Joe Miller Announces Run Against Lisa Murkowski as a Libertarian

joemiller

Joe Miller

IPR Note: Joe Miller was the GOP nominee for U.S. Senate in Alaska in 2010 and briefly toyed with seeking the Constitution Party’s nomination for president earlier this year.  From JoeMiller.us

September 6, 2016

Joe Miller Press Release
Anchorage, Alaska

Joe Miller Files to Challenge Murkowski for US Senate Seat

Anchorage, Alaska, September 6, 2016  –  At the urging of disenfranchised voters across the state of Alaska, 2010 Republican Nominee Joe Miller today filed his paperwork to run for United States Senate.

“Alaskans deserve a real choice,” said Miller. “The choice between a Democrat, a Democrat-backed independent, and a Republican-In-Name-Only – who has been one of Barack Obama’s chief enablers – is no choice at all.”

With a near-historic low of 15.4 percent turnout and only 7.7 percent of Alaska’s registered voters casting a vote for our incumbent senator in the primary, it is obvious that Alaskan voters wanted another choice.

Due to Libertarian candidate Cean Stevens’ withdrawal from the race and a unanimous vote of the Alaska Libertarian Party’s board of directors, Joe Miller will appear on the November ballot as the Alaska Libertarian Party Nominee. Miller seeks to be the first third-party nominee to win a federal seat in decades.

Murkowski is the most liberal “Republican” up for re-election having voted with Pres. Obama 72 percent of the time during the last session of Congress, second only to Sen. Susan Collins of Maine.

“The Conservative Voice for Alaska,” as Murkowski dubbed herself during this year’s primary election, ranks near the bottom of the American Conservative Union scorecard for GOP senators; was given an “F” grade by the Conservative Review for her voting record, and scores just 36 percent with the Heritage Action Committee ratings this session of Congress (34 percent lifetime), well below the 58 percent average for Republicans.

By way of comparison, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who won the Alaskan presidential primary in the spring, scored 97 percent for his senate votes with Heritage Action, while Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, earned a 100 percent score.

Alaska deserves representation that will confront the corruption of Washington and reverse the disastrous, big government policies of the Obama era, not facilitate them. From encroaching federal tyranny and the surveillance state, to illegal immigration and economically devastating trade deals; from confirming activists judges and pushing globalist treaties, to using our military as an experiment in social engineering and undermining religious liberty; from systematically trampling on the Constitutional rights of the weakest and most vulnerable among us, to burdening our children and grandchildren with intergenerational debt; Lisa Murkowski has failed Alaska and America. It’s time for a change.

If elected, Miller pledges to caucus with the Republican Party, but be a voice for reform on Capitol Hill and within the Last Frontier.

Miller stated, “I am grateful to Cean Stevens and the Alaska Libertarian Party for their vote of confidence. It is humbling. They could not have been more gracious and helpful. This is an historic opportunity for liberty-loving Alaskans to lead this nation to a post-partisan future of limited constitutional government. I’m calling on all Alaskans of good will to join us in this effort. Together we can make history!”

——-
Joe Miller is a limited government constitutionalist who believes government exists to protect our liberties, not to take them away. He supports free people, free markets, federalism, the right to life, religious liberty, American sovereignty, and a strong national defense.

70 thoughts on “Joe Miller Announces Run Against Lisa Murkowski as a Libertarian

  1. George Dance

    That’s nice. Call it Charlie Earl’s revenge; a chance for a Tea Partier to go head-to-head against an establishment Republican in the general election. Unlike 2006, the Democrats will not be running a token candidate, while tacitly supporting Murkowski’s campaign; this will be real 3 (or 4) way race.

    Question: is the LNC going to interfere? Bylaw 5.4 says that “No affiliate party shall endorse any candidate who is a member of another party for public office in any partisan election.” While this looks like it’s meant to apply to candidates running against Libertarians, it also looks like it may (or may not) apply to a candidate pledging to caucus with another party – IOW, that it’s something the LNC and/or the JC has authority to involve itself.

  2. Thane Eichenauer

    I’ll check back in a month when he may or may not disclose whether or not he supports legal adult use of marijuana and an end to foreign military adventurism. It isn’t clear from his web site if he has a position on these issues.

  3. Trent Hill

    Alaska’s Statewide races are always amongst the most interesting to third party & independent observers. The state has an independent streak and has regularly given us surprises like Libertarian state reps, Alaskan independence office holders, and successful write-in campaigns for US Senate. It’s always interesting and this time seems like it will be no different.

    Iv not seen any reporting on it here at IPR, it Margaret Stock is running as an independent. She’s a Harvard educated immigration lawyer and recipient of the McArthur Genius grant, so she’ll be formidable in some respects at least.

