Wayne Allyn Root wins vice-presidential nomination

Wayne Allyn Root just won the vice-presidential nomination. I don’t have solid numbers here, but I will post them when I get them.

So it’s final. Barr/Root for the Libertarian Party in 2008.

UPDATE: Here are the numbers.

Root: 289
Kubby: 255
Williams: 14

h/t to Richard Winger

48 thoughts on “Wayne Allyn Root wins vice-presidential nomination

  1. Jason_Gatties

    Yes!!!! I agree with Gene. I’m a proud libertarian and want to do my part to support liberty.

    So Trent, what’s Baldwin’s URL again???

  2. Trent Hill Post author

    And he’s not going to contribute thousands to Saxby Chambliss or some other neocon candidate,either!

    I think 800k is about right for Barr. It might be less.

    For the first time: I think Baldwin will beat Barr.

  3. Jason_Gatties

    thanks. After I let my initial nausea run its course, I will read up about Baldwin more. I know a lot about him, but I want to make an educated decision before I make any type of decision.

    I will say this Trent, it must feel good to have a candidate your party can rally around. I felt that way 8 years ago, 4 years ago. Today, hmmm…not so much.

  4. MattSwartz

    Unless I find out that Baldwin, too is ex-CIA, or that his chosen VP likes to shout “BANG!” at awkward intervals, I will also be going for Baldwin.

    He’s not perfect, but he might be a better libertarian than Barr, and he’s certainly more trustworthy.

  5. Trent Hill Post author


    I think Baldwin is actually more libertarian, more pro-liberty, more small-government-oriented than Bob Barr. My problems with Barr are many, but he doesnt even seem to UNDERSTAND the Fed, The Gold Standard, or any of these other issues so important to us. Baldwin does.

  6. Trent Hill Post author

    Mary Ruwart wont endorse Baldwin–don’t expect it either. But Baldwin won’t make large contributions, with your money,to neocon candidates.

    Some people say Barr is a neocon. I disagree with that, but he’s certainly a friend of those who are.

  7. MattSwartz

    Did anyone else see Imperato lobbing Ruwart to take Barr’s VP slot? C-SPAN showed several minutes of their conversation, which Mary clearly wanted to end but was too considerate to end abruptly.

    I may disagree with some of her stances, but it’s clear that she is a remarkable woman.

  8. darcyrichardson

    Rejecting real Libertarians and nominating a Barr-Root ticket is the equivalent of the Green Party nominating the harbor pilot and drunken ship’s master on the ill-fated Exxon Valdez, the Constitution Party naming George McGovern as their standard-bearer, or the antebellum Free Soil Party picking Jefferson Davis as their presidential nominee.

  9. NewFederalist

    Trent- I was being somewhat facetious about Mary Ruwart endorsing Chuck Baldwin but also serious about your comment about Baldwin being more libertarian than Barr. You may be right but how will Baldwin exploit that now? I think the LP nomination of Barr/Root just kills the chances of the CP making a breakout this year. Absent an endoresement by Ron Paul, I have to believe Baldwin/Castle is just a minor footnote in political history.

  10. G.E.

    What Baldwin could do to win libertarian support:

    1. Come out strongly against the Fed, for gold, or better yet free-market money. This is #1, because the LP has nominated two inflationists.

    2. While maintaining his firm anti-abortion stance, use libertarian language in do so. “It’s aggression against the unborn” or “initiation of force against a living human” — AND make it very clear that the federal government should have NO SAY in abortion. (I know he agrees, but he needs to emphasize this).

    3. Cut down the anti-immigration rhetoric and protectionism. That probably isn’t going to happen, but if he wanted my advice, I’d tell him he needs to take a Ron Paul line, not a Tom Tancredo line. Border security is fine. End the welfare state should be a priority. And as for immigrants, if you can’t welcome them in, at least de-emphasize this. Conservatives will know the deal.

    4. Attack the CIA, DOMA, and the Patriot Act. Support states rights on drugs and come out in favor, like Ron Paul, of medical marijuana.

    5. Attract some prominent libertarian endorsers.

  11. Trent Hill Post author

    Hardly. Barr is not as popular amongst the Ron Paul-people as Baldwin. Plus, Barr’s outreach pretty much ends there. Right now he is polling well,but when people learn he is now for open-borders and more liberal of social issues–he’ll lose all his steam. 1% at best.
    Whereas Chuck Baldwin can reach out to the various disaffected republicans because of his solid immigration stances and social positions.

  12. NewFederalist

    But Chuck Baldwin doesn’t have any money unless Ron Paul helps him. He also won’t be on the ballot in as many states. Plus, the MSM doesn’t know who he is. How can he overcome all that?

