The Constitution Party is encouraging members of the Libertarian Party, specifically those in its Mises Caucus and paleo-libertarians, to leave the organization and join it instead. In a recent video, the party argues that ideological divisions within the Libertarian Party have made it difficult for these members to advance their priorities while remaining in the organization.
In the video, published this week on the Constitution Party’s Liberty Rising outreach channel, host Alec Pavlik briefly discusses the ideological foundations of libertarianism, tracing its roots through figures such as Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, and Ayn Rand. He argues that early libertarian thought was significantly influenced by paleo-conservatives, and that divisions within the Libertarian Party—particularly between factions associated with the Cato Institute and the Mises Institute—have made it difficult for current paleo-libertarians to gain traction within the party.
Pavlik directly addresses members of the Libertarian Party’s Mises Caucus, focusing on several shared positions between the caucus and the Constitution Party, including opposition to abortion, support for border security, and a commitment to constitutional governance. He asserts that such Libertarians—especially those who support figures like former Congressman Ron Paul—face pushback within their own party for holding these views, and that the Libertarian Party’s policy goals are prone to shifting, unlike those of the Constitution Party.
“The key thing about the Constitution Party is that, because we have a clear line we will not cross, we will always remain as libertarian as the Constitution has always been,” Pavlik states in the video. He contrasts the organization with the Libertarian Party, which he cautions could one day “become nothing more than a moderate Democratic Party.”
The full video is available for readers below:
With thanks to Nuña for making Independent Political Report aware of the recent video in our Monthly Open Thread.
The Scorpions, based upon their Mormon/Masonic theology, attacked ( and drove from the Party ) the excellent, and very very hard working, Chairman of the Illinois CP for deviating from ‘ The Program;” i.e.; he would actually DO.something as compared to what the Party has mutated into – Controlled Opposition which, as a political ” Potemkin Village,” is completely different at the top in its Politburo Controllers than the many well meaning members imagine it/them to be.
Hence the death of the Illinois CP was purposely DESIGNED by the Scorpion Controllers.
The CP is not dying by accident but by DESIGN/PURPOSE; i.e.; The Scorpions/Politburo have created a quicksand swamp where well meaning patriots will dissipate their energy working to develop a Party whose REAL goal(s) are completely different from what they are imagined to be.
Don J. Grundmann, D.C.
Chairman, Constitution Party of California; the 1st State Affiliate of the Christian Nationalist Party – where we observe the.deliberate collapse/betrayal of the founding principles of the national CP and work to carry them onward after its betrayal/murder.
LMAO – the deadest of all third parties wants to take on the one entity that has created a PR nightmare for the national party and several state affiliates. Of all the states that have a so-called presence, they’re only active in the states with such a small signature threshold to get on the ballot.
In Illinois, they’re pretty much nonexistent despite having a so-called chair. The last time they filed paperwork for a POTUS candidate was Baldwin/Castle in 2008. They’ve been mostly absent from Congressional and U.S. Senate races, as well as lesser offices such as statewide constitutional officers and the Illinois General Assembly. The last time the “Constitution Party of Illinois” ran a candidate was 2020, but that was mostly because of the petitioning relief that was litigated by the Libertarian Party of Illinois, the Illinois Green Party, and an independent candidate in Libertarian Party of Illinois et. al. v. Pritzker.
Since then, they’ve been literally non-existent as they haven’t ran candidates in 2022 or 2024 for Illinois in particular
Oh well, there goes the Sunday theory. Baby girl Nuna occupies the toilet just as long on a school day – skipping class, perhaps? Given her general lack of class, that seems likely. I wonder how many voices she has in her head?
@Root’s Awesome Teeth
“In a way, the Constitution Party is THE most successful third party today […] But in both cases, the respective third parties have much to be pleased with.”
U+1F914 Since any overlap between Trump’s policies and those advocated by the Constitution Party – and given Trump’s propensity for not walking his talk, I wouldn’t overestimate its extent – are a so-called “eucatastrophe”, I don’t think it would be fair – nor wise – to ascribe success to the Constitution Party over it.
To my knowledge, it is – unfortunately – not as if Jim Clymer was sitting at the negotiation table with Trump, the way Angela McArdle was – though that is certainly something which Justin Magill might want to consider trying.
“It’s little wonder that the CP will shrink. Why vote CP when you can vote for the new GOP?”
Because the differences between Trump’s GOP – as long as that lasts – and the CP massively outweigh any eucatastrophic overlap. And Trump’s extensive history of betraying his voters, does not exactly inspire much confidence either.
Good luck finding many CP members who will shift their vote to a Log Cabin RINO who considers abortion and gay marriage issues, a “spot on the wall in the basement” of a country which “has holes in the roof”, and who still doubles-down on claiming Operation Warp Speed was one of his “greatest achievements” that “saved millions of lives”…
—
@Northrop-Grumman
“Christian Zionists and a Deep State intelligence operation ( chronicled at TheCorruptionOfAlanKeyes.blogspot.com )”
Oh boy, here we go again. All Christians are necessarily Zionists – assuming you are using both words correctly. And Alan Keyes did a great job at continuing “the noble work and legacy of Howard Phillips”, unlike anti-semite Chuck Baldwin.