  4. mARS

    This is a delusional, paranoid man who thought, when seeking to become state GOP chairman, that his opponents were spying on him and plotting to murder him. He lost as the GOP nominee six years ago; I’d be surprised if he breaks 15% as a Libertarian this year, and that’s only because Metcalfe is an exceptionally weak Democratic nominee. It will be interesting to see if he places higher than Stock.

  5. Tony From Long Island

    This guy makes Bill Weld look like David Bergland! Where are all of the haters denouncing this? Even I think this is ridiculous. You gotta be at least SORTA libertarian to usurp the ballot line!

  6. AMcCarrick

    Tony From Long Island… The silence over here is pretty deafening…. people are ripping into over on ball-access.org though. This guy is truly a detriment to the Libertarian ideology… people wrongly criticized libertarians as Republicans….. if this guy gets elected they’ll now likely be right. How could the Alaska LP support a foreign intervention, anti-drug legalization, pro-life, Anti-gay Senate candidate? What in the actual hell? Are they try to turn into the Constitution Party?

  7. dL

    “This guy makes Bill Weld look like David Bergland! Where are all of the haters denouncing this? Even I think this is ridiculous. You gotta be at least SORTA libertarian to usurp the ballot line!”

    The candidate Miller replaced, Cean Stevens, is basically a right-wing GOP nutter, too. Of course, when one takes a stand to stop nominating these GOP carpetbaggers, one gets lambasted as a “purist.” Well, yeah, “purist”==libertarian. The LP is for libertarian candidates. If you are just out for name recognition and X% of the vote, well, this is what you get saddled w/.

  8. AMcCarrick

    dL….There’s a difference between these guys who have only about a libertarian ranking of 25% compared to Weld and Johnson who have a libertarian ranking of over 80%. The “purists” that are being lambasted are those who are anti-Weld/Johnson even though they’re 80% or so in line with the platform…. Everyone including pragmatists like myself are lambasting Miller and Stevens.

    Go down the list where do Johnson and Weld disagree with the platform/ideology…. Only on Religious Freedom for Business Owners and Gun restrictions…. Where does this guy disagree with the LP platform/ideology? On everything but Gun restrictions and Religious Freedom for Business Owners…. This guy is literally the polar opposite of Weld and Johnson on EVERY issue.

  9. Tony From Long Island

    AM – I was just about to say that. I score 70 / 70 I am a democrat and am proud of that. But I am a former member of the LP and there is a LOT in the LP platform I agree with.

    This is different than Bill Weld. I see only ONE thing this guy is sorta libertarian about. I am fine with big tent, and I don’t want “purists” to represent the party, but I don’t want pure right-wingers either.

  10. AMcCarrick

    JamesT; Everything but gun rights…. He’s pro-gay marriage, favors drug legalization, is anti-war, favors reductions in government regulation on business and individuals personal lives, favors massive spending cuts… just look at the platform and check off everything by gun rights.

  11. AMcCarrick

    Big Dawg… When he was presented with the falsified information that Bush presented sure, in fact most people did…. When he came to know the truth he whole retracted his support… dipshit. One fuck up, and an admitted fuck up at that, doesn’t automatically mean somebody isn’t libertarian, you moron.

  12. AMcCarrick

    Guess by your logic, Big Dawg, we SHOULD have mandatory minimum sentencing, because one fuck up is the determinant of a persons character.

  13. Andy Craig

    On The Issues maintains probably the best Nolan Chart rankings of politicians; and easily the most comprehensive.

    Joe Miller:

    For comparison’s sake

    Bill Weld-

    Gary Johnson-

    Ron Paul-

    Rand Paul-

    Bob Barr-

    Mike Gravel-

  14. Andy Craig

    Make of it what you will, but I find it’s a pretty handy reference to get a rough sense of where somebody is on the issue spectrum, handily broken down into familiar NC quadrant terms.

  15. wolfefan

    I don’t know, Lester, but there are plenty of anti-Weld comments here. If AC is trying to remove them all he is doing a singularly poor job.

  16. dL

    “Go down the list where do Johnson and Weld disagree with the platform/ideology…. Only on Religious Freedom for Business Owners and Gun restrictions…. ”

    Weld’s Law and Republicanism is an anathema to libertarianism. Weld supports:

    (i) The Patriot Act
    (ii) Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
    (iii) Drug Laws
    (iv) Overwhelming American Military Supremacy

    Those 4 things alone disqualify him as libertarian. Not even up for a discussion. Where did you people educate yourselves re: the libertarian tradition, critique,history,major thinkers, philosophy? A David Boaz fortune cookie?

