Tomorrow we should know if Bob Barr is officially asking for the Libertarian Party presidential nod.
It should take a bit longer to discover how Ron Paul will react to that. Let's hope it does.
I love you Libertarian Party people. Your ideas are powerful and almost uniquely rational in the national political debate.
But at the risk of making enemies: Placing high hopes for political success in Libertarian Party hands is like sending Abbot and Costello to remodel the Vatican.
LP activists seem to live by the credo that sheer power of our ideas trumps any need to adapt ourselves to the gutter world of electoral politics. That's why all elected Libertarian public officials could comfortably convene in a Motel 6 room.
I hold out hope for the party -- even send a little money now and then -- but we're not ready for prime time, and a badly handled Republicans-for-Paul movement toward the Libertarian Party wolud be a colossal strategic error.
---
Barr and the LP of course hope Paul will endorse Barr quickly as the Libertarian standard bearer. We're seeing speculation that such a thing could happen, although the information source seems to be limited to a Fox News report based on a blog.
If it does, a very high price will be exacted, a sub-prime mortgage on our political goals, especially as they are at least marginally obtainable though the Republican party.
A Barr endorsement by Dr. Paul would send his libertarian Republican backers to the GOP convention naked, wafting B.O. in their isolated wakes.
And if the name Ron Paul should be uttered from the podium, the boos will peg the decibel meter. The GOP divorce from Ron paul and all he stands for would be messily final.
And isn't it always the children who suffer? Libertarian-thinking Republicans and the concepts they bear.
It is true that party loyalty has covered more sins than the sheets in a per-hour motel, but it is a custom to be accommodated, though not slavishly worshipped.
A hasty Barr endorsement by Paul would negate the efforts of libertarian Republicans in nudging that party toward a Constitutional view of American government. And it would take years or decades to recover from "political treason," which is precisely the phrase the Republican establishment will use.
I find it perfectly understandable that Dr. Paul can not support John McCain. But I hope he can find the stamina to withhold a formal statement to that effect at least until after the convention.
Even then the damage control challenge for libertarian GOPers will be massive, but at least we'll be able to cite our man's fight through the final round in the arena to which he committed himself.
It might take the communicative genius of a Peggy Noonan to frame that position in such a way as to mute GOP horror at a post-convention defection, but it would stand a greater chance of success than trying to spin a premature bolt to Barr and the LP.
To desert before the coffin lid is screwed tightly down is to beg to be labeled "sore loser," "traitor," "opportunist." Fairly or not, those labels will stick. The public may forget them in a few months, but memories are long among party elites.
---
In November I will try find a way to vote for Ron Paul, a sentimental gesture if nothing else.
Failing that, I will support the Libertarian. It is my default mode which I violate only when the Electoral College and my very swingy state look so close that the Democrat could win.
And then I and my like-minded Republitarians plod the weary road back to the GOP, doing our small chores on behalf of the lesser of the evils, reserving our best efforts to drown the neocons and closet statists in a Red Sea of Constitutional thought and libertarian reason.
We hope Dr. Paul makes the job no harder.
©2008 Random Outlier, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Friday, April 4, 2008
Last modified: Friday, April 4, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of Random Outlier only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Random Outlier is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Random Outlier of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By Random Outlier |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: rtbohan
Date: 2008-04-04 12:14:13
I agree with you that it is a little unfair for Fox News (and some Nolanchart columnists) to announce an endoresement from Ron Paul before he has announced one
On the other hand, if Ron Paul, as expected, is not the Republican nominee, then his supporters (indivicually) need to have a Plan B
My personal opinion is that writing in Ron Paul's name is not the answer, since the vote in November is not an election of the President but election of the electors who get to vote for President in December. Since there are no elctors chosen in any state to vote for Ron Paul, a write would be considered a spoiled ballot and neither counted nor reported.
If the choice lies with the Libertarian Party, I think it is not the best plan to simply vote for whoever. A better plan is to investigate the Party's possible nomines and decide who you want to vote for among them, and support that candidate however you can, whether you will be a delegate to the Denver convention or not.
Posted By: John Campbell
Date: 2008-04-04 12:41:41
This country deparately needs a viable third party, and there has never been a better time for one to break through. Five years of a pointless war, erosion of civil liberties, explosion of government debt and a pending financial collapse make the timing perfect. Add to that the fact that it is suddenly trendy to be libertarian (small L) with more and more people using the term.
The Republican Party has fully and completed abandoned its principles. Now is not the time to working for change with the Republican Party. Now is the time to kick it to the curb.
I'm only sorry Ron Paul doesn't see it that way.
Posted By: Brad Forschner
Date: 2008-04-04 14:02:20
I agree that the Republican convention be final before Ron Paul announces who he supports or endorses.
As for whether libertarians support the R or D or L, I think personal duty and principles sometimes force you to cross those lines and try to make the best choice you can for whatever reason you choose.
When I was young, I supported Democrats. As I grew older, I supported Republicans, and independents. When I found the Libertarians, I knew I was home. But, now, I've begun to question my membership. The difficulties that come from being a third party candidate are huge. Sometimes I think others have been correct, that we could change that Republican party into one a little more suited to libertarians.
My local county republican party has made clear the republican party is no home for those "ron paul libertarians". On the other hand, I've seen the work from my local county's republicans. When the other parties try to marginalize the libertarians, it's fun to compare them the same way.
When we as libertarians go to the republican meetings, there's just a small handful of republicans. At the democratic meetings, it is the same thing. A handful of party supporters barely large enough to fill a room. These party meetings are no larger, and often smaller than their libertarian party counterparts.
So apparently, the main thing about getting the votes is having that D or R behind your name. So the ignorant masses that have been blindly led to always vote D or R will support your whole slate of candidates.
Because of the attitude my county republicans have had towards the libertarians, I will be attending their meetings, and I'll bring some of my small L Libertarian friends with me. Maybe there's a few ways to change the direction, attitude and principles of my local republican party without having to change the direction, attitude and principles of the old codgers in charge of it now.
Posted By: William
Date: 2008-04-04 15:59:14
If a candidate is still campaigning, what logical sense exists in such a candidate's endorsing any candidate other than himself?
Who does John McCain endorse for president?
Who does Hillary Clinton endorse for president?
Who does Barack Obama endorse for president?
The mainstream technique of asking candidates, "Who do you endorse for president?" is an attack tactic to cause the presupposition, in the minds of uneducated and undecided viewers and readers, that the candidate will eventually have to give an endorsement instead of being the victor.
Although unlikely to receive the Republican nomination, Ron Paul has always been a viable candidate. If Ron Paul is still in the race at the time of the convention, he can achieve the nomination by majority vote at a brokered convention.
If you support Ron Paul, giving credence to those who entertain the possibility of Ron Paul endorsing another candidate by reporting on the speculative articles, even to chastise the articles, perpetuates and spreads the presupposition that Ron Paul will eventually have to give an endorsement instead of being the victor.
Posted By: Jessie Jones
Date: 2008-04-04 18:00:18
Screw Paul and his endorsement...who cares about you Libertarian-lite individuals and your endorsement...if Barr wants Pauls endorsement...it's only because he wants an excuse to rape you guys out of your money just as paul already did.
When you're done trying to play captain save a hoe with the Republican party, your welcome to play with us grown ups in the real libertarian party.
Remember people. A house divided will fall...that is the very premise Paulites are using to split the Republican party.
So unless Paul is trying to make the argument that libertarian party should be abolished in order to "infiltrate" the Republican party...which he would be laughed off the stage after saying something like that...he should keep any endorsement to himself while us real libertarians do what both he and his supporters are scared to do which is build our own house instead of trying to steal someone elses...not very libertarian to me.