In fact, comparing the successive presidential candidates of the CP and AIP is quite ironic, because Keyes fits into the Phillips-Goode-Blankenship-Terry succession perfectly, whereas Baldwin (and now Skousen) clearly belongs to the Wallace-Maddox-Hoefling-de la Fuente line.
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8 U+1F60F
Try dropping some more of those
“Thankfully, they will be forced to accept Allah soon, whether they want to or not.”
“Everyone in every country must be converted to Islam, at the point of the sword”
“The closest thing to an ideal government nowadays is Afghanistan under the Taliban, and should serve as the model for the global caliphate.”
and
“The penalties for [rebellion against civil authority in all forms and religious authority] – whipping, confinement, hard labor, public humiliation, reduced nourishment”
zingers to show how much of a serious IPR contributor and totally not a troll you are… U+1F60F
Soon you’ll have us all fooled with your muslim mother-son spiel /s
—
@Nolan’s Doppelganger
“Nuna, I bet the number of Paul supporters who decided they couldn’t support Paul because his running mate, Marrou, was pro-choice and for gay rights, was about the same number who supported Marrou but wouldn’t vote LP because Paul was pro-life. That is, a mere handful each.”
Hmmm… U+1F914 I would counter-bet that even if they were about the same number, they were more than a mere handful – especially relative to the less than half a million voters who ended up voting for the LP in 1988. I believe big-L Libertarians weren’t as quick to “vote yellow no matter what fellow” back then, and small-L libertarians still aren’t.
“Murray Rothbard’s recap of the campaign in ‘Libertarian American’ newsletter, mentioned the financial irregularities of Nadia Hayes, Paul’s campaign manager and business manager, as a contributing factor to his low vote total.”
Thanks for the lead. The name “Nadia Hayes” seems to ring some bell – but it could be deja vu. I’d need to look into it further.
“Rothbard made no mention of Marrou dragging down the campaign.”
Given that Rothbard himself had – prior to wizening-up under influence of his Mises Institute co-founders and colleagues – advocated the right to violate the NAP against unborn children, I’m not sure that – even by 1988 – his not mentioning Marrou’s effect on the campaign, makes any case that the latter was not a ball-and-chain to the ticket.
—
@X
“The common picture of Jesus was modelled by the illegitimate and likely homosexual son of a corrupt Roman pope.”
You are thinking of Pope Alexander VI, right? Since the Borgias rose to prominence well after the Great Schism, that does not explain why Jesus is depicted similarly in our Orthodox icons.
“The vast majority of registered AIP voters mistakenly checked that box on the voters registration application without realizing that they registered with a party”
I’m aware of this long-running narrative – perpetuated by such totally unbiased sources as the LA Times and Gavin Newsom – that “many” Californians supposedly are too retarded to understand the difference between “American Independent Party” and “independent”. But I have yet to see any compelling evidence to make me believe there is anything to it. (And if there is, then perhaps we should take away California’s electoral vote – at least until they fix their literacy…)
“The vast majority of the rest registered AIP to get George Wallace on the ballot and didn’t bother to change it”
This again, I find hard to believe. Are you seriously trying to tell me that a significant number of current Californian voters have never had to re-register to vote, or change or update their voter registration in 57 years?! Or else, that they just keeping mindlessly filling out the same party on their registration, 26 years after Wallace’s death?! (And again, if true, perhaps we should strip California of its electoral votes…)
Curious : The Godmother; i.e.; Controller of the Party & lead Scorpion/betrayer; is Janine Hansen.
Don J. Grundmann, D.C.
Chairman, Constitution Party of California, 1st State Affiliate of the Christian Nationalist Party
Don Grundmann,
Who is the Godmother?
I forgot to mention that baby girl Nuna was having her latest marathon toilet occupation and phone pecking session on the day of the week her supposed religion sets aside for worship and prayer, and during lent at that.
Perhaps that’s why she could have the toilet so long to herself , the rest of her family was at church while she only pretends to believe in their religion. Perhaps she also neglects school, work, and play, while her better adjusted siblings (if she has any) and her parents are busy with those pursuits, and she instead hides in the dirt room and pecks the phone with her little beak to write novel length hate screeds – how very sad.
* constitutional role
“the high point of the Constitution Party was 2008 when it was the 3rd biggest party in the country. ”
Only if you use voter registration as the measure and count the American Independent registrations in California. The American Independents conominated Constitution Party presidential candidates in 1992-2008, but that didn’t make their registered voters Constitution Party supporters.
The vast majority of registered AIP voters mistakenly checked that box on the voters registration application without realizing that they registered with a party – had they read more carefully, they would have checked decline to state a party. The vast majority of the rest registered AIP to get George Wallace on the ballot and didn’t bother to change it later regardless of how they voted decades later.
By most other measures – ballot access, number of votes, number of candidates, number of elected officials, party budget, presidential campaign budget, self identification in polls, number of active local groups, etc – the constitution party never came close to being the third largest party.
