The reason why Libertarians don't get elected into office is because... - Page 5

Ardentfrost · 11-13-2006, 10:55 AM

The other night, Steven Colbert had Tim Medows on his show playing a black republican who was going through Harlem asking black people who they were voting for (and trying to get them to vote republican). He asked one guy "Why are you voting for democrats?" and the guy responds "Because I'm black."

hsmith · 11-13-2006, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by 7960

the only thing being difficult here is you.

try this......... go find some friend of a friend and say "can I explain something to you and get your opinion?" Then give a 3 min lecture on how the govt should get out of everyone's lives. The person will probably agree. Then say "of course, one of the results of this is that heroin would be legalized. Would you vote for a candidate who supports all of this?" and see what s/he says. My guess, the person says something like "that all makes sense right up to the point where you want to legalize heroin. We don't really need that."

This has NOTHING to do being a cornerstone of either party and everything to do with common sense.... people will vote for a candidate who wants the govt out of our lives. People will not vote for a candidate who wants to legalize heroin. But keep believe it's about being brainwashed or some shit like that if it helps you sleep at night.

ok.

hsmith · 11-13-2006, 11:13 AM

I don't see how you can "make smaller government" without actually reducing the size of government and having plans to do so

but, ok

lew · 11-13-2006, 01:22 PM

I guess we should just lie.

We'll ONLY say we want to reduce government. That's it. We want to reduce government and taxes.

Then once we get elected, we'll legalize drugs, abolish all taxes, dismantle federal agencies, bring the troops home, abolish welfare, etc.

Thorgrim · 11-13-2006, 01:48 PM

What's funny is that this is an example of the free market in work

People see a languishing project going on for how many years, see it going nowhere, and they choose to invest their $20 dollars or however much in to other programs, even ones that were failing (democrats) over libertarians

They voted with their dollars and their votes...to someone else

If you have a product(libertarianism), you have to convince people, especially people who like your product (libertarians) that its worth investing in...for future gains...that hasn't happened

In a real free market, libertarianism would have gone bankrupt and been shut down years ago, odd that libertarians abandon the basic rules of the free market to keep their message alive

Phantom · 11-13-2006, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

What's funny is that this is an example of the free market in work

I agree with that. Ignorance among voting population keeps the Dems and Repubs in power.

Ardentfrost · 11-13-2006, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by lew

I guess we should just lie.

We'll ONLY say we want to reduce government. That's it. We want to reduce government and taxes.

Then once we get elected, we'll legalize drugs, abolish all taxes, dismantle federal agencies, bring the troops home, abolish welfare, etc.

We also need scandals apparently. That's what ppl really like...

.... because they watch too much fucking TV.

SpicyMcVoodoo · 11-13-2006, 02:16 PM

Whatever happened to that project where a bunch of libertarians were all going to invade a state and take it over?

Thorgrim · 11-13-2006, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Whatever happened to that project where a bunch of libertarians were all going to invade a state and take it over?

they all decided to eat doritos and watch TV instead, much less work involved and doritos are a lot cheaper than actually moving

Seriously though, they'd only need 300,000 (200,000 actually, but 300,000 to be safe) people to completely take over the government of Wyoming...a governor, the entire state government for that matter, 2 senators, a federal representative...

That's right, only 0.1% the US population would have to be dedicated libertarians

that's the problem, its one thing to take the quote of a founding father and thump your chest, its another to actually get off your ass and do something

7960 · 11-13-2006, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

they all decided to eat doritos and watch TV instead, much less work involved and doritos are a lot cheaper than actually moving

Seriously though, they'd only need 300,000 (200,000 actually, but 300,000 to be safe) people to completely take over the government of Wyoming...a governor, the entire state government for that matter, 2 senators, a federal representative...

That's right, only 0.1% the US population would have to be dedicated libertarians

that's the problem, its one thing to take the quote of a founding father and thump your chest, its another to actually get off your ass and do something

You are ignorant.

