Here's an old, but really good, MyDD post on what we'd need for a presidential win (and some great advice on Internet marketing)

Someone should make a note that html is nerfed on the LP blog. Here's that link:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/4/25/171055/077

"Many of these people could very well be receptive to the Libertarian Party's message."

Well yeah! But, unfortunately, this party is in disarray and lead by people that don't even grasp the import of our platform. They seem to not have the slightest of notion of the value of principle on principle. The IES stands as my proof.

It has taken 150 years or so for this proud nation to descend to its current depths of statist depravity. Some of our bretheren in this party seem to think the reversal of this slide can be achieved in the next couple of years by a little compromise and a lot of playing the game. Huh?

This is exactly why the electorate is disgusted with the Ds&Rs. And we want to emulate them why? When this stunning number of Americans stands ready to be annointed with the message of Liberty the Libertarians want to become Republicans or Democrats.

Until the leadership of the LP and the staff in Washington rejects the dark side of pragmatism and returns to the light of uncompromised principle we offer nothing to these disaffected souls.

As it stands now, we offer nothing to our own.

Time for the broom ladies and gentlemen. We can't afford to squander another opportunity like this.

Bruce A. Hoepner

I believe the American people can and will be receptive to the Libertarian Party's message of constitutionally limited government, civil and economic liberties. I believe that the way to get these Americans to look at the party, is to develop of media marketing strategy telling them all about the party, the benefits and so on and so forth. This will require fundraising and a great deal of planning. It can be done, however.

I believe that by taking this route, party membership can double by 1 to 2 million easy. It is worth to talk about it.

We are already a major force. Let's increase it a little more.

I feel that the Libertarian Party can and will be a significant force in politics in America. Before I was a Libertarian, I was a liberal. I was concerned about the poor and working class and how they can be benefited.

We can make a dent with Democrats by explaining how our positions on the issues can help the poor and working class.

- How we can make healthcare affordable for all without trying the failed Canadian method of socialized medicine.

- That ending the income and estate taxes will truly help the poor and working class as hard-working, productive people are penalized with the income tax and other hard-working Americans such as farmers are hurt by the estate tax.

- How ending welfare and replacing it with private charity (as the income tax is gone) will be the most successful safety net of all.

I remember back in 2003...christmas after I graduated. These people, up in Tulsa, they lost their home to a fire and all their christmas presents. Well, the local salvation army and local radio station provided them with clothing, shelter and money.

When my Aunt hit hard times last year, the local church provided her with food and clothing (for my then-10 y/o cousin Haylee). I remember her crying of joy...she couldn't believe people were so generous.

I think the LP could really make a mark with the DNC. We have the issues -- now we have to show how our positions will help the poor, working class, small businessman, the farmer, the family.

I'm a former conservative, but I think Chuck B's got the right idea. I think the biggest misconception about libertarians is that we want to destroy society and throw the country into chaos all for the sake of individualism. If we can show how wrong that stereotype really is, a lot of people (liberal and conservative and neither) will find our party a lot more appealing.

What we have to offer is not the issue. We have held the moral highground since the party's inception.

What we lack is a national structure that has the heart to present the party's values in their original form.

The issue is not the substance. It is the will and ability of the national party to accurately represent the core principles of the Libertarian Party. They are not fulfilling their principle function.

Bruce A. Hoepner

Last year, before the elections, I realized that I could not in good conscience vote for George Bush even though I had been registered as a Republican since I was old enough to vote. I briefly considered voting Democrat, but once I started listening to what John Kerry was saying about what he would do as President, that went out the window. Ditto for Ralph Nader. I started investigating the libertarianism and the Libertarian Party. Now I'm a registered as a Libertarian and also shelled out the bucks to become a Life Member of the National LP.

That's not to say that I agree with everything the National LP does, of course.

You'll find few people that agree with any party 100%. But I'm glad to hear you liked this party's message enough to join.

It's no surprise people are getting fed up with both parties.

http://wwwnew.towson.edu/clt/editorials/peak1.html

The Libertarian Party is really the rational alternative (with realistic solutions) to the two "mainstream" extremist parties.

