Bob Barr will be a campaign visit to New Hampshire — where he may be one of two Libertarian presidential candidates on the ballot — on Tuesday. It is reported that he will spend the day giving interviews and talking with fellow candidates — presumably Libertarians.
There will be a meet-and-greet at 8:00 P.M. at Murphy’s Taproom, 494 Elm Street in Manchester.
“The momentum for Bob’s campaign is really growing,” says LPNH chairman Brendan Kelly. “He’s polling at 10% without any yard signs and he hasn’t even been here yet.”
The Barr campaign reportedly scheduled the NH trip after the latest Zogby poll was released showing Barr’s support at 10%, the highest level of any state.
The Zogby poll did not include George Phillies, the other Libertarian likely to be on the ballot in New Hampshire.
Paulie – there are logistical and practical reasons I can’t move the meeting to make it a protest – among other things George is one of the people that will be there, and he has mostly agreed not to publicly bash Barr –
Gene, I would agree with you on your analysis IF Barr was “mostly libertarian” – however I’m very convinced that that is NOT what he is running on, and therefore anybody he attracts is unlikely to be a benefit to other Libertarian candidates. Instead I fear that Barr (and to a lesser degree Root) will severely damage the credibility of the party, and leave us trying to do “damage control” for the next several decades.
You say “Americans have a natural inclination toward libertarianism. Not the kind of jet-fueled libertarianism we both espouse, but a real basic “leave me alone†streak. If we can appeal to that very basic form of libertarianism, we will have struck gold.”
I agree, but I don’t see Barr tapping into that streak – instead he is tapping the “mind everyone else’s business” streak with his anti GBLT rights stance, his religious bigotry, his pro-war-on-some-drugs policy, his support for gun-control (remember Lautenburg?) and so forth… I have no more expectation that a hypothetical Barr administration would leave me and mine alone than an ObamcCain administration would; so why should I support it?
ART
Andy – I just don’t agree. Obama may be worse than Bush and might be as bad as any president since Truman or Wilson.
But McCain is an outright monster.
We’re talking about the difference between Ted Kennedy and Adolph Hitler here. They’re both evil, but one significantly more so.
McCain and Obama suck equally.
The analogy I like to draw: it’s sort of like parachuting down and deciding to land on top of one of two large piles of manure which look to be about the same in size.
“2. Ensuring the defeat of McInsane.”
GE, I don’t consider Barr potentially ensuring the defeat of John McCain to be a positive outcome. Yes, McCain sucks, but so does Obama. It is not like electing Obama over McCain is going to be any kind of victory for liberty. McCain and Obama suck equally.
Also, this could make the Libertarian Party into a “spoiler” which means the LP will get smeared for “stealing” the election from McCain much like Nader was alleged to have done to Gore back in 2000.
The Libertarian Party – if properly marketed – SHOULD BE regarded as something totally seperate from the “left vs. right” political paradigm. We should not be just drawing votes from disgruntled conservatives, we should also draw votes from people on the left as well as people in the center and independents, and we should also be inspiring non-voters into going to the polls and voting Libertarian.
I am not going to reprint Trosper’s analysis, but when he says that it is better that an impure Barr gets more votes than a pure Barr getting 400,000, I challenge this as better.
Getting them into the door via electoral politics is a poor way to get them to be “real” libertarians, unless such electoral politics is geared mostly toward educating and influencing the debate.
Barr will only get them into the door via a conservative outlook . . . those who want to vote for a conservative candidate. A candidate whose primary emphases are upholding the legislation of morality, one who believes in “law and order”, and who believes that the role of the state is some amount more than zero, in every realm of society. This is Barr.
Believe it or not, the libertarian movement is still in the didactic/educational stage . this greatly saddens me, but I accept it and feel that running candidates, especially for such high level posts is valuable only for getting the libertarian message out, and getting the competition to respond to it.
Barr, unfortunately is mostly getting a conservative message out, and for the most part the libertarianism is lost. Barr then, is only a LINO, and the talking heads know it.
Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik, and the others, to the extent they were interviewed, were never questioned as to their difference to libertarianism. Barr is . . . and for good reason. He is so far off the mark on so may things, only a blind person wouldn’t see it.
Thus getting the voters in through the “libertarian” door is best done when they are convinced of the virtue of the principles and consequences of liberty, and not the virtues of “teaching the conservatives” a lesson. Barr’s strategy and positioning does the latter.
Paulie, the 16% is from a poll done a few years ago, by Rasmussen I think, where one of the variations of the opinion survey for the OPH/Nolan chart were asked on a telephone poll.
