Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We Libertarians will vote our way with no mind given as to who it may help or not help. We only hurt the Republicans in this particular race. But, we are working to hurt both of the major parties. Your whining only pleases me.
Unfortunately we Libertarians, because we see the hypocrisy in both parties, are being viewed (by many) as anarchists. This couldn't be further from the truth, however the truth doesn't seem to matter anymore.
Ron Paul was stabbed in the back by Republicans, the country is being stabbed in the back by progressives.
Please explain how a candidate that is pro-life, anti-gay marriage, anti-immigration and pro-war is close to being a libertarian.
Many libertarians are pro-life. Ron Paul, for example. I am pro-choice, but I can understand the argument, libertarian or otherwise, that a life, born or unborn, should be protected. Why are so many lefty pro-choicers seemingly unable to see that?
I also am anti-gay-marriage, just on the grounds that 'marriage' is an English word with a longstanding meaning. If you call it 'civil union' or something, it's fine by me, but I am intrinsically suspicious of any 'newspeak' in politics. That said, I consider it as largely a distractive issue. "Gay marriage" is probably inevitable, and I'm not going to put any effort into stopping it.
As far as immigration, libertarians do tend to be pro-immigration, as am I, but in the context of the Welfare State the calculus does change (just as w/ drug laws). If we have the Welfare State we have to have a Nanny State to go with it, or costs quickly go out of control.
As for "pro-war" who even knows what that means. If you just asked Mia Love whether she was "pro war," I don't think the answer would be a simple 'yes.'
Bottom line, the devil is in the details. When you paint with a spray can, you don't get a very accurate portrayal.
and take away about 1/2 of the Libartarian vote and she would have been an easy winner.
In my comment, i posed a question that you did not answer. It is obvious why but i will give you another chance. What exactly do you know about the Congressman ?
Do you even know what "half" the Libertarian vote is in the 4th congressional district of Utah is ? You are making claims without the ability to back them up.
Many libertarians are pro-life. Ron Paul, for example. I am pro-choice, but I can understand the argument, libertarian or otherwise, that a life, born or unborn, should be protected. Why are so many lefty pro-choicers seemingly unable to see that?
we see it, we just disagree with banning it in all cases, Ron Paul isnt a libertarian by the way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
I also am anti-gay-marriage, just on the grounds that 'marriage' is an English word with a longstanding meaning. If you call it 'civil union' or something, it's fine by me, but I am intrinsically suspicious of any 'newspeak' in politics. That said, I consider it as largely a distractive issue. "Gay marriage" is probably inevitable, and I'm not going to put any effort into stopping it.
will never understand why anyone else has a problem with other people being happy based on the definition of a word,smdh, BUT marriage(the social and legal contract) predate English.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
As for "pro-war" who even knows what that means. If you just asked Mia Love whether she was "pro war," I don't think the answer would be a simple 'yes.'
Bottom line, the devil is in the details. When you paint with a spray can, you don't get a very accurate portrayal.
Pro War has always been a dumb term. I think a better one would be pro aggression.
Well I'd be the first to admit that I don't know much about Matheson; I gather that he's a a centrist/moderate Dem in order to have been elected so many times in that district. But he is still a Democrat. Especially in the context of a party led by the likes of Pres. Obama and Minority Leader Pelosi, that likely translates to one more vote for 'big government.' If he bucks the party, he's not going to get the lollipops for his district that he needs to stay in office.
And again, judging by her campaign rhetoric, Mia Love is pretty close to being libertarian. So it befuddles me why Libertarians would effectively support someone who agrees with them 10-20 percent of the time over someone who agrees 80-90% of the time.
These types of arguments make no sense. President Obama reduced the size of the federal work forced, increased spending at the lowest rate of any president since 1950.Infact every Democrat(including carter) has grown government at a lower rate than Republicans. How is it that the Democrats are called Big Government ???
The one thing the right wing has done right is to paint their narrative of Democrats no matter how wrong it is.
and to answer your question is that they may not agree with love 90% of the time, Libertarians are just as diverse as the other parties, that district could have libertarians who are more socially liberal than conservative.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,865 posts, read 10,400,492 times
Reputation: 6670
Yeah, the ''criticisms'' leveled against Obama are little different than Clint Eastwood debating an empty chair. And when the definition of ''Libertarian'' starts to include using the power of the state to enforce essentially religious views (!), then the term becomes virtually meaningless. But good luck getting any of today's ''conservatives'' to admit that, as long as they can stiil figure out some sort of ''lawyerly'' excuse or semantic ''loophole'' to weasel thru!
Many libertarians are pro-life. Ron Paul, for example. I am pro-choice, but I can understand the argument, libertarian or otherwise, that a life, born or unborn, should be protected. Why are so many lefty pro-choicers seemingly unable to see that?
I also am anti-gay-marriage, just on the grounds that 'marriage' is an English word with a longstanding meaning. If you call it 'civil union' or something, it's fine by me, but I am intrinsically suspicious of any 'newspeak' in politics. That said, I consider it as largely a distractive issue. "Gay marriage" is probably inevitable, and I'm not going to put any effort into stopping it.
As far as immigration, libertarians do tend to be pro-immigration, as am I, but in the context of the Welfare State the calculus does change (just as w/ drug laws). If we have the Welfare State we have to have a Nanny State to go with it, or costs quickly go out of control.
As for "pro-war" who even knows what that means. If you just asked Mia Love whether she was "pro war," I don't think the answer would be a simple 'yes.'
Bottom line, the devil is in the details. When you paint with a spray can, you don't get a very accurate portrayal.
So in other words, you have no explanation for why a candidate that has taken positions on most major issues that directly conflict with the Libertarian Party platform can be described as a pretty close match for libertarian voters.
On just three major Libertarian Party issues, she fails any rational test.
Gay marriage
Immigration and birthright citizenship
Marijuana legalization
What makes you think that us libertarians should necessarily vote for Republicans? Republicans laughed as Ron Paul walked away. I went Democrat, and I went big.
I'm a libertarian as well and typically vote Republican but I'm socially liberal and am sick and tired of the Republicans pandering to Evangelicals, Tea Party members and other social extremists that I had no choice but to vote for Democrats in certain positions. Libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
The Republicans have messed up badly. When they catered to the right wing extremists, they alienated much of their voting base and it's going to continue in losses for them unless they stop pandering to the extremists in their party and get back to their core principles of less government, increased privatization, self reliance, and reduced spending.
Ron Paul was stabbed in the back by Republicans, the country is being stabbed in the back by progressives.
Ron Paul has no one to blame but himself. The man behaves so brash and cavalier which turns a lot of people off. He has brilliant ideas but he is a poor politician. If he learned how to act and behave more diplomatically and speak in a way that is not demeaning to anyone, he would have probably become a much more prominent politician and would have achieved far more success. No one takes him seriously when he speaks and it's become a comedic act. Paul comes across as a witty yet bitter curmudgeon much like Ross Perot did in the early 90's. Great ideas alone doesn't win elections.
I like Ron Paul but knew he would never win anything because of the way he represents himself. Perhaps one day there will be a libertarian who carries himself much better similar to Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. I think the country is naturally more in line with libertarian views and don't realize it because the libertarian face has been Ron Paul.
Ron Paul has no one to blame but himself. The man behaves so brash and cavalier which turns a lot of people off. He has brilliant ideas but he is a poor politician.
How dare a politician represent himself in an honest and straightforward manner.
Check out how Ron Paul was treated by Morton Downey, Jr. BTW Downey, Jr. was diagnosed with cancer and became an anti-smoking advocate before passing away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
