• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Fall On Your Sword, Libertarians, And Vote For Romney

Or here is an idea: the Republican party could, you know, actually earn the Libertarians' votes. If the Republican party does lose by a slight enough margin that the Libertarian vote could have saved them, well, you can bet the Republcian party will pay more attention to them come the next election. Unless they are complete morons.

And I don't have ulterior motives in saying that; I voted third party myself. I wish the Greens could pull as many Democratic voters as the Libertarians can pull Republican.
 
celticwar17 said:
I just don't pay attention to the religious nuts on the republican side, I think they will be their own downfall... most people that are religious are fine. In my view social conservatism will never have any realistic chance in the future, and I choose not to worry about it that much because to me there are much better things to worry about. Liberals gathering the masses to complain about such things is now just being used as a tool to have left wing government philosophy hitch a ride and sneak along with the end of social conservatism.

I've never had a republican tell me who I can have sex with. (I'm sure you can reference some random dudes quote I don't care about, but do you honestly believe that this country is at risk of such a thing if Romeny is elected?).
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, if you ignore the GOP's history then they certainly don't sound as bad! And yeah, actually, Republicans have tried to tell people who they can have sex with, and how. Sodomy laws, anyone? Oh, and they're more than happy to tell you who you are or are not allowed to marry.

You should talk to an actual socialist and see what they think about the Democrats.
 
Dragonfly said:
If the republicans lose it's a direct reflection on how weak Romney is. That's an important lesson.

The last thing us third party voters want is any party thinking a "romney type" candidate is acceptable for this country.

We don't see Romney as an improvement. It's really that simple.
Click to expand...

Romney is weak but Obama is even weaker or else he would have blown this thing open 3 weeks ago. I don't care how you vote, but the GOP is going to be more inclined to support some of your issues IMO--especially since Romney is very flexible in his positions.
 
Deuce said:
Well, yeah, if you ignore the GOP's history then they certainly don't sound as bad! And yeah, actually, Republicans have tried to tell people who they can have sex with, and how. Sodomy laws, anyone? Oh, and they're more than happy to tell you who you are or are not allowed to marry.

You should talk to an actual socialist and see what they think about the Democrats.
Click to expand...
I consider you as a conspiracy theorist. You really think that voting for Romney, he is going have people tell you who you should have sex with? And tell you who you can't marry?
 
Fisher said:
Romney is weak but Obama is even weaker or else he would have blown this thing open 3 weeks ago. I don't care how you vote, but the GOP is going to be more inclined to support some of your issues IMO--especially since Romney is very flexible in his positions.
Click to expand...

Funny, I remember when Republicans turned the very concept of changing one's mind into this horrifying lack of character.

celticwar17 said:
I consider you as a conspiracy theorist. You really think that voting for Romney, he is going have people tell you who you should have sex with? And tell you who you can't marry?
Click to expand...

I said Republicans, not Romney. They lost the fight over the sex thing. The supreme court ended that one, otherwise I'd bet it would have made the official GOP platform this year and we'd see Romney on both sides of that one.

As for marriage:
http://mittromneycentral.com/on-the-issues/same-sex-marriage/

Yeah, it certainly does seem like he'd be telling me who I am not allowed to marry.
 
Deuce said:
Funny, I remember when Republicans turned the very concept of changing one's mind into this horrifying lack of character.
Click to expand...

I'm not a republican so sure why not :) I am anti-Obama and Romney is what I gotta do....I was gonna throw up my hands after Big Bird and vote Libertarian but then came Benghazi.
 
,
zimmer said:
You think Democrats are for Liberty?
OBAMAKARE. That's a control freak's dream. With that they've got you by the balls.

We've got debt up to our eyeballs, 4-years of unemployment at 8%, business has no confidence in this guy... and Obama is your guy?

Because of what??? The Patriot Act??? Something signed into law with Democrats???

egg-on-your-face.jpg
Click to expand...