According to Rasmussen, 16% answered in such a way that put them in the libertarian quadrant. However, now that I recall more vividly, only 2% actually “self-identified” their political beliefs as being libertartian.
So, maybe a 43% of the 2% would be appropriate in analyzing this, again assuming that 2% is a reasonably accurate representation of the population. This would then be about 0.86%.
Still not bad, but again as the election draws closer, and the Dems and Reps have their horse and pony shows, that will dwindle to 1/2 of the 43% or less.
Thanks for pointing this out Paulie. However, if I remember correctly, Barr was polling something like 9% of conservatives in the Zogby poll. That will likely dwindle to less than 1/4 of that.
Barr is likely to get 800,000 to 1,200,000 votes.
However, if the percentages don’t drop as precipitously as has happened in the past, if we see that Barr still has 3 to 4% a few weeks before the election, he may actually break 2 million votes.
Still, even with 2 million votes, will it have been worth it to throw out the baby with the bathwater? That, my friends, is THE question!
I’ve given MY answer!
The whole meme of Barr ensuring McCain’s loss depends on the idea that he will draw only, or primarily, votes that would otherwise go to McCain. While this may seem to be a logical conclusion based on his campaign rhetoric, it is not borne out by actual polling data to the limited extent it is available.
I’ve long maintained that the biggest share of disaffected vote up for grabs this year is “libertarianish”-left, which also happens to be the biggest growth sector.
Barr is positioning himself to appeal to the far right, who are by nature predisposed to go back to McCain, no matter how much they gripe about him, after they get hit hard with a heapin’ dose of Obamanation/o.bamapost style fearmongering about Obama (if Tom Knapp, Conservative Heritage Times and I – what a combination! – are right about what might happen to Obama, substitute Clinton here). Despite appearances, these votes are not available.
There are some inklings that Barr actually understands this. For instance, see
http://lastfreevoice.wordpress.com/2008/07/20/barr-crashes-liberal-blogger-convention-is-welcomed-but-only-if-he-pays-the-regular-entrance-fee/
Actually, an anonymous Barr campaign staffer told me that the strategy may actually be to get these disaffected conservatives for as much money as possible before they go back to the Republicans, and then launch a real quest for the real available votes coming from the left: we shall see if there is any truth to this.
G.E. // Jul 20, 2008 at 2:20 am
If Barr does not get the most votes ever by a Libertarian, his campaign will be a complete and total electoral disaster.
But to what end? He’s not spreading the libertarian gospel.
There are two positive outcomes of a Barr candidacy:
1. Getting ballot access for some states with 1-2% thresholds so they can run real Libertarians in 2010.
2. Ensuring the defeat of McInsane.
I’m tired of being consumed with hate and disgust and I’m trying to focus on these two potentially positive outcomes… At least for the next day or two.
There’s no reason to “hate” Bob Barr or any Libertarian candidate. Hate leads nowhere because it’s a dead end street.
See, with that posting, you are basically taking the view I am of the Barr campaign. The goals of ballot access and ensuring the defeat of McCain are my two top priorities, thus, that is why I tactically view the Bob Barr campaign as a “tool” for Libertarians. I think more can be accomplished as well.
Think about it for a few minutes: which would be best for the party? A philosophically pure Bob Barr who garners 400,000 votes and hardly any media attention, or a Bob Barr that is “mostly” libertarian, but garners over a million votes and a record amount of positive media attention?
I insist it’s the latter, not the former which will benefit the party, and the overall libertarian movement in general.
Americans have a natural inclination toward libertarianism. Not the kind of jet-fueled libertarianism we both espouse, but a real basic “leave me alone” streak. If we can appeal to that very basic form of libertarianism, we will have struck gold. You see: that basic form of libertarianism sounds “reasonable” to the masses, as opposed to the hardcore stuff that gets us excited. Now, I don’t like that reality, but reality is a bitch, as they say.
So, for now, we appeal to that nebulous, base libertarianism and get our foot in the door, so to speak. Then we have people seriously listening and considering the LP for once in their lives. To me, that is GREAT news. It is at that point we can actually begin REAL education of the masses. You simply cannot teach if you don’t have someone’s attention.
Think of it like this: Your passion in life is swimming and you want to share that passion with children who do not yet swim. What do you do? Throw them in the deep end of the pool and tell them “sink or swim”, possibly scaring the hell out of those kids, or do you take them by the hands in the shallow end of the pool until they gain skill and knowledge enough to eventually brave the deep end on their own? We cannot expect Americans to embrace our passion unless we gently bring them step-by step along the way.
The Barr campaign is the shallow end for voters, and we are in deeper waters, encouraging them to come in a little deeper and a little deeper and a little deeper.
Point taken.
In some sci fi books, we already live in a libertarian world.
Come on Paulie, that’s not all we do.
Usually we tell people to read books, too!
🙂
PEACE
Steve
Mildly Bummed… I have a local Libertarian group that I run on that Tuesday evening
Bring ’em with you.
I’ve been ruminating as to why Ron Paul got so much more enthusiasm than the LP. I don’t think it had anything to do with his social conservatism for most people.
When someone showed interest in Ron Paul, they were encouraged to do stuff: stand on the street corner with a sign, distribute literature door to door, etc. When someone shows interest in the LP in most cases they are asked to….send money, go to (usually monthly) meetings to sit around and bitch and moan, send more money, go to more do-nothing meetings, etc.
People who are naturally inclined toward action and results tend to (with a few exceptions) lose interest and not come back. This may be as big, or even bigger, a problem for the LP as it stands now than any ideological deviation.
Got people in your group who are both anti Barr and pro Barr? No problem! Get them both out there to hold competing demonstrations at the same time. Just the simple fact that you get them out there at all would be a positive step.
So should we all throw everything we have at you in the next two days before the hate, disgust, (I’ll throw in) anger come back?
If Barr does not get the most votes ever by a Libertarian, his campaign will be a complete and total electoral disaster.
But to what end? He’s not spreading the libertarian gospel.
There are two positive outcomes of a Barr candidacy:
1. Getting ballot access for some states with 1-2% thresholds so they can run real Libertarians in 2010.
2. Ensuring the defeat of McInsane.
I’m tired of being consumed with hate and disgust and I’m trying to focus on these two potentially positive outcomes… At least for the next day or two.
43% of 16% (your figure) would be far better than any LPOTUS candidate ever has done. That’s before you add in his support among those who do not self-identify as libertarian.
43% of self described libertarians support him. 43%? That folks, is PATHETIC for the LIBERTARIAN candidate!
No, when you consider that the vast majority of small l libertarians don’t vote big L. The other categories in this poll were liberal and conservative, not Democrat and Republican – thus, the l they meant was small l, not big L.
If Barr actually holds 43% of small l vote in November, that will be impressive. It’s also rather unlikely.
Maybe he thinks he can peel off part of the progressive, Democratic vote.
More likely, he wants them to give him positive coverage for “splitting the Republican vote.”
Can somebody explain to me why Bob Barr is at Netroots Nation, a progressive blogger convention formerly known as Yearly Kos, when he’s turning down Libertarian events right and left?
He is? I’m favorably surprised.
Mildly Bummed… I have a local Libertarian group that I run on that Tuesday evening – it will keep me from showing up to protest outside his event… Would have been worth the gas to show up with a sign “LP Presidential Electors Against Barr”…
ART
Speaking for myself
S, in other words, Barr is taking the “libertarian” vote for granted. Let me tell you, Barr has, at best 1/2 of the “libertarian” support. I read recently from one of Zogby’s polls that Barr has a fair amount of conervative support, and 43% of self described libertarians support him. 43%? That folks, is PATHETIC for the LIBERTARIAN candidate!
I for one, refuse to vote for Barr/W.A.R. I know MANY other small l and capital L libertarians who also will refuse to vote for him.
Go ahead Barr, take the libertarian vote for granted . . . when something like 16% of the electorate are either self described or are libertarian in how they answer poll questions, you take that vote for granted at your own peril.
But then, if you read how Barr is positioning himself on issues, especially just this week, he is catering the conservative and liberal voters.
Jeremy, it makes sense to talk to the “progressive” and “right-wing” voters. They’re a far larger block of people, for one. The libertarian vote, while important, is likely to swing in his direction without Barr courting it particularly.
The apparent answer: he was in town already for a right-leaning blogger conference.
From the same link, here’s an interview with Barr from a well-known progressive blogger.
That makes sense, I think. He has the LP nomination locked up right now; for what reason would he prioritize preaching to the converted?
Maybe he thinks he can peel off part of the progressive, Democratic vote. If so, more power to him.
I won’t vote for him, but more power to him.
Can somebody explain to me why Bob Barr is at Netroots Nation, a progressive blogger convention formerly known as Yearly Kos, when he’s turning down Libertarian events right and left?