Ken Sims, I like to say welcome and thank you for joining the Libertarian Party. I will raise a toast to you tonight at the Loudoun County, Va. Libertarian Party meeting at (Nido's. 201 Harrison St. Leesburg, Va. 7:00pm)

Best Regards
Bill

As a purist myself, I agree with Bruce A. Hoepner about the need to avoid the "darker side of pragmatism" in the LP. The platform as a problem is a red herring since most new recruits and prospects either don't read it or don't make their decision based on it. However, we can't overlook the need for our party to appeal to non-purist libertarians.

Let's look at two hypothetical voters who score Libertarian on the World's Smallest Political Quiz, but just barely.

I'll call the first one Jack Daniels. Jack is a Right-Libertarian. On the Nolan Chart, he barely makes it into the Libertarian camp near the Conservative line. When he "took the quiz" he indicated that he doesn't like homosexuals getting married; he is totally in favor of the War on Drugs; and he thinks there should be a limited version of a National ID card. He also totally favored the War in Iraq, and while he is beginning to have his doubts about Bush's motives and justifications in remaining there, he is very glad that Saddam Hussein is deposed. He's skeptical of the LP on national defense issues, but he is right with us on economic issues.

Now let's look at our Left-Libertarian, Liz Lasby. She barely makes it into the Libertarian area of the chart above the Liberal line. Liz is totally with us on the social issues and opposes the War in Iraq, although she's a little uncomfortable with repealing all anti-drug laws for adults. However, she thinks totally privatizing Social Security is a scary idea; she's very skeptical of cutting government spending by 50% or more; she doubts that we can successfully replace government welfare with private charity; and she's not totally in favor of eliminating all barriers to international trade.

Is there room in our party for both Liz Lasby and Jack Daniels? I think so. Furthermore, I know we have to make room for them. This doesn't require changing our platform. Rather, it requires changing our minds about who we recruit and how we recruit them.

Toward this end, I propose we pursue a Voter Identification Project. This would be accomplished using a team of Libertarian volunteers from around the country (and even around the world) who have access to the Internet and a phone, cell phone, or Internet Telephony. We acquire voter registration lists for a given electoral district, cross-reference it with the white pages of the local phone book (via CD), then set up and merge them into a secure web-based database system to give the volunteers a place to secure-logon to a page-by-page list of people to call and give the quiz to. The results of the quiz are then stored in the secured, web-based database.

What do we do with this list once we've completed a district? Our national/international team moves on to work a second district. Meanwhile, we run a candidate for office in that first district, concentrating our campaign on those voters who scored Libertarian on the quiz. A focused campaign is much easier and cheaper to run than a "shotgun marketing" campaign, and it makes it possible to hit your likely supporters again and again both in person, by mail, and via the Internet (email, web pages, etc.)

In essence, we would be finally starting to do what the Republicans and Democrats have done all along. They start by energizing their own supporters of registered Republicans and Democrats (from the voter registration lists) to build support for a candidacy. Then, once they have that support energized, they extend their campaign outward via the media and other marketing efforts.

Our task is to identify everyone we can find who falls in the Libertarian area of the Nolan Chart and include them in our election-based outreach. That's the only way to find the road to victory. The Voter Identification Project would be a major step toward that goal.

I know a lot of independents. Almost without exception they want to vote for the man, not the party. In practice, this means they pragmatically select ideas and issues they like and, mostly, exhibit cognitive dissonance in doing so. I don't think many of them would be attracted to LP, principled or not.

Re Nolan chart: ever notice that it is theoretically possible for one person to answer every one of the ten questions differently than the next person, yet they will find themselves on the exact same place on the chart? In real life, the voters ask themselves questions far more complicated than those found in Mr. Nolan's chart
(which is still vast improvement over the old left-right one dimensional model.)

I'm not surprised by the 27% figure.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051117/ap_on_go_co/tribes_letters___dollars

this is very good reason why a lot of people don't trust either party.

Walt (and Bruce),

I agree with you on the GOTV, Walt, but what is your fallback position for such sterling examples of the platform like this gem?

