On August 19, an Insider/Advantage/WSB-TV poll was released for the U.S. Senate and gubernatorial races in Georgia. For U.S. Senate, the poll shows: Republican Johnny Isakson 47%; Democrat Michael Thurmond 35%; Libertarian Chuck Donovan 7%; undecided 11%.
For Governor, the same poll shows: Republican Nathan Deal 45%; Democrat Roy Barnes 41%; Libertarian John Monds 5%; undecided 9%.
In the entire history of popular elections for U.S. Senate in Georgia, only one candidate for that office who was not the Republican nominee nor the Democratic nominee has ever received more than 5% of the vote. That was in 1920. An independent candidate that year, Harry Edwards, polled 5.10%. Edwards was the only opponent of the Democratic nominee, Thomas Watson.
The best Libertarian Party showing for U.S. Senate in Georgia was in 1996, when Jack Cashin polled 3.60%.
Longtime Macon journalist Harry Stillwell Edwards, mentioned above, was a best-selling novelist and was quite popular on the lecture circuit when he ran against former Populist leader Tom Watson in predominantly-Democratic Georgia in 1920. One of his books, published earlier that year, sold more than three million copies.
The Democrat beat him 94.9% to 5.1%?
Austin. don’t you think one of the problems with our political system has to do with the fact that most voters would rather vote for a major party, any major party, candidate rather than a minor party cnadidate whose views the share?
The bigger story that wasn’t covered by the libertarian media, was the endorsement the Libertarian Party candidate received from a small County Republican Party executive committee three weeks ago. The County GOP refused to endorse incumbent Republican Sen. Johnny Isakson. The vote on the ExComm was 3 to 2 to back Libertarian Chuck Donovan.
Now you would think this would be huge news. A Republican County Executive Committee breaking ranks and endorsing a Libertarian Party candidate over a Republican for US Senate. Big frong page feature in LP News, glaring headling at LP.org, press release and maybe even a press conference by the Georgia LP, glaring story at Ballot Access News and Independent Political Report.
Well, you’d think wrong.
You see, the story doesn’t fit the Left Libertarian template. The reason the County GOP backed the Libertarian over Isakson, is cause Isakson was a mush-mouth on Obama’s Birth Certificate, and wouldn’t answer the GOP ExComm’s repeated quries about Obama’s non-US birth.
So, the libertarian/third party media just ignored the story. You see, many in the LP don’t mind at all engaging in far out conspiracy theories if it bashes Bush, or shows Republicans in a bad light, but question Obama’s birth, and his legitimacy to hold the office of the Presidency, oh, no, no, no. Can’t have none of that.
Eric Dondero, Publisher
LibertarianRepublican.net
Oh, and we at LR did cover the story.
BTW, I should mention the County in question, while tiny, also happens to be home to Atlanta Hartsfield Airport.
Watson had, by the 1910s, carried what was left of the Populists (not much) into a highly racist ideology…a real betrayal of the joint work that black and white Southern farmers had done together in the 1890’s.
Watson was a “perennial” candidate by 1920. I think his win in the primary probably surprised the Democratic establishment. Maybe David Gillespe can offer more info.
Pingback: Republican-endorsed Libertarian Party candidate for US Senate now polling 7% in Georgia « Read NEWS
Eric Dondero- IPR covered the story you are referencing back on August 7th. To date it has 13 posts.
I humbly stand corrected. IPR did report on this a couple weeks ago. Sorry for the error.
But no reporting at LP.org, LewRockwell.com, Cato, Reason, Ron Paul websites.
You think this would be a huge story? Never before, that I’m aware of, and I’ve been with the Libertarian Party for over 25 years, has a local Republican Party ever broke ranks and officially endorsed a Libertarian Party candidate for any federal office, or even local office for that matter.
So, why the silence from the libertarian media?
The Libertarian Party is loathe to oppose Obama. You’ll notice, in every single press release they put out from LPHQ critical of Obama’s policies, they’ll go out of their way to insert two or three paragraphs bashing the GOP, even though the GOP has nothing to do with the subject matter. Still, they’ll insert that in there, just so people know, they’re not aligned in any way with Republicans. It’s pathetic.
So, now we’ve got an historical endorsement from a local Republican Party, quite possibly for the first ever in history, and there’s a complete Libertarian media black-out over it.
