Democrat Strategy for future

[Scribbler1]

There is one benefit to joining the Libertarian Party over being a registered independent, even if you're not wild about them. The government doesn't respond to anything unless you bash it over the head with a brick and one of those bricks is sheer numbers of dissatisfied people. It's pretty obvious the government will stay hijacked by the two big parties and the Libertarian party doesn't have the muscle to take anything away from them. However, the more people who sign on to ONE identifiable party, as opposed to aimless, disgruntled voters registering independent, the larger the party will become and that will be noticed more than independents.

I for one am registered L.P. because, although I disagree with a lot of the party's positions it is nevertheless the one party that comes closest to my political philosophy. I believe if you hope to gain ANYTHING with your one piddling vote, being a registered independent means your vote is already wasted. I'm not selling the L.P. and I really don't care which alternative party you belong to as long as it IS a recognized party.

[Osborn F Enready]

And the fact remains that the Libertarian party is the biggest, most widely known (though misunderstood) party out there. If the Lib party could just get national recognition in the media, and the elections were MANDATORY open debates, with unscripted questions, we would see change immediately.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready And the fact remains that the Libertarian party is the biggest, most widely known (though misunderstood) party out there. If the Lib party could just get national recognition in the media, and the elections were MANDATORY open debates, with unscripted questions, we would see change immediately.

That's a damned big IF, my friend. Nothing remotely like that will happen until the sheep realize the government, and therefore the election process is controlled by two parties that don't want to share the power. Once they realize the ridiculously obvious truth that those who HAVE, want to KEEP what they have then perhaps they might support a little diversity in the government. Until then, ANY alternate party is spinning their wheels.

For that, at least, you have to give credit to the L.P. for stamina (zero marketing skill, but stamina). Look at Perot, he lost one election and walked away from the whole thing when he had a real possibility of making a stronger showing in the following 2 elections.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Scrib. The Lib party just needs to get some P.R. going and get some of the BRAINS to run, not just the mouths who like to support the party. A lot of people liked Nolan, and I didn't think he was terrible, I could have lived with him, I just preferred Badnaricks more adamant, no frills stances.
I catch a lot of criticism for supporting Badnarik, which doesn't bother me. Even a 12th grader could do better than Bush or Kerry, or any of the other major party hopefuls, so comparing them to Badnarik is laughable to begin with.

National attention in the media, would bring on waves of national support, if the message was just allowed to be heard by more people. Nobody could embarass this nation more than the yahoos in charge now.

[Compugasm]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready National attention in the media, would bring on waves of national support.

Assuming the preamble to their appearance wasn't "And here's that crazy lunatic who wants to give everyone guns and take away your medicine."

[underbear1]

I don't think a Libertarian will ever gain the presidency, and if by some miracle/tragedy (depending on your view of Libertarians) that occured, he/she would be unable to change much, because neither the Democrats or Republicans in Congress would work to achieve those Libertarian objectives.

[Osborn F Enready]

That is why I am for a more direct approach to change, since the realistic approach isn't much an option in this "faux" representative republic.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: underbear1 I don't think a Libertarian will ever gain the presidency, and if by some miracle/tragedy (depending on your view of Libertarians) that occured, he/she would be unable to change much, because neither the Democrats or Republicans in Congress would work to achieve those Libertarian objectives.

I've been a Libertarian for close to 20 years and I have been saying just that for almost all of those years. He would be a lame duck even before the Diebolds cooled down. The Democrats and the Republicans have the house and Senate and even if a L.P. president proposed a workable plan to solve every problem on Earth he would be stopped at the legislative level. One of my problems with my party is that it doesn't seem to CARE, much less support local and state candidates and THAT is what we need more than a president. A 20-25% of Congress would be nice to have before we even THINK of the White House. With a sizable minority in Congress the L.P. members would have the power to shove a wrench in anything the Republicrats would want to do. Either that of they would show the nation that they ARE actually two faces of the same party when every single thing either side proposes will need to be almost unanimously voted for by BOTH parties just to overrule the Libertarians.

I have often accused my state party of running the state L.P. like a club, and an unrealistic club at that, instead of a real party that wants REAL political power. This is obvious by their emphasis on the presidency rather than realizing the simple truth is that Congress is where the power is.

[RickSp]

The LP has never done the heavy lifting of developing a workable local platform. The Rothbardians are too willing to beat down anyone who makes the attempt. Until the local LP becomes more than a debating society, the LP will continue to be ineffective. As the cliche goes, all politics is local. The LP has never bothered to even show up.

