Libertarian Party and Reform Party Respond to Press Inquiries About Sarah Palin Possibly Joining Third Party

From Ballot Access News, July 1st, 2013:

Recently, Sarah Palin hinted she would consider leaving the Republican Party. U.S. News and World Report contacted the Libertarian Party and the Reform Party to get reactions. See this story.

An excerpt from the linked article above, written by Steven Nelson and published on USNews.com today, follows:

Former vice presidential candidate and Gov. Sarah Palin, R-Alaska, openly mulled leaving the Republican Party in a Saturday interview on Fox News, citing her “libertarian streak.” The Libertarian Party, frequently a refuge for renegade Republicans, isn’t sure that she would be a good fit – and the Reform Party, too, says it has “zero interest” in Palin.

“[W]hile a few of Sarah Palin’s views are aligned with those of the Libertarian Party, her pro-interventionist foreign policy, her support of the 2008 Republican-led bailouts, her loyal support of Big Government Republicans, her social conservative agenda and her lack of concrete backing for any serious downsizing of Big Government runs afoul of the Libertarian Party’s goals and most Libertarians’ views,” the Libertarian Party’s executive director, Carla Howell, told U.S. News.

Palin could conceivably find a home in the Constitution or Reform parties – but the Reform Party, which had its heyday in the 1990s, is entirely uninterested.

To read the full article, please go to the following link:

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2013/07/01/sarah-palins-libertarian-streak-doesnt-impress-libertarian-party

56 thoughts on “Libertarian Party and Reform Party Respond to Press Inquiries About Sarah Palin Possibly Joining Third Party

  1. Jill Pyeatt

    Thanks, Carla, for your excellent reply about Palin. I don’t think she’s be a good fit with the LP, either.

  2. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    The Constitution Party would absolutely adore her and probably try to nominate her for their presidential nomination in 2016. Ignorance, religious zealotry, xenophobia, homophobia, islamopobia, ardent-pro-Zionism – Palin is a perfect fit for the CP.

  3. William Saturn

    “Over the weekend, Palin responded to a question about whether she would consider starting a new ‘Freedom Party’ with radio host Mark Levin.”

    I guess they’ve never heard of the AFP.

  4. Steve M

    why do libertarians regularly tell people they don’t fit… should be something else… why not say… sure… we need your vote and help?

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    Steve M @ 5,

    Well, consider the context. Palin’s reason for mulling a departure from the GOP is that the GOP seems to be leaning, ever so slightly, toward a very mild move in a somewhat libertarian direction on immigration. Why would the LP want a politician who is leaving the GOP because it’s getting too libertarian?

    And Palin is just a train wreck in general. She was elected mayor of Wasilla as a “progressive” and acted like one, concentrating on raking in federal pork and saddling the town with millions in debt for an eminent-domain powered sports center. Then she was appointed to the state’s oil commission and eventually became governor, also as a “progressive,”even endorsing the idea of giving every Alaskan a “debit card” to buy gas with on the state dime, and supporting the Bridge to Nowhere before she opposed it.

    Then along comes John McCain’s VP offer and all of a sudden she’s a “libertarian-leanning conservative.”

    Next week she may announce that she’s the reincarnation of Gus Hall, or a follower of Lyndon LaRouche.

    There’s just no percentage in being associated with her.

  6. bruce a smith

    Thank you Lesiak, Jill and Thomas for hitting the nail on the head concerning Palin.

  7. Jill Pyeatt

    Steve M: if Ms. Palin comes to our local region meeting, or our county meeting, you bet I’ll tell her “we need your vote and help”, and put her to work, as I do any new people. In the context of this article, however, I agree with the writer that I don’t think she’d be a good fit.

  8. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Thomas Knapp: Then along comes John McCain’s VP offer and all of a sudden she’s a “libertarian-leanning conservative.”

    Long before McCain’s nomination of Palin, Erik Dondero was claiming that Palin was a libertarian. Don’t know what his logic was.

  9. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    Lesiak: ardent-pro-Zionism – Palin is a perfect fit for the CP.

    I don’t think the CP is pro-Zionist.

    That’s why the California AIP split from the CP.

    The AIP is pro-Zionist/pro-War on Terror. The CP is more anti-interventionist.

  10. Thomas L. Knapp

    RTAA,

    Palin did make some libertarianish noises even before the VP nod. I even fell for that a tiny bit myself.

    But keep in mind that Dondero claiming someone is a libertarian is not evidence that that person is a libertarian. As a matter of fact, it’s pretty good evidence that they’re not.

