Video: The Nanny of the Month is …

posted at 3:21 pm on October 1, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

We usually have a lot of fun with Reason TV’s Nanny of the Month feature — and by fun, I mean that we keep second-guessing their choice.  This month, they’re challenging readers and viewers to choose for themselves.  In their third anniversary edition of the NOTM, they make the case that neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney want to keep the government’s nose out of our business, and ask viewers to choose which is worse:

This month Nanny of the Month turns three-years-old (!) and for the first time ever you the viewers will decide who takes home top dishonors in this “very special” election edition.

So will you vote for the the pro-drug war, pro-smoking ban, pro-health insurance mandate, pro-Patriot Act candidate who supports cracking down on medical marijuana and online poker? Or maybe you’ll pull the lever (well, click the screen) for the pro-drug war, pro-smoking ban, pro-health insurance mandate, pro-Patriot Act candidate who supports cracking down on medical marijuana and online poker.

Either way freedom loses. But hey, that’s democracy!

Doesn’t matter if you’re under 18, a convicted felon, illegal immigrant or even foreigner who’s never set foot in America–as long as you can click a mouse, you can vote (as often as you like!) in Reason TV’s very special Election Edition Nanny of the Month.

Interestingly, Reason’s fellow libertarians don’t agree with the premise, according to a poll in part from Reason itself.  Cato reported last week that Romney has hit a high-water mark among libertarians for Republican candidates — and that his level of support among them doesn’t decline much when Gary Johnson is added to the mix:

The Reason-Rupe September 2012 poll includes our favorite ideological questions to differentiate libertarians from liberals and conservatives. Using three questions, we can define libertarians as respondents who believe “the less government the better,” who prefer the “free market” to handle problems, and who want government to “favor no particular set of values.” These fiscally conservative, socially liberal voters represent 20% of the public in the Reason-Rupe poll, in line with previous estimates.

Among these likely libertarian voters, the presidential horserace currently stands:

Romney 77%
Obama 20%
Other 3%

Romney’s share of the libertarian vote represents a high water mark for Republican presidential candidates in recent elections.

As the chart below shows, George W. Bush won 72 percent of libertarians in 2000, but lost many libertarians by 2004, as the wars, spending, and growth of government weighed on many libertarians. John McCain matched Bush’s 2000 vote share, winning 71 percent. Many libertarians seem to have preferred McCain’s independent streak to Obama’s soaring promises. But if the election were held today, the Romney/Ryan ticket would get more libertarian votes than any candidate since 1980.

What about Johnson?  Added into the mix, he takes seven points from both Romney and Obama, leaving Romney with a 70/13/14 advantage among libertarians.  So much for the Johnson “spoiler” effect. Be sure to vote in the NOTM poll by clicking on Obama or Romney for the “honor,” but libertarians certainly seem to be able to tell them apart.

Breaking on Hot Air

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

EG has voted..

Electrongod on October 1, 2012 at 3:25 PM

What about Johnson? Added into the mix, he takes seven points from both Romney and Obama, leaving Romney with a 70/13/14 advantage among libertarians. So much for the Johnson “spoiler” effect.

Don’t tell Pragmatic.

Bitter Clinger on October 1, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Buying votes, with your taxes, one constituency at a time, one EO after the other.

Schadenfreude on October 1, 2012 at 3:26 PM

From diapers to Depends — Obama 2012, and always

Schadenfreude on October 1, 2012 at 3:26 PM

“Electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket.”
BHO

Just reminding.

Gunlock Bill on October 1, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Buying votes, with your taxes, one constituency at a time, one EO after the other.

I would expect nothing less from the criminal organization occupying the WH.

hawkeye54 on October 1, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Please note Reason along with LewRockwell.com, AntiWar.com, Radley Balko and the Agitator, Ron Paulists, et.al. represent the leftside of the libertarian movement. They do not represent mainstream libertarians, and they most certainly DO NOT represent those of us who are right-libertarians.

Eric @ Libertarian Republican

ericdondero on October 1, 2012 at 3:32 PM

When I was a little boy, when I thought, “America,” my first thoughts were things like the flag raising on Iwo Jima, or the moon landing.

Now, my first thoughts are the more equal Pigs in Congress and the White House, and a big baby, sucking his thumb and needing changing.

OhEssYouCowboys on October 1, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Obama gave me a phone.

Romney….he sucks…..BAAAAD.

Four-More-Years. This nation needs more unemployment, foodstamps, and deficits!

It’s the best way to get a free phone you numbskulls!

Tim_CA on October 1, 2012 at 3:36 PM

Why must Reason put out such a video? It’s not fun being reminded of how sh*tty Romney is and can be. But, in the end, it’s ABO!

ahlaphus on October 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Reason’s fellow libertarians don’t agree with the premise, according to a poll in part from Reason itself. Cato reported last week that Romney has hit a high-water mark among libertarians for Republican candidates

We agree with Reason’s take. Most of us are just resigned to the fact that the coming deleveraging would be preferable to follow a Japanese path under Romney as opposed to a Zimbabwean one under Obama. It’s nothing to be proud of and quite depressing really. A lot of folks like myself thought the disaster of McCain would learn the GOP something, it didn’t. Our many protests and threats(some made good) of sitting out the election has had LITERALLY no demonstrable effect upon the impervious corruption and stupidity of the GOP. So we’re picking our poison accordingly. Cheers!!

abobo on October 1, 2012 at 3:42 PM

The face of The Commie supporters:

America in devolution

OhEssYouCowboys on October 1, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Obama gave me a phone.

So he can text you endlessly to remind you how wonderful he is to you and please remember to vote for him…..oh, and that phone allows him to know your location, and prompt you with directions to your nearest polling place and a date and time alarm so you know when to go…so if you wanna keep that free phone and free unlimited minutes and all sorts of free stuff comin’, well, you know who to vote for!

‘Cause if you don’t vote for Obama, just remember:

“What Obama giveth, Obama can taketh away”

hawkeye54 on October 1, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Reason’s fellow libertarians don’t agree with the premise, according to a poll in part from Reason itself. Cato reported last week that Romney has hit a high-water mark among libertarians for Republican candidates — and that his level of support among them doesn’t decline much when Gary Johnson is added to the mix

I figure that just says there are a lot of libertarians that will vote for Romney to get rid of Obama. That doesn’t mean they think Romney isn’t a Nanny-stater.

MeatHeadinCA on October 1, 2012 at 3:51 PM

HotAir — Guaranteed Soft & Squishy — Or Your Money Back™

FlatFoot on October 1, 2012 at 3:52 PM

Realistically, it’s more of a Race between Obama and Napolean’s Mini-Me(AKA Michael Bloomberg), the Power Mad Mayor of NY City! Given the 2 choices from Reason, there’s no question that the Failure-in-chief won this one, Hands Down!

For those following,How to take on the Obama Enemy media: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 1, 2012 at 3:57 PM

You can point to a few conspicuous “outer garments,” and try to paint the two as the same, as incorrigible nanny staters. That is a mistake. At the core I believe Romney exalts the individual, and as he frequently repeats on the stump, he deeply believes in the economic and personal freedom that our founders espoused. He makes some exception in cases of domestic security (Patriot act), and putting aside the debate on the individual mandate, it has been argued that Romneycare was a tangential intervention that left private industry intact, while Obamacare was a fundamental change that amounts to a de facto govt takeover. Clearly, Romney want to repeal O-Care, O doesn’t. Romney, by and large, and by an order of magnitude of difference with O, believes in an individual and freedom centric society; O has said repeatedly that he believes in society based on the “collective.” So, no contest.

Although, in 1 key area there is in fact little difference. That is the drug war. As more and more conservatives move away from the idea of the police state and massive expense that the unwinnable drug war induces, Romney still takes the “old-fashioned” standard line. Without a lot of fanfare, on that issue Romney still echoes the old guard authoritarian stodgy establishment Republicans of yesteryear. I think time will change that.

anotherJoe on October 1, 2012 at 4:01 PM

LOL…you people are fooling yourself if you really believe that Rombama has any real respect for individual liberty. If he did, he wouldn’t have pushed his own BS individual mandate in Romneycare.

MoreLiberty on October 1, 2012 at 4:03 PM

This idiotic “pox on both houses” B.S. is the exact reason I stopped calling myself a libertarian four years ago. The idea that Romney would assault American freedoms as much as Obama has is laughable.

Caiwyn on October 1, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Lesser evils, it must be in the constitution or something, maybe they found emanations from penumbras there that require nothing but lesser evil candidates by the GOP?

Social liberal is a euphamism for morally irresponsible behavior. I have yet tto see such not effect us all.

Small government, no values, means loose the criminals, the parasites, the neer-do-wells, to spread crime, social disease, uncommitted parenthood, their non-compliant corrupted offspring, and the destruction of our economy. All this and far more without reasonably enforced social mores to protect the responsible.

Just remember, that cruds like Occupy folks are social liberals too.

Don L on October 1, 2012 at 4:38 PM

There is going to be a financial crisis like in Europe, perhaps worse.

The dilemma is, do we want Obama in office when it happens, so the public will be forced to realize government micro-management is to blame? But there is the risk of a massive government takeover of the market.

Or should it happen under Romney, who might lead to the side of Capitalism to navigate us through treacherous waters, but run a huge risk of Capitalism being blamed, and plunging the country for years to decades with socialist presidents who will claim to protect America from evil capitalism that destroyed the “legitimate” economy.

V-rod on October 1, 2012 at 4:47 PM

This idiotic “pox on both houses” B.S. is the exact reason I stopped calling myself a libertarian four years ago. The idea that Romney would assault American freedoms as much as Obama has is laughable.

Caiwyn on October 1, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Romney might not assault freedoms, but both houses of Congress certainly has.

V-rod on October 1, 2012 at 4:49 PM

What about Johnson? Added into the mix, he takes seven points from both Romney and Obama, leaving Romney with a 70/13/14 advantage among libertarians. So much for the Johnson “spoiler” effect.

Maybe this isn’t as strange as it sounds. I came across this article the other day; according to the author, Obummer has crossed the line of too many deal-breakers, and will vote Johnson (presumably because he can’t bring himself to vote Romney). Perhaps if we can get these deal breakers out there, many more Libs might throw their vote to Johnson as a protest.

Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama
The case against casting a ballot for the president — even if you think he’s better than Mitt Romney

right of the dial on October 1, 2012 at 4:50 PM

From diapers to Depends — Obama 2012, and always

Schadenfreude on October 1, 2012 at 3:26 PM

via ‘Always’ and ‘Tampax’, the Flukes and Julias would argue…

jimver on October 1, 2012 at 4:57 PM

They are correct, Romney is more of a Bush-like “compassionate conservative” than libertarian, but Obama is an incompetent Marxist and even worse. If anyone thinks Romney will take drastic but necessary steps like abolishing the EPA and the Dept of Education, or pulling us out of places like Libya, they haven’t been paying attention.

Libertarians would do better to work to move the Republican Party closer to the libertarian side of the spectrum. In that regard, Gary Johnson would have helped us all if he had chosen to run as Senator from NM instead of becoming the Libertarian Party candidate.

The Republican Party would have done better to welcome Gary Johnson and his ideas instead of pushing him away. The fact that he’s now pulling votes from Romney is their fault.

Common Sense on October 1, 2012 at 5:35 PM

…no one should even be close to JugEars!

KOOLAID2 on October 1, 2012 at 5:37 PM

MY VOTE = MICHELLE OBAMA

Varchild on October 1, 2012 at 7:52 PM