Thanks Libertarians

[kaz]

Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

1) Actually, most of the libertarians who vote for the libertarian candidate would not have voted for the Republican.

2) I object to your proposal that liberty not even be on the ballot.

3) I'd vote for Ross over Read My Lips again.

And usher in Clinton or Osama.

Makes sense. *rolls eyes*

My standard for the Republicans since I left the party in circa 1990 has been that I wanted them to give me one legitimate reason to vote for them. Just one. If Republicans can't clear that hurdle, it's on them, not me. It's the bottom rung on the bar I am asking them to clear.

 

[kaz]

I served part of my time in Reagan’s army. Ronald Reagan never would have tolerated the TPM trying to break the government. He never would have tolerated the hate for minorities and women and gays.

He would have broken the TPM in a heart beat.

The mainstream GOP will never give into the TPM, because it is a small freak group out of step with America.

Reagan would have loved the actual Tea Party movement, his words are clearly their mantra. What you are referring to is the liberal caricature of the Tea Party. What you want them to believe is irrelevant.

 

[lakeview]

THAT was my point.

If libertarians want to make a difference, you need to join our party and pitch in. Help, don't hinder the defeat of scum-sucking, lying dimocrap filth.

Make your voices and your draw strong enough that you have a say in the party.

This shit of running your own candidate and harming Republicans is only going to get you disliked by Republicans and laughed at by the scum-sucking left because you're doing their job for them.

THINK about it.

I've been hearing Republicans saying this for over 30 years and you guys have not learned anything over that time. Their draw is already strong, strong enough to make you guys whine everytime you think they cost you an election yet you keep asking them to compromise and adapt to you. That's not going to happen and you'd think the GOP would have learned that by now. You have a better chance of convincing blue dogs to switch parties than you have of libertarians compromising with you.

 

[dblack]

Libertarians didn't nominate Romney.

 

[dblack]

Is this the part where republicans blame libertarians for their loss...again?

Looks like.

Thing is, I'm actually ok with those eager to eject libertarians from the Republican party. I don't think we belong there. I suppose taking over the party is a laudable goal, but that's just an attempt to convert Republicans to libertarians, and most don't want to be converted.

This is why I'm seriously hoping the Republicans nominate another middling corporatist like Christie. It would give a huge boost to the libertarian movement, splitting real limited government proponents from the neo-cons once and for all...

well, hopefully

 

[Pheonixops]

I appreciate it. Almost as much as I appreciated the totally insane Ross Pirogi giving the 1992 election to Bill the rapist Clinton.

Really appreciate it guys. Way to go... Got your heads on straight, huh?

As usual


Big Obama Bundler Donated To Sarvis, the Fake Libertarian Candidate in Virginia
—Ace

A bit late for this to have an impact, but...



Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

I hope Sarvis gets at least 10% of the vote so our state can have Libertarians on the ballot and hopefully in the debates. How is Savis allegedly a "fake Libertarian"? What are his views and stances that make him the aforementioned in your opinion?

Off the top of my head, he is in favor of government tracking of all vehicles!

He's not a libertarian, he's a shill!

I haven't heard of that position, when I searched "sarvis government tracking of all vehicles" nothing came up on Sarvis on the first few pages. Judging from where he stands "on the issues", I think that your assertion may be incorrect. Here are his stances:
Robert Sarvis' Issue Positions (Political Courage Test) - Project Vote Smart

 

[Jarlaxle]

I served part of my time in Reagan’s army. Ronald Reagan never would have tolerated the TPM trying to break the government. He never would have tolerated the hate for minorities and women and gays.

He would have broken the TPM in a heart beat.

The mainstream GOP will never give into the TPM, because it is a small freak group out of step with America.

You're hallucinating again, boy!

 

[mudwhistle]

1) Actually, most of the libertarians who vote for the libertarian candidate would not have voted for the Republican.

2) I object to your proposal that liberty not even be on the ballot.

3) I'd vote for Ross over Read My Lips again.

Yeah...... How'd that work out?

Same thing either way. HW is the straw who broke the camel's back who drove me from the Republican party, if you want regret for not voting for him you're not going to get it.

Why should you have any regret for helping Democrats win elections because of your stubbornness.

 

[bripat9643]

I appreciate it. Almost as much as I appreciated the totally insane Ross Pirogi giving the 1992 election to Bill the rapist Clinton.

Really appreciate it guys. Way to go... Got your heads on straight, huh?

As usual


Big Obama Bundler Donated To Sarvis, the Fake Libertarian Candidate in Virginia
—Ace

A bit late for this to have an impact, but...

Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.

Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama. This revelation comes as Virginia voters head to the polls Tuesday in an election where some observers say the third-party gubernatorial candidate could be a spoiler for Republican Ken Cuccinelli.

Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

Sarvis isn't a libertarian. He's a fake. He supports big tax increases. No libertarian would ever support increasing taxes.

 

[bripat9643]

I served part of my time in Reagan’s army. Ronald Reagan never would have tolerated the TPM trying to break the government. He never would have tolerated the hate for minorities and women and gays.

He would have broken the TPM in a heart beat.

The mainstream GOP will never give into the TPM, because it is a small freak group out of step with America.

There you go again, spewing Democrat talking points. The TEA Party isn't trying to break the government, although I wish they were, and no one hates minorities, women or gays. That's pure Dim propaganda. But when have you ever hesitated to spew America hating propaganda? You even posted communist propaganda right here in this forum.

The so-called "mainstream" Republicans (read "establishment" or "RINO" Republicans) are the ones who are going to get broken. They can either fall in line and do as they are told, or they can go over to the Democrat Party where they belong.

 

[bripat9643]

The tea party is libertarian. We're going to see this shit defeated.

The Tea Party stopped being libertarian when it signed away its soul to the Christian Right.

And your proof this happened is...?

*crickets*

Most libertarians are atheists, so I find that claim amusing.

 

[bripat9643]

I served part of my time in Reagan’s army. Ronald Reagan never would have tolerated the TPM trying to break the government. He never would have tolerated the hate for minorities and women and gays.

He would have broken the TPM in a heart beat.

The mainstream GOP will never give into the TPM, because it is a small freak group out of step with America.

Horseshit, Fakey, you've always been in the communist party. Who do you think you're fooling?

 

[bripat9643]

1) Actually, most of the libertarians who vote for the libertarian candidate would not have voted for the Republican.

2) I object to your proposal that liberty not even be on the ballot.

3) I'd vote for Ross over Read My Lips again.

And usher in Clinton or Osama.

Makes sense. *rolls eyes*

My standard for the Republicans since I left the party in circa 1990 has been that I wanted them to give me one legitimate reason to vote for them. Just one. If Republicans can't clear that hurdle, it's on them, not me. It's the bottom rung on the bar I am asking them to clear.

With a lot of Republicans, I have to agree with you, but Cuccinelliis is one worth voting for. Certainly, a McAuliff win would be a disaster for the state of Virginia.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I appreciate it. Almost as much as I appreciated the totally insane Ross Pirogi giving the 1992 election to Bill the rapist Clinton.

Really appreciate it guys. Way to go... Got your heads on straight, huh?

As usual


Big Obama Bundler Donated To Sarvis, the Fake Libertarian Candidate in Virginia
—Ace

A bit late for this to have an impact, but...

Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.

Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama. This revelation comes as Virginia voters head to the polls Tuesday in an election where some observers say the third-party gubernatorial candidate could be a spoiler for Republican Ken Cuccinelli.

Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

Did you get the fake part of your post?

 

[Pheonixops]

I appreciate it. Almost as much as I appreciated the totally insane Ross Pirogi giving the 1992 election to Bill the rapist Clinton.

Really appreciate it guys. Way to go... Got your heads on straight, huh?

As usual


Big Obama Bundler Donated To Sarvis, the Fake Libertarian Candidate in Virginia
—Ace

A bit late for this to have an impact, but...

Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.

Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama. This revelation comes as Virginia voters head to the polls Tuesday in an election where some observers say the third-party gubernatorial candidate could be a spoiler for Republican Ken Cuccinelli.

Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

Sarvis isn't a libertarian. He's a fake. He supports big tax increases. No libertarian would ever support increasing taxes.

Really?

2) State Taxes:

Using the key,indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category; you may use a number more than once.

Slightly Decreasea) Alcohol taxes
Maintain Statusb) Cigarette taxes
Greatly Decreasec) Corporate taxes
Maintain Statusd) Gas/Oil taxes
Slightly Decreasee) Property taxes
Maintain Statusf) Sales taxes
Greatly Decreaseg) Income taxes (low-income families)
Greatly Decreaseh) Income taxes (mid-income families)
Greatly Decreasei) Income taxes (high-income families)
Slightly Decreasej) Other or expanded categories:
I have proposed the most principled, equitable, comprehensive tax reform plan of any candidate for Governor. We ought to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, the income tax (to spur employment and leave families with more take-home pay), and replace the existing sales tax w/ a uniform consumption tax on all retail sales of goods and services, a very broad-based, efficient tax that enables us to keep rates low. Close ALL loopholes, industry subsidies, incentives/credits/deductions. Move to fewer, simpler broad-based taxes with low rates. Eliminate archaic and economic-activity-reducing taxes, especially business taxes, and unpopular taxes like the car tax.