Try to pay attention. I know it's easier to construct strawmen that you know how to defeat, but it's really bad form.

I did not say Obamals my guy, nor did I speak any praise of the Democratic party.

Votng Romney= the opposite of libertarian. Anybody who votes for Obamney is voting against libertarian principles.
 
Fisher said:
I'm not a republican so sure why not :) I am anti-Obama and Romney is what I gotta do....I was gonna throw up my hands after Big Bird and vote Libertarian but then came Benghazi.
Click to expand...

Ahh, right. You were totally going to vote third party but the right-wing propaganda convinced you of their universe's version of the Benghazi attack. Ok.
 
LowDown said:
Sorry, but there's no evidence that Romney wants to do any of that. You are projecting your own rot into the argument. Bain capital was not a big croney capitalism outfit, for example. They don't do a lot of special pleading with the government.
Click to expand...
Just because he has constantly done things like that and continues to protect the interests of big business over competition means nothing at all. Don't call yourself a libertarian when you vote for big giovernment. You are tea party all the way. You like big government just as long as it limits others.
 
Deuce said:
Ahh, right. You were totally going to vote third party but the right-wing propaganda convinced you of their universe's version of the Benghazi attack. Ok.
Click to expand...

As ideal as it would be to vote third party, the stakes are way to high this time for idealism. Mathmatically, libertarians who vote third party are casting their vote for Obama. This is fine as long as you acknowledge that this is the case. Right now, we as libertarians have to choose which of these two crappy candidates is a closer match to our values. If you value your personal freedoms, their is only one choice.
 
Another "the sky is falling so sacrifice your vote/principles" thread.
 
zimmer said:
OBAMAKARE
DEBT
ENERGY
BUSINESS

All huge differences.

We don't need just Romney... we need both chambers.
Click to expand...

Considering the only difference is that Obama will give government contracts to his campaign contributors and Romney will give government contracts to his campaign contributors, but corporations donate to both parties, no, not that much of a difference at all.
 
Good luck with this.

When you tell a Libertarian that he must do something whether he likes it or not, he will do the opposite of what you tell him.
 
johnny_rebson said:
Good luck with this.

When you tell a Libertarian that he must do something whether he likes it or not, he will do the opposite of what you tell him.
Click to expand...

Nobody likes being told who to vote for. Implying that a Libertarian is wasting his vote from someone voting for a waste named Romney is ironic.

Anyway there is roughly 40-45% of elgible voters who don't vote. Why not go for those votes?
 
Kr1ll1n said:
WRONG. The majority of Libertarians are, generally speaking, fiscally conservative and socially liberal.
This would mean a push towards a true free market system, and reduced taxation.
The flip side to this would be that issues like gay marriage, abortion rights, and welfare would be relegated to the states to handle.
Click to expand...

So then you're choosing between a fiscally conservative candidate and a socially liberal one, why choose the former and not the latter?

Dragonfly said:
I absolutely LOVE how the faux-conservatives of this era have started to repeat the chants of "Democrats are the tax and spend party" and "Republicans are the party of small government and less taxes".
Click to expand...

Seriously. Both parties are about taxing people and then giving that money to special interests. It's just which special interests that differ.
 
Helix said:
when i voted libertarian back in the day, i always used to love it when close to an election, the Republicans would suddenly demand a vote. lol

i would point out that they just spent the last four years calling me a loserdopian, losertarian, and liberaltarian while largely ignoring and insulting my political views. it's good to see that nothing has changed.

to the OP, though, i would point out that your post is just going to piss off libertarians for the most part. "fall on your sword?" lol. if you want the libertarians under your tent, you're going to have to rethink a big part of your platform. just my two cents.
Click to expand...

See... whike you think the OP made the assumption you're all Republicans, I think you made the assumption he's asking you to join the party...

