The Kentucky Libertarian Party has never placed a statewide nominee on the ballot in any year, except in presidential years. To do so requires 5,000 signatures, due in early August. The only Libertarian Party nominees for U.S. Senate in Kentucky history have been in presidential years, when the presidential petition can include a U.S. Senate candidate as well.
Now, however, the party is considering running someone for U.S. Senate in 2010. See this story. The party disagrees with Republican nominee Rand Paul on the issue of same-sex marriage, and foreign policy, and other issues. The party is irked that the media assumes that Paul’s views match Libertarian Party views, and if the party ran its own nominee, the press would stop making that mistake.
Pingback: Kentucky Libertarian Party May Attempt to Run U.S. Senate Candidate | Independent Political Report
The press is getting it right for a change. Rand Paul is more L than GOP. Now if the Constitution Party will now only run someone for senator so that way, as a conservative, I’ll have someone to vote for. (Oh, oh. No luck there. They told me by e-mail they are unofficially supporting Paul!)
If the LP actually does run someone against Rand Paul it would probably enhance his chances. The LP nominee could really take a lot of media heat off Paul by being far more radical and making him appear mainstream in contrast. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Rand Paul campaign would quietly assist the LP in fielding an opponent.
This would be very foolish in my opinion as it will turn the Campaign for Liberty AND Tea Party crowds against the Libertarian Party. Any differences that these Libertarians have with Rand Paul are tiny compared to differences that they have with typical Republican candidates, and if elected, Rand Paul will be the most libertarian members of the US Senate, by far.
The Libertarian Party of Kentucky ought to run people for US House or the state legislature or for local offices. Running somebody against Rand Paul is just flat out bad political strategy that will come back to bite the Libertarian Party in the ass.
With regard to the KY LP considering running someone against Rand Paul (Ron Paul’s mostly-libertarian son):
I didn’t think Paul handled himself too well in the Maddow interview (where he failed to attack institutionalized racism within the system, instead focusing on defending the right of the private sector to be racist), but he’s still a better libertarian opportunity for victory than anyone else. Depending on how the LP conducts themselves, I favor them getting into the race, so long as it’s to make Paul look less radical. However, there is also the possibility of the system corrupting Paul, since he doesn’t always appear to have the consistency of his old man. His old man would have called attention to the racism of the system, and fundamental principles, instead of trying to deny the racism of the private system. Also, the word “boycott” didn’t come out of his mouth, and he didn’t use correct historical anecdotes very well about the boycott’s effectiveness in dealing with racism…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0PX1bh4WBw&feature=related
–If he can’t use the above link’s information, and the drug war to challenge the racism of the system, then he is a clueless “libertarian”. Moreover, he didn’t move to jury nullification, the way someone better-educated on the issues would have.
Clearly the media was trying to slam him for racism. THEREFORE, the answer is to PROVE ON LIVE TV that you are not a racist, by empowering the black community with useful information about jury rights. It’s easy to tie that in with strong rhetoric “I believe in absolute freedom to use your property the way the property owner sees fit. …Blah blah blah”
Interestingly, in 2002, I helped put Robert Dyer on the ballot in KY, for the Libertarian Party, so I think I have a pretty good feel for KY politics. (Probably moreso than the candidate himself, although I can’t be sure of that.)
2002: US House, 2nd District: Robert Guy Dyer, 2,084 votes (1.2%)
People loved my description of him, as a “pro-gun, limited government candidate”. On that single issue (gun rights), and on taxes, most people readily stopped and signed my petition. The manager of the grocery store came out, and when I gave him those issues, he said “We’re not supposed to let you do this, but since everyone seems to agree with you, and you’re not causing any problems, I think It’ll be OK. If people don’t want to sign, don’t ask ’em twice, OK?” For those of you who don’t petition much –or ever– “Buck the system” managers are rare, especially ones who buck the system based on philosophical agreement with a petition.
Groups of little old ladies were stopping and signing “to put a pro-gun candidate on the ballot”. If one didn’t want to sign, the others would say “you need to sign this, it’s the right thing to do…” LOL!
