Tom Woods a Possible Libertarian Candidate for President?

John Jay Myers posted a Facebook message suggesting Tom Woods as a possible candidate for the Libertarian Party nomination. The post generated some interesting replies including from Tom Woods himself.

Interestingly, Woods did not reject the idea out of hand. He suggested that his four young children were a barrier to a run but said he has “thought about it.” (As far as I know, this is a new revelation.)

Here are a couple of his replies:

Chris, that isn’t my main reason. I have four little kids to raise. I can’t devote the time.

I have thought about it, btw, but impossible right now.

So maybe not in 2012, but maybe later?

16 thoughts on “Tom Woods a Possible Libertarian Candidate for President?

  1. Steve

    I’ve heard Dr. Woods speak about this during one of his presentations. He brought it up as something of a joke, saying he’d do it so that he could do a “debate” with stuffed dummies representing his D and R opponents. I’d love to see him run so its nice to see that he’s taking it seriously but I’m not holding my breath.

  2. Pingback: Tom Woods a Possible Libertarian Candidate for President? | Conservative Heritage Times

  3. RedPhillips Post author

    I think Tom Woods would be a great libertarian nominee. It would put nullification and secession in the spotlight, and since he is a Traditionalist Catholic he couldn’t be accused of being a libertine.

  4. Robert Capozzi

    This is an interesting idea. Woods is quite articulate. I personally have very serious concerns about the substance and especially the tone that Woods’s secession/nullification views would put on the LP. OTOH, he’s close to RP, with some suggesting he’s Paul’s ghostwriter.

    I might support Woods at the top of the ticket. He might be able to attract larger segments of the Revolution than most I can think of.

    I seem to recall some controversy involving (I think) something called the League of the South, which has a questionable rep. Again, just a vague memory, so don’t hold me to that.

    Woods is close the LvMI, which is not my brand of L-ism by a longshot. Then again neither is Root’s fusionism.

    Still, this is not a non-starter for me.

  5. JT

    Woods, like everyone associated with the Mises Institute, is a loyal supporter of Ron Paul. If he were to run for the Libertarian nomination for President, he’d certainly wait until Paul was realistically out of the running for the Republican nomination before he even announced his candidacy. That will probably be in March, after a bunch of caucuses and primaries are held. That would give Woods at least a couple of months, which is more than Barr or Ruwart campaigned before the national convention.

    But it’s pretty clear from his above statement that he has no intention of running in 2012. And 2016 is a long ways away right now to even think about who the Libertarian nominee might be, IMO. I’m still waiting to see who might jump into the race for the Libertarian nomination this year. I’m hoping there’s a wider field when 2011 ends.

  6. Joe Harrison

    Tom, if you have young children you can’t afford NOT to run. What kind of world would you want them to grow up in?

  7. John Jay Myers

    One of the criticisms is that Woods posts articles on “Lew Rockwell”. I have articles posted on Lew Rockwell.

    The other parts in the second link seem to just be their opinion of what he said, not Woods own words, but if you listen to Wood’s latest speech, he addresses some things he has said in the past.

    But I would stress “the past” part of that, considering we have a guy right now who every time he makes a public appearance or writes an article it is an embarrassment. And turns people away, where as Tom Woods seems to be attracting more an more liberty lovers and more and more respect.
    He also clearly articulates the message without the demagoguery associated with some. That alone is a very strong positive in his favor.

    I do understand that skeletons in a closet can be harmful, but I am not expecting Woods to win, and …. you should see my closet. It’s a mess.

  8. Andy

    I saw Tom Woods speak at an event in San Diego, California last year and I was pleasantly suprised that he’s a better public speaker than I thought that he’d be. I think that he has the potential to be a good candidate so hope he jumps in the race.

    JT // Jun 10, 2011 at 9:11 am

    “Woods, like everyone associated with the Mises Institute, is a loyal supporter of Ron Paul. If he were to run for the Libertarian nomination for President, he’d certainly wait until Paul was realistically out of the running for the Republican nomination before he even announced his candidacy. That will probably be in March, after a bunch of caucuses and primaries are held. That would give Woods at least a couple of months, which is more than Barr or Ruwart campaigned before the national convention. ”

    If Tom Woods is really interested in seeking the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination, then he ought to get in the race right now. He could do this while supporting Ron Paul at the same time. Ron Paul is not likely to win the Republican Party’s nomination. I think that the Republican Party is way to corrupt to allow that to happen. I think that Tom Woods knows this and I think that Ron Paul himself knows this. So Tom Woods could start campaigning as a back up candidate for Ron Paul. If he does this, he’d put himself in an excellent position to capture the support of the Ron Paul r3VOLution and he could ride that wave of support to an impressive (by minor party and independent candidate standards) vote total in November of 2012.

  9. Jim

    Woods should never be allowed anywhere near the ring of power. He is a petty, thin skinned man that bears a grudge for decades. Woods would be akin to John Adams in office.

  10. Robert Capozzi

    12 Jim, no real concern here that Woods’d be elected. Those are dramatic charges with no support. Have you known Woods for decades? What’s the basis for your accusations?

  11. JT

    Andy: “If Tom Woods is really interested in seeking the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination, then he ought to get in the race right now.”

    I agree.

    Andy: “He could do this while supporting Ron Paul at the same time. Ron Paul is not likely to win the Republican Party’s nomination. I think that the Republican Party is way to corrupt to allow that to happen.”

    I think “isn’t likely” isn’t nearly strong enough. That just implies less than a 50% chance. I think “won’t” is more apt.

    Andy: “I think that Tom Woods knows this and I think that Ron Paul himself knows this.”

    I think he knows that Paul’s chance of winning the Republican nomination isn’t greater than 50%. But I also think he believes Paul has a significant chance, perhaps greater than 10%. My sense is that Woods wants to keep the focus of libertarian-leaning people on the Paul campaign and not launch his own.

    I personally think Woods could be a good candidate, though I’d be concerned about how much the media that actually cover him would focus on the Confederacy. No doubt some Libertarians would think that’s a good thing, but I don’t.

  12. Pingback: Who Should I Write-in in 2016 Presidential Polls? | Conservative Heritage Times

Leave a Reply

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