First off, I haven't heard a lot of negative words towards libertarians from Republicans in a long while... In fact, Libertarians are much respected by Republicans these days... look at the success of Republican/Libertarians like Ron Paul... before that Perot... How many Libertarian candidates gain respect by the Democratic Party or the candidates they present...none...

You say if you want Libertarians to join the party, then they're going to have to create room under the tent... but I would argue in that vain that the Tea Party faction forming of the Republican Party IS a lot more in line with the Libertarian principles...

Secondly, no one is asking you to join in the Party... The OP didn't say join the Republican Party... he said vote Romney because he is clearly more acceptable for every American citizen, including Libertarians...

You can still be Libertarian in principle, but recognize the Libertarian principles have a far better chance of action under a Romney presidency than they do under an Obama presidency...

and while many of the Libertarians are upset about Romney over foreign policy issues, everyone has to see Romney's domestic issues are his priorities, and those are the ones which match up quite well with the Libertarians...

So to suggest you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama on foreign policy is being disingenuous to the major philosophical differences to governance and the role of the federal government in daily lives of American citizens that are present in Romney and Obama... and how those differences clearly align Romney up with Libertarians and Obama up with socialists...

Libertarians are ardently against the move to a New World Order... who is driving you to it at 100mph? Right not Obama has the pedal to the metal in that regards... and a Romney presidency would give you at least the chance of that being slowed...

So, clearly the OP didn't word his appeal in a way that most Libertarians would identify with... but his general point is a valid one...

Libertarians would do well for themselves by recognizing the clear difference between Romney and Obama, and how much beneficial a change of administration would be for Libertarians right now...

and that isn't going to come by wasted protest votes... that would come from getting being Romney's bid as the opposition candidate...

You can always go back on that vote on Romney 4 years from now if he doesn't live up to his side of that bargain by being more sympathetic to Libertarian issues...

Right now, you know Obama does not...
 
IndepCentristMA said:
See... whike you think the OP made the assumption you're all Republicans, I think you made the assumption he's asking you to join the party...

First off, I haven't heard a lot of negative words towards libertarians from Republicans in a long while... In fact, Libertarians are much respected by Republicans these days... look at the success of Republican/Libertarians like Ron Paul... before that Perot... How many Libertarian candidates gain respect by the Democratic Party or the candidates they present...none...

You say if you want Libertarians to join the party, then they're going to have to create room under the tent... but I would argue in that vain that the Tea Party faction forming of the Republican Party IS a lot more in line with the Libertarian principles...

Secondly, no one is asking you to join in the Party... The OP didn't say join the Republican Party... he said vote Romney because he is clearly more acceptable for every American citizen, including Libertarians...

You can still be Libertarian in principle, but recognize the Libertarian principles have a far better chance of action under a Romney presidency than they do under an Obama presidency...

and while many of the Libertarians are upset about Romney over foreign policy issues, everyone has to see Romney's domestic issues are his priorities, and those are the ones which match up quite well with the Libertarians...

So to suggest you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama on foreign policy is being disingenuous to the major philosophical differences to governance and the role of the federal government in daily lives of American citizens that are present in Romney and Obama... and how those differences clearly align Romney up with Libertarians and Obama up with socialists...

Libertarians are ardently against the move to a New World Order... who is driving you to it at 100mph? Right not Obama has the pedal to the metal in that regards... and a Romney presidency would give you at least the chance of that being slowed...

So, clearly the OP didn't word his appeal in a way that most Libertarians would identify with... but his general point is a valid one...

Libertarians would do well for themselves by recognizing the clear difference between Romney and Obama, and how much beneficial a change of administration would be for Libertarians right now...

and that isn't going to come by wasted protest votes... that would come from getting being Romney's bid as the opposition candidate...

You can always go back on that vote on Romney 4 years from now if he doesn't live up to his side of that bargain by being more sympathetic to Libertarian issues...