Posted By: logicprobe
Date: 2008-04-04 18:20:46
"while us real libertarians do what both he and his supporters are scared to do which is build our own house "
Many of us Ron Paul Republicans are refugees from the Libertarian Party. I did my time in the LP, even running for office. After almost forty years isn't it obvious that the political marketplace has rendered its verdict? If the LP were ever going to become a real political party, it would have happened by now.
So Jessie, have fun playing with your little toy political party and delusions of grandeur while us realistic libertarians do the hard work in the real world.
Posted By: Jessie Jones
Date: 2008-04-04 19:05:44
Well mister logical premise...I guess the market has already spoken about Ron Paul as well. If he were going to be president, he would have done so in 88.
So like I said, keep the word libertarian out of your mouth as you speak because last time I checked the Republican platform doesn't have a libertarian position in it!!!!!
40 years of service only to become a quitter in the end.
Posted By: Logical Premise
Date: 2008-04-04 20:50:24
No, that person above is logicprobe, who I've never heard of.
I, as a Statist, think the more poltiical parties the better. I don't have a problem with the Libertarian Party and I rather admire a lot of what Christine Smith has said and done.
On the other hand . . . to be honest, the Libertarian Party is a vehicle for local and perhaps state elections. You never have and never will be a national influence, and it doesn't matter if you do it "building your own house" or hide under the skirts of the Republican party, because your message is antathema to the lazy, worthless shiftless hordes that you call the People and Statists the Mob.
I find it endlessly ironic that the Big Government , which according to you abuses the people, gets the most support, and the Libertarian ideals, which is ostensibly for the People, is mocked, villified, ignored and sidelined.
That being said...I think logicprobe's point contains heavily broken logic. The Republicans are not going to adopt Libertarian ideals, but will be happy to drape themselves in the trappings of such for a single election if only to suck down the extra 5% of RP voters that might go that direction.
Republicans have even more to lose from an honest Libertarian party than Democrats do.
Posted By: Jessie Jones
Date: 2008-04-04 21:55:13
Sorry ...logical probe is what I meant.
Posted By: Dave Nalle
Date: 2008-04-04 23:05:37
I don't understand why any libertarian would support a creepy statist stooge like Bob Barr. He's less Libertarian than McCain is.
Dave
Posted By: dshinn
Date: 2008-04-04 23:38:57
Random Outlier writes: "It is my default mode which I violate only when the Electoral College and my very swingy state look so close that the Democrat could win. And then I and my like-minded Republitarians plod the weary road back to the GOP, doing our small chores on behalf of the lesser of the evils,..."WHAT? - Isn't one of the main reasons why Ron Paul is not a lot closer to getting the nomination because of the media's mostly successful marginilazation of him so that people were choosing "the lesser of two evils?" I don't know about you, but one of the main reasons I was told when canvassing for Ron Paul for their not planning to vote for him was that he couldn't win! They push these "know-it-all" polls so early that 95% haven't even begun to look at the candidates, and then many of the people will only look at the top 2 or 3 because they want to vote for someone who has a chance of winning so they "don't waste their vote."
I don't care how much it looks like the Democrats may have the lead come November, if the Republicans on the ticket aren't standing for what I think a Republican should stand for, then I will have to make a tough choice at that point. I'm not going to say now what I'll do, because I don't know what the choices will be at that point. But I promise all the integrity I can muster that I will not be choosing to cast my vote based on a party name.
If we wanted to choose the lesser of 2 evils, we could have done that in the primary as well, right? Why would we move to that strategy in November?
Posted By: Tomas
Date: 2008-04-05 13:42:44
It makes no sense for Ron Paul to endorse someone while he is still campaigning. Ron stated that he would not win in the "conventional" sense. While is everyone giving Ron a eulogy? It ain't over yet. Wait and see... The rEVOLution has just begun. The pen is mightier than the sword.