Later, I ran into Dyer’s son in 2005 in Arizona, while putting Coconino County’s AZ LP on the ballot at a grocery store near Northern Arizona University. (Since then, the AZ LP –a completely backwards or infiltrated Libertarian Party– has put me on a “petitioner blacklist” for a number of self-contradictory reasons that don’t hold up to any scrutiny. While on the blacklist, the AZ LP commended my 2003 and 2005 work –anonymously– at their 2009 state convention because it resulted in the continued ballot access of Coconino County, AZ.) Dyer’s son actually said he and his father had quit being active in the LP because “the LP gave him no support or even encouragement whatsoever”.
I don’t really know if this is true or not. Perhaps Dyer wasn’t a serious candidate himself. Who knows?
But there is certainly a lack of strategic knowledge in the LP, as a whole. We appear to be a net for the delusional political rejects from the other parties, as well as “losing single issue” fanatics. Running someone against a candidate who is friendly to us is not the best idea. Will they speak against Paul publicly? If so, that’s bad news that the media would love to exploit. (Remember when Bob Barr was attacked for all the areas in which he wasn’t libertarian by the mainstream media? Remember how easy it was to get him to backpeddle on Hannity?)
In short, if the KY LP wants to run a paper candidate, go ahead. But if they take more than their usual percentage of the vote (insignificant), it will be a shame. The LP exists to make America free, not stroke the egos of delusional candidates. I’d be surprised if Dyer himself voted for anyone other than Rand Paul.
If the KY LP is serious, and committed, it probably wouldn’t even raise this question. After all, is Rand significantly more libertarian than any other candidate for US Senate in the nation? I think the case could be made.
Moreover, rather than get 1-7% in a congressional race, or 1% in the Senate race, why not run a bunch of people for state house and win? Why not ally yourselves with Rand Paul as Tea Party candidates, and get elected?
It seems to me that the prior strategy is the winning strategy.
And if we’re not in it to win it, we’re not serious.
No candidate who isn’t willing to walk his entire district is serious. This is a good litmus test. State legislative districts are walkable. Walk them. Say the right thing. Get elected. Carl DeMaio has some advice for those who want to win more individual freedom, along those lines:
http://www.reason.tv/video/show/fixing-san-diego-a-conversatio
He’s 100% right.
If I counted correctly, there are 42 of the 100 KY state house districts that have only one candidate (21R, 21D). The LPKY ought to run candidates in as many of those districts as possible.
I just hope they don’t run a Sonny Landham-type person again.
Per TPM: Ken Moellman denies (State Chair). He says Rand is not a Libertarian (Gee, What A shock there).. But No active plans..
Wondering when the deadline is
Jake Witmer said: “Depending on how the LP conducts themselves, I favor them getting into the race, so long as it’s to make Paul look less radical.”
This would be a horrible idea because it would marginalize the Libertarian Party and it would also turn the Campaign for Liberty and Tea Party crowds against the Libertarian Party.
The LP of Kentucky should sit out of the US Senate race this year. I don’t think that they usually run anybody for US Senate anyway. The smart thing for them to do is to run candidates for other offices such as US House, the state legislature, and local offices such as sheriff, county commissioner, etc… They should work on getting Rand Paul supporters to support them for these lower level offices rather than wasting their time attacking Rand Paul which is only going to alienate people who should be natural allies and potential supporters away from the Libertarian Party.
Here you go again!
If the LP runs against Rand – one of the most visible libertarian minded candidates in the history of the LP – it will confirm that the negative attitudes many have about the LP are well placed.
Too often the LP (of which I have been a member since 1980) is looking for someone to oppose rather than a positive candidate to field.
It’s one of the reasons I don’t advertise to my friends that I belong to the LP.
I am in tune with our party’s principles – but aghast that so few in the LP have any clue about how to win public approval.
Maybe that’s not their aim?
A Libertarian running for public office is like a plumber telling a customer “I don’t like water, and I don’t do pipes.”