The Issue: Individuals are forcibly medicated or denied medication, not based on medical need, but based rather on a social agenda as enforced by government.

The Principle: Medication must be voluntary.

Solutions: We oppose the involuntary commitment of any person to or involuntary treatment in a mental institution. We strongly condemn Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC), where the patient is ordered to accept treatment, or else be committed to a mental institution and forcibly treated. We oppose government pressure requiring parents to obtain counseling or psychiatric drugs for their children. We also oppose forced treatment for the elderly, the head-injured, or those with diminished capacity. We are against the invasion of people's homes and privacy by health officials or law enforcement to either require or deny drug taking.

Transitional Action: We advocate an end to the spending of tax money for any program of psychiatric, psychological, or behavioral research or treatment. We favor an end to the acceptance of criminal defenses based on "insanity" or "diminished capacity" which absolve the guilty of their responsibility.

Think carefully. What will you say to defend this platform plank when a R or a D operative stands up
and points out to a mass audience that the LP would in effect advocate freedom of will and movement for the criminally insane?

The LP would allow all mentally ill, no matter what their mental illness, the severity of it, or what they may have done becuase of it, complete freedom. How is this defenseable in a political context?

my goodness, Tim clear up your spelling.

Question - "What will you say to defend this platform plank when a R or a D operative stands up and points out to a mass audience that the LP would in effect advocate freedom of will and movement for the criminally insane?"

Answer - "Why not, Bush and Cheney are on the loose, aren't they?"

Remember the basic tenant of Libertarianism is personal responsibility. You base that on the ability or willingness to do harm to others (yes, I left out themselves). You base that on scientific standards, not political or social. The insane or those of diminished capacity to distinguish between right and wrong automatically fall outside the bracket of personal responsibility and need to be treated accordingly. Those who do not, you leave alone.

It is a scientific question, not a political one.

"Individuals (who) are forcibly medicated or denied medication, not based on medical need, but based rather on a social agenda as enforced by government." Is absolutely wrong. It is used for "re-education" by repressive governments everywhere, individuality is the sworn and eternal enemy of stateism.

I think there are a whole load of Libertarian policies that most people would find worrysome (I'm coming from a minarchist position here). Some, but not all, include: drug laws, transportation, environment and welfare.

Most people are very worried of a return to the era of the robber barons of the late 19th/early 20th century. What Libertarians need to do is explain how Libertarian policies would actually work better than the current government run systems. For example, personal liability would scare most companies into safe environmental policies (so they don't get sued out of existance). Or that the war on drugs is the cause of almost all drug related violence and not the drugs themselves.

As to my spelling, most folks here know that I'm moderatly dyslexic, and some words just dont "look right" to me when I right them, causing me to write the same mistakes on certain words, notably: becuase : seems to be one of my bad ones.

The problem is judging everything by those grounds is that you ignore all other reasons why people vote the way they vote. Most people only have very vague notions of what they vote for and why. And many people will actually vote *AGAINST* science, even when the facts are indisputable - mostly becuase of religious reasons.

People generally do not make voting decisions based on fact and logic. They make voting decisions based on emotion and suggestion. Libertarians often dont respond well to those things - they tend to think if they are correct, that takes care of it. They are proven wrong time and again. They expect non-libertarians to see the correctness and respond - but the response normally is extremely negative, over and over.

It's also worth noting that our current platform mentions virtually nothing about the responsibility aspect of rights - but the platform would be greatly improved if it did, politically at least.

I have been libertarian leaning for quite some time. What has kept me from declaring that I am a libertarian? The party does not have enough support across the nation to win national elections. In isolatd areas those who have declared themselves libertarian may win, but in the majority of the country that is not the case. I find myself voting conservative because they have more of a chance to win. Until we change that I can't switch parties officially. I am all for fiscal and personal responsibility, freedom to choose, and fiscal responsibility. The libertarian party has not come out on the issue of abortion. Abortion is the termination of life. Should there not be a law against this since it is harming a being?

Tricia: The official LP position is:

http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml#womerigh

Basically it's pro-choice with the exception that no government funds can go to anyone carrying out abortions.