    Your own your body. You don’t permission from the state to to engage in free exchange. Instead you get FCEN: free trade==money laundering==prison.
    Drug Laws: you don’t own your body, the state owns your body
    The Patriot Act, Military Supremacy ==means to enforce the above. The means to put people in cages and in graves who disobey the authority of the almighty, heavily armed US Govt that boasts the greatest intel/internal domestic security/spy apparatus ever assembled in human history.

    “Purist”==libertarian. Guilty as charged. What are you? A groupie of the groupies(david boaz et al) of Hollywood for the ugly people?

  17. Jill Pyeatt

    I’m removing Nathan Norman/Big Dawg/FrugalFillmore/Lester Fulcrum’s comments. He must be having a grand old time while I was occupied earning a living, but I’m back in my office now and will try to delete them more quickly.

  18. Gene Berkman

    I think the earlier commenters meant to say “I guess libertarian purity now includes being ‘for’ the Berlin wall.’

    I strongly support Gary Johnson & Bill Weld. I have publicized Bill Weld in libertarian circles since his first run for Governor of Massachusetts, and I have supported Ron Paul and other Republicans who are for limited government. I don’t think that Joe Miller fits the description of a limited government conservative, given his support for a wall to keep out immigrants, and his foreign policy stands.

    Don’t know where he stands on marijuana – even Sarah Palin seems to be for legalizing it. But as a whole, I don’t think libertarians should support candidates like Joe Miller, and I hope the Alaska Libertarian Party gets better in the future.

  19. Thomas Knapp

    Bill Weld seems to be mildly libertarian on a couple of issues (he’s against marriage apartheid and would like to mildly relax one aspect of the drug war).

    On pretty much everything else he’s a run of the mill northeastern progressive just like Trump and Clinton, and it shows.

  20. Thomas Knapp

    “Marriage apartheid? Way to disrespect the struggle of South Africans.”

    Separate and unequal legal systems and protections for two different classes of citizens as a matter of policy is apartheid.

    It’s apartheid when the South Africans do it, it’s apartheid when the Israelis do it, it’s apartheid when the Americans do it.

  21. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I am not commenting on anything to do with the specific people in this thread, simply to post against those thoroughly misleading Nolan Chart depictions. Name one issue that Ron Paul wouldn’t get a 100/100 on the Nolan Chart on- USING THE NOLAN QUIZ. It is importing results from different questionnaires and transposing them there, which is completely inappropriate. The Nolan Chart is designed to give high Libertarian readings- nearly everyone named would probably have been in the quadrant, and Ron Paul certainly would have been a top dotter.

    This isn’t an attack on Gary or anyone, but there is no possible universe in which Gary Johnson scores higher on a Libertarian “purity” ranking than Ron Paul. Paul’s major deviation was in abortion (and I think he is right there but that is a different story).

  22. George Dance

    Gene: “Don’t know where [Miller] stands on marijuana – even Sarah Palin seems to be for legalizing it.”

    There’s some pretty horrible stuff on his webpage; it seems, as part of his Tea Party incarnation, he was setting himself up as the leader of the stop-legalization movement.
    http://joemiller.us/tag/legalization-of-marijuana/

    Of course, that was all before legalization passed – it may turn out to be a non-issue – and it was before he got the Libertarian endorsement. Maybe he’s change his mind, or just agreed to shut up about it …

    Which brings me to the point; we’ll have to see what he does as the candidate. Even with him, I don’t think someone should be pilloried for what he said and did before representing the party. It is a reason to keep track of what he’s saying and doing afterward, though.

  23. Caryn Ann Harlos

    George, I don’t see where you think the LNC would have any authority here, he is a registered Libertarian.

    And I think you guys are missing an important point on his pot stance… the Alaska Party is anti-legalization…. wait before you freak out. It is because they are pro decriminalization feeling like legalization is asking state permission for a right and subjecting it to taxation and regulation. You don’t have to agree with their position but please represent it accurately. The Alaska Party’s position is the same thing on gay marriage. They feel strongly that the Libertarian position is not to legalize but for the state to get out. I mention all of this in my last regional report long before this candidacy. This isn’t a new position.

    And I know this because I have had many conversations with their Chair on these issues of concern to Alaskans so that I can properly represent their interests.

  24. George Dance

    CAH – ” Name one issue that Ron Paul wouldn’t get a 100/100 on the Nolan Chart on- USING THE NOLAN QUIZ. It is importing results from different questionnaires and transposing them there, which is completely inappropriate.”

    Indeed it is a different questionaire: Here’s the On the issues vote match quiz:
    http://www.ontheissues.org/Quiz/Quiz2016.asp?quiz=Pres2016

    It does have a few more questions, on things like immigration and prayer in public schools, that the WSPQ doesn’t have.

    As well, it doesn’t ask the candidates to do the quiz, but rates them on their past statements and/or votes.