Right now, you know Obama does not...
Click to expand...

my post may have inadvertently given the impression that i'm still a libertarian. while my political compass score still gives a left libertarian result, i no longer support trickle down and deregulation as the sole cure for our nation's problems. these days, i see that there are both government and corporate threats to liberty. i apologize if i gave the impression that i am a current libertarian. i was simply reminiscing about my libertarian days and how Republicans treated me when i belonged to that party.
 
Because it is close, people in "swing states" should pick between Obama or Romney. In other states, cast your protest votes.
 
Paschendale said:
So then you're choosing between a fiscally conservative candidate and a socially liberal one, why choose the former and not the latter?
Click to expand...

Because if we agree with both of those core tenants, than why would we pick one or the other, if the duality is already well represented by a single party and platform?
 
apdst said:
I can't imagine why a Libertarian would vote for Obama to begin with. Libertarians are Righties, anyway.
Click to expand...
The average libertarian is left-wing on social issues (freedom over security) and right-wing on economic-fiscal issues (again, freedom over security).

Since freedom is the foundation of liberty, which is the root word in "libertarian", .. well, it all does make sense that libertarians are both lefties (socially) and righties (economically-fiscally) at the same time, a kind of "schizoid" blend.

Now there are libertarian-lefts, where social issues are more important, and libertarian-rights, where economic-fiscal issues are more important.

It is clear that this election the personal economic matters of most every American is their primary focus, without really a close second.

Thus many of those voting libertarians planning on voting for Johnson are focused on the economic-fiscal aspect of the Libertarian party.

And thus, those libertarians, if they had to make a second choice, it would be the economic-fiscal conservative candidate, essentially, Romney.

That's why those voting for Johnson are truly taking votes away from Romney -- there's simply no question about it.

I read a number of internet news articles on the matter today, that there are considerably more people planning to vote for Johnson who would otherwise vote for Romney than for Obama.

And again, that's totally understandale, from a political science perspective.

Thus it is the right thing to do, I've also read in many internet news editorials today, for libertarians who don't want four more years of Obama's America-killing socialist economic policies to simply fall on their sword and vote for Romney.
 
Fall On Your Sword, Libertarians, And Vote For Romney
Click to expand...

Short answer: no.

Long answer: noooooooooooooooo.
 
Libertarians generally are only left on social issues that require no spending or big programs.
 
Dissent said:
Nope. Voting for Johnson. I hope Obama gets re elected and destroys the country so we can start anew.
Click to expand...
Yes, but don't for a moment think that "starting anew" will do anything other than create a major new political party at the very center of the political spectrum where the great "silent majority" lives.

There will be no hope at that time for the Libertarian Party, none whatsoever, to be a player at that time, as the Libertarian Party simply does not have any broad appeal to women.

And, that's understandable. Women are more likely to choose security, both economic-fiscal and social, thus they are more likely natural "justicerians", to continue coining an appropriate analagous term.

Indeed, as this thread illustrated there are indeed more libertarian men than women, quite a bit more, in fact: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/125545-there-more-libertarian-men-than-libertarian-women-real-life.html.

The libertarian philosophy is essentially a young, single, male's philosophy, obviously, and thus does not have broad appeal to the population as a whole .. and it simply never will.

If Obama does do things that spell the eventual end of America, we'll lose our entitlements as citizens, and thus there simply will be no "starting over".

But if Obama is elected, and we can somehow stop him from killing America as his ideology compels him, any new "start over" movement will occur at the center of the political spectrum, far away from the schzoid of libertarianism (libertarianism which is left-wing on social issues and right-wing on economic-fiscal issues).

The center of the political spectrum is home to the great silent majority, equally populated by men and women, where there is likewise balance in social and economic-fiscal issues, the focal point of liberty and justice for all American citizens.
 
Ontologuy said:
So I implore you, to look deep within, way past any superficial ideological idealism .. and realize what you must do, for the good of the country, for the good of all your fellow American citizens: fall on your sword, and vote for Romney.
Click to expand...
Why are you suggesting they vote for Romney and not Obama?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom