For any of you who speak Russian, this is how the ex-USSR press is covering the Barr nomination.
Жертва Бората (Borat’s victim)—about Barr’s candidacy
http://gazeta.ru/politics/election_usa_2008/2008/05/26_a_2735420.shtml
My dad emailed me the link the morning after Barr’s nomination. He is having a field day mocking me for being an LP member with this.
This is not to put me in the camp of those who oppose the party, or those like disinter who have precluded the possibility of supporting Barr.
On the other had, neither am I willing to give a ringing, and, as far as I can tell, unconditional endorsement of Barr-Root, a la Steve Kubby.
Although I am as yet far from certain, my initial inclination is to take a wait and see attitude, as described by Less Antman:
This is going to be a balancing act for radicals. We DO want to keep pressure on Barr so that he doesn’t feel emboldened to tell conservatives what they want to hear to draw votes from McCain.
We will have NO influence if we declare our unconditional refusal to vote for Barr, and even less if we let him know he doesn’t have to worry about our being in the LP after the election.
The proper approach for LP radicals is to constructively work for state and local candidates and ballot access and to focus on better internal education (or any internal education, which would be a good start). We can work for the party through November without having to specifically work for Barr-Root, and neither an unconditional commitment nor an unconditional rejection makes sense.
However, what practical incentive do Barr and Root have to listen to us? Surely, they can find more votes, and, even, more activists outside of traditionally hardcore radical LP ranks? If ever they had to compromise with us and make concessions, that time has passed now that they have safely secured the nomination. From now on, as anyone with practical political experience knows, their job is to move away from trying to please the party base, and towards reaching out to grab votes from the great undecided muddle. This is true of all parties.
In fact, if they were to pay me as a political consultant for advice on how to package their message with a view towards increasing their vote total in this election, I would be ripping off my client if I told them anything other than downplaying hardcore libertarian positions. That is, if their job as candidates is what most people define the job of candidates to be – getting the maximum number of votes possible in THIS election.
I happen to think that the job of the Libertarian Party should be somewhat different than that; but it is currently clear that those who agree with me on this have lost the fight, at least for the time being, to those who do not. Given this fact, is it possible to stay and fight and win this battle in the future, or is it time to cut my losses?
I’m not yet sure; stay tuned for an upcoming post: “I haven’t left the Libertarian Party, but has the Libertarian Party left me?”
Briefly speaking, I do not know the answer yet.
My support is not unconditional, and is based on actions rather than party loyalty. In other words, I will see what the campaign looks like. If I was into the idea of “my party no matter what,” I would still be a Democrat.
But it does not matter much either way – I will still collect signatures for Barr if he pays well enough (if I can collect signatures for Greens and Constitution Party, which I will, I can certainly collect signatures for the LP regardless of who the candidate is), and I will still most likely personally not be able to actually vote in November, regardless of my support level, for logistical reasons. Regardless of my support, I’m unlikely to have the financial means to make any donations to the campaign. In other words, very little changes based on how I feel about the campaign.
As far as my writing, I will continue to tell the truth the way I see it – I’ll say good things about the ticket when they do good, and bad things when they do bad, as I see it. If anyone at any point thinks that I am worth commissioning to write anything (hasn’t happened yet, and I have no indication that it ever will), he who pays the piper calls the tune.
I highly encourage the pro- and anti-Barr factions to engage in a bidding war for my services. And I expect that the offers will come pouring in just as soon as I hit “publish,” and not long after hell freezes over.
Less
aynrkey
bostonteapartygoer
Kenn Jacobine
mattdharris
Mike Seebeck
Miche
paulie
Jim Davidson
ponggod
Stuart Richards
Todd Andrew Barnett
Lumping Root together with Barr is a mistake –they are two separate individuals (and although they have to appear as like-minded for the campaign, it is a benefit to Barr if he adopts Root’s thinking prior to Nov, 4). Root was a solid libertarian before the convention. Barr was still telling Roger Roots from FIJA (albeit in a roundabout way) that he disagreed with Jury Nullification of Law at the convention. Hmmmmm. I know that you don’t agrew with this, but Root would have been –by far– the best presidential candidate the party has ever had. Putting off the “Root Revolution” by 4 years was unintelligent (and what will you do in 2012 if you dislike the Barr campaign? Will you once again shoot yourself in the foot opposing Root?).
However misguided it was, it was only typical of “radically-vocal-anti-war-at-all-costs-and-in-all-situations” libertarian delegates (the prior outcome in 2004 was just as bad, for the same reasons). Moreover, when it became obvious that Root and Barr together could beat Steve and then more obvious that they could beat Mary, it would have made quite a bit of sense for her to send her support to Root. I think that in between the balloting next time, they should allow for more time for people to do the addition and subtraction, and perhaps allow for speeches from people who actually have some significant knowledge about the situation to talk.
Hi Jake,
I actually wasn’t lumping anything, except for the mnemonic.
I get along with Wayne, and like the direction he is moving in. Check out my comments on the Vortex of Freedom radio show.
Mary would not have endorsed Root for the same reasons she would not have endorsed Barr. Neither was radical enough for her, and both campaigns participated, directly or indirectly, in blowing out of proportion her position on age of consent laws in what was ultimately a successful attempt to keep her from getting the nomination.
Why didn’t Root endorse her rather than Barr?