Rasmussen: Libertarians favor Obama over McCain, 53/38
posted at 2:15 pm on July 5, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The definition of “libertarian” in this case is even less exact than usual. They asked voters to define themselves as liberal, moderate, conservative, or “not sure” with respect to both fiscal and social policy, then plotted them in a 16-box matrix. If you consider yourself fiscally conservative and socially liberal, voila — you’re a libertarian. The unpolled X factor, of course, is foreign policy, which presumably is acting as a sort of tiebreaker between the anti-war social liberal Obama and the pro-war fiscal conservative McCain. I’m still surprised, though, as Maverick’s reputation for maverick-iness and his famous “agents of intolerance” speech in 2000 aimed at Robertson and Falwell has led some voters (sometimes to his detriment) to believe he’s more socially liberal than his voting record would suggest. Either libertarians aren’t fooled or they don’t care. Or, of course, maybe they agree with the Democratic narrative that McCain is Bush III and are voting for, ahem, Change, irrespective of the actual policies being offered.
The silver lining: Maybe this means Bob Barr does more damage to Obama than to McCain. The gray cloud:
The next biggest block of voters, representing 20% of all voters, are both fiscally and socially moderate. Forty-nine percent (49%) of these voters are Democrats and 33% are not affiliated with either major party. They are a bit less likely than the population at large to have completed college but demographically reflect the nation in most ways. Obama leads among these voters 59% to 30%.
Moderate/moderate voters aren’t a perfect proxy for independents or undecideds, but they may be the best of the 16 groups here. 59/30, with only 18% identifying as Republican, doesn’t inspire confidence.
Here’s a clip from last month of America’s Greatest Patriot acknowledging the overlap between his supporters/cult followers and Obama’s even while he derides Obama as an agent of the status quo, particularly with regard to keeping troops in Afghanistan. Or, as I like to call it, the war Ron Paul forgot he voted for.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
I only hope a lot of Libertarians are BO’s supporters who will vote for Barr. Having Libertarians voting for BO makes sense. BO will make it legal to smoke POT. A lot of Libertarians are young POT SMOKERS!! Which party will allow them to smoke Pot all day?? Democrats. That is why they are pro-Democrats
BroncosRock on July 5, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Not this libertarian. Those people are morons. I don’t like either candidate but Obama would be the worst president for liberty in a long time.
libertytexan on July 5, 2008 at 2:21 PM
BO will make it legal to smoke POT
libertytexan on July 5, 2008 at 2:22 PM
I’m less pro Obama, and far more anti-McCain. I think we can pressure a jellyfish like Obama, and I think we can’t influence McCain no matter what. Logical argument, no effect. Historical example? Useless with McCain. He’s the opinionated old curmudgeon at the Barbershop. Nothing you say or do will ever change his mind. No amount of fact or truth will ever influence McCain, and anyone who thinks it will, is a self deluded fool.
So I figure the naif Obama will be a better choice. As we’ve seen in recent days, his strongly held beliefs is to get and keep power. He’ll follow the crowd on most subjects. McCain will insult the crowd and pitch one of his famous fits if they dare disagree with him. He always does.
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 2:26 PM
In my experience, the problem with many of these kinds of “libertarians” is that they like the idea of fiscal responsibility, but also love the idea of expensive social programs without bothering to wonder who’s going to pay for them.
Lehosh on July 5, 2008 at 2:28 PM
BroncosRock on July 5, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Is there no television reception in your trailer park? You obviously don’t know the Libertarian Party if all you equate to is legalized pot. Here’s a primer for you: Libertarians like LIMITED government. The Republicans USED to adhere to this but those days are LONG GONE. Many Republicans are card-carrying Libertarians like Barr and Paul. Libertarians will vote for BO over McShame because McShame is the wolf in sheep’s clothing, an amnesty liar and a 100-year war fan.
DanKenton on July 5, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Funny thing is, that’s not really the case. All you have to do is look at Massachusetts, the most “liberal” state in the union. The problem is, it isn’t. It’s perhaps the most restrictive in terms of individual rights. You can’t buy or use fireworks for example. You can have an open fire outdoors. Etc. This is the biggest nanny state in the Union. The only place Dem states tend to be “liberal” is on sexual matters.
