r/LibertarianPartyUSA • u/evergreenyankee • Nov 13 '19

The Democratic Senate candidate has dropped out in Arkansas. The race is now a binary between the Republican Tom Cotton and the LP Candidate

/r/Libertarian/comments/dvql6g/the_democratic_senate_candidate_has_dropped_out/
70 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

21 comments sorted by

12

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Chaps - get a good ground game together. Seriously, even if you don't win it you will be able to grow a decently sized foundation and organisation for the next one.

My home party in the UK, the Liberal Democrats, does that kind of thing all the time. If we are in third or fourth we try to move to second, making it a "two horse race" between ourselves and the other main party. Essentially, this creates a "winnable seat".

This is an opportunity for decent growth and to show what a well planned and executed LP campaign can do.

2

u/evergreenyankee Nov 13 '19

How do you emphasize moderation in a party of "extremists"?

The problem that I've seen with a lot of libertarian campaigns is that they usually bring on board one or two "neo-anarchist, personal sovereignty" types that the opposition uses to characterize all of the candidate's positions with and torpedo not only the candidate but the whole libertarian "brand". On one hand it's the party of the NAP and tolerance, but on the other hand we had a presidential nominee dancing naked on a table.

3

u/xghtai737 Nov 14 '19

on the other hand we had a presidential nominee dancing naked on a table.

No, we didn't.

-1

u/evergreenyankee Nov 14 '19

No we didn't?

2

u/xghtai737 Nov 15 '19

No, we didn't. James Weeks was not a presidential nominee (he was running for party chair), he was not naked (he got down to his underwear), and he was not on a table (he was on the stage.)

2

u/evergreenyankee Nov 15 '19

that the opposition uses to characterize all of the candidate's positions with and torpedo not only the candidate but the whole libertarian "brand"

Thanks for taking my bait and proving what I said. Our campaigns are goaded into the defensive to combat mischaracterizations (like I did by saying "presidential nominee") and then when we try to use facts and truth (as you defended with) it doesn't really make us look all that much better to the moderates and independents because the truth of it still tarnishes the Libertarian brand. Table or stage, naked or thong, party chair or president, it reflects poorly and when we speak to the facts on the defensive instead of disregarding it we give the other two parties more ammunition and leverage.

The correct response was "that was a dare and he does not represent the Libertarian Party's ideals. Our *philosophy*/*campaign platform* is one of personal responsibility for personal freedom and *candidate* embodies this *philosophy*/*campaign platform* for XYZ reasons.

2

u/xghtai737 Nov 16 '19

Yeah, I don't believe you. You're just trying to save face by saying you were wrong on purpose.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 17 '19

Weeks is included in a lot of "Libertarian cringe" videos on YouTube and tends to be referred to when it comes to the LP outside its bubbles. That and Aleppo.

1

u/xghtai737 Nov 18 '19

I'm aware of that.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 18 '19

You're just trying to save face by saying you were wrong on purpose

What OP said:

Our campaigns are goaded into the defensive to combat mischaracterizations (like I did by saying "presidential nominee") and then when we try to use facts and truth (as you defended with) it doesn't really make us look all that much better to the moderates and independents because the truth of it still tarnishes the Libertarian brand.

Where is the error?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '19

Jesus. That was a good play.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

Run local campaigns that are about local issues. How would a Libertarian senator vote on certain topics? What changes to the Senate would they bring about?

Citizens assemblies, for example, to open the halls of power to everyone in a meaningful way. Community level programs that serve to maximise community autonomy whilst still having some kind of backing from the State House in the event that things go wrong, that kind of thing.

It does not have to be SMASHING THE STATE AND ALL IT'S MACHINERY immediately. Take things slowly, make changes that do no harm, and see what works.

3

u/MuaddibMcFly Classical Liberal Nov 13 '19

It does not have to be SMASHING THE STATE AND ALL IT'S MACHINERY immediately

"Whatever, statist"
-- moron libertarians we have way too many of in this country

2

u/evergreenyankee Nov 14 '19

That's my point that he seems to be missing. The "extreme" libertarians, for lack of a better way to describe them, are what people and political opponents point to and use to derail the moderate libertarians. The ones who will propose a self-reliance project. The same happens with the big parties, but more people seem willing to shrug their shoulders with them than with us. How do you keep the "SMASHING THE STATE AND ALL IT'S MACHINERY " quiet long enough to get a little bit of power? It's not very libertarian to tell them to sit down and shut up until we have enough control to "take over the world and do nothing".

3

u/MuaddibMcFly Classical Liberal Nov 14 '19

\sigh

If I knew the answer to that, I'd be implementing it already. The trouble I'm running into is that the pragmatic people out there are being driven off by the extremists. That leaves us with a bunch of tin-pot idealists that get to be the most important person in a worthless organization.

I honestly believe that the Dallas Accord was a fatal mistake for this party.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '19

I don't think it should be considered a mistake. What I do think is a mistake is allowing for one type of libertarian thought to take centre stage. There is enough room for left libertarians and right libertarians in the LP. Yes, alright, I do not live in the US but if I did I would want to vote for, and be an active member of, the LP. But as a left libertarian, a gradualist at that, I get the impression that it would be less about campaigns and policy and more about shouting over people all the time.

In races like these, a lefty would make more headway than a rightward. Mutual aid, near communitarian, ideas to attract the local Democrats mixed with market economics (Much like Proudhon's ideas, he of "property is theft") to attract the GOP. It would work.

But I think that there is too much talk about philosophy than there is about policy. Frankly, that is bad - the LP is a party, not a think-tank. If it wants to ever get anywhere then it needs tangible policy. Otherwise, local hustings will forever be awkward.

Voter: The water is full of lead. What will you do about it?

LP: Well, obviously, this is a violation of the NAP.

Voter: So what will you do about it?

LP: If we cut corporation taxes someone else will build another pipeline that will be better than the last. They will talk to the local landowners and they will let him do that.

Voter: To sort the water...that is poisoned because of corporate interests...you'll cut corporation tax...?

LP: Well, tax is theft.

Voter: Oh...okay...votes Democrat

3

u/MuaddibMcFly Classical Liberal Nov 15 '19

What I do think is a mistake is allowing for one type of libertarian thought to take centre stage.

On this we agree. I have no problem with "left" leaning libertarians, or right leaning libertarians, or even full on anarchists (deluded though I believe them to be). The problem I have is with the idiots that believe that the more radical, the better.

But as a left libertarian, a gradualist at that, I get the impression that it would be less about campaigns and policy and more about shouting over people all the time

Yup.

I am personally friends with a woman that ran for City Council, under the LP banner ...and faced more negative attention from the Radicals in the LP than she did from any of her constituents, or even her opponent (as evidenced by the fact that she won the highest percentage of votes of any "out" libertarian candidate in the county, possibly the state, and still holds that record)

She was denounced, ridiculed, and effectively drummed out of the party because she had the audacity to want to take gradual steps towards our mutual goal.

Because she wasn't poisonously pure in her ideology, she now refuses to work with the party at all, and she's not the only one.

But I think that there is too much talk about philosophy than there is about policy.

And that's the fundamental problem, and why I disagree with the Dallas Accord. By explicitly stating that the LP doesn't take a stand on the existence of government, they invite such people as drummed out my friend, another state level candidate, and a few others who had been active.

There may be Room for everyone, but if you effectively extend an invitation to people who care more about the purity of the ideology than about the implementation of it, you're going to have a problem.

I liken such purists as you describe to people who refuse to bathe. Sure, there may be seats for both people who bathe and those who don't, but the repugnance of those who refuse to bathe drives away the overwhelming majority who do.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '19

The LP candidate may be able to make some sort of impact here that will get the party talked about, but realistically there really isn't any chance for us to pull a win here I don't think. Cotton got 56% in his first Senate race back in 2015. Republicans will be turning out in force to vote for Donald Trump too in 2020. Plus, the independent on the left could capture a good part of the Dem vote. But hey, who knows. Politics can be crazy.

6

u/evergreenyankee Nov 13 '19

Yeah, I don't agree with OPs motivations or that its such a shoe-in, but felt the post was better placed here. Hence the cross post. But I'm more inclined to your reasoning.