Press "Enter" to skip to content

Reason Magazine: Who’s Getting Your Vote?

As Campaign 2008 entered its home stretch, Reason Magazine asked a variety of policy wonks, journalists, thinkers, and other public figures to reveal for whom they are voting this fall, for whom they pulled the lever the last two times around, whether this is the most important election in their lifetimes, what they’ll miss most about the Bush administration, and which past president they’d most like to have waterboarded. Their answers, as of late October, are at http://www.reason.com/news/show/129640.html. Thanks to David Weigel for emailing contact.ipr@gmail.com with this story.

Notably, the mostly “small l” libertarians surveyed by Reason seem to be going heavily for Obama over McCain, confirming Rasmussen’s poll results. These include several who voted Republican or Libertarian in the past. Others are voting for Bob Barr or not voting, either out of principle, convenience, frustration over living in “safe states” where their vote can not conceivably change the electoral vote, or lack of good choices. Some of the Barr voters are enthusiastic; others, less so.

IPR is doing our own reader endorsement survey, with over 100 responses thus far covering everything from Presidential choices to local races and ballot initiatives. Readers here may want to take a look at the Reason survey, and answer their five questions themselves, either on this post or the previous one:

1. Who are you voting for in November?

2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?

3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?

4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?

5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?

About Post Author

paulie

41 Comments

  1. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    I’ll have it up when I find a link if no one else does first.

  2. emmamess emmamess October 30, 2008

    can i still watch this debate – anyone with info – please post me a link to see a replay.

  3. constituentresponse constituentresponse October 30, 2008

    Most libertarians are focusing on “un-electing” those Senators and Representatives who voted “yes” for the Bailout. One such group, called the Constituent Response Team, has been working to do just that.Â

    CRT has put together a Bailout Vote Map that makes it easy (as a mouse click) to find out how your Senators and Representatives voted.

    The Constituent Response Team has also just published pre-customized web banners and ads targeted at those who voted “yes” for the Bailout. You can easily paste these ads onto your website or blog using simple embedding code (provided off course).

    If you are interested in either, check out Constituent Response at http://www.constituentresponse.com . The Bailout Vote Map is on the main page; the “Vote ‘no” on incumbents who voted ‘yes'” ads are under the Host CRT Ads link.

  4. Ross Levin Ross Levin October 30, 2008

    Yeah, even I’m not sure about Nader’s character. Good thing he ain’t winning!

  5. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp October 30, 2008

    Mike,

    You write:

    “To compare [Nader] to Root is just insulting.”

    It was meant to be — and it’s accurate.

    They’re flip sides of a coin:

    Root the “millionaire Republican business mogul” who actually just runs a boiler-room telemarketing scam, Nader the “consumer advocate” who’s a multi-millionaire but won’t divulge his portfolio, almost certainly because he built that portfolio in the same way some of his organizations have been caught red-handed doing (short-selling companies they/and or Nader were about to attack and other insider trading practices that Nader calls for others to be imprisoned for).

    Root, the “big house, new Hummer” image, Nader the “simple room” image. I don’t know if Root’s house and Hummer are really his or just heavily mortgaged props, but Nader got caught going in the front and out the back of the “simple room” years ago — down the street to the luxury brownstone he bought in his sister’s name and really lives in.

    Does Nader make some good arguments on some important issues? Yes. But I wouldn’t trust him as far as I could throw Root.

  6. Mike Gillis Mike Gillis October 30, 2008

    Nader will leave behind a model for fighting off ballot access obstruction.

    He’ll leave behind a series of lawsuits and legal precedents that have made it easier to get on state ballots and harder for major parties to toss us off.

    And whatever votes he gets will help the myriad of parties that have endorsed him – the Peace and Freedom Party of CA, as well as those he started in UT and IAand has offered post-election party building assistance to in other states, as well as the Independent Party of DE and others.

    Plus his plan at creating a non-partisan Congress Watch group and other endeavors.

    And why should other independents reference one another? Unless of course, like John Murphy in PA, you’ve endorsed that candidate. That’s what independent means.

    My chief issues with McKinney are that the party she’s attached to is one I’ve found to be structurally and politically incompetant, the people she’s most closely associated with inside of the party are some of those that fought hardest against democratic reform, her campaign’s seeming unwillingness to seek media and her apparently choice to not actively campaign until after the convention, her alliances and wooing of conspiracy groups and fringe organizations like the 9/11 Truthers, the Workers World Party and others, as well as her almost kneejerk reaction to view everything as a political conspiracy against her involving spies, mass graves and saboteurs.