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 2:35 PM
I don’t think libertarian means what it use to because I consider myself more libertarian than anything else and socialism, Marxism and most isms run counter to what I feel a libertarian should be. BO represents pretty much opposite everything I believe in.
jmarcure on July 5, 2008 at 2:38 PM
That’s a very, very, very dangerous and dead wrong assumption. If anything Obama will be pushed hard left by a Democratic, radical Left Congress. That’s not me speaking, that’s Dick Morris speaking. He said Clinton wanted to come in and govern as a centrists and was immediately forced hard left by Congress and the same thing will happen to Obama, only worse in Dick’s eyes.
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 2:39 PM
duh… they’re more interested in hating and punishment for they’re losing over and over than they are in actually liberty… all I can say is they deserve what they get. I hope they lose all their rights by the times it’s done.
Kaptain Amerika on July 5, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Libertarians have become fringe nutjobs.
I rest my case.
hindmost on July 5, 2008 at 2:40 PM
@ BroncosRock on July 5, 2008 at 2:20 PM
Don’t know what you are smokin.
@ Lehosh on July 5, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Wait, what libertarians want larger social programs? There is no such thing as a libertarian that wants bigger government.
muyoso on July 5, 2008 at 2:42 PM
True about MA telling everyone what to do and how to do it. NY isn’t much better. If one wants the country run in this fashion, let me suggest that Obama is your candidate.
jeanie on July 5, 2008 at 2:45 PM
These are Lunatics, not Libertarians
This brings to mind the “You can call me Ray” beer adverts from the Old Days. Too many people are attaching themselves to a term and concept they do not understand.
Barry ( Goldwater ), we hardly knew ye……….
Janos Hunyadi on July 5, 2008 at 2:45 PM
Isn’t Barr’s voting record that of a staunch social-con? Isn’t Paul pretty much a social-con too?
I just find it completely ironic that people who call themselves libertarians vote for the party who truly limits individual freedoms every chance they get. And if you don’t think so just look at NY and MA. These F’in people want to control what you eat, what you drink, where you go to school, your kids, etc., etc. A libertarian who votes for BO is a pretty gullible person.
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 2:46 PM
So you’re argument is not that my assumption is wrong, that Obama is mailable, but the threat that he may go left instead of centrist.
I notice that no one has the audacity to claim that McCain really is a conservative to the core, because no one believes it. They know that McCain’s own record demonstrates his “Maverick” moniker is earned.
So both of my assertions were thus proven. As for Clinton, I’d disagree. If you can recall history instead of someone’s assertions of intent, then you’ll remember that Clinton ran on Tax Cuts in 1992, and before he was sworn in, gave a tearful explanation that he couldn’t do it after all, Bush had lied to him about how bad things really were, so his first act was to raise taxes.
Not exactly a Centrist idea, jacking up the taxes right off the rip, but OK.
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 2:46 PM
I am a Libertarian and I see Obama as the greatest threat to my freedom since Jimmy Carter.
Of course, no one ever polls me. :(
I also think Ron Paul is an idiot and Bob Barr is a joke. Does that make me less of a Libertarian?
JayHaw Phrenzie on July 5, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Confirming my suspicions: Libertarians are just ‘heads who want to see the ganj legalized and really don’t put much thought into anything else.
‘Cause that’d harsh their mellow, maaaaan…..
SuperCool on July 5, 2008 at 2:51 PM
jmarcure on July 5, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Libertarian still means what it always did, less government! This poll is absurd at best and yet another attempt by the media to redefine language and history to fit The Messiahlair’s message that change is all that matters. Obama is the antithesis of a true Libertarian.
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 2:26 PM Do you really believe what you wrote?
dmann on July 5, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I don’t know how well libertarians fulfil the “socially liberal” tag either. I mean yeah the don’t want government regulation of drugs or sexuallity, but on the other hand:
1) Many (includining myself) view the preservation of Life as a proper role of government.
2) They are againt welfare.
3) They are againt government education system.
4) They are against enviromental legislation.
etc.
Micheal on July 5, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Barr/Paul 08 because nuts have to have someone to vote for !
William Amos on July 5, 2008 at 2:59 PM
He’s going to be pushed hard left by a Democratically controlled congress. Bet on it. If you think he’s going to govern from anywhere near the center you’re in for a big surprise – he won’t have the support of his own party. It’s not that hard to understand.
McCain will govern from the center because that’s pretty much where he is. He’s also always been a consistent fiscal conservative and I don’t see that changing.
