Bob Barr, Roseanne Barr Negotiating Progressive-Libertarian Alliance Ticket?

I have just learned from high placed campaign sources that Roseanne Barr, a candidate for the Green Party presidential nomination, and 2008 Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr are in serious discussions about a joint campaign for POTUS.

The sticking point right now is which one would head the ticket. Roseanne Barr has been making the case that, as the progressive, she would bring 27% of the voters in the country on board as supporters in the general election, as opposed to only 13% that would support the Libertarians. She also explains that she had a top rated TV program in the 1990s, much more popular than Bob Barr’s impeachment of Bill Clinton, and that she has been voted queen of the US Parliament Inc.

For his part, Bob Barr’s team points out that according to the blueprint set forth by political mastermind strategist (and himself one of the leading contenders for the Boston Tea Party presidential nomination) Robert Milnes, the male candidate should be on top and the female should know her place as the VP candidate. “A woman’s place is in the naval observatory, and the Bible says men should always be on top” according to Barr staffer April Moran. “In other words the determining factor for the top of the ticket should be based on anatomy, not ideology.”

Asked to explain this development in light of Bob Barr’s recent endorsement of Newt Gingrich, Ms. Moran said “Newt is a real libertarian, however I just don’t like that Mitt Romney. He is a total yankee liberal from Massachusetts and follows a heathen religion. I know we need to get that illegal alien African Muslim socialist out of the white house by any means necessary, and I think that the poll numbers obviously show that Mr. Bob can win this thing by having a progressive female as a VP candidate.”

Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier will lend his considerable experience to the campaign as a high placed advisor.

22 thoughts on “Bob Barr, Roseanne Barr Negotiating Progressive-Libertarian Alliance Ticket?

  1. Joe

    I heard they were running nude and setting up a bear joint.

    This must be stopped!

    Joe, chair of the Bar Bare Barr-Barr Bar Committee.

  2. Upstartgreen

    I hear Oprah has agreed to finance the campaign since all the other Billionaires are already pledged to either the republicans or the democrats.

  3. paulie Post author

    I don’t think it’s a secret that this was an April Fool’s post, but just in case anyone missed that, well, yeah, it was.

  4. dlw

    I’m just saying that all 3rd parties of all ideologies ought to support the use of American forms of Proportional Representation. It’s what will get us either elected or positioned to get r-e-s-p-e-c-t.


  5. paulie Post author


    However, it’s also an obscure issue that most people do not understand and don’t care about.

    How much pull do you think alt parties have to get people to understand and/or care about it?

  6. Count Awsome

    Just because DLW is a candidate for president with the LT Party Movement, doesn’t mean he can get away with making such ill-informed remarks.

    According to Wikipedia and most mathematicians agree, the Droop quota does not absolutely guarantee that a party with the support of a solid majority of voters will not receive a minority of seats.

    The only quota under which this cannot happen, even in rare cases, is the slightly smaller Hagenbach-Bischoff quota, the formula for which is identical to the Droop quota’s except that the quotient is not increased to the next whole number.

  7. dlw


    It’s a matter of marketing.

    Both major parties want to dominate our politics. Their ability to potentially dominate our politics stems from how already one party tends to dominate our state politics, which is why we don’t care about state politics, it’s depressing.

    But if we made it impossible for either party dominate a state’s house of representatives then neither could dominate the state’s politics, which would trickle up to make neither able to dominate our nat’l politics. And then, their incentive would be to cooperate, rather than to attack each other so fiercely!

    I think that if Alt parties joined around this issue and kept it simple, “Here’s a way to stick it to both major parties!” And yeah, it’s like Wheaties, it’ll do lots of good things for our democracy. We did something like it in IL from 1870-1980 and it “worked”. It helped the 2nd biggest party stay competitive with the biggest party so the biggest party couldn’t fall asleep at the wheel.

    Count, I did not make such a statement and quite frankly “absolutes” don’t matter that much if one uses a whole host of 3-seat PR elections for one state legislative branch. The law of large numbers will make the “right” outcome prevail the majority of the time. then it can be argued the umpteen other consequences justify the practice.

    There is no LT Party. LTPs are a new kind of party that I blog about at my blog.
    google it.

  8. Swiss Rule

    We welcome our conversation and in the Swiss parliament we like the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota because it guarantees that one part wins a majority ever when the majority vote for that part.

  9. Swiss Rule

    For example when the Automobile Part wins 2% of the vote, the Auotmobile Part also wins 2% of the total MPs.

  10. Swiss Rule

    Very much like the Americas parliament, and that’s a very good movement, even though they are favor the Droop quota and no the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota. I like this subject very much. My relatives lives in America.

  11. dlw

    Hello Swiss Rule.

    I argue for American forms of Proportional Representation both because they increase the feasibility and because I’m of the opinion that proportionality in representation is not the goal. Winner-doesn’t-take-all election rules solve a problem in “more local” elections that it doesn’t solve so much in “less local” elections: it makes what would be chronically non-competitive elections become competitive.
    check out my published essay, “Towards a Winner-Doesn’t-Take-All Electoral System”.


  12. Count Awsome

    DLW, I appreciate your conciliatory response, and I agree that droop or hare in multi-winner districts is an improvement over your standard winner-take-all style methods.

    However, to be certain that the candidates receiving the majority of the votes are rewarded with the majority of the seats the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota should be used. (Named after its inventor, Swiss professor of physics and mathematics Eduard Hagenbach-Bischoff (1833–1910) coincidentally.)

    Rather than using whole numbers, by using percentages, then all mathematical imperfections are resolved.

    Please try to reach a consensus on this with your associate AKA Tirade Faction if possible. I apologize for sounding so picky, but the fact remains that the droop quota is inferior to the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota.

    DLW wrote;
    “Count, I did not make such a statement and quite frankly “absolutes” don’t matter that much if one uses a whole host of 3-seat PR elections for one state legislative branch. The law of large numbers will make the “right” outcome prevail the majority of the time. then it can be argued the umpteen other consequences justify the practice.”

  13. dlw

    I think that if there are only 3 seats in a super district then we cannot use the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota, since it might lead to some districts getting more representation than others.

    At the end of the day, majority rule will be safeguarded in the state senate and so there’s no need to guarantee it in the state house of representatives.

    And I prefer the Hare Quota, which is less likely than the Droop quota not to end with a majority rule. This is because the system’s going to remain rigged to keep 2-party domination. But the third party representatives, who’ll need only 10% of the votes to win a seat with 3-seat LR Hare, will decide which major party is in power in the state house of representatives, which will in turn prevent either party from leveraging its control of the state house to get an unfair advantage in other elections, including our US nat’l elections.

Leave a Reply

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