Why? Cause the endorsement came from Republicans critical of Obama, and oh, no, no, no, can’t have that. Golly-wee junipers. We just can’t have the Libertarian Party seen as bashing Obama.
So, the silence.
I don’t necessarily disagree with the apparent LP bias against the GOP but might it not be because the media always links them as a splinter party from the GOP? While it is true that many of the founding members were former Republicans I am just saying that the current LP leadership might be trying to put more distance between themselves and the GOP to try to correct that media perception.
Stike that Casual Bystander, not “many of the founding members,” of the Libertarian Party were Republicans, ALL OF THEM WERE, almost without exception: David Nolan was Chairman of the Colorado Young Republicans at the time, John Hospers, former Vermont REPUBLICAN legislator Roger MacBride, Ed Crane, whomever from the old days. They were all Republicans.
The Libertarian Party is an off-shoot of the Republican Party, like it or not.
It’s no accident that 8 out of 9 Libertarian Party Presidential candidates since 1972 were/are Republicans.
It’s no accident that every single Libertarian ever elected to a state legislature – Alaska, New Hampshire, Vermont and Michigan, “Caucused” as Republicans once in office.
The LP serves a useful purpose in American politics, much like the NY Conservative Party.
Yes, you’re correct. The LP does go out of their way to put distance between them and the GOP. And it’s entirely transparent, and hypocritical. If they just owned up to their status in American politics as an offshoot of the GOP, they’d be 1,000 times better off.
But alas, they have to be spoiled little brats at times. “Wah, wah, we hate Republicans… we’re hate Republicans just as much as we hate Democrats, if not more, wah, wah, wah.”
While I consider myself a constitutional libertarian (or perhaps a libertarian constitutionalist) I am no longer a member of the LP. I really don’t see anything wrong with trying to distance the party equally from the two dominant parties. Just my $0.02.
What’s wrong is that we Libertarians hardly ever elect anyone to public office, precisely because of this policy.
Do you know how many elected Republicans have offered to list themselves as “elected Libertarian Party officeholders,” over the years, but were rejected by the National LP because of their idiotic stance on distancing themselves from the Republican Party???
How many missed opportunities we’ve had. How many Libertarians we could have gotten elected under the Republican ticket? But the LPHQ was too goddamned snitty about the whole thing. “Oh, no, we can’t run as Republicans… We can’t elect someone unless they’re on the ballot strictly as a Libertarian.”
This sort of attitude has severely hurt the Libertarian Party over the years. And the overall libertarian movement.
Again, I don’t necessarily disagree with you BUT… (there you have it, my BIG but) if one is really trying to build a true third party (like the Populists of the late 19th century) you don’t do it by being affiliated with one of the two dominant parties. I do agree with you that it is more important to elect libertarians than Libertarians. Unlike you I do not see very many in the GOP.
Good point. But some of us are not necessarily trying to “build a third party.” Rather our objective is to build a viable libertarian movement in American politics that actually elects people to public office, and actually has an influence on public policy.
This is why I created the Republican Liberty Caucus 20 years ago. However, we still need the Libertarian Party to function in the real world of American politics, and be a little pragmatic, as well.
Foul! You just used the words “pragmatic” and “Libertarian Party” in the same sentence! According to Noah Webster and the all hallowed Statement of Principles this cannot be. The LP NatComm will decide your penalty later. 😉
Alas, you are indeed correct.
Hey Casual Bystander, you seem like a level-headed libertarian. I’m sure my friend Richard won’t mind if I give a little plug for my website. Come visit me at http://www.libertarianrepublican.net
All the best…
I already have… 😉
Congratulations to Chuck Donovan and the hard-working Libertarian Party in Georgia!
Post #12 is not accurate. The 4 Libertarians elected in New Hampshire in 1992 formed their own caucus, as did the 2 elected in 1994. Also, Steve Vaillancourt, elected to the New Hampshire as a Libertarian in 2000, caucused with the Democrats, not the Republicans (however, he is now a Republican).
It’s worth noting that, in Georgia, if no one gets 50%-plus in the general election, the top two vote-getters meet in a runoff in December.
Pingback: Republican-endorsed Libertarian Party candidate for US Senate now polling 7% in Georgia