As for Clinton, you just made Dick’s point. He wanted to be a centrist and was pushed Left by the Democratically controlled congress. When they lost congress, he was able to move back more toward the center.
If you like Obama for his positions, be a man and stand up and say so. Don’t cloak your support in some convoluted argument that you’re going to “shape” him into what you want when his party is going to control 2/3 branches of government and maybe 3/3 before his tenure is up.
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 3:00 PM
William Amos on July 5, 2008 at 2:59 PM
“sometimes you feel like a (paul)nut, sometimes you don’t!”
Obama or Die
dmann on July 5, 2008 at 3:03 PM
No sh*t.
And about half a dozen of them are regulars here on this site to tell us all not to vote for McCain.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Yes. I’m a Conservative to the core individual on 85% of the issues. I have no respect for, nor admiration for, McCain’s service as a Politician. I have only disdain and disgust for McCain as a politician. Especially after the 2000 election when he was so liberal, mostly out of anger of losing the nomination. Exactly like Clinton, he feels he’s owed this election, which is why he’s screwed up the last three months by not campaigning. He’s finally figured out he’s going to have to fight to win. That’s evidenced by the relaunching of his campaign next week.
McCain is no conservative, and I honestly believe we have no idea of his real feelings on any issue. I believe he’s far more liberal than we fear, and I honestly and truthfully believe he’s too dangerous to have within a hundred miles of the Oval Office. I don’t trust him, not one bit. I wouldn’t feel real comfortable having him on the local School Board, much less affecting National Policy.
So yes, I really do believe it. I believe McCain will do far more damage to the nation than Obama, because the Blue Dog Democrats and the Republicans will oppose Obama. The Republicans won’t oppose McCain, and he will raise our taxes, bet me on that one. He will push through his dangerous amnesty first and lip service to security sometime immigration policy. He will appoint Moderates to the court that make us long for the days of qualified candidates like Harriet Myers.
Yeah, I believe that, because I’ve been watching McCain do his thing on Sunday Talk shows for too long not to believe it. If he gets elected, God Forbid, and proves me right, will you cheer him as a great President because of the war? Or will you gnash your teeth and curse the day we nominated him? I’ll be sipping whiskey and smiling. Because I know that he’ll only have one term, and the Democrat we get elected President in 2012 will make us wish for Obama as a candidate. They will be less mailable, and far more Socialist than Obama. People like Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi.
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 3:07 PM
It’s amazing to me that people who call themselves libertarian these days are willing to give up all their other freedoms to get high, have unregulated sex and abort any conceptions. They’ll give up their rights to private property through eminent domain. They’ll give up their rights to develop their own property through “conservation comissions.” They’ll give up their right to eat food made with trans fats, or too much refined sugar. They’ll give up their rights to smoke tobacco, a legal product. They’ll give up the right to raise their children as they see fit. I could go on and on and if any of them doubt me, come to Massachusetts. Live here in the Liberal Utopia for a while and tell me it was all worth it.
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 3:14 PM
It never fails that a libertarian that opens their mouth around me, ends up sounding like a loon by the time the convo is done..just like them loon lefties.
diaphanous on July 5, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Not this libertarian conservative either.
My idea of libertarianism is ‘the best government is the least government’ coupled with self-ownership and individual freedom. So I find today’s big-government, statist left antithetical to everything libertarian in me, as the left urges more regulation of our lives, and by alleging government is the source of our rights, awards government the license to restrict them into nothingness.
Voting for Obama, the most leftist Dem candidate in our history, is inconceivable.
petefrt on July 5, 2008 at 3:16 PM
He was able to move back to the center? ABLE? Are we talking about the same Clinton who claimed the Republican plan to reduce spending would bankrupt the nation in five years and lead to double digit unemployment? Or are we talking about the same Clinton who shut down the government because the Republicans were getting rid of several layers of Beuocracy in the school lunch program. Which Clinton are we talking about?
The Clinton who only noticed that Terrorists were training in the Middle East when Monica testified before Ken Star? Or are we talking about the Clinton who admitted in 1998 that he’d raised taxes too much, but still would not support a tax cut the Republicans wanted. Which Clinton are we talking about?
Clinton was never a centrist, not after the election in November anyway. He opposed Welfare Reform, only signing it after the Republicans passed it for the third time, demonstrating that they were not going to let it go. He signed it and promised gloom and doom for America now that it was law, largely because the Congress could overturn his Veto. Then of course, four years later, when it’s a massive success giving people control of their lives, he claimed it as his signature issue while he was desperately seeking a legacy other than Monica. He credited the Brady Law with preventing a hundred thousand criminals from getting guns. When we asked how many were being prosecuted, it turned out that none were, because none were actually criminals who should have been denied the guns. Most of them had misdemeanors or other minor infractions which were not prohibitive under the law. The rest were incorrect identification of the actual buyer. Instead of John Smith the banker, they believed they had John Smith the bank robber trying to buy a gun.
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Snake307 on July 5, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Well ain’t that special, have a shot for me! I fail to see any metion of both candidates voting records or ratings metioned by you…oh ya I forgot…The Messiahlair doesn’t look as rosy through those glasses. Nuff said, time to get on the bike and work off some frustrations! America was a great country!
Obama or Die…….
dmann on July 5, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Hence the scare quotes around “libertarians”. The bare definition of “socially liberal and fiscally conservative” describes a wide swath of people who are not so much libertarian as intellectually lazy. They like the sound of not wasting money, and they like the sound of feeding the world and universal healthcare, but they don’t try to reconcile those things.
Lehosh on July 5, 2008 at 3:17 PM
Where is the pressure going to come from that is you imagine is going to shape Obama into something even a liberal conservative would find acceptable? Where is it going to come from? A congress controlled and lead by far left Democrats? From the media? From the Internet? Where is it you imagine this imaginary pressure is going to come from exactly?
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Wow. The same “McCain is no conservative lie … yet …. again.
Lets review, shall we?
Also to link this story was HotAir. And obviously McCain is running against Obama. What’s Obama’s rating, you ask? His rating was an “8″ compared to McCain’s 83.
So, next time any idiot wants to tell you that McCain is a liberal and/or not a conservative, you can tell him where to stuff it, now that you know the truth. McCain is by no means a strong conservative, and the republicans who voted for him in the primaries knew that. That’s the way it goes. It’s down to two people, and the people who want you to not vote for McCain for selfish reasons or ulterior, know that the result of not supporting him is to help Obama win.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Yes sir.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Capital L Libertarians have been useless, or worse, to the cause of liberty for 30 years. On the other hand, the term ‘libertarian’ is, today, virtually meaningless, given the range of actual beliefs of those who identify by that label. It doesn’t signify anything close to a cohesive set of views and bears little resemblance to the actual philosophy of Jefferson, Madison, et al, who once inspired it.
JDPerren on July 5, 2008 at 3:20 PM
You are hilariousness. You refuse to acknowledge Clinton was pushed right by a Republican congress but think Obama is going to be pushed right by a Democratic congress. ROFLMAO!
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 3:24 PM
the LP, Lew Rockwell and company are the Moveon.org of fiscal conservatism and ‘free market’ proponents.
Rockwell called McCain a ‘murderer’ on his blog last week.
jp on July 5, 2008 at 3:36 PM
from the LRC blog
jp on July 5, 2008 at 3:37 PM
the LP are not followers of Ayn Rand on Foreign Policy
they are followers of Anarcho-Capitalist, Murray Rothbard, who thought the Cold War was a hoax to expand big govt. and was in bed with the Birchers ….Buckley threw them under the bus.
jp on July 5, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Wow, thanks for coping this quote from Lew Rockwell, jp. It’s like General Clark’s statement with a little extra crazy added to it.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 3:43 PM
If this is true it just goes to show why libertarians always lose: they make no sense. To anyone.
Obama is the guy who wants to create a national health care system. That is just about as close to socialism as you can come in this country. And yet, here we have the don’t tread on me people supporting the guy who wants to create another a program that mandates service to the state. Some national service program.
It is about isolationism, blowback, chickens coming home to roost, that is the only explanation. Crazy people.
Terrye on July 5, 2008 at 3:55 PM
It is also about selfishness and spite. Some of these socalled libertarians are treating the Republican party like a jealous man who assaults the woman he lost. If he can’t have her by God no one else can either.
Terrye on July 5, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Any libertarian who votes for left-wing, statist, borderline socialist, and pathological + manipulative liar Barrack Obama is not a libertarian.
Helps when I am one and backed Giuliani, now McCain(-Geller?).
HotAirJosef on July 5, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Progressives for Bob Barr! He’s the man!
indythinker on July 5, 2008 at 4:05 PM
Wait. Are you saying he’s conservative, or he’s liberal?
What you’re saying is: lifetime, McCain is more liberal than 80% of the Republicans in the Senate. Recently, he’s more liberal than 95% of the Republicans in the Senate.
But he’s not liberal, he’s conservative! And anybody who says any different is a LYING LAIR WHO LIES ABOUT JOHN MCCAIN!
More:
Rated 61% by the US COC, indicating a mixed business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 17% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)
Rated 18% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance. (Dec 2006)
misterpeasea on July 5, 2008 at 4:12 PM
This is not at all representative of the libertarian movement. Rasmussen simply does not know what the correct definition of “libertarian,” is.
For one thing, libertarians are split right down the middle on the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A slight majority of libertarians are opposed to the War in Iraq, but if a poll was conducted, a majority would likely be in favor of Afghanistan, even most of the Ron Paul followers.
So, to put Anti-War answerers in the “libertarian” camp is simply incorrect.
And we are not “socially liberal” either. To say that implies that we favor affirmative action, special rights for gays, and a large role for the state in providing for welfare. The proper libertarian position on all that is too be opposed to those stances.
Trust me, libertarians do not support Obama in any, manner, shape or form. They are mostly lukewarm to McCain at best, and most are indeed supporting Bob Barr. But to say a large majority of libertarians are supporting Obama, is ludicrous.
Eric Dondero, Publisher
Libertarian Republican blog
ericdondero on July 5, 2008 at 4:18 PM
Looks to me like there are a lot of folks with ulterior issues hiding behind the label of libertarianism, such as libertines, McCain haters, and war protesters.
petefrt on July 5, 2008 at 4:19 PM
Obama/McCain are both lousy options for libs. It’s like choosing whether you want to have sex with your dad or your mom. The idea of both makes me vomit in my mouth.
LT Nixon on July 5, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Yes, Lew Rockwell did call John McCain a “murderer” this week on his blog. We reported on a few days ago at LR blog.
But Lew Rockwell and his followers are on the far-out fringes of the libertarian movement.
LEW ROCKWELL DOES NOT IN ANY MANNER, SHAPE OR FORM REPRESENT THE MAINSTREAM OF THE LIBERTARIAN MOVEMENT.
Rockwell is even on the fringes of the Ron Paul movement.
Eric Dondero, Fmr. Senior Aide
US Congressman Ron Paul, 1997-2003
Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus
ericdondero on July 5, 2008 at 4:22 PM
Rockwell has a widely read website by libertarians and Paleo’s though, right?
jp on July 5, 2008 at 4:23 PM
LT, what the hell are you doing here bro?
Good to see a fellow Libertarian Republican here at HotAir.com. I dare say this is the very, very best website on the entire Internet. Even better than my own Libertarian Republican blog, and I’m sorry to say even better than your LT Nixon Rants blog.
ericdondero on July 5, 2008 at 4:23 PM
Rockwell’s site is widely read by Paleos, Bigots and Far Out Conspiracy backers, like 9/11 Troofers.
It is no longer “widely read” by libertarians.
The top blogs for libertarians these days are Reason.com, Libertarian Republican blog, LP.org, Bob Barr blog and of course Hotair.com.
ericdondero on July 5, 2008 at 4:25 PM
1) Many (includining myself) view the preservation of Life as a proper role of government.
Micheal on July 5, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Do you mean the senseless killing of our troops in far away lands? Then yes, you’re correct. But if you’re talking about the unborn, think again. Here’s their platform right off the LP.org site:
1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration
DanKenton on July 5, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Hear, hear.
I hope Eric posts here more often on this and other topics.
SteveMG on July 5, 2008 at 4:31 PM
And Republicans. I don’t think this geezer was anybody’s first choice. The collective sigh you hear is the Republican base acknowledging certain defeat.
DanKenton on July 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM
Obama is untested. Libertarians know that McCain’s default position is that there is a Federal Government solution to every problem. From a hang nail to free speech McCain seems to advocate more regulations that, with perhaps good intentions, end up being bloated failures.
David
LifeTrek on July 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM
Well lookie here. It’s one of the 53 percent. How predictable.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 5:06 PM
You are absolutley correct. Ulterior issues, and motives. And some others come to conservative web sites, with the world ‘conservative’ in their username and they advocate the same thing as democrats.