  25. George Dance

    CAH – I quoted the relevant section, and the question: is endorsing a candidate who’s promising to caucus with the Republicans any different from endorsing a Republican candidate? That’s not a statement of my views, since my views are in fact irrelevant: it comes down to what the LNC. or any of its members, thinks.

  26. George Dance

    Tony from LI: “This guy makes Bill Weld look like David Bergland! Where are all of the haters denouncing this? ”

    I suppose you’ve got the answer, now; but if not, I’ll spell it out: The “haters” or (to use their preferred terms) the “purists” or “libertarian Libertarians” aren’t concerned about Miller, because he’s not the presidential nominee. Johnson and Weld are getting the flak because they are: they’re the guys with the targets on their backs.

    The fact Miller’s not going to endorse, or vote for, Johnson/Weld may even make him one of the good guys, for some of them.

  27. langa

    Sure, Miller’s not a libertarian, but then again, he’s not being held up as the national face of libertarianism like Johnson and Weld are. That’s why so many of us are “hating” on Johnson/Weld.

    And Caryn is right about those charts. Any system that rates Gary Johnson as more libertarian than Ron Paul, or rates Bill Weld as anything close to libertarian, is simply worthless.

  28. dL

    “I suppose you’ve got the answer, now; but if not, I’ll spell it out: The “haters” or (to use their preferred terms) the “purists” or “libertarian Libertarians” aren’t concerned about Miller, because he’s not the presidential nominee. Johnson and Weld are getting the flak because they are: they’re the guys with the targets on their backs.

    The fact Miller’s not going to endorse, or vote for, Johnson/Weld may even make him one of the good guys, for some of them.’

    Nope…I’ve properly mocked Joe Miller going back to 2010
    https://rulingclass.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/tea-partier-joe-miller-communist-east-germany-a-model-for-border-security/

    And you are not going to be able to find anyone amongst the “purists” who supports him. Weak stab at slander to offset the relevant question that his LP candidacy poses: if name recognition is at the top of the list when it comes to preferred LP candidates, then why don’t the pragmaticrats support him? If his stand on the issues disqualify him, then what exactly are the disqualifying issues? Obviously supporting TeamGov rules out the drug war,the patriot act, gun rights, anti-war as potential disqualifying issues. So what are the disqualifying issues for a non-purist perspective?

  29. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    From the LP Alaska Facebook page, posted earlier today:

    UNDERSTANDING LIBERTARIANS IN ALASKA
    Alaska Libertarians are not:
    NOT Pacifists
    NOT Anarchists
    NOT Pro drug use
    NOT Pro abortion
    NOT Pro gay marriage
    If you have questions review the platform on the website and frequently posted here on Facebook.
    The libertarian philosophy is not what uninformed Republicans and Democrats say it is. The libertarian philosophy allows diversity of thought and chooses to defend the Constitution not Political Party Cronyism.


    https://www.facebook.com/AlaskaLiberty/posts/1060649030654947

    I commend the LP Alaska for making things interesting. I predict Miller is actually going to run a serious campaign and get the highest percentage of the vote of any LP U.S. Senate candidate this year. And sure, he has a Cruz-esque foreign policy probably, but he or his wife did help the Ron Paul delegates in some way at the extremely tumultuous 2012 Alaska GOP convention where a Ron Paul supporter was able to get elected chair IIRC.

    I think it’s fair to say Miller could be called the Alaskan version of Paul LePage without the some of the slightly racially tinged rhetoric of the Maine governor. I appreciate politicians who actually say what they believe and don’t cower before the Altar of Political Correctness. I think it’s fair to say the LP has become just as politically correct as the Greens, which isn’t praiseworthy.

    It does not matter if some say that is not actually “politically correct to be politically incorrect”.

    My last point is that I wish the Alaskan Independence Party was still active. Bob Bird was actually endorsed by Ron Paul in 2008 and got a somewhat decent 4%. AIP would seemingly be a better fit for Miller, but I commend the Alaska AIP, anyway. It’s the reciprocal effect: national LP nominates left-wing SJWs because “more votes and respectability,” while Alaskan LP responds with “here, we’re gonna balance it out with a hard- right-winger,” even if he potentially has some remnants of neocon foreign interventionist thoughts. This is at least according to my imagination how things went down.

