no public evidence to support his assertions. Finally, this past Monday evening (2003 State of the Union Address) we were to hear the full case for going to war against Iraq. Unfortunately, all we heard Monday were more assertions with no offer to make public any 'evidence' the Bush administration claims to have." - Harry Browne
"The principle of non-intervention should guide relationships between governments. The United States government should return to the historic libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, abstaining totally from foreign quarrels and imperialist adventures, and recognizing the right to unrestricted trade, travel, and immigration."

Education: Position provided directly to SelectSmart.com by Mr. Browne: "I would remove the federal government from education entirely. I would repeal the income tax immediately, so parents can afford to send their children to schools of their own choice, or to home-school their children, without having to get vouchers or approval from government."

Healthcare: "...proposals for socialized medicine are worse than the disease."

Social Security: Libertarians would replace a "failed Social Security system (with) healthy system based on individual retirement accounts."

Illicit Drugs: "It's time to re-legalize drugs and let people take responsibility for themselves. Drug abuse is a tragedy and a sickness. Criminal laws only drive the problem underground and put money in the pockets of the criminal class. With drugs legal, compassionate people could do more to educate and rehabilitate drug users who seek help. Drugs should be legal."

Ex-felons' Voting Rights: Libertarians generally agree that ex-felon voting rights should be restored.

Gun Policy: "Law-abiding, responsible citizens do not and should not need to ask anyone's permission or approval to engage in a peaceful activity. Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person and cannot morally justify criminal penalties."

Abortion Policy: "Recognizing that abortion is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question." "We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization, or any other forms of birth control."

Environmental Policy: "The environment would benefit immensely from the elimination of sovereign immunity coupled with the privatization of "land and beast."
"Confirming former Libertarian Party member Gale Norton as Secretary of the Interior would be 'one giant leap' towards more sensible federal environmental and land-use policies, the Libertarian Party said today." LP Press Release Jan 17, 2001

Minority Issues: Position provided directly to SelectSmart.com by Mr. Browne: "I oppose Affirmative Action. The federal government should be color-blind, and not take race or gender into account in any way in any matter."

Civil Liberties: Libertarians are in agreement with the ACLU more than half the time. Libertarians oppose the ACLU's defense of entitlements, but support their defense of rights and liberties.

 

FoBoT

No Lifer
Apr 30, 2001
63,082
12
76
fobot.com
no

i voted for Browne last year, but i was in georgia and it was very clear that georgia would go to bush by a large margin, so ya know

i heard that some of the "liberal" libertarians want to join up with the Green Party in 2004 to form a larger 3rd party, that does it for me, there is no way i would go in with the greenies
 

SportSC4

Golden Member
Aug 29, 2002
1,152
0
0
Maybe at the end of my lifetime. Irregardless, i still vote 3rd party, even if people still think that I'm "throwing my vote away". For environmental 'jobs' I typically vote Green Party, else for health care. I can't justify voting for a Democrat or Republican when I don't agree with either.
 

toekramp

Diamond Member
Jun 30, 2001
8,426
2
0
Originally posted by: SportSC4
Maybe at the end of my lifetime. Irregardless, i still vote 3rd party, even if people still think that I'm "throwing my vote away". For environmental 'jobs' I typically vote Green Party, else for health care. I can't justify voting for a Democrat or Republican when I don't agree with either.

posting words such as 'irregardless' or statements like 'i could care less' should call for a small vacation


sorry just a pet peeve ;)
 

steveeast112

Banned
Dec 22, 2002
230
0
0
No. When people say that they voted Libertarian, people think that they threw out their vote. Unless a very popular person (ie. Colin Powell, Hillary Clinton) went Libertarian, people are hesitant to vote that way.
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
3
81
No, of course not.
There will never be more than a small percentage of the population that is crazy enought to believe that libertarian policies would work.

That said, I do agree with them in some ways. Mainly in regards to personal freedom issues like drug legalization. And I agree in principle that the government shouldn't be providing for everyone the way it currently does with welfare and various other entitlement programs. But I do think we need a safety net. There are certain cases where people truly do need help and I think it is our societies obligation to help these people. If a child needs a heart transplant to save his/her life, they should not be left to die simply because it is expensive.

So although I agree in part with many libertarian philosophies, they simply take those philosophies too far. They are too extremist to ever get more than a small minority of the votes.

It is the same thing with the green party and with independents like Pat Robertson. All of these third parties may have positions that people fundamentally agree with, but they don't provide any room for compromise and moderation. They are too far removed from the center and take each of their views to an extreme. And the vast majority of americans, while they may lean left or right, are really fairly close to the center when it comes to political and social views. The fact is that the views of at least 80% of the people in this country are fairly well represented by either the Democrats or the Republicans.

EDIT: I think a libertarian government would cause a far greater split between the rich and the poor. If you eliminate public education, you take away opportunity from those low-income kids who can no longer afford to go to school. One of the reasons this country is great is that everybody has the opportunity and resources to be successful if they work hard at it. Yeah, if your parents are rich, you may not have to work for it, but at least everyone has the chance. Take away public education and that goes away.

This view alone is enough to keep me from voting libertarian.
 

Jzero

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
18,834
1
0
Originally posted by: toekramp
Originally posted by: SportSC4
Maybe at the end of my lifetime. Irregardless, i still vote 3rd party, even if people still think that I'm "throwing my vote away". For environmental 'jobs' I typically vote Green Party, else for health care. I can't justify voting for a Democrat or Republican when I don't agree with either.

posting words such as 'irregardless' or statements like 'i could care less' should call for a small vacation


sorry just a pet peeve ;)

Disirregardless of Toekramp's pet peeve, I don't think hardcore libertarianism will ever be popular enough. I agree with libertarianism in spirit, but most of the libertarians I know seem to be essentially the right-wing answer to socialists. They present a lot of good ideas on the surface, but as you dig deeper, they seem more and more fanatical and the ideas seem more and more fantastic.

And I mean fantastic as "fantasy," not as "good."
 

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,801
581
126
I think what you're going to see at some point (hopefully) is a large upset in the Republican party where it will undergo a liberterian transformation of sorts (just not all the way). I think most of todays conservatives and moderates and independents appreciate (the latter 2 anyway) economic conservatism, but are seriously bogged down by the social issues that many Republicans crusade over. However, I really think a lot of this is contingent upon the Democrats having a stronger front than they're offering now, as well as the old Republican blood dying off... and then there's always the South. ;)
 

SirStev0

Lifer
Nov 13, 2003
10,449
6
81
third party canadates will unfortunitely never get there chance. Shure democrates and republicans hate each other but they both hate third parties more. Look at the Body up in Wisconsin. he declined to run for relection for the third time but he did it so late that the republicans and democrates spent so much time and money bad mouthing him that they didnt have much to fight each other. it resulted in hogpoge

i saw ventura speak a few weeks ago and he mentioned that the reforms want him to run for pres... if he does im going to completely back him... however i know that it will be futile... yet still i feel on the off chance he does get in maybe he can clean up things alittle bit and pave the way for third partiers in the future
 

Kyteland

Diamond Member
Dec 30, 2002
5,747
1
81
Perhaps you should generalize this. Given today's politics and the dominance of the two parties, will we ever see a president that is not a member of those two parties?

I find it very doubtful that a third party could get elected any time in the next 40 years. However, stranger things have happened.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Someday the Libertarians will kick out the neocons and re-take control of the Republican party. :)

The Libertarian party is a disenfranchised faction of the Republican party. The communist threat in the 50s followed by the Vietnam war and the leftist hippie threat in the 60s allowed the fascist neocons to displace the REAL conservatives out of the Republican party. Some of those founded the Libertarian party in 1971, and the ranks have been growing as the 2 major parties become more and more corrupt.
While the Libertarian party hasn't had much success in state and national elections, local influence has grown too large to be ignored. LP candidates may not be your governor or congressperson, but they're probably on your school board, water district, and/or city council.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: yamahaXS
lol, no. Libertarian policies are amazingly shortsighted.
Yeah, and the Republicrats think so long term.

"Slash taxes!!!"

"More programs!!!"

A Republicrat would never do anything shortsighted.
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Hahaha, just look at Social [in]Security.

"Maybe if we ignore it, the imminenet collapse of social security will go away..."
 

BatmanNate

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
12,444
2
81
Forgive me for not taking some of you guys at your word, but would anyone care explaining how the LP is "short sighted" because that sounds a little ironic coming from people who support our social security system. :D