Usually we would call these people ‘democrats.’
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 5:09 PM
And your what world are you living in where Obama doesn’t believe that X 10,000,000,000,000?
Have you heard McCain talking about socializing medicine? What can be more anti-libertarian than having the government take over medicine?
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Here’s one libertarian (whatever that is) who is throwing in the towel and going for McCain. Not with enthusiasm, but sure can’t vote for that Chicago Marxist.
Skipper50 on July 5, 2008 at 5:17 PM
I seriously doubt it. Check this out:
49% are Democrats. So that’s why they, as a group, are breaking for Obama so strongly. I would strongly suspect that Barr will attract many more Republican voters than Democratic voters. Might be enough in some states. There’s been some talk that Barr puts Georgia in play for Obama.
Mark Jaquith on July 5, 2008 at 5:27 PM
Exactly.
And Ralph Nader hurt John Kerry in 04. Ross Perot hurt George Bush in 92. Voting for a third party candidate usually does that. Bob Barr is no exception. This man and all of the others do more harm than good. What’s worse, you would think that their followers could see that, but they seem to be inflicted with the same mental condition. Truly bizarre.
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 5:37 PM
That wasn’t the point I was making… I was making a more objective judgement about what Barr’s effect will be. I can’t bring myself to vote for McCain as the lesser of two evils. The competition is too close (for which is less evil), and at least if I vote third party and Obama wins (likely the case), the Republican Party is set up to sweep in with a limited government candidate in 2012.
Mark Jaquith on July 5, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Is that a fact, Nostradamus?
wise_man on July 5, 2008 at 5:51 PM
libertarians are just liberals who aren’t afraid to say they don’t want to pay taxes.
peacenprosperity on July 5, 2008 at 6:12 PM
You so called Libertarians for Obama better wake up. Did I tell you or what?
Nanny State:NYC’s best cannolis now illegal
You people want the whole country to be like Boston and New York?
TheBigOldDog on July 5, 2008 at 6:18 PM
The comments on this thread prove my point, eloquently. The word ‘libertarian’ has become meaningless, since individuals with contrary views on nearly everything can be put into that category. This is yet one more reason the Libertarian Party never went anywhere. In fact, it may be the most fundamental reason.
JDPerren on July 5, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Libertarian by any other name would be as Loony.
Sorry if I insulted any Paulovers in Hotair.
Christine on July 5, 2008 at 8:00 PM
“libertarians are just liberals who aren’t afraid to say they don’t want to pay taxes.”
peacenprosperity on July 5, 2008 at 6:12 PM
LOL and rt on.
Although my dad admitted that he’s still a registered Repub (who blames everything on Republicans), I think that he should call himself a Libertarian because that’s the only thing he disagrees with Demos on: taxes.
Christine on July 5, 2008 at 8:04 PM
As a registered libertarian I have yet to ever vote for a socialist. Oooops, I mean democrat.
Sorry, I get those two mixed up sometimes.
I tend to vote R. Unfortunately, too many LP candidates are fruit-bats. I’ll be voting McCain. Not he’s not my 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice. But he’s better than Carter — the Sequel.
Also, it is stupid to expect the Blue-dogs and Republican minority to quell the socialist ascendancy if Obama wins. The blue dogs are sadly much more about barking than biting. They won’t stand up to the Ried-Pelosi Commisariat.
TABoLK on July 5, 2008 at 8:26 PM
They’re insane. Nothing libertarian about having the “trans fat police” rip food out of your mouth or reach in your shirt and measure your love handles.
whitetop on July 5, 2008 at 8:47 PM
I’m not so sure. I meet many “libertarians” whose political philosophy is pretty much the same as Obama except a desire to formally legalize drugs. Get them talking about the environment for example, and you’ll pretty much the exact opposite of what a real libertarian would support.
I think the Libertarian Party made a cataclysmic mistake in going so hard after pothead college students, and we are merely seeing the results.
18-1 on July 5, 2008 at 8:53 PM
I’m a 25-year Libertarian activist. I’ve served on the Libertarian National Committee, as Ron Paul’s Libertarian Presidential Campaign Travel Aide, as Congressman Ron Paul’s Senior Aide for 6 years, and as Founder of the Republican Liberty Caucus.
Trust me on this: BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY ON THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM AS YOU CAN POSSIBLY GET FROM LIBERTARIANISM.