  13. MattSwartz

    Baldwin’s ideas +this election cycle + the Meetup.com model + a little more attention from Ron Paul = 500,000 votes.

  14. Mike Theodore

    You know, Lance Brown called me today while I was out on the lake and told me Barr won. Okay, I could take it. He then said that Kubby would most likely be the running mate. I not only could back that, I would campaign for that. I was excited the whole ride home. Then I read this…
    I’ll announce it here: I will not support the Libertarian nominee for President. Thanks alot, Wayne. If I could vote, it wouldn’t be for you. You just lost a Libertarian.
    I was so excited, now I have no one to back…

  15. Dylan Waco

    I like Pastor Chuck and may vote for him, but he won’t get more votes than Barr. The talking heads will push Barr as the anti-McCain spoiler, which will make up a lot of pissed off conservatives minds for them. Baldwin won’t even be on the radar. If you are going to vote for the protest candidate you tend to vote for the most visible one..it will be Barr.

  16. Lance Brown

    Sorry for being off on my Kubby VP prediction Mike. It was close! 😉

  17. Mike Theodore

    No problem. My hopes were up. I even drew a Barr/Kubby bumper sticker. I was writing down numbers of billboards they could advertise on. Now….ROOT!

  18. Trent Hill Post author

    “1. Come out strongly against the Fed, for gold, or better yet free-market money. This is #1, because the LP has nominated two inflationists.”

    This is already done. Baldwin is strongly in favor of endingthe Fed, and endorses the concept of competing currencies.

    “And as for immigrants, if you can’t welcome them in, at least de-emphasize this. Conservatives will know the deal.”

    I agree. Border security should be emphasized,but immigrants should not be blamed.

    “Attack the CIA, DOMA, and the Patriot Act. Support states rights on drugs and come out in favor, like Ron Paul, of medical marijuana.”

    CIA: Done.
    DOMA: Done.
    Patriot Act: Done.
    States rights on Drugs: Done.
    Come out in favor of Medical Marijuana: Done, I think.

  19. Trent Hill Post author

    As for libertarian endorsers: Point me some who would consider it.

  20. NewFederalist

    “As for libertarian endorsers: Point me some who would consider it.”

    Ron Paul? That what it will take for Baldwin/Castle to outpoll Barr/Root.

  21. RedPhillips

    A paleo candidate should not be shy about addressing the issue of demographic change re. immigration. This is the issue many people are concerned about but few are willing to address for fear of being called bad names by the PC police.

    I am not sure who is blaming immigrants and what they are being blamed for. Rhetoric towards immigrants should not be harsh. That is neither helpful nor civil.

  22. Dylan Waco

    I have no problem with a paleo candidate addressing demographic change via immigration. I don’t think it will win them many votes though.

  23. trinman


    darcyrichardson // May 25, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    “Rejecting real Libertarians and nominating a Barr-Root ticket is the equivalent of the Green Party nominating the harbor pilot and drunken ship’s master on the ill-fated Exxon Valdez, the Constitution Party naming George McGovern as their standard-bearer, or the antebellum Free Soil Party picking Jefferson Davis as their presidential nominee.”

    Actually, Darcy, the Greens already had sold out: Nader never was or ever will be into their Principles; they just grabbed him as a shot at “getting the FEC money” (martching funds, as Anderson did after 1980, as Buchanan did for his Sis in 2000)

    JTTH – Steve

  24. trinman

    RE: Lance Brown // May 25, 2008 at 10:43 pm

    “Sorry for being off on my Kubby VP prediction Mike. It was close!”

    right up until this mystery guy Williams maneuvered into a power position, just as Root had on the top tier …

    This was very well orchestrated; anyone else see “Recount” tonight? eerily familiar, seeing how dysfunctional ALL political parties are …

  25. MattSwartz

    How do Nader’s positions differ from those held by the Green Party again? I’ve heard his speeches and seen their websites but I can’t pin it down. Besides personality issues, where’s the rift?

  26. trinman

    Matt: look carefully at the things the Greens claim to embrace (also do some research or ask someone who was there then … Nader actually made a speech of some sort in which he renounced nearly all of the nine points (or whatever they call them; been a long day and I am not going to Google again tonight)

  27. trinman

    Matt follow up: the year they took on Nader the other two contenders were two longtime Green activists: (1) Stephen Gaskin, founder of The Farm (Summertown, TB – I keep meaning to visit, having known many friends both here and elsewhere who knew of or had been to the place; and (2) Jello Biafra, the lead singer of the Dead Kennedys punk band. Both had done more than their share of GP activism and deserved a shot, but the Naderites overtook their convention and called anyone who didn’t want to “go for the gold” (that 5% meaning FEC checks after the fact) was not interested in moving the GP into the mainstream power slots (they used other words). IIRC Biafra left the GP hanging, and Gaskin may have as well, tho I think he did support David Cobb in ’04 as the regained their souls

  28. Pingback: Conservative Heritage Times » And the 2008 Libertarian Presidential Nominee is… Bob Barr!

  29. David R. Jeffries

    As the late, great Warren Zevon said:

    WZ: I just took a short vacation, Roy. Spent it getting a Root canal.