    Even if Ralph weren’t running, I could never cast my vote for her and would likely be voting “None of the Above” as a write-in.

  7. cyrano3000 cyrano3000 October 30, 2008

    1. Who are you voting for in November?

    Bob Barr

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?

    Badnarik and Browne (I’ve always voted for the Libertarian Party candidate for President ever since 1988).

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?

    No, they are all equally important as of the time they are held.

    4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?

    Nothing.

    5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?

    This question is an insult to all victims of torture as well as all moral people who refuse to engage in torture.

    Lastly Mike Gillis@34, I have no beef with my father voting for Ralph Nader for President here in Arizona. However Ralph Nader, who I believe to be a principled individual, will leave nothing besides some decent books, once he leaves the political scene. I know of no congressional candidates running under the Nader Party label.

    I am running against an Independent (and a Republican and a Democrat) for the office of federal representative for Arizona’s first congressional district. He hasn’t mentioned Ralph Nader once either on the podium or off.

    Ralph Nader is the last of his kind because principled socialism as a philosophy has been abandoned by name. Socialism has been adopted in fact and principled action is down for the count as far as I can determine.

    As for Austrian Economist’s claim that McKinney is an unhinged loon and a disgrace to the Green Party, there is more respect and honor in advocating peace and socialism than there is advocating imperialism and freedom any day of the week.

    “Peace, commerce and honest friendship” – Ron Paul’s subtitle says a lot.
    http://www.ronpaulforeignpolicy.com/

  8. Mike Gillis Mike Gillis October 30, 2008

    Thomas, that isn’t a fair assessement. Unlike Root, Nader has spent decades getting results for the issues he cares about.

    Even in his last couple presidential runs, his lawsuits have made it easier for third parties to get their candidates on the ballot. Arizona and Ohio being the most prominent.

    Nader is simply the candidate best equipped and with the longest record and ability to run a national third party campaign without a large personal fortune.

    People attack him for self-promotion, but were he not in the race, there would be no prominent progressive voice in this race. All due respect to people like McKinney and LaRiva, but they had months to build real campaigns, raise money and garner attention for their issues and they failed at it.

    To compare him to Root is just insulting.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp October 30, 2008

    “Ralph Nader is one of the most principled leaders in American history, and sadly one of the last of his kind.”

    Ralph Nader is the Wayne Allyn Root of the left — a self-promoting manipulator. Their respectable schtick focuses are different, that’s all.

  10. svf svf October 30, 2008

    and why?
    VIETNAM
    GREAT SOCIETY
    ETC.

  11. svf svf October 30, 2008

    1. Who are you voting for in November?
    BARRRRRRR

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
    BADNARIK / BROWNE (R.I.P.)

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
    IF I DIE TOMORROW PERHAPS.

    4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
    DICK CHENEY

    5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
    LYNDON B. JOHNSON

  12. Austrian Economist Austrian Economist October 30, 2008

    1) NADER. Why I’m not voting Obama/McCain, that’s rhetorical. Barr is a gutless GOP-weasel of a plant, Baldwin has scruples but is a theocrat and just not visionary (unless your vision is the Apocalypse), and McKinney is an unhinged loon that is a disgrace to the Green Party. Ralph Nader is one of the most principled leaders in American history, and sadly one of the last of his kind.

    2) Kerry (lamentably) and Nader. John “I wouldn’t have pulled outta Fallujah” Kerry. Fuck that.

    3) Maybe, ehhh. Aren’t they all? Though I do agree that McCain winning is as close to the metaphor of Sauron reclaiming the ring of power. I generally agree with Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky’s assessment that one should freely vote their conscious in safe states (most of ’em), but there must be a sensitivity to the prospect of enabling McCain/Palin to sneak to victory.

    4) Knowing that I could run the country better than the POTUS. Is that exclusive to Bush, though? I’ll be humble and say yes. Plus, it was really a prime era for viciously angry, scornful political art and expression. Once Obama gets elected, people will be naive and pacified enough that one may actually have to parse their words when criticizing the government.

    5) I’m a whiny contrarian dweeb who can’t detach himself from reality for 30 seconds to answer a theoretical question, boo hoo hoo.

    The list is long, but in a heartbeat, if one *must* waterboard an ex-president, NIXON. That heartless motherfucker can bathe in napalm and gargle Agent Orange while I’m at it.

