About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 20, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 20, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 20, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 6:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
As I wrote before here, if Romney had miraculously eked out a narrow margin win, with only the House, he was at most being set up as the designated fall guy for when the wheels fall undeniably off.

"See? We went back to the dangerous policies of the past, and it was a catastrophe; Obama and the Reds had nearly turned the nation around."

Obama and the Reds fully -own- this mess now. "George Bush did it!" has officially lost all luster. And the 'thuds' you are hearing around America this morning are any expansion plan books being slammed shut now that business knows which way this election has turned out. If he thinks the half of the nation that strongly disagrees with his politics is going to pull together to make his mess work for him, he is delusional. Its his politics, its his agenda, its his radical theories; all he has to do is make them work to prove them wrong. On his own. And those who struggle only to carry his load for him might finally realize that, and stop; under Romney, many more would have (falsely) had hope for freedom.

Because as I wrote over a year ago, Romney was never going to be 'that guy' even if he had won; the last 18 months were pure national distraction, a meaningless horse race.

Romney remains the 'safe' choice, as in, it will make absolutely no difference to anyone on earth whether Obama or Romney wins the election. The government under Romney will not shrink, it will be gleeful 'let's run the economy' bidness as usual as we all continue to circle the drain under a red flag instead of a blue flag,' and for most, that will be enough. But it will change little. True, he might live up to his word, assuming he has control of both houses, and repeal ObamaCare, but that is at most elimination of a future negative; what already exists today is way beyond out of all control. Will he take an axe to it? I with full confidence seriously doubt it, based on his words and demeanour. He will take his turn at driving the bus, and the federal bus will be massively bigger when he hands it over to the next gleeful bus driver.

No need to amend a word of that, from well over a year ago.

Good luck in the coming mess.

regards,
Fred

Post 1

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 8:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
America is officially fuxored.

Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 15, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 8:50amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have stepped up my plans to buy a boat and get back to sailing... sailing far, far away. I must have been asleep when the America I loved got up and left.

I made excuses in my mind for those who voted for Obama the first time. He was young, enthusiastic, positive, energetic and full of promise. And as much as I despised his politics, I was proud that the racism of the past was no more. But this election... this time he was exposed as a failed hack, full of excuses, spouting negative angry attacks in place of promise or performance - a liar in chief. No more excuses.

I don't want to be here for the coming train wreck. I don't want to be one of those who spends time carping about the politicians, saying, "I told you so," and watching those who try to carry on the fight being branded just a bunch of sore losers by the mental midgets of the far left.

It is clear now that the combined effects of a dishonest liberal media, nasty Chicago-style politics, segments of the population that vote based upon purely racial considerations, flocks of fantasy-minded young who have been brain-washed into little eco-bots for progressivism, moneyed interests that want to push their snouts deeper into the public feeding trough, those who are angry in their sense of entitlement, the far left intellectual loons who have grown as loud as they are now numerous, and the abysmal level of political and economic ignorance of the average voter have taken the country - and like Fred said, they own this mess.

I was retired. Now I'm on strike. There isn't any outward difference at all, but it feels different. Right now, the day after the elections, I'm feeling bitter, sad, disappointed, but it is the facts of the election that leave me newly pessimistic about the chance that our country will even get another shot at moving in the right direction. Like an addict sinking deeply into major substance abuse, this is a culture that will have to hit bottom, to collapse and disintegrate, before anything else is tried.



Post 3

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 9:52amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve:

You have surely made a good decision to separate yourself from the chaos that is inevitable. The American Dream is dead. As judged by the 300 point drop in the Dow today, it seems that the 1% are taking steps to protect themselves from the fate of the proverbial Golden Goose.

Sam


Post 4

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 10:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Just remember to sing if only inside the "Anthem to the ego".
Poignant and beautifully expressed Steve.

Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Post 5

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 12:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
2008: Obama: 69,456,897(53.6%), McCain: 59,934,814(43.7%) Total 129,391,711(100%)

2012: Obama: 59,583,302(51.1%), Romney: 56,969,530(48.9%) Total: 116,552,832(100%)

If Romney had gotten the same number of votes in 2012 that John McCain got in 2008...he would have defeated Obama by 351,000 votes...

Obama dropped 10 million votes between 2008 and 2012...

The GOP dropped 2.9 million votes between 2008 and 2012...




US Population in 2008: 303,202,683

US Population in 2012: 312,780,968


Almost 10 million more people.... over 10 million fewer voters.


America has been beaten down, and a large fraction of America just told both parties to go to Hell.





Post 6

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 4:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Spot on, Fred. In fact, I'm going to quote your last post on facebook. At first I couldn't believe that Romney got fewer votes than McCain did, but I guess your last line says it all.

Perhaps the system really does need to come crumbling down for us to put the pieces back together. Hopefully it doesn't get too ugly for too long...

Post 7

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 4:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dan,

At this point I no longer see a way to steer us away from our current path... not under normal conditions and with the ballot box. It is certainly true that the Republicans could mount an extraordinarily powerful campaign in 2016, but by then, it will be much less likely to succeed than Romney's campaign this year. I think that the scales have tipped and those who are the recipients of redistributed wealth now outweigh all other groups. Add the powerful influence of the liberal media, and the wide spread political and economic ignorance and I just don't see it happening. Our culture harbored progressiveness in its media, its intellectuals, it's colleges and universities... for too many generations and now the price is about to be paid - for generations.
-----------

Of course the other path to a turn around is what happens when the government runs out of funds, no one will loan to them, and fiat currency gets discounted even before it is printed (and, believe it or not, all of that can happen is a fairly short period of time). With such a crash and such a loss of purchasing power the current style of government can no longer function as it does. That creates a kind of cultural choice point - it is possible, and reasonable, to choose Capitalism and rebuild. But in that state of panic and desperation it is more likely that a strong man will take charge and whatever America becomes it will not be free.

Even the die-hard Republicans must now realize that their party, their "establishment" is no longer able to succeed over the long term. The left has framed this like this: "If the Republicans don't learn how to attract people of brown and black skin, and single women, and the young, then they are done." If the Republicans go that way - trying to appeal to splintered demographics, they will once again be doing, "Me too!" and that won't change the trajectory towards collectivism.

Post 8

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 6:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

I'm going to disagree with you superficially below. I don't believe in special interests, but sometimes your "general welfare" or "general interest" is inclusive (because it is more objectively correct than any other alternative).

You're not supposed to bash your team-mates after the opposing team destroys you in a game. That being said ...

Kids, women, and nonwhites went for Obama big-time. Why is that, you say? I was listening to NPR before the election and the journalist was in the barber shop. One guy said he was for Romney. The other guy flipped out and said something like this:

"You're nonreligious, nonwhite, and sexually active outside of marriage. Why vote for a guy who, from the very get-go, doesn't have your interests at heart?!

What that comment told me is that the Democrats have effectively convinced the public that Republicans hate atheists, nonwhites, and the permiscuous -- especially so if you're female. Considering permiscuity, we can add drugs to the mix. That's 4 things Republicans hate:

1) nonbelievers
2) nonwhites
3) the sexually active -- especially if you're female (and not married)
4) drug-enthusiasts

What the election told me is that there are enough people fitting into one of these 4 categories to win an election (assuming that there was absolutely no voter fraud in this election -- and that the majority really did pull the lever for Obama). What the analysis told me is that this will get worse over time. So, now, look at those 4 things and ask yourself: "Could Democrats have pulled this propaganda campaign off against a libertarian?"

The answer is, of course, no -- the Democrats have no similar defense against libertarians. The upshot? If Republicans ever want to administer government in this country again (like I said, this narrative will only get worse over time), then they have to swallow the bitter pill of libertarianism. No more Republicans making idiotic comments about women's reproductive systems shutting down after a rape.

Why did kids, women, and nonwhites go for Obama? Because of Republicans (because they got caught not being libertarian enough).

No more.

Ed

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 11/07, 6:30pm)


Post 9

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 6:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed,

I read your post and I don't see where we disagree. Either something I wrote isn't clear, or you read it differently than I intended it. What was the sentence you disagreed with.

Post 10

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 7:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

Like I said, it's a superficial difference based more on semantics than substance. I'll bet we are in general agreement with each other. The sentence was this:
If the Republicans go that way - trying to appeal to splintered demographics, they will once again be doing, "Me too!" and that won't change the trajectory towards collectivism.
The way I see it, the Republicans have a big hole in their defensive line (think of football as an analogy). That hole is their relative lack of libertarianism. Now, the Democrats see this hole and exploit it. Notice how they effectively switched the narrative off of the economy and onto social issues like abortion and birth control? Because Republicans don't follow an objective morality -- one that is essentially libertarian -- there will be splintered demographics for the Democrats to appeal toward. It's because Republicans aren't good (read: libertarian) enough. You can fix this hole by swallowing the bitter pill of libertarianism, and you will lose some of your hard-core conservative base when you do that -- but you will gain so much in the process, simultaneously appealing to almost all splintered demographics in existence.* It's just something to do if you want to win any more elections, that's all I'm saying.

Ed

*p.s., In my post above, I accidentally left out the gays. Gays are another group that can easily be made to feel alienated from the Republicans. Again, libertarianism (or Objectivism, if you will) fixes all that and takes all of the wind out of the Democrats' offensive.


Post 11

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 8:11pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed,

Democrats target specific groups to entice them with goodies or to scare them with threats of what the Republicans will do to them.

All that I said is that the Republicans will fail if they attempt to focus on demographic groups.

We agree that what the Republican party needs to do is go libertarian - it is the only way they can get the moral high ground and be consistent.

They need libertarian principles not just for the moral high ground, and not just for the consistency, but it is the only platform from which the wreak of socialism is clearly visible. From that platform it is possible to see what a disaster it would be to follow the progressives.

Post 12

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 8:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed,

I agree. We have some hope in that the Libertarian political philosophy has picked up steam in recent years, evidenced by the Tea Party and Ron Paul's gaining popularity. It will be interesting to see whether the Republican party will eventually adopt these values, or whether a new party will emerge and the Republican party will die. I think the only thing standing in the way are the masses of non-thinking religious right that are in the country, and in particular representing the Republicans.

Anyway, that is my hope for now. It's amazing how someone with a long record of integrity (Ron Paul) can get people thinking and turning away from the filth that they have heard from everyone else. Can you imagine if he were more charismatic!?

Post 13

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 8:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

We agree on everything here. It was just how we went about saying it. Republicans are guilty of the Me, Too method you mentioned (trying to find splintered groups), but as you say, that's like merely pouring more water into a bucket with a hole in it. It is better to plug the hole. My stress was merely that it is from the prior existence of the hole where Democrats gain the needed ground to launch an offensive on the social issues.

Dan,

Too true. I'm not sure if you were around here then, but I met Ron Paul in person recently. He told me that libertarianism is gaining ground in the universities. He told me that issues will break soon because the debt is now too large to ignore. The problem with Ron Paul is he seemed small in real life. Maybe everyone seems smaller when you meet them. The guy probably only weighs a buck-sixty while soaking wet. In my warped view, what he needs is a good dose of testosterone. Strap a couple Andro-Derm patches on that man's shoulders and watch him take charge of this great nation. Steve was saying that we may eventually fall to a strong man. So why not let it be Ron Paul, all 'roided up and in a fitful rage against socialism? Just picture him in the primaries with the testosterone level of an 18-year-old, not letting anyone weasel out of his arguments against them. I mean, I can picture him yelling at Newt Gingrich:

"You're just a progressive in conservative clothes! Why don't you go sit on the couch with Nancy Pelosi?!"

:-)

Imagination can be fun.

Ed

(Edited by Ed Thompson on 11/07, 8:45pm)


Post 14

Wednesday, November 7, 2012 - 9:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed,

Now that's what I'm talkin' about! Haha, good stuff. And that's awesome that you met him!

Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Post 15

Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 9:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Dan:

It's odd when you look at those turnout numbers, but they explain our bewilderment; the GOP 'won' the relative enthusiasm battle by losing fewer voters than the Dems...and still lost.

...because all of America is losing with these two parties of power.

The Dem's problem is they believe their own bullshit; the GOP's problem is exactly the same.

As a fringe observer of American political trends, I can't for the life of me understand the broad embrace in the GOP of the following 'tactic:' in Jan 2008 at the GOP Primary debate at Reagan's library, McCain, Huckabee, and Romney -- Mitt Romney -- walked facefirst into ANderson Coopers fair but loaded question: "Tell us why YOU are best suited to RUN THE ECONOMY." And all three GOP frontrunners not only gleefully answered in context, as if this really was the former SOviet Union, but embraced it with dinner and flowers. By the time Ron Paul gave his "W.T.F. are you morons droning on about, this is not the former U.S.S.R. and it is not the function of the POTUS to "RUN THE ECONOMY," it was way too late. And they all grinned at Ron Paul like it was he was the f'n idiot.

Anderson Cooper-- and all of the Dems -- must have been laughing asses off. It was a fair and brilliant question, and exposed the rot that is the modern GOP; false hope for freedom as the alternative to no hope for freedom.

Sometime after that debate, in Spring of 2008, I have a local GOP idiot on my front porch, campaigning for state office. I ask him about the GOP's embrace of this 'run the economy' nonsense, and he confides in me, like it was a brilliant strategy of some kind, that "James Carville's "It's the Economy, Stupid!" is just too much of a political winner, and the GOP just has to roll with it." And then I threw the idiot out of my house, took a long hot shower, and clearly saw the modern GOP for what it is; an atrophied, bloated party of mental midgets, glad handers, lightweights, who don't have the intellectual horsepower to counter a four word bumper sticker from 1992.

Then, the GOP got drubbed in 2008, and in the post-mortem announced that it had to do some 'soul searching.'

And that 'soul searching' resulted in an 18 month pony show of the same old same old, in which the final result was running that same Mitt ROmney running on the exact same argument; that he, as POTUS, was best suited to RUN THE ECONOMY.


And in these resulting 'run the economy' economies, with this president and his abysmal record, the cumulative GOP braintrust could not defeat the Democrats with the argument "We will be better Democrats." Well, no shit.

Followed by, in 2012, the same tired excuses of "the GOP needs to do some soul searching..." Translated: the GOP will run that idiot Chris Christie in 2016 and lose again to Hillary. That is, if there is a 2016 election.

And we wonder why there was no enthusiasm in the Tea Party for Mitt Romney? A nice and decent man, no doubt, he would have been the perfect federal bus driver 30 years ago, coming into office to ride the federal bus and maybe give it a few tweaks. But we're 30 years beyond the time when tweaks around the edges were going to fix anything.

And in the end, he was the only choice we had to 'defeat the real Democrat', and not enough of us held our nose and voted for 'hope.'

But he dodged a bullet, as I said up thread. He was never going to be 'that guy.' RealPolitiks in America demands that the GOP embrace the far religious right and their insistence on trashing the constitution with their injection of political religion into the public debate. We have an absolute right to private and public religion precisely because of our prohibition against political religion...and in their eyes rolled into the back of their heads zealoutry, they don't have a clue that they are selling our freedom with their nonsesne. They come full circle and butt heads with the far religious left -- Scott Nearing's "Social Religion" Progressives, staring at each other over the hostile dividing line of Choice/Life and gay marriage(neither of which are deserving issues of public policy by the state, they are matters for individuals and churches/groups, period under the principles of free association)but otherwise identical religious nuts.

And in that battle to eat freedom, America loses its freedom... has lost its freedom.

Faint glimmers of hope; the protest against both atrophied parties of power evident in the dropping turnout numbers.

My wife, the long time Republican, finally seeing the GOP for what it is. I think I might have finally won over another libertarian; I've been working on her for years.

Ron Paul's observation of gaining popularity on college campuses.

There was more than one lesson just handed the GOP, who pushed aside Ron Paul at its convention, ignored the Tea Party totally in its quest to compete as Triangulated Democrat-Lites(who were -still- painted as TeaParty Extremists, even though they were fully disavowed in this election), and as a result of their lack of active enthusiasm for voting for yet more of the same, narrowly lost the election, and saved the nation from the spectacle of Mitt Romeny becoming the designated fall guy for what is about to befall the US. Will they learn from their lessons? No evidence whatsoever; they are atrophied, calcified, and stuck in the past. They are full boat 1972, plus a website.

And, that is a RealPolitik lesson for any libertarian political movement; it isn't close to having any realistic shot at taking power in this nation on this side of the coming wreckage, certainly not in time to avert this wreck on rails. No, the focus needs to be on post-wreck politics; that is the only realistic future battleground within any kind of reach. That nation will be ready and willing and hungry to flush the parties of power who brought on the wreck, and that is where future political opportunity exists. That is where the real battle of America will be fought. The battle for the old America is over, old news. That ship of state is sinking, irretrievably at this point. Take the best of its lessons and history, and move on.

regards,
Fred

(Edited by Fred Bartlett on 11/08, 9:13am)


Post 16

Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 9:38amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I can't really take much credit for winning over my wife from the GOP.

After this latest hosing, she told me "I wish there was a party that was fiscally conservative and socially moderate."

I just said, "Would you also take 'advocates of freedom, defenders of personal liberty, and guided by principles of free association along with that?"

But I've been telling her that, for years. It just takes some folks longer to leave The Borg.

She is an elected/unpaid official, by the way. President of a local school board. Ran for office three times, she is wrapping up her 3rd four year term next year. She ran successfully three times, cross registered on both the Democrat and Republican tickets, as all/most school board candidates and judges do, because such positions are supposed to be inherently 'non-political.' She is politically aware, but her attitudes towards libertarians(like her goofy husband)have been largely shaped by the propaganda coming from the parties of power and the main stream press.

That is changing. Slowly, by default, because both parties of power are massively screwing the pooch, and the nation.

Post 17

Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 1:21pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Fred,

I sanctioned post #15 and find myself in near complete agreement.

You wrote that no existing libertarian political movement is close to "... having a shot at taking power in this nation on this side of the coming wreckage, certainly not in time to avert this wreck on rails." And,
... the focus needs to be on post-wreck politics; that is the only realistic future battleground within any kind of reach. That nation will be ready and willing and hungry to flush the parties of power who brought on the wreck, and that is where future political opportunity exists. That is where the real battle of America will be fought.
I agree, mostly, but I don't think there is time before the wreck to do that kind of building, and I believe the power structure in place is too easily grabbed by a strong man during a time of panic and that we no longer, as a people, have the moral fiber or self-responsibility to resist that. That is my darker view of the future, but because we have choice, and because exceptional leaders can arise to meet terrible conditions, it is possible that a crisis could be used to take us to small government.
-----------------

On the question of what strategy to take in the meantime to guide our voting and support....

==== Problems ====
One problem is that we talk about the GOP or the Dems and their policies, but we only have control over our own individual actions.

Further, in the political arena we have to recognize that it nearly always takes a long time for the Overton Window to make large moves. That means we have to plan our personal actions - our strategy - so that it is the most effective in a landscape that changes in small to medium steps over what is usually a long period of time.

We also have to recognize that we are a two party system and unless our plan is to change that, we either replace one of the parties with the Libertarian party (make the GOP a minority party - a place where the social conservatives and neo-cons can go), or we convert the GOP from the inside till it becomes a party supporting Libertarian principles.

=== Solutions ===
Here are three paths a libertarian might choose between in hoping to move our country politically to where it should be:

1.) Refuse to vote Republican unless they run someone truly exceptional. Encourage them in that direction, of course, and encourage them to include more libertarian principles, but ONLY vote for Libertarian candidates. And ONLY support bills that don't violate libertarian principles. This strategy is to force them to go libertarian to get our vote or our support, or to get out of the way as the Libertarian Party takes their place. This is sort of a Gary Johnson approach.

2.) Continue to push for the the inclusion of libertarian principles in the Republican party. Accept no major compromises but vote for the Republican candidates over the Democrat's (unless they are total turkeys). The strategy is to maximize the reform efforts in making the Republican party more libertarian, fighting from within, while recognizing it will not be real effective in the beginning at resisting the Democrats movement of the nation to the left. This is a recognition that years will be spent converting the GOP before the tide can be turned against the DEMs. This is kind of a Ron Paul strategy.

3.) Same as above, but accept compromises as long as the net result is a movement in the right direction. The strategy is to use the Republican party, while improving it, to move in small steps in the right direction and mostly resisting the moves of the Democrats before we go too far to the left. The efforts here are divided between converting the GOP and fighting the DEMs move of the country to the left. More like a Ronald Reagan (but who sees a libertarian rather than a conservative future, although far off in the future).
-------

All of those are almost purely political and much of the war will be educational. National political elections are a good educational platform, and that would figure in as well.
-------

I invite comments. And in the interest of honesty I'll say that I'm in the process of an entirely different 'strategy' - going sailing... and sailing so far away that no one would know what "GOP" means.

Post 18

Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 3:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

That sounds like a great idea; unfortunately I am young and will (assuming I don't get too creative on the motorcycle between now and then) be seeing more of the process than you. I can hope that the money I make will be worth enough to buy a boat in the future, but we'll see...

Although we have mentioned that the Republican party must become more libertarian, I am actually hoping that does not happen. My reasoning is that even if the GOP starts to change, it will still have the "momentum factor" from all of it's fallacious ideas from the past several years. There is no way they are going to accept all the ideas in any kind of a short period. At the best it will be 2 steps forward, one step back. Better than nothing, but not as good as a new party emerging. A new party does not have to deal with the momentum, because it has none. It can lay its complete liberty-based platform from day one. And as its popularity grows, the old GOP-ers have to give it an honest look-over for once, and many would come to realize how much it makes sense for them.

This presents a dilemma for someone like me. It would be pretty tough for me not to vote for the "practical candidate" to beat someone like Obama, especially if the change takes a long time to come about. To watch the left's policies continue, and not be actively trying to stop it in the short run -- it would be tough to swallow. Not to mention the number of friends/family who would think me an impractical loon. But, at this moment, I think it is the best long-term strategy. I plan to vote all third party at the major positions in the foreseeable future and encourage others to do the same. As always, I encourage someone to tell me why I am wrong. But right now that's the plan.

Post 19

Thursday, November 8, 2012 - 4:16pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for the reply, Dan.

You chose what I listed as option 1. Build the Libertarian party and end up replacing the GOP (eventually).

I can understand that. But, I see the issue of the GOP becoming more libertarian differently than you do. I think we want to see every single facet of American politics move more towards libertarianism. The Overton Window has to shift or the changes won't last and there will be a pendulum effect wiping out gains.

I'd say don't worry about old GOP momentum because every tiny move they make towards libertarianism, the stronger the Libertarian party becomes - Libertarianism acquires more credibility, with more people, faster that way.

Here are some positives related to strategy 1:
- It has the side effect of forcing the GOP to accept more and more libertarian principles as the Libertarian party grows and threatens the GOP.
- It gives a cleaner educational platform during political campaign periods when it gets a large enough percentage to force the media to pay some attention.
- You will be free of Social Conservative nuttiness.

The negatives are that:
- There are often more loons in the political fringes (Libertarian Socialists, Anarchists, etc., all roost within the Libertarian Party).
- It is the least effective in combating the steady progression towards socialism in the short and middle term (the question is which strategy is the best for the long term death to socialism).
------------

When someone says that the GOP won't accept new ideas.... that is only part true, since some people do accept new ideas, but also new people are moving into the GOP and bringing new ideas with them, and when the culture changes, then power often shifts more to those in the GOP who are most closely in sync with the culture. What we want to see is all the Social Conservatives, and moderate Republicans to find themselves stranded in the GOP with no power or influence and becoming a smaller percentage as time passes.

Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.