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.
71% of the vote statewide. I doubt any "far left Democrat" anywhere across the country can get elected in a statewide election with THAT much of a landslide. The people want Sanders deep down inside. It's like one of those weird religious people that refuse life saving medication that they know can save them but think they will go to hell if they receive modern medicine. The average American, especially the poorer Republican voter, wants Sanders but doesn't want him because he thinks his ideas are "foreign and too European" for this American voter to accept. When, in fact, the ideas and policies that Europe has adopted all came from the US.
Sanders does have great libertarian viewpoints on gun ownership which is likely why his support is so large.
In Europe Libertarianism is considered extreme left wing. I don't see anything wrong with elements of the libertarian philosophy, but in US politics I think of the Ayn Rand type who espouses minimal government etc. A very childish and ignorant way of thinking.
Not believing that you need the government to take care of everything for you is childish? Seems to me to be quite the opposite.
Libertarianism is a philosophy; it was never really intended as a system of day-to-day statecraft which, due to the nature of life in an industrialized society, can't be divorced from simple responsibilities, both public and private.
And FWIW, I was at one time (a very long time ago -- 1969/1972) acquainted with some of the participants in the emergence of the Libertarian movement/party on campus; one of those was Dana Rohrabacher, now in his fourteenth term in the House -- representing the 48th District of California (southern Orange County).
Today, Rep. Rohrabacher wouldn't know me from Adam: and to be honest, I spent my career in a field (transportation - both rail and highway) in which it is, by definition, impossible to escape interaction with the public sector. When I started, about 40% of American rail mileage was in bankruptcy; Amtrak (which was called RailPax at the time) was cobbling a system together from cast-off equipment, and the sky seemed to be the limit for trucking (with a brand-new Interstate Highway System and Diesel fuel at $.0.30 per gallon).
Today, four out of five of the 100 largest trucking firms of 1971 have gone through bankruptcy, North American railroading is down to seven major carriers (all financially sound), and Amtrak is still a joke.
Such things are of necessity in an industry and infrastructure tied, by its very nature, to the public sector.
Ayn Rand played a simple, but very important role; she provided a logical, well-grounded reply to the follies of both Marx and Hitler. While doing so, she operated in the fantasy-world of a Hollywood screenwriter, and inspired a young audience seeking a "society without coercion" that was no more pragmatic than Marx' "withering away of the state".
No matter; she evolved into the single strongest and most effective advocate for individuality at a time when the experiment which began with the Enlightenment was at maximum peril; and that was sufficient.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 08-22-2015 at 08:30 AM..
I jumped off the Libertarian train wreck around 2010 after realizing that the movement was made up of crooked liars who just wanted to feather nests and full of dupes that believe in slogans. Fast forward to 2015, and the most popular candidate of the GOP is not Rand Paul, it's Trump. Rand has less than 10% poll support, and no matter what gimmicks he tries to pull, he can barely budge. With Trump being so popular, it's clear who the GOP electorate really wants, it's definitely not Libertarian. Thanks to Trump, the Republican voter has rediscovered their love of trade protectionism and what I call "cultural protectionism". Libertarians, real Libertarians, do not believe in protectionism or restricted borders. I was one of the first wave to give the Pauls the finger, and now more people are jumping off that sinking ship called Rand Paul
Well, to begin with Rand Paul is not a Libertarian, both he and his father have Libertarian leanings, but they are playing to a GOP platform. The problem is, the oligarchs have pushed the cost of getting elected POTUS to new heights that only wealthy donors can afford, so they buy candidates in the two parties that they will control in congress, that's why a third party can't attract the money it takes to get elected. The Libertarian philosophy, of less government, is counter to the desires of a oligarchy or plutocracy where using and controlling the government is their power. I think the main reason Trump has captured the minds of Republicans is because he has made his message simple while the others are trying to moderate the party platform and capture independent voters. I still don't think Trump would ever win the nomination, he's a rogue, he can't be controlled by the power elite, and because of his offensive biases he has lost large blocks of voters and would only serve to elect a Democrat.
As for the position of the Libertarian party, they do not believe in unrestricted borders, they truly believe in the Constitution, a strong defense, and civil liberties, all of which the Republicans and Democrats are destroying. Rather than lecturing the positions of the party, read for yourself at lp.org. BTW- If by some miracle Paul did win the nomination, would you vote for him or Hillary?
Sen. Rand Paul has loyal support, very unique messages, a foundation laid by his father, and a really crummy campaign team. He's not acting like a career politician, and he is a true conservative, (not sure I can call him Libertarian leaning anymore)
He is definitely a different type of Republican. Too bad people just don't get his wonderful messages.
He has not been able to attract a sufficient number of billionaire backers.
That is what the founding principals of a nation run by the people is all about.
I suggest you go back to the UK, where the government runs 88% of your life and you pay for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Not believing that you need the government to take care of everything for you is childish? Seems to me to be quite the opposite.
My point exactly. Suggesting that the"government runs your life" or that not ascribing to the Ayn Rand literature means wanting the government take care of everything " is the ignorant rhetoric that I am referring to.
My point exactly. Suggesting that the"government runs your life" or that not ascribing to the Ayn Rand literature means wanting the government take care of everything " is the ignorant rhetoric that I am referring to.
I think I may be losing your drift? Our government has been sold to the highest bidders, this is the result.
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.