  13. Austrian Economist Austrian Economist October 30, 2008

    ALSO – I mean I always suspected he was a bitch, but here is proof in the pudding from Reason’s Dave Weigel.
    ————-

    1. Who are you voting for in November? I’ve got the luxury of a guilt-free, zero-impact vote in the District of Columbia, which I would cast for Bob Barr if he was on the ballot. Since he’s not, I’m voting for Barack Obama, the only remaining candidate whom I trust not to run the country (further) into the ground with stupid and erratic decisions, and who (miraculously for a Democrat) has run a less brain-dead, faux-populist campaign than the Republican.

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000? Last time, it was that guy from Massachusetts who hated the troops and lied about his Vietnam service in a French accent. In 2000 I not only voted for Ralph Nader but served as an electoral college elector for him in the state of Delaware. I regret the Nader vote, but not the Kerry vote, as a weak Democratic president with a conservative congress would have been pretty tolerable in retrospect.

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime? Clearly the most important was 1988, when Americans rejected Mike Dukakis and spared themselves from a tax hike, a liberal Supreme Court justice, a pointless intervention in Central America, and a bungled handling of Soviet dissolution. But this is a close second, because I really don’t think McCain has the temperment to be president or the interest in standing up to a Democratic Congress, his only theoretical advantage over Obama.
    ———

    Listen to this guy. He is voting Obama, regrets not his vote for Kerry, but that for Nader?

    And the 1988 election?

    I mean, could this guy eat any more shit? What a dumb little turd. I’m sorry, I’m calling it like it is. Why does he have any input at a half-reputable magazine.

    The responses of the Reason editors have knocked that publication down about a half-dozen notches in my book.

  14. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    Stanhope rocks!

    But what’s he doing examining Barr’s underwear?!

  15. Austrian Economist Austrian Economist October 30, 2008

    I just wanna point out Doug Stanhope’s response to question #1:

    “The Libertarians were hijacked in some type of fishy Beer Hall Putsch by a neo-con with holes in his underpants, so I can’t even vote with my heart this election. I will vote for Obama on behalf of everyone watching in the world, because he’s the coolest to watch on television. ”

    He’s not my favorite comic, but still respect for calling out prime shithead Bob Barr. So here’s a skit of his on medical marijuana.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd5_nTwLVEg

  16. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn: Obama.

    Leonard Liggio: Barr.

    Daniel McCarthy: Ron Paul write-in. Baldwin preferable to Barr, Obama preferable to McCain.

    Scott McConnell : Obama.

    Declan McCullagh: Not voting, reluctantly.

    Robert A. Pape: Obama.

    Lew Rockwell: Never votes, and is against it.

    Gerald J. Russello: Not voting in prez race.

    Steve Sailer: Write in Ward Connerly.

    John Schwenkler: Barr.

    Joseph Sobran: Baldwin.

    Peter Wood : McCain, reluctantly.

    Interesting that paleocon/paleolibs have a very similar vote distribution to their hated “tReason Orange Line Mafia,” or whatever the kids are calling it these days.

    Obama wins a plurality vote in both crowds. The only difference is the smattering of Baldwin votes – only a small handful – among the Takistanis.

  17. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    Found a more comprehensive TakiList

    http://www.amconmag.com/issue/2008/nov/03/

    Brimelow: Baldwin first, Barr second (apparently, Nader third – see comments above).

    Reid Buckley: McCain, reluctantly.

    John Patrick Diggins: Obama, reluctantly.

    Rod Dreher: No one, for the first time since eligible.

    Francis Fukuyama: Obama, not very reluctantly.

    Kara Hopkins: McCain, reluctantly.

    The site has frozen, I’ll get to the rest in a bit…

  18. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    Upon reading the loathsome Brimelow’s piece, it’s not really so much an endorsement of Nader as a lamentation that he left with no better option, since Connecticut has no other alternative candidates on the ballot and does not meaningfully count write-ins.

    He celebrates Nader’s bad position on migration issues, and makes me want to vote for McKinney – but then I think about her (apparently at this point) skipping the debate, as she did the one in DC, and as Rosa may also be skipping the VP debate, and well…no.

  19. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    Raimondo (sorry, typo’d an extra N on his first name above) makes a decent case for Nader, albeit not convincing in his reasons for rejecting Ron Paul and Bob Barr merely for their spat; a trivial reason to reject either or both. But, he points out Nader’s good points, and McCain and Obama’s bad points, admirably.

    He misses Nader’s bad points, of course:

    http://realchange.org/nader.htm

  20. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 30, 2008

    4. That he isn’t viewed as a living god like Barack 0Bomber.

    Good point. As hard as it is to imagine right now, I think Obama will make us miss the good old days of President Shrub.

  21. darolew darolew October 30, 2008

    s/also/answer

  22. darolew darolew October 30, 2008

    1. No one. Politicians can all go to hell.
    2. I was too young to vote in 2000 and 2004. I supported Bush though, because that’s who my parents supported.
    3. Elections are never important, so that’s hard to answer.
    4. I’m going to miss being able to criticize the president without having to worry about offending my friends (who’re all far-left liberal types).
    5. I wouldn’t waterboard anyone. Rephrasing the question as “Who was the worst ever president?”, I’ll also Woodrow Wilson without hesitation.

  23. Catholic Trotskyist Catholic Trotskyist October 29, 2008

    I am glad to have such a monumental effect on you, GE, as I am the only person I know who actually views obama as a living god. I will have to have God sentence you to 20 years in purgatory for each election that you refused to vote in, however. How far you and Mike Gillis have fallen; you were once filled with greatness, as you apparently voted for Revolutionary socialist Lieutenant commander Gore in 2000.

    Glory to God in the highest, and peace to God’s people on Earth, amen.

  24. G.E. G.E. October 29, 2008

    I’m not voting period, not for president or any other office, ever again. “FUCK YOU!” was a strategy for the presidential election only. If I’m not going to vote for anyone or anything, I’ll just stay home and read my daughter a few extra stories.

  25. Mike Gillis Mike Gillis October 29, 2008

    GE…

    Whatever happened to a write-in vote for “Fuck You!”?

  26. G.E. G.E. October 29, 2008

    Oh, I can’t say Bush. Then I’ll say all of them except Bush and Cleveland.

  27. G.E. G.E. October 29, 2008

    1. No one. And it feels great.

    2. Nader and Gore.

    3. No. It’s equally unimportant as all others in history.

    4. That he isn’t viewed as a living god like Barack 0Bomber.

    5. I would have Bush waterboarded since he thinks the practice isn’t torture. “What’s good for the goose ought to be good for the gander!”

  28. Trent Hill Trent Hill October 29, 2008

    I wouldn’t waterboard anyone. But I detest the presidencies of Wilson and Lincoln.

  29. Ross Levin Ross Levin October 29, 2008

    Asking a bunch of idealists which president they would like to waterboard – that’s bound to get a lot of hilarious answers.

  30. Sivarticus Sivarticus October 29, 2008

    1. Chuck Baldwin.

    2. 2004: Ralph Nader.

    3. Maybe, but only because the primary part of it may have been crucial if Ron Paul’s movement takes off. To date, 1992 was the most important General Election in my life. It was the only one so far where there were three choices with a true shot at becoming President, and the last one to feature a third party candidate in the debates and on National TV multiple times.

    4. Like other people have said, the comedy generated by Bush’s screw ups.

    5. Lyndon B. Johnson. He was an utterly monstrous dolt in foreign policy. His decisions on Vietnam and the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty are only eclipsed by some of the failures of the current administration. Also, I’m not convinced he had nothing to do with JFK’s assassination.

  31. TheOriginalAndy TheOriginalAndy October 29, 2008

    “1. Who are you voting for in November?”

    I’m probably not going to vote in the Presidential race this year, but if I do end up voting in the Presidential race this year I will do a write in vote for Ron Paul.

    “2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?”

    Michael Badnarik in 2004 and Harry Browne in 2000.

    “3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?”

    I really hope not.

    “4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?”

    Nothing.

    “5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?”

    It’s hard to say since there are too many of them who deserve(d) this fate.

  32. Brian G Brian G October 29, 2008

    1..Reluctantly…Bob Barr
    2..2004..Michael Badnarik…2000..Harry Browne
    3.No
    4.Not a damned thing.
    5.I’m not a pro- waterboarding person but if I’m asked to select a president I dislike it would have to be Lincoln.

  33. Mike Gillis Mike Gillis October 29, 2008

    1. Ralph Nader.

    2. 2000: Regretfully, Al Gore. 2004: Regretfully, David Cobb.

    This year I get to cast a vote I won’t regret.

    3. That’s what they keep telling us, but I suspect that they’ll tell us the same thing about every subsequent election.

    4. The old thing I’ll miss about Bush is the comedy gold he’s given people like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert for the last eight years.

    5. I’m against waterboarding ANYONE, but if I had to pick a “worst president”, I’d say Woodrow Wilson.

  34. Catholic Trotskyist Catholic Trotskyist October 29, 2008

    Lots of great comments on that site.
    My answers:

    1. Barack H. Obama (praise be unto his holy name), as everyone hopefully knows now.
    2. I was too young to vote in the last elections, but would have supported John Kerry in 2004.
    3. Most likely. Although I do admit that people think each election is one of the most important. I actually think the 2012 election might be the most important.
    4. The ability to make extraordinary claims about the upcoming Obama administration on TPW and IPR. I understand that when Obama doesn’t implement the International Socialist Revolutionary New World Order in the first year of his presidency, I may be subject to incisive questioning.
    5. Andrew Johnson.

  35. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 29, 2008

    Knapp is mostly correct.

    Since waterboarding a corpse is pointless, that leaves Carter, Old Man Bush and Clinton to choose from. And I’m not a waterboarding type.

    If I really have to answer, I guess I’ll just punt and go with Al Gore. What kind of president wins an election and then just walks away when he’s served notice of a preemptive coup d’etat? He should have fought. He should have taken the oath of office, attempted to faithfully execute that office, etc., even if it meant exile and/or civil war.

    I agree, but this isn’t grounds for torture. Shunning, perhaps.

    Given those options, the one I would feel least guilty about torturing would be Bush Sr. Given his semi-concealed history below Director level in the CIA (The Nation, among others, has debunked this denial/glossing over), I think it is likely he has personally tortured people himself. He still reportedly wears Che Guevara’s watch as a token of one such session. Not that two wrongs make a right, however.

  36. Thomas L. Knapp Thomas L. Knapp October 29, 2008

    1. Who are you voting for in November?

    Undecided. The candidates on the ballot in Missouri are Barack Obama, John McCain, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin and Ralph Nader. The only one I’ll even consider voting for (and I never thought I’d be reduced to this) is Nader. Cynthia McKinney is a write-in option, so I’ll probably go with her instead.

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?

    Michael Badnarik and Harry Browne.

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?

    I’ll tell you in 50 years.

    4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?

    The litmus testiness of it. Support Bush = you’re either an idiot or irredeemably evil. It will probably take awhile for Obama’s regime to become unambiguously evil enough in practice to match that level of obviosity for litmus test purposes.

    5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?

    Since waterboarding a corpse is pointless, that leaves Carter, Old Man Bush and Clinton to choose from. And I’m not a waterboarding type.

    If I really have to answer, I guess I’ll just punt and go with Al Gore. What kind of president wins an election and then just walks away when he’s served notice of a preemptive coup d’etat? He should have fought. He should have taken the oath of office, attempted to faithfully execute that office, etc., even if it meant exile and/or civil war.

  37. Fred Church Ortiz Fred Church Ortiz October 29, 2008

    1. Who are you voting for in November?
    Full ballot here.

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
    04 Peroutka, because Nader wasn’t on my ballot. 00 couldn’t vote but supported Browne

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
    I’m not dead yet.

    4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
    Moments like these.

    5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
    I agree with Drew Carey – no one. Let’s stop making lists of who to waterboard.

    This is a fucked up question.

    It’s Reason, people.

  38. paulie cannoli paulie cannoli Post author | October 29, 2008

    1. Who are you voting for in November?
    Not voting. See comment 41 on the previous post

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/10/your-endorsements/

    2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
    Didn’t vote either time, but wanted to vote for Harry Browne in 2000, and voted for him at the LP convention that year. See comment 41 on the previous post again.

    3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?

    No. Every election the Ds and Rs trot this out to hoodwink everyone into voting for them, and it’s a setup every time. Pretty much the same people control both, with only minor differences. Both lie frequently, so you can’t even accurately gauge which one is less evil based on what they tell you while they campaign.

    After all, Bush was going to bring us a humble foreign policy, Bush Sr. promised no new taxes, every Republican runs on tax/spending/regulation cuts, Nixon promised peace with dignity, LBJ, FDR and Wilson all ran as peace candidates (in 1964, 1940 and 1916), and FDR was the small government candidate in 1932, among other things.

    This “most important election” thing has a boy who cried wolf air to it. If one ever does come along, we won’t recognize it.

    4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?

    Not hating Democrats.

    5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?

    This is a fucked up question. In a way, they all deserve it, and a good argument can be made that they should all have the experience so they will be less tempted to do it to others. But then, having been tortured has not made McCain less bloodthirsty. Torture is wrong, and we shouldn’t wish it on anyone (except willing masochists), no matter how reprehensible they are/were.

  39. Ross Levin Ross Levin October 29, 2008

    1. No one
    2. No one
    3. Maybe, for a few reasons: 1) climate change 2)economic crisis 3)recovering from Bush’s policies
    4. A common enemy (plus, an Obama administration could be deadly to the progressive grassroots if everyone assumes he’ll take care of their progressive problems)
    5. I agree with Drew Carey – no one. Let’s stop making lists of who to waterboard.

Comments are closed.