[Osborn F Enready]

Yea Yea Yea......Maybe if you were a member you should have volunteered to carry those programs to the top for the party?

I agree, that they need work in the Lib party, but that work is taking place more and more everyday.

The party is growing, and they are going to start making changes as soon as more people can name three branches of our government.

It takes educated voters before their vote CAN make a difference.

Right now the choice is as numb to most as picking what color they like better, blue or red. It takes an educated person to realize they aren't being educated, and its a shame that the only people from public schools who do this, are the ones that educate themselves.

[Osborn F Enready]

By the way, I am not a partisan, but if I have to pick a party to get representation, I pick the Libs since they respect the actual term "RIGHT" as opposed to privlidge, and they also don't mince their platform to conform to way the wind is blowing for public approval.

If you want to read the libertarian platform, go and read a copy of the Constitution and pay special attention to the Bill of Rights. That about sums it up.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Yea Yea Yea......Maybe if you were a member you should have volunteered to carry those programs to the top for the party?

Yo Os, I have been in and out of the LP for 30 years. I have been an elected LP state party chairman and a state party presidential campaign chair, a national convention delegate, as well as being active in and indeed running several campaigns, so spare me your pointless crap. It gets old.

[Osborn F Enready]

Rick said: Yo Os, I have been in and out of the LP for 30 years. I have been an elected LP state party chairman and a state party presidential campaign chair, a national convention delegate, as well as being active in and indeed running several campaigns, so spare me your pointless crap. It gets old.

I say:
How is it pointless Rick? Did you deem yourself one of the "blind, no idea having, bumblefooted" libertarians also when you were running for office? If so why did you run? What motivated you to run Rick, and why for that party?

You are always quick to criticise the only people standing up for the document that binds us, and label them as "never wills" because YOU lost YOUR will. I haven't yet, but thanks for trying to speak for me..... NOT!

What is getting old is the mentality that people stick with what shows them instant gratification, and if it doesn't they just cancel the ideals and logic behind what drew them there in the first place because "it wasn't popular enough". I can understand getting fed up, and becoming less active in the party, but to cast the label "never-wills" like you do, it is almost as if you resent them regardless of how much support they get.

I could be wrong, but I am entitled to be and should be proven so if I am. If you prove me wrong, I will accept it, but I will still get pissed the at the way you blanket label them as if you can see the future. When I blanket label the major parties, it is based on the past, and the current, for which ample evidence exists. The future is unwritten.

[RickSp]

Give me a break, little boy. Your lectures are stupid and fucking insulting and I really get bored with the rants. You want to do better, go ahead. I doubt if you can get out of your own way, but show us what you can do. Just spare me all the whining about the media. I have read your verbiage and you seem to have nothing in particular to say. Te media figures that our really fast.

[Clarence]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready If the Lib party could just get national recognition in the media, and the elections were MANDATORY open debates, with unscripted questions, we would see change immediately.

I think every american should be clammoring for unscripted debate and photo ops. Open debates would give other parties a chance to at least influence the vote. The way I see it, if red and blue are battling to and fro with some politics, an independent could pipe in with something relevent and influence the debate between the two majors. at the very least. If the right person comes along, in an open debate and honest coverage, we would know it. Right? Confidence in our elections is falling off quickly, from what I perceive. The democrats have a challenge there. Jimmy Carter is at the front of that one, so I don't know if anything will happen.

[Osborn F Enready]

Rick said: Give me a break, little boy. Your lectures are stupid and fucking insulting and I really get bored with the rants. You want to do better, go ahead. I doubt if you can get out of your own way, but show us what you can do. Just spare me all the whining about the media. I have read your verbiage and you seem to have nothing in particular to say. Te media figures that our really fast.

I say:
Hmm, seems I hit a soft spot. Sorry if that hurt Rick.

[bishop]

i think he's basically saying that talk is cheap.

[Morgan_Freeman]

Quote by: RickSp The LP has never done the heavy lifting of developing a workable local platform. The Rothbardians are too willing to beat down anyone who makes the attempt. Until the local LP becomes more than a debating society, the LP will continue to be ineffective. As the cliche goes, all politics is local. The LP has never bothered to even show up.

Hey, give me some credit, will you?

[Morgan_Freeman]

Quote by: Scribbler1 He would be a lame duck even before the Diebolds cooled down. The Democrats and the Republicans have the house and Senate and even if a L.P. president proposed a workable plan to solve every problem on Earth he would be stopped at the legislative level.

But wouldn't that be preferable to having an R or D in office?

[RickSp]

Quote by: Morgan_Freeman Hey, give me some credit, will you?

OK, except you, Morgan.