Tim: your "think carefully" scenario is ridiculously easy to answer. If they're "criminally insane" then they are guilty of a crime. Move them from the hospital to the nearest pentitentiary until their sentence is complete.

"...[Libertarians] tend to think if they are correct, that takes care of it. They are proven wrong time and again. They expect non-libertarians to see the correctness and respond - but the response normally is extremely negative, over and over."

Tim, you hit the nail on the head. They refuse to play the game of politics whilst waving the 'party of principles' flag. And politics IS the game of getting into office.

The problem is that liberals and conservatives are unlikely to want to go Libertarian because we have a few ideas that both sides strongly disagree with.

A Conservative will like the idea of Economic and Social freedom, until he learns social freedom includes drugs, and possibly other things like abortion or gay marriage, or that the United States is not supposed to have a standing army that a conservative is not going to like.

A Liberal might like the idea of social and economic freedoms, until they learn that economic freedoms also means the government stepping out of most private affairs and ending welfare, and less taxes on corporations, and less environmental regulation.

Right now we as a party have ideas and beliefs that are right, darn it, but the ideas and beliefs are unfortunately not shared by most Americans. Educating people about why we are right is the only way to turn them around. You've got to show people what liberal and conservative policies have cost the nation.

Steve: then why do we have a Libertarian Party?

IF libertarians refuse to play the game of politics, why are any of us here?

Walt,

too much ground to cover. Loudoun County Meeting tonite at 7:00.

suffice it to say that the public wont vote for the LP on this issue, anyways.

Tricia says: "What has kept me from declaring that I am a libertarian? The party does not have enough support across the nation to win national elections.... I find myself voting conservative because they have more of a chance to win. Until we change that I can't switch parties officially."
---------------------------
If libertarian-leaning conservatives (and liberals) keep voting for the D and R parties running America into the ground until the LP is viable, the Libertarian Party will never be viable.

If libertarian-leaning conservatives (and liberals) stop voting for the D and R parties running America into the ground and join the LP, the Libertarian Party might not win right away, but it will get stronger every year, and eventually either win or force the D and/or R parties to reverse course and start embracing liberty.

I guess it all comes down to whether you want to be a follower (following the crowd even if it is headed in the wrong direction) or a leader (even if not many people follow you at first).

Tricia, you're what's called a free-rider, and that's not a very respectable position to be in.

Bill,

>Ken Sims, I like to say welcome and thank you
>for joining the Libertarian Party. I will raise
>a toast to you tonight at the Loudoun County, Va.
>Libertarian Party meeting at (Nido's. 201 Harrison
>St. Leesburg, Va. 7:00pm)

Thanks. About seven hours late, but [clink].

Ken

I was there, and it was done. (clink)

Tricia: I think you make a fair point about why you don't want to join the LP yet. The wasted vote syndrome is one that frustrates us, but it's a point we have to face up to as a party. The solution is hard work to build the party from the ground up. The Voter Identification Project (VIP) is a good first step in that direction.

What I would ask is that if you really want to see a party like the LP become a challenger to the D's and R's, you help out when it comes to doing some VIP party building among the voters.

Timothy: "suffice it to say that the public wont vote for the LP on this issue, anyways."

Forcible medication? You're kidding right? I doubt that the public will vote for anyone on this issue, regardless of the stand they take. It's not a big public concern right now.

No vote based on conscience is EVER a wasted vote. Voting for the lesser of two evils always is because you always end up with an evil. The "wasted vote" argument is an intellectually and morally bankrupt con designed to keep the status quo in perpetuity. You pound away at something long enough, it will bend or it will break.

Tricia, you need to take a stand in life and live by it. For example if you do not believe in abortion, don't have one. Do not presume to tell another woman that she can't. The notion that a fetus is a viable being is a belief, not a fact and is a pointless debate.

Live your beliefs, live your convictions, but never presume to coerce others into changing theirs. If you are"... all for fiscal and personal responsibility, freedom to choose, and fiscal responsibility..." Why did you vote Republican (assuming that they are the current flag bearer for the so called conservative movement)? Bush has been the biggest expander of the Federal Budget since Lyndon Johnson in the '60's; the biggest enemy of personal liberty with the obscenely named "Patriot Act"; and is all for personal responsibility until it violates the narrow religious views of his "Christian" Coalition masters(remember Terri Schaivo?)