“Many Biblical figures are believed to have long hair, including Jesus.”
It’s not known whether Jesus’ hair was long or short. The Bible says it was white like wool. The common picture of Jesus was modelled by the illegitimate and likely homosexual son of a corrupt Roman pope.
The Bible does not prohibit men having long hair. Some passages discourage it, while others don’t. What constitutes long hair has differed in different cultures and times.
If by way beyond wrong you mean right, then yes. And speaking of mythology, the ahistorical musings of black robed kangaroos greatly exceeding their constitutional rule due to the self serving misinterpretation by previous kangaroos are mythology at best. Do I need to do redundant web searches to prove what I said earlier or can you use search engines yourself?
>If a person is not violating the person or property of other via coercive acts, they should be able to live their lives as they see fit, so this means that people can engage in degenerate behavior, but this does not mean that all libertarians celebrate degenerate behavior as if it is a great virtue or a good idea. Degenerate life styles are risky, and in a libertarian society degenerates would not be able to run to government to bail them out if they screw up their lives. They would have to turn to private charities or family or friends, or they may ruin themselves or end their own existence via Social Darwinism (like dying from a drug overdose). Degenerates may also get shunned by a lot of people in a libertarian society.
>Saying that a person should not go to jail or prison for engaging in a behavior is not the same thing as agreeing with or celebrating the behavior.
^^^^^THIS!^^^^^
>That depends on what you mean by “theocracy”. If you mean a group of people governing “in the name of God”, then there is certainly something to that – though it will still depend on the people and how they govern: imagine for examples autonomous monasteries governed by true holy men (those under their monastic rule join voluntarily).
Fair statement.
By “theocracy” I mean political rule by force based upon the decrees of a mythology, regardless of its age or beliefs. As some examples, sharia, the Holy Roman Empire, the Vatican, and modern liberalism (their deity is the state).
Your monastic example is one of voluntarism, which is different in that there’s consent involved, not force. That would be an example of Liberty because of the consent and lack of force–so long as they can also leave if they wish.
>I don’t know who Donny is. Are you having hallucinations?
I wasn’t talking at you.
But since you chose to comment, you’re way beyond wrong on this.
Nuna, I bet the number of Paul supporters who decided they couldn’t support Paul because his running mate, Marrou, was pro-choice and for gay rights, was about the same number who supported Marrou but wouldn’t vote LP because Paul was pro-life. That is, a mere handful each. As for the 1988 campaign, Paul campaign insider Murray Rothbard’s recap of the campaign in “Libertarian American” newsletter, mentioned the financial irregularities of Nadia Hayes, Paul’s campaign manager and business manager, as a contributing factor to his low vote total. Rothbard made no mention of Marrou dragging down the campaign.
F. Der S. (may I call you Der?),
I am devoted to the truth of Allah, not to mythology. And I am not “brutally suppressed.” I am most thankful that I am disciplined by my husband, by civil and religious authority, and by the upbringing I received from my parents into being free of the degenerate “freedom” of women in the West. Thankfully, they will be forced to accept Allah soon, whether they want to or not.
Meanwhile, baby girl Nuna must be an only child, and a latchkey child at that, since clearly nobody else in her house needs to use the water closet. I can picture her squatting there over the toilet for a solid hour or two, if not more, pecking away at her phone to squeeze out epic length delusional screeds which in all likelihood not even one person will read, much less take seriously, while she squeezes out other things of equally foul stench, but of greater value – at least those other things she produces can be used to help fertilize the fields. In all likelihood these are the only two things she will ever produce, given that she is far too acerbic to get and keep a husband and produce children.
@Andy
Being a statistically relatively successful third-party won’t mean much to libertarians, if the party isn’t libertarian (anymore). And – in my opinion – the Constitution Party does a better job at encapsulating libertarian values than the Libertarian Party does.
In addition, the Libertarian Party is by those same metrics going downhill fast. Exponentially even.
This past national convention was an unmitigated disaster (what with questionably seated delegates voting on whether or not they themselves had been seated, non-delegates partaking in viva voce and rising votes, ter Maat’s fraudulent endorsement mid-vote under the guise of a point of personal privilege or parliamentary procedure, and delegates being misinformed regarding the consequences of a NOTA victory…).
Then came Harlos’ conspiring with the Colorado SoS Griswold to subvert the LPCO’s legitimate nominations. Followed by Harlos’ ceaseless attempts to undermine the national committee and its chair. The judiciary committee choosing sides with Harlos against the national committee, was the final nail in the coffin for the party – at least on the national level.
Add the terrible optics of running Oliver-ter Maat as the “Libertarian” ticket, and McArdle’s replacement with Nekhaila, and the party might as well dissolve itself forthwith. Because it’s going nowhere but (even further) down.
Like I said, at this point the greater name recognition is going to do more harm than good: the Libertarian Party isn’t famous, it’s infamous/notorious. And it’s only going to get worse.
