David Boaz of Cato, quoted by Steve Newton at Delaware Libertarian. While the article discusses small-l libertarians choosing among the perceived lesser evil among the two largest parties, the clear tendency of both of those parties against freedom on all sets of issues has clear implications for considering other alternatives:
Libertarian—or fiscally conservative, socially liberal—voters are often torn between their aversions to the Republicans’ social conservatism (and, for some of them, military adventurism) and the Democrats’ fiscal irresponsibility. Usually they end up voting on the basis of economics.
Research that David Kirby and I have done shows that libertarian-leaning voters have typically given up to 70 percent of their votes to Republicans. But in 2004 and 2006, that number fell off sharply. Republican congressional candidates barely held a majority of libertarian votes in 2006, and of course the Republicans took a pounding in that election.
Why did those voters turn away from the Republicans? Well, Bush and the Republican Congress stuck to their social-conservative guns: they sought to ban gay marriage, limit stem cell research, and insert the federal government into Terry Schiavo’s hospital room.
They got bogged down in an unnecessary and endless war, and they asserted extraordinary powers of surveillance and arrest. Meanwhile, they managed to add more than a trillion dollars to the federal budget and launched the biggest new entitlement since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. So those who had been willing to accept some social conservatism as the price of fiscal responsibility realized they’d made a bad bargain.
Some of those independents voted Democratic in 2006 and 2008, figuring that the Democrats would be more tolerant and could hardly be more profligate. And what are they now seeing?
President Obama is exceeding all their fears on fiscal and economic issues. After promising a “net spending cut” during the campaign and denouncing “the most fiscally irresponsible administration in history,” he has sent federal spending and the deficit soaring into the stratosphere.
Meanwhile, he’s not delivering what some of his voters hoped for on social issues. No gay marriage, even as Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, conservative superlawyer Ted Olson, and the legislature of crusty New Hampshire sign on.
No end to the drug war, even though he’s the third president in a row to have acknowledged using drugs. He even mocked a question about drug legalization at his online town hall. (“Dude, we elected that guy, what’s up with that?” is Reason editor Matt Welch’s summary of the blogosphere’s reaction.) No pullout from Iraq.
So once again fiscally conservative, socially liberal voters are starting to wonder if they made a bad bargain.
date / charts are just massive personal experiences, and personal experiences lie!
The economy and jobs are primary over the deficit. We have to “invest” in our future. Read about the New Deal and learn what we did right, wrong and what we didn’t do or do enough. I look at the data/charts and they don’t lie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal
Bush is like a 911 terrorist.
Like, totally, dude.
A so-called libertarian shilling for Bush and the GOP? Wow. Bush and McCain were the most prominent socialists of the Republican Party and American history until the election of Obama.
Bush and mainstream GOPers have absolutely no conservative or libertarian track record. Just a hardcore Marxist one, as proven by their outspoken support for the Bankster bailouts.
Yes, Peter, that’s who he’s referring to, two former libertarians turned statists, and are considered still libertarians by Dondero’s mentally ill statist state.
Let’s address his claims for a minute, shall we?
“The GOP channels the libertarian rhetoric AND ACTION!!! when they’re in the majority, and when the have the Presidency.”
Bullshit. Look at the Bush deficits, the wars, and the subjugation of rights under the PATRIOT Act. NONE of those are libertarian in nature, NONE of them are limited government, and NONE of them protect individual rights.
Hell, under Section 805 of the PATRIOT Act, jaywalking can get one labeled a terrorist and sent to Gitmo. How is THAT libertarian?
“Bush appointed more Libertarian Party members to office than all other previous Presidents combined.”
Addressed above.
“In 2004, Bush proposed seriously privatizing Social Security. He used a blueprint from the Cato Institute.”
Cato’s model was long-shown to be flawed in that it didn’t allow for the essential elements of sunset, opt-out, and was far to reliant on the stock market investing as mandatged by the federal government and the Fed’s manipulation of the economy. I blogged about that years ago when it came out, including a 12-step plan to solve the problem outside of government mandates. Bush’s system was merely a thinly-veiled attempt to do then what TARP actually has done–rob the Treasury for the bankers.
“Bush cut all of our taxes drastically in 2003.”
No, he didn’t. He cut the tax rate, but in doing so closed personal income loopholes so that actual tax dollars paid went UP. It wasn’t noticed since the deficit was so damn high. I know for a fact that my personal income taxes went up in 2003 from 2002.
“In 2005, he cut so much government that Baltimore Mayor, now Governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley said: “He’s like a 9/11 Terrorist, cutting local and state government funding…””
Where? You’re talking the OFBCI President, the F-22 and F-35 President, the Blackwater/WMD/two wars of aggression/bloat the unbalanced budget and double the debt President.
Can you cite ANYWHERE in the 2005 federal budget where the overall cuts caused government spending to go DOWN? It didn’t happen.
“And all the time Libertarian Party members just sat back and yawned; didn’t back Bush up one iota.”
Yep, we sure did, because we had no reason to back a warmongering dry drunk statist who blew the bankroll because he wanted to show the world he could do what his Daddy wasn’t allowed to do.
“Shame on all you Bush bashers out there, who didn’t back Republicans when it counted.”
It’s never counted as a time to back Republicans, because like the Democrats, they’re not worth backing, period! Why should I back a major Party when they are antithetical to my own political and personal beliefs?
“If we all go to Obama’s concentration camps in a year or two, it will be y’all’s fault.”
