The Election's Unanswered Question
Posted by Shrugger 11 years, 5 months ago to The Gulch: General
Those of you who voted for Romney and claim to be Objectivist Liberty Lovers WASTED your vote and violated your values. Had you instead cast your vote for the Libertarian candidate, you might have helped the Libertarian Party gain more recognotion... more stories about Libertarian principles would be written and read post-election... more of our friends and neighbors would be talking about the liberty movement... and you wouldn't have violated your values. The problem in this country IS NOT the moochers... YOU are the problem! YOU are the guiltiest man in the room!
I understand your perspective, but are there enough “Objectivist Liberty Lovers” to have made a difference?
Apparently there aren’t enough Libertarians. I suspect there are more self described Libertarians than Objectivists since there isn’t an objectivist party. It is possible that if all banded together there might be some influence, but if all voted for Johnson and turned the election from a narrow win to a landslide for Obama he would be perceived as having a solid mandate for all the havoc he could wreak. Is this an acceptable unintended consequence? The two party system is so entrenched in our media and society, I believe we must consider infiltrating one or both major parties and trying to influence them from within to return to a Constitutionally limited government. The alternative you seek is a noble endeavor, however having voted third party before, I feel the option must be well established before the election and that it will take a sympathetic media. It may be easier and necessary to infiltrate/ change the media first. Perhaps they should be the focus of guilt.
Long before there was a Libertarian party there was more Liberty. It was not/ is not exclusive to the Libertarian party. The Constitution party claims considerable membership. So why didn’t they receive more votes? We are pawns to the media and the politicians. The outcome was pre-determined. The best man for the job would be the last one to have it.
Respectfully,
O.A.
* No Matter how many articles are written and how much traction the Libertarian party gets, unless we win it will make no difference.
* Once we reach 50% of people not paying into the system we will not win without war.
* It turned out not to matter who you voted for because Obama won with or without the 1% that voted for Johnson. Even if another 20% had voted for Johnson rather than Romney Obama would still be president.
From the election results it is safe to assume we have all ready crossed the 50% who will vote for handouts every time. Stalin's "useful idiots" are well entrenched in America.
Do you really believe that even 30% of the vote going to Johnson would create enough of a stir to do anything other than get Johnson black balled by the media? If so I have some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
Those who voted for Romney voted for the only chance that existed to slow the train long enough to get the republican party turned around and for small government, no other course offered a chance of success.
The comment with the thread would indicate that people would read articles from places that are not mainstream that do not all ready understand you cant spend more than you take in without having a financial failure and other basic principles....
The media was all ready in the pocket of big government, so how do you propose to get people who need to read this kind of article to read it? I have sent them to "Liberal friends" before, they simply do not read them or they only want to hear about what they get out of it.
You post makes two assumptions. 1) The press wants to carry a small government story. It does not. 2) that the US populace that voted for Obama is intelligent enough to listen to reason and philosophical enough to care what it tells them. They are largely neither.
The election clearly shows that what I thought would be the case 4 years from now if Obama won is already the case. The moochers are to numerous to remove politically.
Agreed. Ross Perot got 19% of the vote in 1992 and nothing changed in the system.
How would you go about getting the Libertarians a real chance at the presidential ticket?
Garnering more support for Libertarian political candidates is just ONE WAY of gaining the attention of the populace in general.
In the long run, the person occupying the White House would matter little IF the libertarian movement was widely supported in this nation.
Had you, along with every other liberty-minded individual, voted in accordance with your principles in this past election... today's top news stories would be discussing why there was such a strong surge in Libertarian votes... and inevitably... many of our neighbors would be learning for the first time in their lives that there is an alternative to the republicrats... and perhaps... in some future election... those people would finally vote for their values.
Then we WOULD have elected officials that reflected our values.
Look at stories were a gun saves lives, or a conceal and carry prevents a shooting. They exist in about the same numbers as things like the Colorado shootings, but you never see the pro gun story in the news.