Don't delude yourself into thinking there is any difference between those two parties, they are Vanilla and French Vanilla. The Democrats suck up to the Socialists, nanny statists and whatever downtrodden minority of the moment captures their attention; the Republicans to the rich and powerful Corporate Interests, the right-wing christian Ayatollahs and they BOTH suck up to the One-Worlders.

Chuck: Very well said.

"Live your beliefs, live your convictions, but never presume to coerce others into changing theirs."
Isn't that what you've just done to Tricia????

Walt,

I dont follow you. I was saying that practically speaking, this is a throwaway plank, unless it is used for attack purposes by politicalo operatives from other parties. All the more reason to either take it out entirely or fix it somehow. I'm not sure what we should do first, tackle the real headache planks and get them done or tackle the fluff and filler like this plank and get rid of it. Either way, we'll be better off.

I'd rather not have some D standing up at a candidates forum in 2006 and using it against our candidates, the same way the old "Children's Rights" plank was used against me.

"Libertarians believe that you have the right to live your life as you wish, without the government interfering -- as long as you don’t violate the rights of others."

Murder, violates the rights of the murdered. Of course in western cultures murder unacceptable. Without a universally accepted defination of when a developing human life earns legal protection, there is no resolution so the LP takes no position.

With the public an membership split it is a no win for the party. The LP draws from liberal, conservative and centrist camps and cannot afford to loose any about this issue. I urge tolerance, this issue is not yet resolved.

Tim: I think you're being paranoid. I don't think it will happen.

But let's say, just for the sake of discussion, that some politico *does* challenge our candidate on that plank. Are you really saying that both (a) our candidate will be unable to reasonably defend it and (b) that the public really favors forcibly medicating people against their will as a normal governmental function?

If the Libertarian candidate can't answer that question, s/he's not a very good candidate.

And I can't imagine that most people will favor that sort of governmental function. Just the idea of it will make most people's stomachs queasy, regardless of whether they're Libertarian or not. That's just one reason why adventure films that include government badguys threatening to drug the heroes or heroines are so popular...and why the crowd cheers when the hero gets his revenge.

I think you're trying to create a crisis that doesn't exist, Tim.

Tim, good question. I believe that there is an LP because enough people want a government that is less involved in their lives than reds and blues.

One of these recent winning LP candidates has posted here (election thread) stating that he did play the politics (shaking babies, kissing hands, accentuating the positive, downplaying the negatives) but in previous posts (from his)in the same thread there are statements from others pretty much saying that they shouldn't sink to the level of reds and blues because the LP has principles.

I would assume that many are 'here' for the exchange of ideas, to learn and contribute. I am here looking for people like the successful candidate I mentioned so that when they attempt that state level office I can put my support behind them.

addendum to previous post:
It may even be you. Let me know when you run for that state level office.

Ken, It was a pleasure to salute you. I'm sorry you were not there, maybe someday, we can all raise a glass and say a toast to the return of "Liberty for all..." (Clink)

Bill

Tricia,

America needs you, you could be the voice that turns America from the nose dive it has taken. In the last 5 years, the Federal Government has grown by 36%. The debt is over 16 trillion dollars. Sadly, this has happened under the leadership of the political party that claims to be the "small government party" ,"the fiscal conservative party". Tricia, we need you to say enough, please help us, with your voice we can win.

Bill

Walt and Tim,

I can't wait to have you both together at the same table. We are going to have a blast!

Soon, My Friends, (Clink,clink, clink)

Bill

Bill,

>Ken, It was a pleasure to salute you. I'm
>sorry you were not there,

Well, seeing as I'm in Nevada, it would have been a bit of drive! <G>

>maybe someday, we can all raise a glass and
>say a toast to the return of "Liberty for
>all..." (Clink)

That would sure be nice!

Ken

Walt,

when you went through what I did in 2000, you will have no doubts. Try defending the childrens rights plank in front of a audience of 500 + as a candidate of this party, (thankfully now gone) or the mental health plank.