    My main point was sharing the Facebook status from the AKLP, anyway. ^^

  30. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Re posting to make sure it didn’t get drowned out by my rather pointless commentary:

    From the LP Alaska Facebook page, posted earlier today:

    UNDERSTANDING LIBERTARIANS IN ALASKA

    Alaska Libertarians are not:
    NOT Pacifists
    NOT Anarchists
    NOT Pro drug use
    NOT Pro abortion
    NOT Pro gay marriage

    If you have questions review the platform on the website and frequently posted here on Facebook.
    The libertarian philosophy is not what uninformed Republicans and Democrats say it is. The libertarian philosophy allows diversity of thought and chooses to defend the Constitution not Political Party Cronyism.

    https://www.facebook.com/AlaskaLiberty/posts/1060649030654947

  31. dL

    “I think the earlier commenters meant to say “I guess libertarian purity now includes being ‘for’ the Berlin wall.’”

    No, I meant exactly what I wrote. It refers to people like people like you who promote GOP carpetbagging under the fictional banner of “limited government conservatism” and toss out “purity” to offset any criticism of that nonsense. So when you have another instance of GOP carpetbagging by someone who is even worse than Weld, I’m trying to figure what your defense will be when the nutters in Alaska call you a purist. Apparently, now purist would mean someone who objects to the Berlin wall.

  32. dL

    “The libertarian philosophy is not what uninformed Republicans and Democrats say it is.”

    Neither is it what a bunch of uniformed right-wing nutters to the north say it is.

  33. dL

    “I think it’s fair to say Miller could be called the Alaskan version of Paul LePage without the some of the slightly racially tinged rhetoric of the Maine governor. I appreciate politicians who actually say what they believe and don’t cower before the Altar of Political Correctness. I think it’s fair to say the LP has become just as politically correct as the Greens, which isn’t praiseworthy.”

    LOL. Right-wing PC culture is just as virulent as the left-wing variety. More so, in fact. For example, here is rightest PC nutjob Joe Miller outraged over the politically incorrect speech of Colin Kaepernick.

    https://twitter.com/JoeWMiller/status/773156045875191808

  34. dL

    “I am not commenting on anything to do with the specific people in this thread, simply to post against those thoroughly misleading Nolan Chart depictions. ”

    Yep. Generally, political multiple-choice quizzes(with a limited set of choices per question) are at best a simple first-order approximation. Example: “I side with..” that Gary Johnson likes to promote. Well, I took it and I sided most w/ GJ as a straight multiple-choice questionnaire. However, since Johnson actually took to time to elaborate on his answers, my own human grading reduced the agreement percentage significantly based on his extra commentary.

  35. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Look, I never stood for the pledge or said it in high school (almost never). I realize we’re talking about the anthem here, but I still really don’t care what he did. But he’s just an opportunist, he’s making millions to run around chasing after a rubber ball (credit: Mark Dice) and he’s not being oppressed. Patriotism can’t be forced – and especially in the U.S. , we live in one giant transcontinental shopping mall, culture doesn’t exist here at all, except in maybe some remnants of the Deep South, possibly. Still, the media shouldn’t be covering it as much as it does – and people shouldn’t be making an issue out of this – US government is killing civilians each day overseas, that is an actual scandal, not some anthem or flag protest or whatever.

    This is why America needs to disintegrate into several states – maybe it can restore a sense of community when there are smaller countries, and the US military hegemony can collapse as well as that private banking cartel that’s still around.

    http://libertyhangout.org/2016/09/radical-decentralization-the-only-sane-strategy-for-the-libertarian-movement/

  36. Simon Saez

    Wow! This Joe Miller guy makes Murkowski not seem so bad. In fact, I have always thought Murkowski is leaps and bounds above the average Republican in the U.S. Senate.

    Why does the Alaska Libertarian Party even exist if it is going to support cretins like this guy?

  37. Thomas Knapp

    Simon Saez,

    It’s unfortunate, but not surprising.

    Back when Sarah Palin ran for governor, the Alaska LP did not endorse her (contrary to some reports) — but several members of its executive committee, possibly even a majority, did personally endorse her.

    Oddly, the Alaska LP seems to be one of the few real-world examples of the “social club” mindset that GOP cargo cultists moan about whenever they aren’t given free exclusive use of the LP label for whatever Big Name of the Day has them all hot and bothered. Any party supporting Joe Miller for anything is 180 degrees opposite “serious” politics.

  38. Chuck Moulton

    This isn’t surprising. Most of the Alaska LP board were Joe Miller supporters in 2010.

    I think Murkowski leans more libertarian than Joe Miller. It depends what issues you care about most. I don’t live in Alaska though… it’s up to them who they nominate, not us.

    I find the Alaska Facebook meme quoted above very offensive. That wouldn’t fly in the states I’ve been involved with.

  39. Chuck Moulton

    Chuck Moulton wrote:

    This isn’t surprising. Most of the Alaska LP board were Joe Miller supporters in 2010.

    I phrased that poorly. What I meant was the board in 2010, not the board in 2016.