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

Whatever happened to that project where a bunch of libertarians were all going to invade a state and take it over?

This isn't what they were going to do. They wanted to get libertarians to move to a state to "affect politics, not "take it over."

And it's happening, now, in NH.

[ Free State Project - Liberty in Our Lifetime ]

Thorgrim · 11-13-2006, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

You are ignorant.

This isn't what they were going to do. They wanted to get libertarians to move to a state to "affect politics, not "take it over."

And it's happening, now, in NH.

[ Free State Project - Liberty in Our Lifetime ]

I don't know if you've been watching the news, but the Democrats just took over the two house of rep seats, both state houses of legislature...after the 2006 election they control the state house, state senate, governorship, the executive council, and the entire HoR delegation

Now I am not going to go race by race, but in the two of the most important contests, NH01 and NH02, NH voted in two big liberals

Sounds like Libertarian victories to me, tax and spend liberals controlling the state government and its federal delegation, real progress

7960 · 11-13-2006, 03:27 PM

^^^

you really are ignorant...if you're not even going to try to understand what they're doing please don't comment on their project.

here's the FAQ. At least read the "when"

FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) [ Free State Project - Liberty in Our Lifetime ]

hsmith · 11-13-2006, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I don't know if you've been watching the news, but the Democrats just took over the two house of rep seats, both state houses of legislature...after the 2006 election they control the state house, state senate, governorship, the executive council, and the entire HoR delegation

Now I am not going to go race by race, but in the two of the most important contests, NH01 and NH02, NH voted in two big liberals

Sounds like Libertarian victories to me, tax and spend liberals controlling the state government and its federal delegation, real progress

7960 · 11-13-2006, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

I agree, it's extremely funny that he showed his ignorance of what we're talking about

AVengeance · 11-13-2006, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

We also need scandals apparently. That's what ppl really like...

.... because they watch too much fucking TV.

sheeple luv da drama.

Thorgrim · 11-13-2006, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by 7960

^^^

you really are ignorant...if you're not even going to try to understand what they're doing please don't comment on their project.

here's the FAQ. At least read the "when"

FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) [ Free State Project - Liberty in Our Lifetime ]

So not only can't they meet their pathetic goals, but they have a pathetically long time line, but even in the off chance that their half-ass project works, it would mean little to nothing considering the head the democratic majority in New Hampsire, the governor, won by over 200,000 votes, and their grand solution to be heard would be to get 20,000 people...reducing her win to a mere 180,000 votes

truely, this will have earth shattering consequences

perhaps you can make some predictions about their future success rate, and we can put them along side your 2006 predictions

hsmith · 11-13-2006, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

So not only can't they meet their pathetic goals, but they have a pathetically long time line, but even in the off chance that their half-ass project works, it would mean little to nothing considering the head the democratic majority in New Hampsire, the governor, won by over 200,000 votes, and their grand solution to be heard would be to get 20,000 people...reducing her win to a mere 180,000 votes

truely, this will have earth shattering consequences

perhaps you can make some predictions about their future success rate, and we can put them along side your 2006 predictions

yeah it is easy for people to just uproot and move cross country

you can't even think through your bias

Thorgrim · 11-13-2006, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

yeah it is easy for people to just uproot and move cross country

you can't even think through your bias

Oh give me a break, the people who dealt with civil rights took beatings, broken bones, jail, etc and you're here whining about moving to a nice house in another state for a few years?

Oh thats right, people fighting for civil rights actually BELIEVED in their cause, it wasn't just a fad

7960 · 11-13-2006, 06:15 PM

Right...that makes a lot of sense. You're expecting them to make a decision to affect politics and when, in the very next election nothing changes, you say they failed. Like I said, ignorant.......... especially considering

1. they aren't expecting the 20k people to come to NH just to vote for "their candidate"
2. it's not realistic to expect 20k people to move overnight
3. it's evident from your comments that you have little-to-no idea what they're trying to accomplish

But other than that your comments are appreciated