It's not so much that the average person cares, it that such items provide political attacks free of charge to our opponents. The woman who asked me about the Childrens Rights Plank was and is a well known Democratic supporter in this area. They pay attention to this stuff, and use it against us when they feel they need to.

Of course there are many libertarians who think any concession to principle is a sellout. I dont have much to say to them except that the party is beginning to head away from your brand of libertarianism, becuase it hasn't actually done anything in the real world to get us our liberty back, and the results are pretty plain for all to see.

Timothy: You're correct. I think there are a number of LP policy decisions that would be hard to explain to your average Joe. To list some of them: Children's rights (at least the child labor laws), environment, drugs (certainly hard drugs), transport.

The problem is if the LP is to abandon some of these policies, which ones do we abandon? The LP takes its support from both the left and the right. If you're not carefull, and let's say only repeal laws that would appeal to one side over the other, you are in danger of fragmenting the party.

With such a significant percentage of Americans not identifying with either of the two national parties, what a wonderful opportunity for the LP to mobilize with practical, pragmatic solutions to the issues of the day instead of focusing on issues (legalization of drugs) that will turn voters off.

Additionally, let's adopt the Penguin as our Party symbol. It's about time to abandon Lady Liberty as too many other political entities use it.

Penguin Power! Adopt the Liberty Penguin now!

It is worth noting that some libertarians are against abortion for the very reason that it is an act of aggression against a human life.

www.l4l.org

It's based on logic/scientific reasoning on this site. Check it out, at least just for interest if nothing else. I understand that these do not necessarily represent the party platform though.

As one of twenty-seven percent, I find most of your arguements fairly inconsequential. I have watched your party with great interest for a couple of years now and voted Libertarian in my local elections when the candidate proved viable. However, thats just it, many of you want to tackle big issues and that just isnt going to happen. The general public votes every four years and has very little clue as to what goes on around them in a microcosm. Vote local and build, it will take years, but I think there is a movement to capitalize upon. I will continue to view viable local libertarians if they are qualified to represent my views (fiscally conservative and belief in individual freedom that does not infringe on the constitutional rights of others). However, on a larger scale, I will continue to be the independent I have registered under until your party can "figure it out" and get the base you need. Always watching, ready to vote.

But Tim, I did go through what you went through, only I did it in 1996. I had plenty of tough issues to anser. The platform doesn't control how you answer a question, no matter what it says, and it didn't control me. Yet, in spite of that, I remain true to the platform.

ANY candidate of ANY stripe is going to get tough questions on issues...regardless of what their party's platform says. Most candidates don't agree with everything on their party's platform, regardless of the party label under which they run.

The trick is not to eliminate controversial issues from the platform. That only makes you a blah party with blah candidates...hardly a winning formula for a third party candidate. Instead, you have to learn how to address them and turn them from negatives into positives.

My guess is that you didn't have anyone helping with your campaign who could have walked you through alternative answers that you could have happily given instead of the ones that made you uncomfortable. That has nothing to do with changing the platform. Rather, it has to do with learning how to advocate what YOU advocate.

Considering that only 1/3 of our country voted in the past election, I could only imagine what would happen if this 27% (assuming most didnt vote) got up and made a statement.

Perhaps a viable candidate for President in '08 could focus his or her efforts on New Hampshire very heavily and win that state.

This may create momentum in the other states where people want to vote Libertarian but don't want to "waste their vote."

Personally, to me a vote for principle is never wasted!

P.S. Penguin Power! Adopt the Liberty Penguin now!

I can relate to this because I once was a lost soul in all of this political clout. I believed in less government and personal freedom. I didn't know where I fell under the political spectrum. I thought my only choices were with the corrupt two party system.

One day while speaking to one of my professors, he told me he was a libertarian. This sparked my interest and he pointed me to the true party of freedom!

People out there are unaware of the Libertarian Party and it is our job to inform them that there is a better choice!

Excellent blog, very helpful, thank you for sharing, keep up the fine effort and excellent job. Click out: morgage rates or mortgage and mortgage loans site or by visiting at: http://www.i-mortgage-rates.com/