BF2S Forums Libertarians

I'm mostly Libertarian myself.  I think it's basically the better parts of Democrats and the better parts of Republicans combined into one party.

Phantom2828 wrote:

Ok well I am very interested in the Libertarian party which is one of the many 3rd parties in the US. Here is all the 3rd parties we have http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

And here is the Libertarian website. http://www.lp.org/issues/platform_all.shtml

Well I took their little test and apparently I am 100% libertarian.

This topic is to discuss about libertarians. What you like. What you don't like.

Ok I just went through this http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

I didn't know there were so many minor parties in the US. I thought this was just a Greek phenomenon what with all the loonies and their parties!!

There's quite a few funny ones but this one takes the cake!! http://www.nazi.org/

Notice in the FAQ section where it says: We reject morality in all its forms as unnatural.  LMAO
And what's this? A Black Panthers link? wtf?

I'd rather have a libertarian president than a republican president.  Last night the candidate for governer in Florida who is libertarian - Max Lynn - actually attacked Charlie Crist the Republican more than he did Jim Davis.

Libertarians are a fragmented party, honestly with no chance of winning a presidential election unless the country is really f*cked and people are literally screaming for change. Some of the campaigns they put forth are pretty unprofessional. When votes of one political polarity are dramatically shared between two parties, the opposite political polarity will probably slip in. Hardly productive for a liberal or conservative who wants someone at least remote similarity in opinion to be in office.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-10-31 18:41:30)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Libertarians are a fragmented party, honestly with no chance of winning a presidential election unless the country is really f*cked and people are literally screaming for change. Some of the campaigns they put forth are pretty unprofessional. When votes of one political polarity are dramatically shared between two parties, the opposite political polarity will probably slip in. Hardly productive for a liberal or conservative who wants someone at least remote similarity in opinion to be in office.

This problem is easily solved by Instant Reform Voting, but of course, the big two parties aren't having any of that.  The problem with the American system is that politicians have figured out how to cement themselves into permanent incumbency.  The best example is how each state has been gerrymandered to create districts that ensure one party is always dominant in the region.

Yeah, I'd love to see a libertarian win.  They just have the best attitude of "Do what ever you want, so long as it doesn't affect or harm another."  Which to me is the best way to go about life  And like it was stated above, it's the 3rd largest political party in the country, and they even hold office in a few places, nothing major, but it's better than nothing.

The biggest problem I think the libertarians have is that the party has developed a reputation for having nut jobs in it.  Like the extreme anti-government militias that hide in the woods, or the ultra hippy living in the middle of no where growing his weed.  I really don't see anything wrong with these people, but it's hard to get common people to associate with your party when it's got that sort of reputation.

kr@cker wrote:

dammit i keep trying to contribute, but my painkillers for my broken toe are really kicking in, having trouble staying coherent. Fourth attempt:

Newbie's got a point, right now there is a struggle among them for the direction in which to go, locally I have none to vote for really, they have no publicity aside from Neal Boortz, and come up short nationally on viable candidates. There is also the problem of party loyalty. The so-called "open minded and tolerant" democrats WILL NOT entertain voting for a candidate that is not endorsed by their party. So for now at least, Libertarian votes tend to come from the undecided and Republican side of the spectrum. Which means that the democrat candidate is the only one hitting the polls without a diluted voter base, what may have been a majority vote for Libertarian or Republican just ends up being two weak minority votes.

While this is true of most Libertarians, I'm an ex-Democrat myself....

Last edited by Turquoise (2006-10-31 21:44:43)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

ts-pulsar wrote:

Like the extreme anti-government militias that hide in the woods...

I'm not attacking you or criticizing you, but, refraining from immediately supplying my position, I would like to pose a question to the rest of the readers:

Is it possible for a militia to be pro-government?

Sure it is. What else do you call those wackjobs along the Arizona border that are shooting illegals crossing into the US? They don't want to overthrow the government, just make it do the job that they want it to do.

*special note: in no way does blisteringsilence endorse the wackjobs on the border. shooting people is wrong, unless you have a really good reason. Those nuts don't.*'

ANYway, as a Libertarian that has worked for the state party in the past, I agree with ts-pulsar. Our single biggest obstacle to a greater prominance in national politics is all the wackjobs (man, i really like that word today, don't i?) that we have in our own party. Its not that they're bad people, but the media always focuses on extremes, as they're what make the best news. And we happen to have a lot of extremes.

I would argue that many of the people I hang out with are Libertarians in all but name. They hold the same viewpoints I do, but their parents voted Repulican (or Democrat), and as a result, they do too. The key is breaking the cycle, and to do that we as a party have to get canidates on the state and national stage that can appeal to "everyday Americans."

There are so many stigmas about being a Libertarian that it makes the party hard for the public to comprehend. I have been asked, upon confession to being a Libertarian, if I am an anarchist, a gun nut, a commie, a socialist, a fascist, and (my personal favorite) if I believed in eugenics. Of course, the big two parties aren't doing anything to make those stigmas go away. After all, if the Libertarians didn't seem so strange, they'd both lose all their centrist members. The Rebublicans would be left with Ann Coulters, and the Democrats with Al Frankens.

blisteringsilence wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

ts-pulsar wrote:

Like the extreme anti-government militias that hide in the woods...

I'm not attacking you or criticizing you, but, refraining from immediately supplying my position, I would like to pose a question to the rest of the readers:

Is it possible for a militia to be pro-government?

Sure it is. What else do you call those wackjobs along the Arizona border that are shooting illegals crossing into the US? They don't want to overthrow the government, just make it do the job that they want it to do.

If you mean violent Minuteman Project spinoffs, sure. Otherwise, I don't see how reporting illegals to the government is anti-government.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-11-01 09:17:39)

So what do you guys like about them or dislike?

kr@cker wrote:

their hair, they have horrible hair

I take great offense to that. I happen to have very good hair.

They are a little too isolationist and utopian to be taken seriously, however, I almost always vote for them as my main goal is to break the chains of a two party system.