The March 26 Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this article about Bob Barr’s possibly becoming a candidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination.
The March 26 Atlanta Journal-Constitution has this article about Bob Barr’s possibly becoming a candidate for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination.
barr would be a very strong candidate.but is time and money on his side?
Bob Barr dosen’t really sound like a Libertarian, but maybe he’s for open borders as the Constituion Party to close them. Maybe thats why he didn’t go with the CP.
How about a Mike Gravel-Bob Barr ticket for the Libertarians? Or a Jesse Ventura-Bob Barr ticket?
I thought you wanted us to nominate Nader, Phil 😛
Gravel recieved something like 26,000 votes from all of the primaries combined. What possible advantage to the LP would a Gravel ticket be? What votes from outside of the LP would he draw in? If winning isn’t an option then the next priority for an LP Presidental candidate should be to grow the party and raise it’s visibility. I can’t see Gravel doing either.
The number of votes he received in a major party primary compared with number of votes Obama, Clinton, etc. received is irrelevant. His name recognition (which is the only criterion that seems to matter to anyone in the 3rd party world these days) is far higher – especially within the universe of people who would consider voting for an LP candidate – than anyone else in the running, with the possible exception of Barr and (again with the exception of Barr) he’s the only potential LP candidate who’s actually been elected to anything before. Why on earth would anyone conclude that Gravel WON’T raise the LP’s visibility? How could it not? His switch has already generated all kinds of major media coverage. How much visibility is a no-name like Root or Phillies or whoever going to generate for the LP in comparison? I don’t support the LP or Gravel’s candidacy, I’m just pointing out the obvious.
“What votes from outside the LP would he draw in?”
I’ve made clear elsewhere what I think of Gravel joining the LP, but anybody would have to conclude objectively that he will certainly draw in a good percentage of the left-leaning/independent/disaffected types who admired his candidacy previously even if they didn’t vote for him in a Democratic primary or caucus. These people are already filling up the blogs with pro-Gravel commentary.
Of course, I don’t think most of those people would be attracted to the Libertarian way of looking at the world generally. Abolishing all federal regulatory agencies, the IRS, the Federal Reserve and setting up a Milton Friedman dream world is not going to appeal to these people, nor, presumably, does it appeal to Mike Gravel, which is precisely why his switch not only to the LP but to the ranks of its presidential hopefuls is so strange.
Hopefully, from my perspective, Bob Barr (who is quite committed to the principles of libertarianism) will get the nomination and, along with Alan Keyes or Roy Moore for the Constitution Party, there will then be a strong candidacy that will appeal to disaffected Republicans who will then vote for one of those folks instead of McCain and instead of staying home, thus taking the pressure off of my side of the fence (for once). I can see the Nader and McKinney campaigns praying fervently for Barr and Moore to run (and the Obama campaign, if they have any brains). A Gravel candidacy obviously isn’t going to do nearly as much damage to McCain as a Barr candidacy would.
Roy Moore doesn’t want to run for president this year. It seems Alan Keyes will be the Constitution nominee.
It seems Alan Keyes will be the Constitution nominee.
I doubt it. He’s too gung-ho on interventionism. I think that the Constitution party needs an antiwar candidate to fire up the paleoconservatives to vote their way.
IF THE CONSTITUTION PARTY NOMINATES KEYES IT WILL BE THE END OF THE PARTY.KEYES IS A BLACK VERSION OF HAROLD STASSEN.BOB SMITH WOULD BE THE BEST FOR PRESIDENT ON THE CONSTITUTION TICKET.
Bob Barr would make a fine choice. He believes in the constitution unlike the taxpayer’s party who want to control our social lives. The constitution says the United States must protect our borders and Barr would work to do just that.
I like Bob Barr too, but where in the US Constitution does it mention protecting the borders? I could not find such a mention.
Fred C. Says:
March 27th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
I thought you wanted us to nominate Nader, Phil 😛
Phil Sawyer responds:
Well, I do actually. You are correct. Nader-Gonzalez ’08!