However many or few good people and libertarians the Libertarian Party still has, it isn’t nearly enough to take (back) control of the party and stop – let alone revert – the descent into madness. They would be much better served by joining the Constitution Party and helping expand its ballot access instead – a mutually beneficial move, the way I see it.
—
@Russ
1) Alec’s hair cannot be described as long, by any stretch of the imagination nor historical standard. Try looking at some old icons, and medieval and renaissance art: you will find that most depictions of kings, knights, saints and even Christ Himself, have far longer hair than that of Alec.
2) While having an explicitly (Judeo-)Christian platform, the Constitution Party also has many non-Christian members. For example, a large number of party officers (including ones who didn’t want to remove God from the platform) are mormons.
This all circles back to the US Constitution – around which the Constitution Party is obviously centered – stipulating that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Or, if Madison had had his way, no national religion be established, and no civil rights be abridged on account of religious belief or worship.
As far as I can tell, that was actually the reason for the Christian Liberty Party splitting off from the Constitution Party.
3) Wait till you find out we also don’t have to be circumcised – though it’s always a good idea – and are allowed to eat non-kosher foods… 😛
—
@Paul
I hope you’ll agree then, that by virtue of the single issue of abortion alone already, the Constitution Party has much more affinity with Bergland’s characterization of libertarian philosophy than the Libertarian Party does.
—
@mark tuniewicz
He did fine. He got the libertarians right (Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises), just not the non-libertarians (Cato and Ayn Rand). And even that is only by contemporary English conventions; in other languages Cato is indeed pronounced that way, whereas Murray and Ludwig are pronounced differently.
If you’re going to make snarky comments of no actual substance and want to be taken seriously, please learn to capitalize your own name… U+1F60F
—
@Nolan’s Doppleganger
I think you may be underestimating the impact of running-mates.
Marrou was already an outspoken and – in LP circles – well-known proponent of infanticide and homo-promo. He certainly turned people away from the LP ticket in spite of Ron Paul.
I don’t think there has been much debate that the large difference in results between Gary Johnson two consecutive presidential bids, was due to his running-mates.
Jo Jorgensen wouldn’t have performed nearly as well with John Monds as her running-mate instead of Spike Cohen. In retrospect, Cohen may have carried the ticket for many libertarians who would otherwise not have voted LP.
And, though already a very divisive candidate himself, I’m sure Chase Oliver lost votes by selecting an (“ex”-)jackboot as his running-mate, in exchange for ter Maat’s election interference at the convention.
As for funds being embezzled from Ron Paul’s 1988 campaign, I’d be curious to learn more, if you know of any pertinent resources.
—
@Reality
LOL
Hey now, it’s worth a watch!
So is his appeal to republicans, if that is of more interest to you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeHA2HnA1bA
Russ, there’s no such prohibition to my knowledge. Acts 18:18 can be read by some that Paul had long hair prior to it being cut. In 1 Corinthians he counsels against long hair, but that’s not a prohibition, and has been read by some as a reference to being effeminate rather than just long hair. Samson of course had long hair. Jesus is often depicted with long hair, although that’s questionable. What else are you thinking of?
A) Any squeaks/complaints about needing ” separation of church and state ” is 99%÷ satanists complaining that the predominant remaining christian culture ( although now reduced to a scrawny ” 98 pound weakling ” strength ) is hindering their social and cultural dominance.
B) Referencing the comment of Andy the high point of the Constitution Party was 2008 when it was the 3rd biggest party in the country. Its subsequent destruction via infiltration ( continuing to this day ) by moles + Christian Zionists and a Deep State intelligence operation ( chronicled at TheCorruptionOfAlanKeyes.blogspot.com ) started the slow CP death which continues to this day via the Human Scorpions/Politburo ( inclusive of ” The Godmother ” and not the figurehead Chairman ) which control the Party to this moment.
My time in Randall Terry:x Operation Rescue was notable for working with a broad range of Christian perspectives who set aside theological differences for the greater good of saving children via saving their mothers from choosing death.
The same theological ” blending ‘ in the early CP has now been replaced by Mormon/Masonic ( see the work of Altiysn Childs ) control which attacks/betrays perceived dissenters ( California, South Dakota, Illinois ) and hence guarantees the continual slow death of the CP and that it will have an ever decreasing political influence.
The nomination of Randall as their candidate ( an extremely excellent one ) was an unwelcome fluke which the Scorpions have already corrected to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.
As Chairman of the California CP I used to tell everyone to join and we were growing until The Godmother put a knife in our back as revenge for a pro-life vote of 14 years previously. Hence I now tell everyone ,- Stay away lest you also are betrayed by The Scorpions who have betrayed the noble work and legacy of Howard Phillips.
Bottom Line – The CP is Mormon/Masonic controlled Party which is the reason for its slow continuous death. Our well meaning video maker simply doesn’t have a clue regarding that unfortunate reality.
Don J. Grundmann, D.C.
Chairman, Constitution Party of California
Founder & Chairman, Christian Nationalist Party
where we lament the death of the CP and strive to continue the noble work of Howard Phillips
The host of Liberty Rising is the third Constitution Party member that I am aware of who is specifically violating the Biblical prohibition against men having long hair. So much for the CP’s alleged adherence to Christian Biblical principles.
