I'm sorry, I should have amended it to "empty-headed college kids and Ivory-Tower academics."
I honestly have yet to see a Libertarian run for office that is a regular, down-to-earth guy, and I'm the kind of person that can rattle off the third-party candidates for the last three City Council elections. All the Libertarians that seem to actually run (at least the ones where I live) are more like this guy (who runs in every election on the East Side of Manhattan).
People who are well meaning, who's arguments usually work out great on paper, but who have little-to-no concept of reality or everyday life. For instance, I think the Libertarians are actually probably right in the whole debate above. But only an absolute idiot devoid of and and all common sense would make their point by handing out toy guns to Harlem schoolchildren.
You might actually have to see this guy on TV to appreciate how much of tool he is. He was on the John Stewart show not too long ago, so you might have caught him there.
(edited by MoeGates on 10.3.03 1251) It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, a Chihuahua, Data, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Bjork, Spider-Man, Boston, and a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage.
The problem with the candidates is that a Libertarian has absolutely no chance of winning. I can imagine the sales pitch: So, you have to use your own vacation time at work (provided you can even get off work), fund all your own expenses, serve as your own secretary, press agent, etc., spend all your free time driving from one town to another meeting with groups as large as 10-12 and then you'll garner maybe 0.5% of the vote. On top of all that, you have this idiot handing out toy guns in Harlem. It's tough being outside the top 2 parties, unless you have billions or a household name. And, you didn't even mention Harry Browne, who railed against the federal campaign and election laws (especially receiving money from the government) and then accepted matching contributions after the party qualified. Talking about shooting your own credibility down.
It's a catch-22; you can't attract good candidates unless the party has a chance to win and the party doesn't have a chance to win unless it can attract good candidates (among other things).
Also, the other thing that happens is that a Libertarian candidate tries to distance themself from the two main parties and then they end up espousing the more fringe views of the party. Imagine how much support a Democrat would receive if they went around supporting partial birth abortions all the time. Or, if a Republican candidate based their campaign on prayer or Bible study in school. These fringe Libertarians are the only ones who receive press, and it discredits the whole party.
If you don't vote at all, the least you could do is check out 3rd party candidates. For president, you'd have to find someone who matches your views pretty well, unless you're a total pyscho (I apologize to any total psychos who may be reading). Sure, maybe that won't happen in a local election. Listen, third party candidates at the national level know that at this time, they have no chance being elected. So they don't pander to the bottom line. And a vote for a Libertarian, or a Green, or a Reform candidate will probably get the Republicrats notice more than not voting would.
NOTE: The above post makes no sense. We apologize for the inconvenience.
I'm not talking about my Senator (who actually is as close to a regular guy as politicians get), I'm talking about third party candidates for City Council and the School Board.
It might just be New York and Madison, WI. But when the Greens that run are more "down-to-earth, regular guys," you're in trouble.
It seems that I am - in no particular order - Zack Morris, John Adams, a Siren, Janeane Garofalo, Cheer Bear, Aphrodite, a Chihuahua, Data, Cletus the Slack Jawed Yokel, Amy-Wynn Pastor, Hydrogen, Bjork, Spider-Man, Boston, and a Chaotic Good Elvin Bard-Mage.
Originally posted by MoeGatesI honestly have yet to see a Libertarian run for office that is a regular, down-to-earth guy
How many politicians, period, would you say are "regular guys?"
On a local or national level? A good friend of mine's father used to be the County Commissioner, and through them I've met almost every prominent Democrat in the Pittsburgh area on a social level (and a decent chunk of the Republicans), and I'd say that the overwhelming majority of them were "regular guys".
"It's like you lost your keys in the garage, but you look for them in the living room because the light is better." -Bill Maher, on the impending war in Iraq
No, Most Democrats (48%) say Bush won on a technicality. Hey, I have an idea. Let's pretend they run a poll that asks the following question and get the posted results Is George Bush a smart man? a) He's not very smart (10% result) b)...