Great article about 3rd party voting.

[Goodburbon]

Exactly. Very narrow, unfortunately for the (L) a very small percentage of the citizenry hold those values.

We have to face the unpleasant truth that the majority of citizens want some measure of federal and state government intervention in their lives even if that intervention is detrimental. That mindset will take decades to reverse. The (L) does not have the patience or foresight to undertake that task, that is why we must work within the (R) to slowly turn that mindset back towards constitutional values.

So let's nominate the most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever?

I see things getting better incrementally...


After it all comes crashing down.

[Sharpienads]

So let's nominate the most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever?

I see things getting better incrementally...


After it all comes crashing down.

I understand your argument. Is Romney the "most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever"? Up for debate.

But what is the alternative? Some vote R, some vote L, and some vote D. Who do you think comes out on top in that situation? Do you honestly think that Romney is just as bad as Obama?

[Teufelhund]

And you wonder why more people don't want to join your club (or maybe you don't wonder). You just called us retarded, scared, stubborn, and unable to think. We are able to think. We are not scared. Stubborn... yeah, probably some/most of us. I'm sure that we agree on a lot of things, if not most things. This election seems to be a big sticking point. I understand you arguments, but a lot of times Libertarians do come off as either whiny, better than the rest of us, unrealistic, or a combination. Would I vote for RP or GJ if they had the nomination? Absofuckinlutely. Will I vote 3d party this election? Nope. The change we all want won't happen overnight, we need to get there incrementally.

As far as what we call ourselves, one day the Libertarian party will grow and get more popular. And if/when that day comes, they will be just as corrupt as the other parties, and you'll have to find a new thing to call yourself. I know what being a conservative means to me. I can't help it if others have tarnished the label.

Just my $0.02.

So you would rather argue with me than come over to my side, even though you agree with most of what I'm saying, because I was mean to you? Lmao now who's being childish?

I was actually directing that comment directly at you and Ronin because the two of you defined conservative using the definition of a libertarian; I don't think they're the same thing, but maybe a conservative is not what I've always thought. Honestly though, I didn't mean to call anyone names, just a little frustrated with the fact that we have this division between us, when we mostly agree on what we want and what needs to be done. It just seems like obstinance, admittedly it is probably on both our parts.

[Ronin13]

I understand your argument. Is Romney the "most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever"? Up for debate.

But what is the alternative? Some vote R, some vote L, and some vote D. Who do you think comes out on top in that situation? Do you honestly think that Romney is just as bad as Obama?

Oh I have an answer to this...
Here is where the libertarian "voice" loses interest from the conservatives of non-libertarian belief (granted, like Sharpie said, we do have a lot of concurrent views)- You continuously bash the two party system, what has the libertarian party actually contributed to America's political realm other than bitching and moaning? Have they really pushed to change people's minds, or have they instead alienated and berated people because "they fall for that two party crap"? I'm not insulting or anything here, just from experience, I've seen the GJ and RP supporters this past year say some pretty insulting and disrespectful things when they could be doing a better job of educating and informing people of the L views.

Furthermore, the L's in our society continually say that Romney and Obama are one in the same, just a different approach. If you honestly believe that Romney is no better than Obama, and will just doom this country more, well I'm sorry, I personally believe that is ignorant and incorrect. Now, I will say that yes, there are far better candidates for President than what we have this year (I thought the same thing in '08 with the choice between the unknown guy from Ill, and Emperor Palpatine and his, albeit quite attractive, loony toon AK Governor sidekick) but this is pretty much what we're stuck with, and if you feel that both are incapable of doing a somewhat decent job, you are free to vote however you choose. But this further division between the R and L parties is not going to accomplish anything, much akin to the vast division between the R and D. I have tended to vote R my entire voting life (pretty much Bush's 2nd term to now, not long) but only over the past two years or so have I really thought more independently. But realistically, as much as I would love to see someone who is most qualified for the job, 99 out of 100 times they are not part of the only real parties that have been elected for the past 50 years.

[roberth]

So let's nominate the most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever?

I see things getting better incrementally...


After it all comes crashing down.

And you wonder why no one supports you. The answer is in your mirror.

[Goodburbon]

Really? We have two parties taking turns driving us into the ground and i'm the problem because i have the audacity to point it out? Are you high?

[Goodburbon]

I understand your argument. Is Romney the "most moderate, progressive "conservative" candidate ever"? Up for debate.

But what is the alternative? Some vote R, some vote L, and some vote D. Who do you think comes out on top in that situation? Do you honestly think that Romney is just as bad as Obama?

The republican party sold me down the river. I've been sold the lie too long. If they lose their asses again to a 3rd party maybe theyll learn a lesson. Or they could just blame the people who didnt follow blindly, but actually pay attention to what conservative is supposed to be.

Nah, we'll repeal their signature socialist piece of legislation and replace it...with the conservative brand of socialism. Because thats what the conservatives want...right?

[roberth]

Really? We have two parties taking turns driving us into the ground and i'm the problem because i have the audacity to point it out? Are you high?

You just can't have a discussion with anyone without insulting them can you.

Good luck with that.

[Sharpienads]

So you would rather argue with me than come over to my side, even though you agree with most of what I'm saying, because I was mean to you? Lmao now who's being childish?

I was actually directing that comment directly at you and Ronin because the two of you defined conservative using the definition of a libertarian; I don't think they're the same thing, but maybe a conservative is not what I've always thought. Honestly though, I didn't mean to call anyone names, just a little frustrated with the fact that we have this division between us, when we mostly agree on what we want and what needs to be done. It just seems like obstinance, admittedly it is probably on both our parts.

I'm not being childish, and I don't think you were being mean to me. That's not the reason I don't agree with you guys 100% of the time. The point is there are effective ways to argue. They way Libertarians come off to me and I would think other people is not an effective way. That's all I'm saying. I understand the frustration. It's not so much what we want, but how we get there I guess.

[Sharpienads]

You just can't have a discussion with anyone without insulting them can you.

Good luck with that.

I've noticed a couple people who have been doing that lately. I'm sure I've been guilty of it, too. I'm horrible at inferring tone in text, and it seems I default to them trying to be insulting. Sometimes it's tough when your passionate about something.