  11. Jared King

    *from Dondero’s FB page*

    “Going unreported by US News, Sarah Palin already has the support of libertarians nationwide. It was libertarians who recruited her for VP for McCain in 2008. Specifically, the Republican Liberty Caucus. If you remember Libertarian Bob Barr for president was polling in the 11% range at the time. McCain knew he had to appeal to libertarians. So, Palin from Alaska was picked.

    Palin had the support of the Libertarian Party of Alaska for Governor in her 2006 campaign. I know. I was right there. And helped to arrange the endorsement from the ALP.

    Eric Dondero, Publisher.
    Libertarian Republican
    Founder, Libertarians for Palin 2008.”

    Not that the “Dondero is raving shithead” needs any more evidence, but scrolling a bit further down his FB page has him calling Michelle Bachmann a “hardcore LIBERTARIAN” and adds you “cannot call yourself a “libertarian” in today’s world unless you recognize the threat that Islam poses to the West”

  12. paulie

    Donderror also founded Libertarians for Romney, Libertarians for McCain, Libertarians for Giuliani, Libertarians for Lieberman, Libertarians for Bush, etc. In other words he is no libertarian. Palin’s record is far from libertarian. Maybe she wants the nomination of the American Freedom Party, LOL.

  13. Steve M

    My comment was more then just about Palin it is an attitude that many Libertarians express. To win elections you have to ask people to support your candidates not direct them towards the candidates of other parties.

  14. Ad Hoc

    Winning elections is meaningless if we are propogating unlibertarian viewpoints such as Ms. Palin’s. If you want to win at the cost of ideology that’s what the big two parties are for.

  15. Steve M

    In the case of Palin you are not only telling her she isn’t welcome you by default are telling people who like that they aren’t welcome.

    Which is just bad politics.

    Better to say that we hope Palin explores the Libertarian Party and comes to more fully support its ideas and principles.

  16. Ad Hoc

    Yes, we are telling people that support a massively unlibertarian foreign policy and social issues/civil liberties policies and have a decidedly mixed position on economic matters, as Ms. Palin does, that they aren’t welcome. This is not personal, and they are most certainly welcome if and when they change these positions.

    Ms. Palin’s aggregate libertarian score is lower than Mr. Obama’s (See ontheissues.org). If someone asked a question about Barack Obama running as a Libertarian, it would be presumed that the question would be about him running on the issues he has been known to stand for, not about him suddenly changing a huge chunk of his views. It is no different with Ms. Palin, who at 60/20 scores as an Authoritarian Conservative.

    To say that we hope she comes to “more fully” support libertarian ideas and principles is to imply that she is somehow close to our positions already. She simply is not.

  17. Steven Wilson

    The Ultra right had their run and it is now over. Even Justin Amash is having a hard time getting donations for his campaign.

    She is desperate. Can’t blame her because what else is she? what does she have left?

    The religious dogma has made the GOP rotten. She needs someone else to ride.

    The GOP is caving in on immigration which should help with hispanics. Then they need to accept Social security to secure the baby boomers. The GOP needs customers not another talking head.

    The Ultra Right had their run. Check mate.

  18. Steve M

    Actually it is to imply that on some issues her position is very similar to the Libertarian position. Gun ownership if nothing else. The trick is to get people to look at our positions and to listen to our reasoning. Hard to do once you’ve told them to go away.

  19. Waldemar Testarossa Fiumente

    Yes, almost any politician has some positions that are libertarian. That doesn’t qualify them to be a Libertarian Party candidate. Such a standard would make the label completely meaningless.

  20. Waldemar Testarossa Fiumente

    If you want to win elections and don’t care about ideology, why do you need a Libertarian Party? You already have Democrats and Republicans. And politicians from both of those parties have some issues or others in common with libertarians, or at least pay lip service to them.

    Growth is meaningless if you forego the first half of “Libertarian Party”, the libertarian part.

  21. Waldemar Testarossa Fiumente

    Please fix the ideas @23.

    @23 is the sentiment that makes the LP completely meaningless by erasing its reason for existence. The Republican and Democratic parties already exist, who needs another party whose only purpose is growth and winning, with no concern for ideas and principles?

  22. Steve M

    I never said that Palin is qualified to be a candidate for the party or even a party leader. I am saying that those of you who regularly tell others not to bother learning about libertarian positions are detrimental to the growth of the Libertarian movement.

    When you tell Palin she isn’t welcome and we wont even talk to her, you are telling a few million other voters the same thing.

    As Homer Simpson would say “Stup!”

  23. ATBAFT

    “we wont even talk to her”

    Geoff Neal and Carla Howell ought to at least propose a meeting to her. Let her reject it if she wants. “Using” the other party is a two way street last I looked – maybe there’s an “enemy of my enemy is my friend” sort of opportunity here.

  24. Jill Pyeatt

    Steve @ 27: “I am saying that those of you who regularly tell others not to bother learning about libertarian positions are detrimental to the growth of the Libertarian movement.”

    This really is a misstateement of what this thread is about. Perhaps this happens elsewhere, but who is telling others not to learn about libertarian positions?

  25. paulie

    “I never said that Palin is qualified to be a candidate for the party or even a party leader. ”

    That was the question Carla was asked.

    “I am saying that those of you who regularly tell others not to bother learning about libertarian positions are detrimental to the growth of the Libertarian movement. ”

    I don’t believe anyone has told anyone not to bother learning. The question was whether Ms. Palin would be someone we would like to run for office, with the presumption that this means that her views remain substantially what she is known for.

    “When you tell Palin she isn’t welcome and we wont even talk to her, you are telling a few million other voters the same thing.”

    We’ve talked to her before, and no one said we wouldn’t talk to her again. We’ll talk to Democrats too. But they shouldn’t run as Libertarians unless they become libertarians.

    “Geoff Neal and Carla Howell ought to at least propose a meeting to her. Let her reject it if she wants. ”

    I’m sure she would be welcome to meet with us. But what is the purpose of the meeting? Unless she is offering to change a substantial portion of her views, we should not be interested in a Palin candidacy any more than we would be in a Clinton or Obama candidacy…if anything, somewhat less.

    ““Using” the other party is a two way street last I looked”

    What could we use her for?

    “maybe there’s an “enemy of my enemy is my friend” sort of opportunity here.”

    Why would you think she is any less our enemy than the Democrats are? The Republicans and Democrats are two gangs fighting over the “right” to rob and enslave us. They are both our enemies.

  26. Steve M

    Paulie,

    You are showing info that isn’t publicly available. The USNews only has Carla’s quote not the question she was asked. Taking your word for what her question was then Carla’s quote is seriously out of context. Since the USNews starts the quote with ‘[W]’ the author/editor has clearly cut out a portion of Carla’s sentence.

    The point of the meeting isn’t to change Palin it is to attract some of Palin’s supporters. Even an invite to Palin would have been an opportunity to get attention and interest from her supporters.

  27. paulie

    Use some common sense. If you’ve ever been a journalist and/or a party spokesperson on either end of such an interview, it’s pretty easy to deduce the question – not necessarily the exact wording, but the basic essence of it.

    The point of the meeting isn’t to change Palin it is to attract some of Palin’s supporters. Even an invite to Palin would have been an opportunity to get attention and interest from her supporters.

    The party is already disproportionately loaded with people who confuse our positions with Palin’s, and having that perception commonly held by the public leads us to drive away support from the other direction that we should be attracting. My analysis, elaborated on at great length on many past threads, is that this is hurting us a lot more than it is helping us.

  28. Concerned Citizen

    Paulie thinks Obama has some libertarian positions. I submit that Obama has none. Obama is a socialist opposed to free markets. Makes me think paulie is a socialist claiming to represent the libertarian perspective.

  29. Steve M

    Paulie, Sorry I thought you knew the question instead of making some guess as to what it was. I am unwilling to jump to such a conclusion especially since for the last almost 4 years, Palin has not been a candidate for office or a party official for any political party. Why would you assume she wants to be one now?

  30. paulie

    Sorry I thought you knew the question instead of making some guess as to what it was.

    You’re making guesses also, since you seem to presume the question was whether we want to meet with her or whether we want her to learn more about libertarianism.

    I am unwilling to jump to such a conclusion especially since for the last almost 4 years, Palin has not been a candidate for office or a party official for any political party.

    That’s the whole reason journalists are interested. She’s indicated she may jump parties and she’s been a governor and big 2 VP candidate. Naturally they think she may want to run, and whether we would be open to her running with us.

    That’s not hard to deduce if you have ever been a journalist or a party spokesperson who had to deal with journalists.

  31. Concerned Citizen

    Obama – governs as a socialist/authoritarian and claims otherwise while campaigning. Ontheissues documents the campaign rhetoric.

    Paulie’s conclusion – Obama is almost libertarian based on ontheissues

  32. Concerned Citizen

    Your site claims he is a Libertarian-leaning progressive. Like I said, that site takes a one dimensional look. For those in office, an accurate site would be based on governance and legislation pushed rather than campaign rhetoric. I do not disagree about Palin but if she wants to change give her a chance.

  33. paulie

    Libertarian-leaning…only very slightly. And it does take into account legislation and governance; read the details. See also the dailysource link. There’s no evidence whatsoever that Palin wants to change, any more than that Obama wants to change.

  34. Steve M

    @36

    we don’t want her (and her followers) to learn more about libertarianism?

    Her jumping from one party to another is interesting in that she may take people with her…. whether or not she runs for office herself.

  35. paulie

    we don’t want her (and her followers) to learn more about libertarianism?

    Read @36 again. You presume that was the question, and there is no reason to presume that.

    Her jumping from one party to another is interesting in that she may take people with her…. whether or not she runs for office herself.

    Yes, she may. Those people are not libertarians. They could easily overwhelm the LP and change it into something completely different, thus negating its purpose for existence.

  36. Steve M

    @42… that is what I pretty much suspected. The “Libertarians” fear is that they may become popular and those in charge lose control. So rather then trying become a competitive party they actively work against growth.

  37. paulie

    Au contraire. I’d like us to become popular, and that will only happen when we stop trying endless to kiss up to and bend over for the reich wing, and finally allow the much larger and more receptive left-center-libertarian (primarily, but not only, youth) demographic to see us as an ally rather than an extreme reich wing enemy.

  38. Steve M

    If your plan is just to get the youth vote then you are fighting age demographics.

    In percentages…..

    Under 5 years 19,175,798 6.8
    5 to 9 years 20,549,505 7.3
    10 to 14 years 20,528,072 7.3
    15 to 19 years 20,219,890 7.2
    20 to 24 years 18,964,001 6.7
    25 to 34 years 39,891,724 14.2
    35 to 44 years 45,148,527 16.0
    45 to 54 years 37,677,952 13.4
    55 to 59 years 13,469,237 4.8
    60 to 64 years 10,805,447 3.8
    65 to 74 years 18,390,986 6.5
    75 to 84 years 12,361,180 4.4
    85 years and over 4,239,587 1.5

  39. paulie

    Nope, not only the youth vote. I’ve written about this a lot on past threads.

    And the percentages are irrelevant to what the LP needs to do in the short term. We can easily expand our base of voters, donors and activist many times over from the people that I would like to reach, even though they are only a niche of the larger electorate. Furthermore, their support helps get our message to a larger audience, as it did with Ron Paul. Started with him standing up to Giuliani on foreign policy and it grew from there, despite, not because of, him being more conservative than us on several social issues.

    We need to emphasize peace and civil liberties issues a lot more – exactly the ones where people like Palin disagree with us – and learn to explain our economic perspective in a way that makes it clear that it doesn’t just benefit the rich and that we care about blue collar workers, consumers, the environment, poor people etc.

  40. Michael H. Wilson

    We need to emphasize peace and civil liberties issues a lot more – exactly the ones where people like Palin disagree with us – and learn to explain our economic perspective in a way that makes it clear that it doesn’t just benefit the rich and that we care about blue collar workers, consumers, the environment, poor people etc.

    I cannot agree more. This approach is extremely important and should be pursued vigorously.

  41. paulie

    The disgruntled conservatives can join the CP or start a new party. The LP is not about what they have in mind, which includes a lot of government social meddling and for many of them (like Palin) intervention in foreign matters.

  42. George Phillies

    Go for it, Sarah!

    Splitting up the Republican party into small pieces is great progress for Liberty.

    And if you are a Palinite in Massachusetts, and decide to try pulling this off, I will be happy to give you advice on Massachusetts ballot access.

  43. Steve M

    You are closing minds down to the libertarian perspective Paulie not opening them up.

  44. paulie

    Disagreed. Constantly trying to bring in conservatives who are not even close to being libertarian closes a lot of minds to the libertarian perspective that have a lot better potential to be on our side for the long haul.

  45. Nick

    Growth is good, but never sell out you’re party’s values for growth. It always causes more trouble then its worth.

  46. Steven R Linnabary

    “I never said that Palin is qualified to be a candidate for the party or even a party leader. ”

    But when people of stature come to the LP (or any other opposition party) they would go straight to the head of the class. It is in their nature, you don’t get to where they are by stuffing envelopes at the local county affiliate office or by circulating petitions.

    Of the major party figureheads that have joined the LP (Sam Steiger, Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Wayne Root & Gary Johnson), only Johnson has had an positive lasting effect. Ron Paul and Steiger had pluses and minuses while Root and Barr had negative impacts. Even Mike Gravel’s campaign had a better lasting effect than the Barr/Root campaign.

    The LP just last year had the opportunity to gain a US Senate seat if only we had endorsed Lisa Murkowski who went on to win in a write in campaign. But the fine folks in Alaska decided against selling out our principles for a cheap win.

    PEACE

  47. Steve M

    If (and it is a big if) the republican party splinters there will be a golden opportunity to scoop up non left leaning libertarians… What I am arguing is should we let one wing of the party detrimentally block growth the party for their internal party political benefit?

  48. paulie

    should we let one wing of the party detrimentally block growth

    That’s exactly what the right leaning libertarians have been doing for decades now. Enough is enough.

Leave a Reply

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