Lumberjim for President

lumberjim · 09-07-2007, 07:42 PM

made you look.

but really. i don't follow politics.....but sometimes, jinx makes me talk about them. So, tonight, it strikes us...

Why the hell isn't the Libertarian Party a major player? I mean, from a purely philosophical standpoint, wouldn't most of us prefer to be left alone? Why do we have to choose between war monger religious zealots and nanny state socialists?

i'd vote for me before i voted for any of the current crop. isn't that fucked up? I can't even be bothered to capitalize my sentences.

Aliantha · 09-07-2007, 07:49 PM

yep, that's scarey.

Most people like being told what to do. That's why there's no libertarian party.

SteveDallas · 09-07-2007, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

Why the hell isn't the Libertarian Party a major player?

Because they aren't. If they were a major player, then they'd be a major player.

(I'm not being a smartass--much--but ideological issues aside, you can't get elected if you're not on the ballot. And it's just too hard to get on the ballot if you're not a Democrat or Republican. Sure, it happens here and there, but under the current rules it'd be all but impossible for a third party to have a national ballot presence on a consistent basis.)

Clodfobble · 09-07-2007, 08:39 PM

It's all about brand recognition. If someone gave the Libertarians 300 million dollars to start an advertising campaign right now, they might be able to get enough prime-time ad spots to be a viable "party" in the next election.

The problem in the meantime is, good leaders are practical and can make pragmatic decisions that aren't necessarily ideal in order to get things done. Therefore by definition all the good leaders already recognize that they need to be classfied as a Democrat or a Republican to get anywhere.

zippyt · 09-07-2007, 08:44 PM

Well if you WERE elected , i know you would change the motto to
"in COCK we trust !!"

Undertoad · 09-08-2007, 09:08 AM

There are tons of reasons why the LP is not a major player. Electioneering is a very complex system and the LP has roadblocks at almost every part of it.

Although we *think* that the purpose of political parties is to have a general philosophy, that is way down the list. The purpose of political parties is to bring together somewhat different points of view under a unifying common bloc to wield political power.

The purpose of parties is to run candidates, not to espouse a particular political philosophy so much. That's why if the US became instantly libertarian in political philosophy, there wouldn't be one libertarian party. There would be three, and two of them would be named Republican and Democrat.

The LP's main approach has been basically to disrespect politics - it rejects common politics at this point, because common politics are unproductive to it. You notice that Radar ran for an office that he could not possibly win. The major parties tend to ignore offices they can't possibly win. If they run someone for the office, they don't fund that candidate.

I could basically write a thesis on this matter, having worked on it and studied it in great detail for a decade of my life. Ask anything you want to know.

Undertoad · 09-08-2007, 09:13 AM

This series of pages explains why two-way races produce the best results for people. Its conclusion was devastating to me when I had to admit that it was right.

Quote:

For all its problems, the two-party democracy does a good job of producing and selecting candidates that represent an acceptable compromise between a wide spectrum of opinions. If the process is working well, then by the time of the election many voters may feel that they have very little real choice. This may seem like a failure, but actually it is a sign of success. It means that the system has produced candidates that represent the most acceptable compromise of the conflicting opinions of the voters.

DanaC · 09-08-2007, 09:15 AM

That's a fascinating analysis of the two-way race UT, thanks.

skysidhe · 09-08-2007, 09:38 AM

Either that graph is way to simplistic to make any sense to me or I am too simplistic.

That said I think regardless of political partys our basic fundemental freedoms this country allows gives us the width and breath to think and voice a different way of going about things. Ultimately this may only be between you and your family within the walls of ones own home.

You are shaping the values of your children and from what I can see you have a fine family LJ so in a small way you are president of our own life. Yeah that's simplistic because I am. A die hard romantic and idealist.

Spexxvet · 09-08-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

...
I mean, from a purely philosophical standpoint, wouldn't most of us prefer to be left alone?

But they also want to tell other people what to do, and what not to do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

i'd vote for me before i voted for any of the current crop....

Vote? Just name yourself king --- King Cock.

lumberjim · 09-08-2007, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

But they also want to tell other people what to do, and what not to do.

Well, doesn't everyone judge everyone else? And aren't opinions expressed continually? Saying stuff about people and litigating their lives is vastly different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

Vote? Just name yourself king --- King Cock.

do i detect a note of bitterness?

Flint · 09-08-2007, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lumberjim

Why the hell isn't the Libertarian Party a major player? I mean, from a purely philosophical standpoint, wouldn't most of us prefer to be left alone? Why do we have to choose between war monger religious zealots and nanny state socialists?

The reason is: wedge issues are touted to create an "us versus them" mentality, and we play right into it, like total dumbasses.

skysidhe · 09-08-2007, 12:26 PM

Electoral College voting is one way our country perpetuates the two party system.

Third party votes are usually seen as protest votes. I for one think the electoral college voting system is outdated.

You can sign a petition to abolish the electorial college here:
http://www.petitiononline.com/ctd2000/petition.html

piercehawkeye45 · 09-08-2007, 01:17 PM

I've heard that only 10-15% percent of voting age Americans agree with the Libertarian ideals so that could be another reason.

The two party system isn't going anywhere for a while anyways. The only hope is if someone like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich wins in a Republican/Democrat seat when they really aren't one.

DanaC · 09-08-2007, 01:31 PM

Could someone explain the electoral college thing to me please? I've had it explained before but I can't recall the rationale behind it.

09-07-2007, 07:42 PM	#1
lumberjim I can hear my ears Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 25,571	Lumberjim for President made you look. but really. i don't follow politics.....but sometimes, jinx makes me talk about them. So, tonight, it strikes us... Why the hell isn't the Libertarian Party a major player? I mean, from a purely philosophical standpoint, wouldn't most of us prefer to be left alone? Why do we have to choose between war monger religious zealots and nanny state socialists? i'd vote for me before i voted for any of the current crop. isn't that fucked up? I can't even be bothered to capitalize my sentences. __________________ This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality Embrace this moment, remember We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion ~MJKeenan

09-07-2007, 07:49 PM	#2
Aliantha trying hard to be a better person Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 16,493	yep, that's scarey. Most people like being told what to do. That's why there's no libertarian party. __________________ Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber

09-07-2007, 08:44 PM	#5
zippyt LONG LIVE KING ZIPPY! per Feetz Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arkansas Posts: 7,661	Well if you WERE elected , i know you would change the motto to "in COCK we trust !!" __________________ "Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get. " Brother Dave Gardner

09-07-2007, 08:39 PM	#4
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	It's all about brand recognition. If someone gave the Libertarians 300 million dollars to start an advertising campaign right now, they might be able to get enough prime-time ad spots to be a viable "party" in the next election. The problem in the meantime is, good leaders are practical and can make pragmatic decisions that aren't necessarily ideal in order to get things done. Therefore by definition all the good leaders already recognize that they need to be classfied as a Democrat or a Republican to get anywhere.

09-08-2007, 09:08 AM	#6
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	There are tons of reasons why the LP is not a major player. Electioneering is a very complex system and the LP has roadblocks at almost every part of it. Although we think that the purpose of political parties is to have a general philosophy, that is way down the list. The purpose of political parties is to bring together somewhat different points of view under a unifying common bloc to wield political power. The purpose of parties is to run candidates, not to espouse a particular political philosophy so much. That's why if the US became instantly libertarian in political philosophy, there wouldn't be one libertarian party. There would be three, and two of them would be named Republican and Democrat. The LP's main approach has been basically to disrespect politics - it rejects common politics at this point, because common politics are unproductive to it. You notice that Radar ran for an office that he could not possibly win. The major parties tend to ignore offices they can't possibly win. If they run someone for the office, they don't fund that candidate. I could basically write a thesis on this matter, having worked on it and studied it in great detail for a decade of my life. Ask anything you want to know.

09-08-2007, 09:15 AM	#8
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	That's a fascinating analysis of the two-way race UT, thanks.

09-08-2007, 09:38 AM	#9
skysidhe ~~Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.~~ Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 6,828	Either that graph is way to simplistic to make any sense to me or I am too simplistic. That said I think regardless of political partys our basic fundemental freedoms this country allows gives us the width and breath to think and voice a different way of going about things. Ultimately this may only be between you and your family within the walls of ones own home. You are shaping the values of your children and from what I can see you have a fine family LJ so in a small way you are president of our own life. Yeah that's simplistic because I am. A die hard romantic and idealist.

09-08-2007, 12:26 PM	#13
skysidhe ~~Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.~~ Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 6,828	Electoral College voting is one way our country perpetuates the two party system. Third party votes are usually seen as protest votes. I for one think the electoral college voting system is outdated. You can sign a petition to abolish the electorial college here: http://www.petitiononline.com/ctd2000/petition.html

09-08-2007, 01:17 PM	#14
piercehawkeye45 Franklin Pierce Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 3,695	I've heard that only 10-15% percent of voting age Americans agree with the Libertarian ideals so that could be another reason. The two party system isn't going anywhere for a while anyways. The only hope is if someone like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich wins in a Republican/Democrat seat when they really aren't one.

09-08-2007, 01:31 PM	#15
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	Could someone explain the electoral college thing to me please? I've had it explained before but I can't recall the rationale behind it.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)