He is the direct anti-thesis of a libertarian. He is a Fascist/Communist who scored a perfect 100 on the National Journal index as the most Leftist member of the entire US Senate.
Rasmussen is insane if he thinks any libertarians support Obama.
ericdondero on July 5, 2008 at 8:59 PM
Libertarians for Obama are like fish for deserts.
Of course, most libertarians are as dumb as a box of sand, so what really is the difference?
NoDonkey on July 5, 2008 at 9:50 PM
I very much doubt the U.S. Libertarian Party sought the student pothead demographic. One of the logical outcomes of the non-initiation of force principle is that, as an adult, one has the Right to treat one’s own body as one wishes. It’s not there for the purpose of getting stoners aboard the Libertarian bandwagon; and anyway, pothead college students are almost always Greenies. The only freedoms they care about is the freedom to get stoned and the freedom to suck Nanny State’s tits. In every other respect they are closet totalitarians; you know… what dozy Conservatives got sucked into calling “liberals”. My own country, New Zealand, has a Libertarian Party, too, except the leadership is Randian rather than Rothbardian, but New Zealand’s potheads students would ~NEVER~ vote for LibertariaNZ because they know the Party would dismantle their precious nanny state and destroy all their hopes of New Zealand becoming a socialist controlled agrarian backwater.
Tony.
FierceGuppy on July 5, 2008 at 10:20 PM
What?! I thought libertarians were at least supposed to be pretty intelligent, even if they may not agree on a lot of conservative principles or morals… But how the hell can any intelligent person support Obama (outside of party line voting, white guilt, hatred for this country, or “I’m black, and he’s black” crap)? Seriously, I may not often agree with libertarians, but at least they usually come off as intelligent and thoughtful… I am honestly stunned that any of them could support Obama in any way shape or form.
RightWinged on July 5, 2008 at 10:41 PM
Therefore maybe half a milion or so supposed “libertarians” will vote for a guy who is opposed to individual choice and for more massive government intrusion into every aspect of their lives.
I guess the illegal pot is still getting through.
(O’wow, man, Barack spelled backwards is Scarab! Like the beetle… which means Obama is… the fifth Beatle, duuuude!)
profitsbeard on July 5, 2008 at 11:13 PM
BDS was bad enough (as encouraged by Lew – whom I’ve written for in the pre-BDS days), but I think Ron Paul may have put the stake in the heart of the Libertarian Party.
RP attracted, whatever his intentions, every extreme nutball on the map, and when they got together to form clubs they somehow inexplicably decided they were “Libertarians.” At that point, they flooded the LP (which was already teetering because of the BDS issue – combined with the natural “against whomever is in power” thing the LP has going on).
It’s too bad, because the LP had a shot in the late 1990s at gaining some much-needed respectability. Not any kind of power, but more the sort of influence that comes from providing an intellectual base for the Republicans’ economic ideas.
Dragging the hippies and Troofers back in was the “inappropriate canine relationship” that did that process in.
Too bad, looks like the Libertarians who don’t speak “cracktard” may have to vote Republican for the next decade or two.
Merovign on July 6, 2008 at 12:37 AM
This is perfectly expected (and unfortunate). As I have already written in another thread, the divide in this country is (unfortunately!) not so much on economic but on social issues.
Between a purely totalitarian Republican party who favors more government on every single issue, and socially sane Democrats, the principled libertarians may feel they have no choice but to go with the Democrats as the lesser of the evils.
freevillage on July 6, 2008 at 1:33 AM
I agree with you completely and I am living in this world. I know Obama will expanded bloated systems way more then McCain.
My point was to explain why libertarians didn’t like McCain.
David
LifeTrek on July 6, 2008 at 1:33 AM
About that poll, three words for you: WTF?
Tim Burton on July 6, 2008 at 2:29 AM
Freevillage claims that Republicans “favor totalitarian government” on social issues. Let’s check the record:
Smoking bans? Democrats in favor, Republicans generally opposed.
Seat Belt laws? Democrats strongly in favor, Republicans generally opposed.
Lowering the Speed Limits nationwide to 55 mph? Democrats in favor, majority of Republicans opposed.
Gambling restrictions? Some Democrats in favor of loosening restrictions, Some Republicans in favor of loosening restrictions.
Legalized prostitution? Most Democrats opposed, most Republicans opposed.
Legalized marijuana? Some Democrats in favor, some Republicans in favor.
Ending Affirmative Action quotas? All Democrats strongly opposed, most Republicans strongly in favor.
Protection Gun Rights? Most Democrats opposed, virtually all Republicans in favor.
Regulating people’s eating habits, i.e. bans on Transfats in foods? Most Democrats in favor, Republicans virtually all opposed.
We could go on and on. But the record is clear. With the exception of legalized prostitution, Republicans are clearly ahead on the Live and Let Live vs. Nanny-State scale.
FreeVillage is clearly uninformed, or just another Leftwing hack trying to convince libertarians that the Democrat Party is a better home for them, rather than the GOP. They tried this slick maneuver in 2006, and it worked to some extent. All we libertarians got was more big government, and more Nanny-State laws. Libertarians have learned from that dreadful mistake. In 2008, we are all solidly behind Libertarian Bob Barr, with a few others supporting McCain. Virtually no libertarians are backing Obama this year.
Eric Dondero, Publisher
Libertarian Republican blog
Fmr. Senior Aide, US Congressman Ron Paul, 1997-2003
Fmr. Libertarian National Committeeman 1986/87
Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus, 1990
ericdondero on July 6, 2008 at 7:22 AM
Nailed it on the head. There are those who have studied Libertarian political philosophy, and have serious dedication to its ideals. But quite a few self-identified “Libertarians” are mostly all about the pot and the booty. They’re liberals, but not ready to come out of the political closet yet. After all their hippie parents were liberals and that’s sOoOOoOOoOo twenty years ago, like you know?
Sekhmet on July 6, 2008 at 9:41 AM
Obama
orand Die…….dmann on July 5, 2008 at 3:17 PM
There. Fixed that.
trigon on July 6, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Ah, the disguised insult. Do you use this rationale in other parts of your daily life? “If you don’t eat Corn Flakes (like I do), you’re an idiot….of course I thought you were intelligent up until the point I found out that you don’t eat Corn Flakes.” Did it ever occur to you that Libertarians are simply looking for the fastest path to complete, public disdain for both major parties…I mean beyond the 20% approval rating that they currently enjoy?
DanKenton on July 6, 2008 at 2:12 PM
In this case, they must have confused ‘libertarian’ with people who care about liberty…
whatthecrap on July 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM
all I can say is, “…be careful what you ask for.” If Libertarians actually believe it is better to have Obama’s socialistic health care and government controlled life then when that totalitarian tornado hits, I’ll be sitting on the wall pissing on every Obama-Libertarian and laughing my head off.
second digit on July 6, 2008 at 6:26 PM
This Neo-Libertarian is voting for McCain….I could never vote for a Marxist. I am conservative on foreign policy and the economy, the Constitution, and individual rights. As Jefferson said the country that rules the least, rules best. I’d be a Republican except for the slavish devotion to the Evangelical asshats, which includes overturning Roe v. Wade(it would be as effective as the “War on Drugs” has been in preventing drug use)as abortions would still be performed…I don’t want the government in my life.
adamsmith on July 7, 2008 at 8:00 AM
Second digit, it’s the GOP’s own damned fault. If Republicans had nominated a libertarian-leaning candidate like Giuliani or Romney, you wouldn’t be having this problem of leakage to the Libertarian Party today. Instead, my fellow Republicans, chose the old guy, whose right on foreign policy, but a total Democrat on domestic issues.
Ignore libertarian voters, and the GOP will suffer the consequences. And it pains me to say that, since I’m a loyal Republican.
Eric – Republicans for Barr
ericdondero on July 7, 2008 at 8:12 AM
Yeah, why don’t those Libertarians like him?
He’s only trying to remove Freedom of Speech in his continuing McCain-Feingold Constitution attacks.
I mean, either you can keep your Constitutionally protected freedoms, or you can *gasp* help elect a liberal.
I don’t see why the Libertarians aren’t willing to give up their freedoms and support the front-runner of the “Free Speech right don’t cover Political Speech” mode of thought.
Maybe they’re ageist? Perhaps they’re racist and don’t like his immigration policy. Maybe they’re anti-handicapped and his war injuries are the reason for the lack of support.
I suspect they don’t like his eye color myself.
But damn it couldn’t be his continuing and persistent attacks on the First Amendment, and Free Speech; Libertarians don’t care at all about Constitutional Freedoms and all that guff… right?
gekkobear on July 7, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Comment pages: