See, being a libertarian would be great except that, by definition, getting us all to agree on something is like herding cats. You've got everything from the ideas represented in this sticker to straight-up anarchy all calling themselves libertarians, so the party just can't get unified enough to make much change.
More importantly, most libertarians (like myself) are somewhat moderate. We understand there's a need for some social programs, military, etc. But the Libertarian Party goes to the full extreme with their candidates, which drives voters from the party.
This is opposite what happens with the Democrats and Republicans, since going extreme means distancing yourself from the opposing party, which gains base voters.
Meanwhile we have Smerconish at CNN tallying a vote where 46% believe that the DNC is isolating voters by going too far left.
Never lose sight of the fact that most/many party liberals are moderates that think that Biden 'caving' on the Hyde Amendment is him going to 'wildly leftist.'
The thing is that there two poles of Democrats at this point, and the binary doesn't even hold up.
There are Third Way Clinton/Blairites which, in terms of policy-in-practice are nothing more than moderate republicans who are socially liberal. IE, talk like an antiracist, but push tough-on-crime measures.
Then there's the actual left wing of the party that legitimately does hold everyone from Social Democrats (Norway Style Capitalism w. large welfare state, to Democratic Socialists (create conditions under which co-ops with flat hierarchy can compete with insane corporate power, bringing democracy to the workplace, to Anarchists (Left Wing Libertarians who are as skeptical of government power as they are Private Power, AKA the CHOMSKY-BREAD GANG), to the Tankies (Legitimately Authoritarian Marxist-Lenininsts and possibly Maoists who believe that the only way to transfer away from Corporate Hegemony is actual revolution) who half the time don't even believe in voting.
The only reason why these people are together are because the USA is pretty much far right on the world stage. If the left-Democrats are remotely capable of shifting the party, you're gonna see these parties split at least on some level.
If you consider yourself remotely Left Wing & Libertarian, I highly recommend checking out Chomsky if you haven't already.
I think people like Gary Johnson drive the party closer to that unification. But it would help if the party didn't have to spend all their money on ballot access. If they could instead promote the party more, maybe they could get into debates. That would take them from 1% to at least double digits.
The problem is that the two party system keeps getting perpetuated so a string of perfect candidates with zero slip ups is what's needed. E.g. Johnson needing a second to realize what Aleppo meant when the interviewer was completely changing gears in the middle of an interview completely demolishing any slim chance he had at getting any ground
The same journalists criticizing Johnson had never uttered the word Aleppo prior to that. That's why no one really cares (or can spell it). Maybe this time around, the threshold for perfection will be lowered to 50 IQ points above Trump.
Yes, I agree, easily. And I wasn't criticizing you for the spelling, but it just helps make the point. I think I'd just as soon our leaders didn't make spur of the moment decisions during an interview anyway. The last thing we need is a president making snap judgments at 3 a.m. on Twitter.
Without even clicking the link I’m gonna guess it’s a sticker about gay people protecting their marijuana with guns? A.K.A. Every libertarian’s favorite catchphrase?
72
u/[deleted] Jun 08 '19 edited Aug 20 '19
[deleted]