 

[bripat9643]

I appreciate it. Almost as much as I appreciated the totally insane Ross Pirogi giving the 1992 election to Bill the rapist Clinton.

Really appreciate it guys. Way to go... Got your heads on straight, huh?

As usual


Big Obama Bundler Donated To Sarvis, the Fake Libertarian Candidate in Virginia
—Ace

A bit late for this to have an impact, but...



Of course, getting Sarvis on to the ballot doesn't get him votes, necessarily. To the extent he's a spoiler, it's due to the fact that a sizable number of Republicans prefer a more libertarian take on many issues.

Sarvis isn't a libertarian. He's a fake. He supports big tax increases. No libertarian would ever support increasing taxes.

Really?

2) State Taxes:

Using the key,indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category; you may use a number more than once.

Slightly Decreasea) Alcohol taxes
Maintain Statusb) Cigarette taxes
Greatly Decreasec) Corporate taxes
Maintain Statusd) Gas/Oil taxes
Slightly Decreasee) Property taxes
Maintain Statusf) Sales taxes
Greatly Decreaseg) Income taxes (low-income families)
Greatly Decreaseh) Income taxes (mid-income families)
Greatly Decreasei) Income taxes (high-income families)
Slightly Decreasej) Other or expanded categories:
I have proposed the most principled, equitable, comprehensive tax reform plan of any candidate for Governor. We ought to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, the income tax (to spur employment and leave families with more take-home pay), and replace the existing sales tax w/ a uniform consumption tax on all retail sales of goods and services, a very broad-based, efficient tax that enables us to keep rates low. Close ALL loopholes, industry subsidies, incentives/credits/deductions. Move to fewer, simpler broad-based taxes with low rates. Eliminate archaic and economic-activity-reducing taxes, especially business taxes, and unpopular taxes like the car tax.

Did you have a point of some kind?

 

[Jarlaxle]

The Tea Party stopped being libertarian when it signed away its soul to the Christian Right.

And your proof this happened is...?

*crickets*

Most libertarians are atheists, so I find that claim amusing.

And your proof of THAT absurd statement is...?

*crickets*

 

[dblack]

And your proof this happened is...?

*crickets*

Most libertarians are atheists, so I find that claim amusing.

And your proof of THAT absurd statement is...?

*crickets*

It's hard to come by. I've looked before, and there aren't reliable stats that I know of. Anecdotally, most of the libertarians I've known have, in fact, been atheists - but that's a limited sampling and likely skewed by my own preferences in friends and acquaintances.

There are some interesting comments on the issue by Penn Jillette here:

Penn Jillette on Atheism and Libertarianism - Forbes

 

[Pheonixops]

Sarvis isn't a libertarian. He's a fake. He supports big tax increases. No libertarian would ever support increasing taxes.

Really?

2) State Taxes:

Using the key,indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category; you may use a number more than once.

Slightly Decreasea) Alcohol taxes
Maintain Statusb) Cigarette taxes
Greatly Decreasec) Corporate taxes
Maintain Statusd) Gas/Oil taxes
Slightly Decreasee) Property taxes
Maintain Statusf) Sales taxes
Greatly Decreaseg) Income taxes (low-income families)
Greatly Decreaseh) Income taxes (mid-income families)
Greatly Decreasei) Income taxes (high-income families)
Slightly Decreasej) Other or expanded categories:
I have proposed the most principled, equitable, comprehensive tax reform plan of any candidate for Governor. We ought to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, the income tax (to spur employment and leave families with more take-home pay), and replace the existing sales tax w/ a uniform consumption tax on all retail sales of goods and services, a very broad-based, efficient tax that enables us to keep rates low. Close ALL loopholes, industry subsidies, incentives/credits/deductions. Move to fewer, simpler broad-based taxes with low rates. Eliminate archaic and economic-activity-reducing taxes, especially business taxes, and unpopular taxes like the car tax.

Did you have a point of some kind?

Yeah, you are wrong about the big tax increases, unless you can come up with a concrete example. Look at those stances above, where are the alleged "increases"?

 

[kaz]

Yeah...... How'd that work out?

Same thing either way. HW is the straw who broke the camel's back who drove me from the Republican party, if you want regret for not voting for him you're not going to get it.

Why should you have any regret for helping Democrats win elections because of your stubbornness.

I didn't vote for Clinton either. My vote did not belong to you, so your contention I "helped" Clinton by not voting for his opponent is ridiculous.