  40. Andy Craig

    @Caryn

    The Nolan Chart is not tied to a particular set of questions. You’re thinking of the World’s Smallest Political Quiz; which uses the Nolan Chart. So does this website, taking into account a much broader sampling of issues. It isn’t based on WSPQ’s ten questions; on which both Johnson and Paul (and most people) would score 10/10.

    It also isn’t hard to name issues on which Gary Johnson is more libertarian than Ron Paul. Ron ran ads bashing immigration; called for “denying student visas to terrorist countries,” said he “rejects the notion of separation of church and state,” wanted to use the National Guard to militarize the Mexican border; supported building a border fence; was openly hostile to gay rights throughout his career, etc. etc. And yes, thinking the government should enforce a ban on abortion does count against anybody’s “libertarian” score.

    Regardless of who you think is more right on those things; there’s no accurate Nolan Chart ranking that wouldn’t show Paul on the right side of the libertarian quadrant, unless it’s oversimplified to the point of not really showing any distinction between conservative-leaning right-libertarians and progressive-leaning left-libertarians.

  41. Andy Craig

    @Caryn “there is no possible universe in which Gary Johnson scores higher on a Libertarian “purity” ranking than Ron Paul.”

    Ron Paul, being a hell of a lot less libertarian than Gary Johnson on immigration:

  42. Thomas Knapp

    Andy,

    Pretty much agreed on Ron Paul, but one correction:

    “It isn’t based on WSPQ’s ten questions; on which both Johnson and Paul (and most people) would score 10/10”

    There is no particular set of ten questions which constitutes the WSPQ. They change the questions around every now and again.

    For example, a few years back, they replaced the question on borders/immigration, where if you took the libertarian position (open borders) you got 10 points and if you took Ron Paul’s anti-libertarian position you got none. I never asked, but I always assumed they got rid of that question precisely because Ron Paul would have flunked it.

  43. Andy Craig

    There are several references out there to an article David wrote in the January 1971 edition of The Individualist, titled “Classifying and Analyzing Politico-Economic Systems,” that is supposedly when David first proposed the chart and from which it became attached to his name (even though the basic idea was not original to him.)

    I can’t find anywhere a copy of that article. That’d probably be worth digging up to anybody who has access to those archives. It’d be interesting to see what questions, if any, David posited as examples. Not that I think his questions would necessarily be better, but just for historical interest.

    I’d also be curious to see the different iterations ASG has put their 10-question version through. I did not know they had removed immigration, but I suspect you are correct about the reason why.

    Still asking about the draft is pretty dated… if they ditched immigration (an even stranger absence in the context of the 2016 election), I wonder why they haven’t swapped the draft out with, for example, a question about military spending.

  44. Chuck Moulton

    Andy Craig’s candidate Nolan charts seem fairly accurate.

    Ron Paul was pretty bad on immigration and gay marriage and abortion. The latter two come from his religious views. The former may have been a function of handlers… Ron Paul has flipped around a lot on immigration, and I get the impression his campaign staff (who were hard right conservatives, not libertarians) positioned him that way to match their own views and as a strategy to pick up Tancredo voters. His congressional office staff (libertarians) were livid — they insist those were not his actual views. It’s the same problem Gary Johnson has with his conservative Republican handlers steering his messaging away from libertarian views.

    I’m not saying that excuses Ron Paul’s horrid immigration statements… the buck stops with the candidate, who chooses his campaign staff.

    At least when Ron Paul ran LP he clarified deviations from the platform and didn’t run with the deviations as his top issues.

  45. Andy Craig

    I don’t think they’re perfectly accurate; I might have placed some of them in marginally different locations. Those are the rankings that appear at OnTheIssues.org, at the bottom of their listing of candidate statements on all the issues they track, which is like twenty- or thirty-something.

    But at a quick glance to get a feeling of a politician whose record you’re not familiar with, it’s a handy reference. It’s also easily the most comprehensive listing that uses the NC…. they have pretty much anybody who’s held office in the past two or three decades, or been a major-party nominee.

  46. Caryn Ann Harlos

    @Andy

    ==The Nolan Chart is not tied to a particular set of questions. You’re thinking of the World’s Smallest Political Quiz==

    Yes which is what nearly everyone is since it is used at LP Outreach events and is very simplistic.

    ==which uses the Nolan Chart. So does this website, taking into account a much broader sampling of issues. It isn’t based on WSPQ’s ten questions; on which both Johnson and Paul (and most people) would score 10/10.==

    Which is my point. You can’t simply post those in which the context in which most people would view it would be the outreach quiz. Every time I have seen these on FB that is in fact the context most people viewed them.

    ==IIt also isn’t hard to name issues on which Gary Johnson is more libertarian than Ron Paul==

    Good thing I never said “no issue” but referred to a totality.

    ==rejects the notion of separation of church and state==

    Unless there is some other context I am unaware of this is a pretty bad misrepresentation for what is being implied as to what he meant. I would love to see the context this is made in. From everything I have seen, he didn’t mean that laws should be based on religious morality which is the only libertarian context in which your claim makes any sense. And on gay rights, I would have to see more, but if it is that the state shouldn’t license gay marriages, like the issue with the Alaska LP mentioned above, that is a libertarian position IF the intent is that the state shouldn’t license ANY marriages, and rather than expanding the state, licenses should be done away with entirely. That is not a simplistic issue. That is the position of many Libertarians. I have said I found it to be a lateral move – there were two different issues – and if the government is going to license, they have to license equally, which they still do not, since poly people cannot have a “more than two marriage.

    And no – being against murder (abortion) is not an anti-libertarian position. It does make one opposed to the LP stance however, and many quizzes will rank that badly. They are wrong. Gary support government bans by the way after viability. Gary is right at that point. Even many pro life people think that should be the dividing line because the totalitarian measures that would be needed to enforce earlier would cause more violations than it prevented.

    ==Regardless of who you think is more right on those things; there’s no accurate Nolan Chart ranking that wouldn’t show Paul on the right side of the libertarian quadrant, unless it’s oversimplified to the point of not really showing any distinction between conservative-leaning right-libertarians and progressive-leaning left-libertarians.==

    Never the point. The point is that there is a bait and switch here. On the quiz people are familiar with nearly anyone remotely libertarian gets near the top. And yes, in a more nuanced test, I never said Paul would not be towards the right quadrant. I am definitely left of Paul. People see the chart and think the outreach quiz is being referred to.

    I believe Brett does have a history of the questions BTW if anyone is interested. I saw something on that once but can’t recall where.

    And thanks for info on immigration, was unaware of some of that. Immigration is definitely an issue where I am much more left than many libertarians.

    And note none of this was to say anyone wasn’t a libertarian etc. I am way too busy to engage in those games- we have work to do. I do dispute the way those charts are used in the context and understanding that people will have. And I would highly prefer (like isidewith) that anyone so ranked be given the same questions as we all know there are nuances etc, and scouring public statements and ranking in that manner is not accurate.

    And I carry no torch for Ron Paul. I like him. But I wasn’t influenced by him nor is he who brought me into libertarianism unlike some people. I am definitely a post-Ron Paul Libertarian.

    And so good to see you Chuck!

  47. Andy Craig

    I referenced the source in the original post. I don’t see anybody here actually confused about that, or thinking I was referring to the WSPQ. The ASG ten-question quiz does not have a monopoly on being allowed to use the Nolan Chart.

    Abortion is not murder, and wanting the government to force women to carry to term is a less libertarian position than not wanting the government to do that. We’re probably just going to disagree on that, but it’s something I count against Paul and will continue to do so. I think Johnson’s position is also not as fully pro-choice as I’d personally prefer, but he’s a great deal more libertarian on the issue than Paul and tends to emphasize the pro-choice side of his position.

    As for Ron Paul’s atrocious history on gay rights and the 1st Amendment, he introduced one of the most awful anti-liberty pieces of legislation I’ve ever seen, under the cutesy name “We The People Act”. To wit:

    “”The Supreme Court of the United States and each Federal court—

    (1) shall not adjudicate—

    (A) any claim involving the laws, regulations, or policies of any State or unit of local government relating to the free exercise or establishment of religion;

    (B) any claim based upon the right of privacy, including any such claim related to any issue of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or

    (C) any claim based upon equal protection of the laws to the extent such claim is based upon the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation; and

    (2) shall not rely on any judicial decision involving any issue referred to in paragraph (1).””

    He also insisted he would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, and if you really want to be appalled you should check out some of things he had to say about HIV/AIDS during his 1988 campaign. He got marginally better on the issue towards the end of his career, but only insofar as he was catching up with public opinion.

    I like Ron Paul; I supported Ron Paul; on most issues Ron Paul is great. Maybe, as speculated above, he was just pandering on some of these things and his “real” opinions are more libertarian than his public statements. But either way he is far from the exemplar of purist no-deviations libertarianism. I don’t think *anybody* is; but Paul certainly isn’t.

  48. Caryn Ann Harlos

    That religion comment is contextless. His statement is, in fact, true. What he meant by it is questionable. The founding fathers certainly were not strict separationists (and I think they were wrong). I am a strict separationist (if by that we mean basing laws on sheerly religious reasons – and you have provided nothing that says Paul advocated that – I would be interested in seeing it).

  49. Caryn Ann Harlos

    And yes supporting DOMA would be a huge sucky black mark. No doubt.