HAHAHAHA! You’ll be there before me, because they’ll lock up the neoconservative loonies first, and productive members of society like me will be just fine. Enjoy your trip, you and your paranoia, and don’t forget your swine flu shots along the way!
Dondie: In 2005, he cut so much government that Baltimore Mayor, now Governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley said: “He’s like a 9/11 Terrorist, cutting local and state government funding…”
Huh? You’re actually using a Leftist to define libertarian?
If a Republican raises spending by 10% instead of 20%, the Left screams the GOP “is cutting spending to the bone, throwing old people into the streets.”
If you use the Left as your measuring yard, I suppose I can understand why you imagine that radical socialists like Bush and Palin (whose state is one big federal welfare client) are libertarian.
Bush cut all of our taxes drastically in 2003.
Drastically? You mean, by 80%? 90%? 95%?
Or do you mean a tinny tiny trim, even as he borrowed massively, which will all have to be repaid, with interest?
And all the time Libertarian Party members just sat back and yawned;
Yeah, most of us have heard it all before.
Others, those with “battered voter syndrome”, always believe that their tormentor will be different next time.
Some of us learn from our mistakes, and throw the bums out!
PEACE
DEDUMDUM:
For that matter, can anyone name a single Libertarian that Bush has appointed to office anywheres in the Federal Government?
And no, Sotomayer is NOT a libertarian!
PEACE
ADDEDEDUM:
I’d be interested to know if anyone out there can name a single Libertarian that Obama has appointed to office anywheres in the Federal Government?
Sorry Michael Seebeck, you’re dead wrong! The GOP channels the libertarian rhetoric AND ACTION!!! when they’re in the majority, and when the have the Presidency.
When Bush got into office HE APPOINTED THE VERY FIRST LIBERTARIAN PARTY CHAIRMAN TO A CABINET LEVEL POSITION IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.
Bush appointed more Libertarian Party members to office than all other previous Presidents combined.
In 2004, Bush proposed seriously privatizing Social Security. He used a blueprint from the Cato Institute.
Bush cut all of our taxes drastically in 2003.
In 2005, he cut so much government that Baltimore Mayor, now Governor of Maryland Martin O’Malley said: “He’s like a 9/11 Terrorist, cutting local and state government funding…”
And all the time Libertarian Party members just sat back and yawned; didn’t back Bush up one iota.
Shame on all you Bush bashers out there, who didn’t back Republicans when it counted.
If we all go to Obama’s concentration camps in a year or two, it will be y’all’s fault.
Eric, the GOP ALWAYS channels the libertarian rhetoric when in the minority, and even more so when they get skunked in elections, as has happened the past 2 cycles.
But that doesn’t mean crap, since to them it’s only words. Here’s the reality, Eric: THEY DON’T BELIEVE IT! They don’t want limited government–only government limited in the ways they don’t agree with, which are the same ways the liberals agree with, and vice versa.
In a way, the LP is the same way, except that the ways we don’t agree with are a large intersection of what both of them don’t agree with.
If you think the GOP rhetoric is more than that, then you’re delusional. But I repeat myself, since it is well known that while you may be a good petitioner, you are widely regarded as a philosophical joke in libertarian circles, a sideshow not to be taken with anything resembling a micrograin of NaCl.
“Moreover, the GOP has moved in the libertarian direction, as of late, which will greatly increase their support level even more.”
With the exception of Ron Paul Republicans, this deserves an LOL!
Umm, Danny, who do you expect them to vote for then?
Though, I love the Libertarian Party, and am a 25-year member, I seriously doubt they’ll mount a credible challenge to the Democrats in 2010, for all their Congressional seats.
Republicans will win be default, cause they’re the only serious alternative on the ballot.
Moreover, the GOP has moved in the libertarian direction, as of late, which will greatly increase their support level even more.
Mr. Dondero,
it never said they necessarily were voting Republican instead. The far more likely outcome is lower voter turnout in 2010.
Absolutely brillant piece.
And this is reflected in brand new poll numbers. For instance Republicans for Governor in NJ and VA, are now up by 16 points each.
And in Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey leads Arlen Specter by double digits.
The “fiscally conservative/socially tolerant” voter will put the GOP over the Top in 2010. And hopefully, in 2012 as well.
Thank goodness these voters are coming home to the Republican Party.
Maybe some day Libertarians will start sounding libertarian, too.
Maybe one day libertarians will start voting Libertarian.
Change that looks like the third term of ………..
Most of it is motor voter and lack of as strong party identification in younger generation(s), more so than anything issue-related.
According to the Poll, since Obama took office:
* Independents went from 30% to 39%.
* republicrats went from 65% to 55%.
This is the strongest showing in the 70-year history for Independents, and weakest for republicrats.
It is not just 9/11, but also the Internet, auditing th Fed, bailouts, third parties & their activists, bad economy, and smug non-promise keeping from Obama.
Now that’s change I can believe in.
I have always wanted to say that.
It’s because Obama is suppressing the truth about alien reptiles.
Good data here, the number of republicrats is going into the tank, while Independents are sky-rocketing.
http://people-press.org/report/517/political-values-and-core-attitudes
No doubt, this is because of the 9/11 Truth movement, Obama has done nothing to prosecute the 9/11 murders since he took office.
http://www.freep.com/article/20090814/OPINION05/90814011/1068/opinion/Abandoning-Obama?-
any polling data or just talk?