There is no Biblical prohibition against men having long hair. Samson is famous for his long hair. Many Biblical figures are believed to have long hair, including Jesus.
Are you a Christian? Have you read the entire Bible? Or preferably, several good Study Bibles (the kind with copious notes) several times?
Non-Christians who have never studied the Bible, but who relay on hearsay (out of context quotes, snippets from televangelist shows, etc.), aren’t really in a position to expound upon what the Bible prohibits.
Even well-read Christian of different denominations disagree on such matters.
I had to chuckle at Russ’ comments about Christian men (like the guy in the CP video) violating Biblical commands by having long hair. This hypocrisy is pretty common. I’d be willing to bet that it is the wife who “wears the pants” in most Constitution Party households.
The Libertarian Party is by most measures the most successful alternative political party since the 1970’s. The Libertarian Party has a MASSIVE lead over the Constitution Party in terms of ballot access and name recognition.
In a way, the Constitution Party is THE most successful third party today.
How so? Much like the socialist parties, which never won major elections, yet managed to get their issues enacted into law.
Donald Trump is enacting the policies that the CP has long advocated, yet which the GOP worked against. Consider Trump’s CP style polcies:
* Less immigration, more deportations.
* Less foreign aid.
* Protectionist tariffs.
I don’t know how much the CP helped in popularizing these policies before Trump ran with them. Maybe very little. But however ironically, the CP has won.
Sure, Trump’s policies are not identical to those of the CP, just as the New Deal was not identical to the socialist parties’ policies. But in both cases, the respective third parties have much to be pleased with.
It’s little wonder that the CP will shrink. Why vote CP when you can vote for the new GOP?
I never watch political videos but I watched the first ten seconds, and I think the weird looking young man with the odd haircut and accent said everything that needs to be said in that time. Good luck with whatever else he was trying to do with the remaining 4+ minutes given that he started out correctly diagnosing the project.
I don’t recall Marrou “hamstringing” Ron Paul’s campaign in 1988. The LP V.P. candidate doesn’t usually matter at all, specially when he or she is an unknown running with a somewhat recognizable named Presidential candidate.
Wasn’t Paul’s campaign hamstrung by his top campaign manager who embezzled funds??
If you’re going to record yourself and want to be taken seriously, please learn how to pronounce the names of the people and organizations you are referring to.
The young man in this video seems to be of the belief that Libertarians have no principles. I would suggest that he read “Libertarianism in One Lesson” by David Bergland, the 1976 LP candidate for vice president and 1984 LP candidate for president.
Quoting from Bergland: “All Libertarian Party positions on the issues derive from and are consistent with basic libertarian principles. In capsule form, the libertarian philosophy begins with the idea of self-ownership. Each person owns himself or herself. Therefore, each person has the absolute right to control his or her own life, body, speech, actions, and honestly acquired property.”
The host of Liberty Rising is the third Constitution Party member that I am aware of who is specifically violating the Biblical prohibition against men having long hair. So much for the CP’s alleged adherence to Christian Biblical principles.
“The Libertarian Party is a lost cause. If it ever was one to begin with. LINOs, such as the Cato Institute, are in control of the party, and it’s only gotten worse since they hamstrung Ron Paul’s campaign by chaining him to anti-libertarian Andre Marrou. The LP’s lead over the CP in terms of ballot access – which is already shaky – isn’t worth having to deal with ‘Libertarians’ who have made it there entire purpose to gut libertarianism of liberty and wear the name as a skin-suit. And the LP’s name recognition, such as it is, has become more of an albatross than a boon.”
The Libertarian Party is by most measures the most successful alternative political party since the 1970’s.
The Libertarian Party has a MASSIVE lead over the Constitution Party in terms of ballot access and name recognition.
“Ballot access is volatile. For better or worse, the CP didn’t aim to maximize ballot access this past election; but once they do, they will presumably regain decent ballot access – uniparty shenanigans notwithstanding.
Furthermore, the LP’s ballot access – which I believe will continue to dwindle under LINO control – is also not of much use to libertarians, because they are not in control of the party. The LP will never be allowed to field a libertarian candidate, much less a libertarian ticket. So what value do ballot lines even have then?
Even libertarians who don’t wish to join the CP, are in my opinion better off outside of the LP.”
The Constitution Party had no ability to get on the ballot in most states in 2024. There were a few states where they tried to get on and failed. The Libertarian Party had its worst ballot access since 2008 yet it still got ballot access for its presidential ticket in 47 states. The Constitution party at is best never got on the ballot in as many as 47 states.
I have been an LP member since 1996 and I was not happy with the LP’s presidential tickets in 2008-2016. The LP ticket in 2020 was OK. The LP ticket in 2024 I was not thrilled with but they were at least not as bad as the 2008-2016 tickets, in my opinion, although they raised a lot less money and got a lot less votes.
Having said the above, the Libertarian Party still has a lot of good people in it and does have a lot of good candidates, in spite of the jerks and other bad actors.
I have voted for Constitution Party candidates a couple of times. One time was in a 4 way race between a Constitution Party candidate, a Green Party candidate, and Democratic Party candidate and a Republican Party candidate, for a state office, I believe it was for Attorney General. The other time was in 2016 I voted for the Darrell Castle/Scott Bradley ticket in the presidential election, who I think were more libertarian than the Libertarian Party’s presidential ticket of Gary Johnson/Bill Weld (who I did not even think were really libertarians).
I would have voted for the Constitution Party’s presidential ticket of Chuck Baldwin/Darrell Castle in 2008, as I did not care for the Libertarian Party’s presidential ticket of Bob Barr/Wayne Root, but Baldwin/Castle ended up not being on the ballot in the state where i voted in that election. Baldwin/Castle did get registered as a write in candidate, but so did Ron Paul with Gail Lightfoot as his running mate, so I cast a write in vote for the Ron Paul/Gail Lightfoot ticket instead.
@Andy
“Why would it make any sense to leave the Libertarian Party, which still has lots of ballot access, and which does have some added value with its name recognition, to go to a political party or parties with very little ballot access and less or no name recognition?”
The Libertarian Party is a lost cause. If it ever was one to begin with. LINOs, such as the Cato Institute, are in control of the party, and it’s only gotten worse since they hamstrung Ron Paul’s campaign by chaining him to anti-libertarian Andre Marrou. The LP’s lead over the CP in terms of ballot access – which is already shaky – isn’t worth having to deal with “Libertarians” who have made it there entire purpose to gut libertarianism of liberty and wear the name as a skin-suit. And the LP’s name recognition, such as it is, has become more of an albatross than a boon.
“Yes, there are internal battles within the libertarian party, such as left-libertarians vs right-libertarians, anarchists vs minarchists, radicals vs pragmatists, etc…, but all parties have infighting. One of the reasons that the Constitution Party is in poor shape now is due to infighting.”
The problem isn’t infighting. The problem is that it servers no purpose in the LP. The party will never be (re)captured by libertarians, because it was never fully under their control to begin with. And what grip they had has only slipped exponentially over time.
(En passant, “left-libertarian” is an oxymoron. The name is a contradiction in terms, and the concept a form of cognitive dissonance. There can by definition exist no such thing as a “left-libertarian”.)
In the CP, on the other hand, infighting has served very real and useful purpose: namely exposing totalitarian saboteurs, and sometimes – though alas not nearly often enough – even removing them from the party. Whether you think the CP is in good or bad shape, it is certainly in better shape than it would have been without exposing and cutting out the rotten flesh.
“I think there’s a lot of good things about the Constitution Party, and I am especially sympathetic to the libertarian wing among their ranks, but I see little upside to joining a party that only got ballot access for its presidential ticket in 13 states in the last election.”
Ballot access is volatile. For better or worse, the CP didn’t aim to maximize ballot access this past election; but once they do, they will presumably regain decent ballot access – uniparty shenanigans notwithstanding.
Furthermore, the LP’s ballot access – which I believe will continue to dwindle under LINO control – is also not of much use to libertarians, because they are not in control of the party. The LP will never be allowed to field a libertarian candidate, much less a libertarian ticket. So what value do ballot lines even have then?
Even libertarians who don’t wish to join the CP, are in my opinion better off outside of the LP.
“Don Grundmann
March 19, 2025
There is not now, has never been, and will never be any such thing as ‘ separation of church and state’ as there is no such thing as a human being who does not have a religious belief; i.e.; ALL human beings will ALWAYS be influenced by their belief system(s).
All citizens in our nation automatically live in a ‘ theocracy ‘ which, unfortunately, is Satanic as with the Biden ruling Junta just being more open/brazen about it.
The Libertarian Party is ruled by the theology of.Satanism, just less openly so than the foaming-at-the-mouth Democrats & Greens.”
The 1st amendment does say in party that, “Congress shall make no law….respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.
I would interpret this as no state religion.
I do think that Mr. Grundmann makes a good point though because pretty much everyone has a set of beliefs. Anyone’s set of beliefs could be called a religion. Sets of beliefs influence behavior and decisions. Sets of beliefs could permeate into government whether people want to call it religion or not.
Mr. Grundmann says that the Libertarian Party is ruled by the ideology of Satanism. There may be a bit of accuracy in this description for certain people who call themselves libertarians and some of them may be members of the Libertarian Party, but I do not think that this is an accurate description of the Libertarian Party or philosophy or of many or most libertarians.
Some libertarians think that abortion is in-line with libertarian principles. Other libertarians, like myself, do not.
If a person is not violating the person or property of other via coercive acts, they should be able to live their lives as they see fit, so this means that people can engage in degenerate behavior, but this does not mean that all libertarians celebrate degenerate behavior as if it is a great virtue or a good idea. Degenerate life styles are risky, and in a libertarian society degenerates would not be able to run to government to bail them out if they screw up their lives. They would have to turn to private charities or family or friends, or they may ruin themselves or end their own existence via Social Darwinism (like dying from a drug overdose). Degenerates may also get shunned by a lot of people in a libertarian society.
Saying that a person should not go to jail or prison for engaging in a behavior is not the same thing as agreeing with or celebrating the behavior.
“Rick
March 20, 2025
When the Libertarians run moron communists like Chase Oliver, why would a Constitution Party member be involved with that mess?”
I know of some people who have switched from Constitution Party to Libertarian Party over the years, and I also know of some who switched from Libertarian Party to Constitution Party, although the last person I can think of who I know of who switched from Libertarian Party to Constitution Party was in 2016 and I have no idea if this person is still involved in that party.
“(practically all of whom are members of the Mises Caucus), would be much better off joining the Constitution Party (or the American Independent Party, or the Alaska Independence Party, or the Christian Liberty Party, etc.) or striking out on their own as independent voters. And following your own logic of strength through cohesion, clearly joining the Constitution Party makes the most sense.”
Why would it make any sense to leave the Libertarian Party, which still has lots of ballot access, and which does have some added value with its name recognition, to go to a political party or parties with very little ballot access and less or no name recognition?
Yes, there are internal battles within the libertarian party, such as left-libertarians vs right-libertarians, anarchists vs minarchists, radicals vs pragmatists, etc…, but all parties have infighting. One of the reasons that the Constitution Party is in poor shape now is due to infighting.
I think there’s a lot of good things about the Constitution Party, and I am especially sympathetic to the libertarian wing among their ranks, but I see little upside to joining a party that only got ballot access for its presidential ticket in 13 states in the last election.
@From Der Sidelines
“Theocracy and Liberty are incompatible by definition”
That depends on what you mean by “theocracy”. If you mean a group of people governing “in the name of God”, then there is certainly something to that – though it will still depend on the people and how they govern: imagine for examples autonomous monasteries governed by true holy men (those under their monastic rule join voluntarily).
But that is not necessarily what “theocracy” means. In fact, short God ruling directly without human intermediaries, the closest approximation is anarchy:
https://kevincraig.us/theocracy.htm
—
@Northrop Grumman
“There is not now, has never been, and will never be any such thing as ‘separation of church and state'”
Then you do not understand what “separation of church and state” means. The whole purpose of the separation of church and state, has always been to stop the state from interfering in religious affairs. It is NOT, and never was, meant to keep religion out of governance. As you say, rulers will always be guided by their beliefs – and that’s fine (at least to the extent that having a ruler at all is) – but that does not mean the ruler should (be allowed to) force their personal interpretations on others.
—
@Andy
“Pro-liberty folks in the Constitution Party ought to join the Libertarian Party since the Constitution Party has been going downhill.”
Not nearly as fast as the Libertarian Party. There is frankly no point for any libertarian to remain in such a totalitarian party as the LP. Some larger than life men, such as Ron Paul and Spike Cohen, still think they can do some good there in spite of the party – personally I’m skeptical that even they can – but the overwhelming majority of what few libertarians have not fled the LP long since (practically all of whom are members of the Mises Caucus), would be much better off joining the Constitution Party (or the American Independent Party, or the Alaska Independence Party, or the Christian Liberty Party, etc.) or striking out on their own as independent voters. And following your own logic of strength through cohesion, clearly joining the Constitution Party makes the most sense.
—
@Roman-wannabibi-Shukhevich, the valor stealing, banderite nazi; the boastfully self-proclaimed pedophile and zoophile; the idolizer and threatener of rape and torture; and the idolator who previously claimed to worship some false god called “Perun”, but now has decided to pretend – very unconvincingly – to be both a Arabic muslim woman and her son, yet who does not even know that “habibi” is in the masculine form…
Gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8/8 U+1F60F
—
@Actually
I concur, in the most part. I believe it was the desire of the Founding Fathers that states also should not favor one Christian denomination over another, but that they were more fearful of centralizing power in the federal government, than of the states limiting religions freedom. Whether they assessed those risks correctly, is of course up for debate.
https://kevincraig.us/EndTheWall/UnderGod.htm
—
@Market Anarchist Unity
ALL libertarians have more in common with the Constitution Party than with the authoritarian leftist circus that erroneously calls itself the “Libertarian Party”.
That is certainly true of paleolibertarians and anarcho-capitalists such as myself, but it is also true of minarchists, voluntaryists, classical liberals, and others who have not completed their path to enlightenment yet.
As a member of the Constitution Party, I would be delighted to see any Mises Caucus members who embrace Judeo-Christian values join us. And that includes classical humanists and any muslims who actually take Islam seriously. Because if our party has room for antisemites like Chuck Baldwin and russophobes like Joel Skousen, then it certainly has room for them and their diversity of opinions.
When the Libertarians run moron communists like Chase Oliver, why would a Constitution Party member be involved with that mess?
I don’t know who Donny is. Are you having hallucinations?
As for me, I’m well aware of the nonsensical and counterfactual opinions of supreme kangaroos who were not born at the time of the American Revolution, and equally aware of what those who actually lived at the time wrote. The fact remains, despite what some robed clowns wrote many years later, that most states had official state churches at the time , some well into the 19th century, and that most founders wrote many things which left no doubt at all that Jefferson was an extreme outlier in his opinions at the time.
These are facts, and no amount of insistence from black robed clowns well over a century later changes them.
The rest of what you wrote seems to be addressed to voices in your head or perhaps someone you incorrectly guessed me to be. Good luck with that.
Habibi’s Mom is so cute in her pathetic stupidity and devotion to her mythology and being brutally suppressed.
It’s almost satirical.
Thankfully, there are parts of the world that have evolved past that nonsense.
Sorry, Donny, but your reality check bounced a LONG time ago.
EVERSON v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF EWING TP. , 330 U.S. 1 (1947):
From the opinion by Justice Hugo Black:
The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.’ Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.
From the dissent by Justice Rutledge:
Not simply an established church, but any law respecting an establishment of religion is forbidd n. The Amendment was broadly but not loosely phrased. It is the compact and exact summation of its author’s views formed during his long struggle for religious freedom. In Madison’s own words characterizing Jefferson’s Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom, the guaranty he put in our national charter, like the bill he piloted through the Virginia Assembly, was ‘a Model of technical precision, and perspicuous brevity.’ 8 Madison could not have confused ‘church’ and ‘religion,’ or ‘an established church’ and ‘an establishment or religion.’
The Amendment’s purpose was not to strike merely at the official establishment of a single sect, creed or religion, outlawing only a formal relation such as had prevailed in England and some of the colonies. Necessarily it was to uproot all such relationships. But the object was broader than separating church and state in this narrow sense. It was to create a complete and permanent separation of the [330 U.S. 1, 32] spheres of religious activity and civil authority by comprehensively forbidding every form of public aid or support for religion.
and
The Constitution requires, not comprehensive identification of state with religion, but complete separation.
In other words, Donny, both the majority and the dissent agree that there is in fact separation of church and state.
And your theocracy ramblings are just that: ramblings–unchanged in twenty years and as wrong as they’ve ever been.
Seek professional help for your manic obsessiveness with the Beelzebub mythology, bub.
Honestly, let them take the Mises Caucus. They can have their takeover that they want so badly without dragging the LP down with them. Most Paleolibertarians have much more in common with the Constitution Party than the LP. The LP should focus more on courting other ideologies that don’t kneel to Auth-right douchebaggery. We need more Mutualists, Agorists, Classical Liberals, and radical centrists (who can be converted) in the party.
Separation of church and state isn’t anywhere in the declaration of independence or constitution, it was a personal and idiosyncratic opinion of Thomas Jefferson expressed in his unofficial writings. Compare the language of the first and second amendments – ;”shall not be abridged” vs “congress will pass no law.” The actual meaning was that congress would not establish an official national denomination, which most states had at the time. Very few people then supported anything like “separation of church and state” in the modern sense.
As for libertarian nonsense, it’s basically a child’s tantrum pretending to be a political philosophy. Rebellion against parents and rules turns into rebellion against civil authority in all forms and against Allah and religious authority for some recalcitrant children who never grow up.
The penalties for such behavior should be much the same as for badly behaved children and wives – whipping, confinement, hard labor, public humiliation, reduced nourishment, corner time, and having their phones taken away come to mind.
Don Grundmann is mostly correct, except that he has the wrong religion. Islam is the only true religion. Everyone in every country must be converted to Islam, at the point of the sword if they are not willing, and religious and civil authority must be hand in hand, with complete authority over everyone and everything everywhere, including the former crusaders and godless secularists alike.
The closest thing to an ideal government nowadays is Afghanistan under the Taliban, and should serve as the model for the global caliphate.
Pro-liberty folks in the Constitution Party ought to join the Libertarian Party since the Constitution Party has been going downhill. The Constitution Party used to get ballot access in the upper 30’s or low 40’s number of states in presidential elections, but in 2012 they got 26, in 2016 they got 24, in 2020 they got 18 and in 2024 they only got 13. If they keep declining they may go extinct.
I have interacted with Constitution Party folks ocer the years and a lot of them are small “l” minarchist libertarians.
There is not now, has never been, and will never be any such thing as ” separation of church and state ” as there is no such thing as a human being who does not have a religious belief; i.e.; ALL human beings will ALWAYS be influenced by their belief system(s).
All citizens in our nation automatically live in a ” theocracy ” which, unfortunately, is Satanic as with the Biden ruling Junta just being more open/brazen about it.
The Libertarian Party is ruled by the theology of.Satanism, just less openly so than the foaming-at-the-mouth Democrats & Greens.
Don ,J. Grundmann, D.C.
Chairman, Constitution Party of California
Founder & Chairman, Christian Nationalist Party
where we work to destroy the satanic Social Engineering slavery of our citizens so as to bring both they and our Republic to the freedom and prosperity found in Christianity.
The Theocrat Nutcases that are the also-ran misnamed “Constitution Party” are desperate for membership and relevancy, so they try this stunt.
Pass. Theocracy and Liberty are incompatible by definition. See also the Separation of Church and State.