    I am not aware of the 1988 AIDS comments. But then again, I am not a huge Paul fan so haven’t been studying him… people are often aghast when I say he had zero influence on my libertarianism.

  50. Gene Berkman

    dL – I apologize, I was confused about your remark. I thought you were making a comment about the Alaska LP as being “purist” libertarians, who, in this case, don’t seem to mind the Berlin Wall.

    In your explanation, I can now see the logic. As a Libertarian purist, I do oppose the Berlin Wall. Also as a German-American, I oppose the Berlin Wall and I was not happy about the Soviet occupation of the Eastern zone.

    But if we can deport Joe Miller to East Germany – that I don’t have a problem with.

  51. Caryn Ann Harlos

    And I never said you didn’t reference the chart nor did I make any monopoly claims. I reference the REALITY of the confusion it engenders and many (not you) use it precisely for that reason. Not that FB should be our measure of behaviour but I have seen it done that way on FB with the resultant confusion.

  52. Andy Craig

    If you’ve seen people get confused over that, I’ll take your word for it. I’ve never seen it, and I reference the OTI rankings fairly often. I think most libertarians familiar enough with these concepts to recognize the jargon we’re using, would understand that WSPQ is not the most comprehensive or objective way to place somebody on the NC.

  53. Caryn Ann Harlos

    @Andy

    You and I are deep down the rabbit hole and forget sometimes the limited context others have 🙂

  54. George Dance

    Caryn: “And I think you guys are missing an important point on his pot stance… the Alaska Party is anti-legalization…. wait before you freak out. It is because they are pro decriminalization feeling like legalization is asking state permission for a right and subjecting it to taxation and regulation. ”

    I don’t want it to sound as if I’m taking issue with Caryn Ann’s characterization of the Alaska LP consensus – she is the one person here who can be said to know what she’s talking about.

    And it’s a valid stance in LP terms – the decriminalize/legalize debate has come up here in Canada constantly over the years – anarcho-Libertarians tend to support the former (for the above reasons), and minarch-Libertarians the latter (because it leaves a black market, with enforcement by gangs rather than the law, in place), but it’s not a straight 1:1 mapping – I suspect whether the advocate has a cannabis connection or not is as significant.

    But that beginning – I’m afraid that gives a completely misleading impression of where Miller stands on the issue. I’d again urge those interested to check out his website archive – the things about marijuana having no medical value, about it being a ‘gateway drug’, the stories about the death toll on Colorado highways from cannabis, et al. Miller is a real Drug Warrior, plain and simple.

  55. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Hi George, I confess to not having knowledge about the candidate’s past stand, I can only go by the information that the Alaska Party has imparted to me about the current position and the position of the Party, and to say, this position of the Party is not new. It was urgently communicated to me in my initial “get to know each other” phone call when I was first elected.

  56. Gerne Berkman

    I first heard the term “decriminalization” in regard to marijuana in 1972, while working to pass the California Marijuana Initiative.

    Some people used the term “decriminalize” to mean the same thing as “legalize” but they were afraid that the term “legalize” or “legalization” would cause undecided voters to vote against the initiative.

    Others used the term to describe the California Marijuana Initiative because it ended criminal penalties for possession of marijuana, but did not legalize sale and cultivation for sale. In this meaning, decriminalization meant less freedom for marijuana users than legalization.

    Since that time, California changed the law to make simple possession of one ounce or less subject to a citation and a civil fine; you are still punished for possession, if caught, but you don’t get a criminal record, and thus marijuana (one ounce or less) is “decriminalized” in California.

    Given any of these meanings, it is clear that decriminalization does not provide as much freedom as legalization; therefor, legalization is more anti-statist than is decriminalization. And legalization is no more a case of “asking permission of the government” than is decriminalization.

  57. Jonathan Jaech

    But Gene, if by “decriminalization” we mean total decriminalization, including removing all criminal penalties on growing, selling, transporting, etc., in any amount, without imposing any regulations apart from ordinary tort and similar general civil laws, then “decriminalization” is more anti-statist than any legalization scheme that calls for regulation and taxation.

    Regulation and taxation are classic cartelization moves, designed to create government-dependent special interests, often dominated by corporate entities. Or at least, that is the normal effect.

  58. Thomas Knapp

    Thane,

    It’s good to see Paul getting better on immigration from the days of wetback demagoguing in campaign ads. But reading that sentence (and the whole article), it’s not really clear that there’s much of a change in substance.

    One thing that Rothbard got right was “no particular order.”

    I’m all for eliminating welfare for immigrants — and for everyone else. And I’m happy to work on that at the same time as I work on getting the borders open.

    But holding a libertarian immigration policy hostage to a libertarian welfare policy is like saying “we can only end the war on marijuana AFTER we’ve ended the war on guns.”

Leave a Reply

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