    Roy: Oh yeah, how’d you like it?

    WZ: Well it ain’t that pretty at all!

  30. David R. Jeffries

    If I am annoying anyone with my puns, I’m sorry. I comment in a spirit of lighthearted merriment.

  31. G.E.

    Red – Okay. If you want to focus on the racist “demographic change,” you are not going to win over more than a fraction of the Ron Paul revolutionaries. If that’s okay with you, if that’s your principles, then hey, I can relate. But individualists, like Ron Paul, don’t care about the racial heritage of their neighbors. That’s something the conservative death cult cares about.

  32. G.E.

    Trent – I don’t know, but you might be able to find some. I lobbied lots of libertarians to at least consider Baldwin. I made the argument that while I may not personally agree with, say, his views on gays, I agree on how he would govern as it relates to gays.

    Immigration and free trade are the issues where the disagreement is pronounced, and these are important issues to libertarians. Especially the latter, where, aside from Phillies, there is virtually no disagreement.

    But as a born-again anti-Fed man, I can’t imagine casting a vote for a candidate who is pro-Fed. Baldwin is tentatively my man.

    I would encourage him to emphasize monetary policy. It is a popular issue with Ron Paul people and not something neocon CIA man Barr is going to touch with a 10-foot pole.

  33. RedPhillips

    G.E., I don’t think demographic change should be focused on for political purposes to gain votes. It just should not be run from out of fear of PC reprisals. There is nothing more radical, revolutionary and transformative than rapid immigration and demographic change. The current rates of immigration, legal and illegal, are unprecedented. How could a conservative, someone who wants to conserve, not oppose such?

    We are headed to Balkanization. Many communities already are. If you think all these new immigrants are going to get here and vote for L(l)ibertarians then you are delusional. They are going to vote for socialist/Democrats like all new immigrant groups. You are voluntarily consigning yourself to electoral irrelevance if current trends continue.

    Of course, you could always do the Rove strategy and try and do outreach. Good luck with that.

  34. RedPhillips

    Also, I don’t think Baldwin has endorsed any particular “protectionist” measure. He is against NAFTA, GATT, WTO, etc. as anyone concerned with sovereignty should be. And he is for a revenue tariff to fund the constitutional functions of government. But I don’t think he has endorsed specific protectionist measures such as a steal tariff.

    Also, you don’t have to agree with everything a candidate believes to cast a protest vote. Couldn’t a Libertarian cast a protest vote for Baldwin because he is upset with the LP nominee in the same way that a Republican might vote for Barr out of protest of McCain?

  35. aynrkey

    So much for a unity ticket. The Republican Caucus beat the Libertarian Caucus of the Libertarian Party, and there is no way I could vote for any ticket that includes Root. Possibly Barr, if he hadn’t been so budy ducking questions from the Libertarian Caucus, but not Root.

  36. Steven R Linnabary


    I am probably as hard core as any Libertarian. Almost anarchist, even.

    But, I am also a “yellow dog” Libertarian. I’ll vote for a yellow dog if he is a Libertarian before I’ll vote for a democrat or republican.

    I will most likely vote for Barr in November. I may have to hold my nose.

    OTOH, if somebody resurects the “Personal Choice or Boston Tea Parties or if the USMJ Party runs a POTUS candidate, I may have a dilemma.


  37. trinman

    I vote (anywhere above the local level) for one reason: So I can look myself in the mirror each morning and know that I spoke my mind on the contest, and that I did not sell myself out in the process. (I figured out a long time ago how little it means otherwise.)

    I’ve voted Libertarian for President every time since I could vote (which is every time there has BEEN an LP nominee), even tho in a couple of cases I held my nose in doing so, for various reasons.

    This time I will not break that chain by voting for some other clown … but I might just not vote at all

  38. aynrkey

    With Barr on the ticket with someone with a soul as his running mate, I could hold my nose and vote for him, just like you could vote for a yellow dog.

    Will WAR as the running mate, I’ll probably write in the name of a real libertarian, if I vote.

  39. G.E.

    Red – Libertarians believe in private property, not communism. It’s just that simple.

  40. Pingback: Tom Knapp: Kubby as Libertarian VP candidate in 2012? | Independent Political Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *