Time for a third party?

[HappyJoy]

Time for a 3rd party? We have more than 2, it's only a matter of voting for them.

A day late and a dollar short. Obviously the discussion is a viable third party. I mean duh, how did you not get that? You get asked that a lot, don't you?

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I guess you're shit out of luck then. Maybe someday a political party that perfectly mirrors your niche political views will come along and everyone will love them just as much as you.

Don't care if you don't approve of my views. I am not particularly looking for a "party" to join. The whole thing seems to lead to what happens, you need to constantly bend your views in the interest of the party until they are thinking for you. I personally think the concept of libertarian and party are contradictory for that reason

It's not a matter of if I agree with your views or not, you're still shit out of luck.

 

[Muhammed]

Third party of what?

 

[HappyJoy]

Third party of what?

Apparently the 3rd party should be strictly Libertarian with no purity tests.

 

[kaz]

A day late and a dollar short. Obviously the discussion is a viable third party. I mean duh, how did you not get that? You get asked that a lot, don't you?

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I guess you're shit out of luck then. Maybe someday a political party that perfectly mirrors your niche political views will come along and everyone will love them just as much as you.

Don't care if you don't approve of my views. I am not particularly looking for a "party" to join. The whole thing seems to lead to what happens, you need to constantly bend your views in the interest of the party until they are thinking for you. I personally think the concept of libertarian and party are contradictory for that reason

It's not a matter of if I agree with your views or not, you're still shit out of luck.

Shit out of luck for what? I don't have an unfulfilled objective

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The poll below shows many Americans, like myself, feel that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans represent our interests."

Which is silly, given the fact it’s neither the role nor responsibility of either party to do so.

Indeed, why would anyone want a given party to ‘represent his interests.’

You are at liberty to represent your own interests, to speak for yourself to your elected representatives, and to make your position on the issues known.

“But the PACs, and the lobbyists, and the special interests, and the big money in politics drown out my voice where I’m not heard.”

And?

That’s the way it’s always been, it’s nothing new.

That’s why we’re a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy – reflecting the wisdom of the Framers who knew the people would always be at odds with special interests, and why the people are subject solely to the rule of law, not men.

The Framers’ intent was that whomever might be in power, whatever party or political faction, that the rights and protected liberties of those vanquished and out of power would still be safeguarded by the Constitution and its case law.

In accordance with the original intent of the Framers, therefore, a woman or gay American shouldn’t be concerned that the likes of Trump might be president, that even if a hateful bigot such as Trump should become president, women and gay Americans needn’t worry about their rights and protected liberties being violated.

But that’s clearly not the case.

With the likes of Trump as president – or any republican, for that matter – through judicial appointments, women and gay Americans would again be subject to discrimination and disadvantage through force of law.

And that’s what's gone wrong in the American political process – not the PACs, and the lobbyists, and the special interests, and the big money in politics, and that the two parties don’t represent me – but that we’ve crossed the forbidden line in the context of total political war, where now our very rights and civil liberties are at stake and in jeopardy due to the outcome of an election, that our very rights and civil liberties are ‘fair game’ for attack – the exact situation the Framers sought to avoid by creating a Constitutional Republic.

 

[HappyJoy]

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I guess you're shit out of luck then. Maybe someday a political party that perfectly mirrors your niche political views will come along and everyone will love them just as much as you.

Don't care if you don't approve of my views. I am not particularly looking for a "party" to join. The whole thing seems to lead to what happens, you need to constantly bend your views in the interest of the party until they are thinking for you. I personally think the concept of libertarian and party are contradictory for that reason

It's not a matter of if I agree with your views or not, you're still shit out of luck.

Shit out of luck for what? I don't have an unfulfilled objective

Shit out of luck that you won't see a President who comes close to holding your political views.

 

[kaz]

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I guess you're shit out of luck then. Maybe someday a political party that perfectly mirrors your niche political views will come along and everyone will love them just as much as you.

Don't care if you don't approve of my views. I am not particularly looking for a "party" to join. The whole thing seems to lead to what happens, you need to constantly bend your views in the interest of the party until they are thinking for you. I personally think the concept of libertarian and party are contradictory for that reason

It's not a matter of if I agree with your views or not, you're still shit out of luck.

Shit out of luck for what? I don't have an unfulfilled objective

Shit out of luck that you won't see a President who comes close to holding your political views.

Again, how can I be "shit out of luck" when I don't have that objective? We're way ahead of the Roman Empire in the speed of our fall, we're well on the way. I'm advocating my views, I have no expectation I will get them again in this country. The parasites won. Now it's just a question of how long it will take you to suck us dry

 

[HappyJoy]

I guess you're shit out of luck then. Maybe someday a political party that perfectly mirrors your niche political views will come along and everyone will love them just as much as you.

Don't care if you don't approve of my views. I am not particularly looking for a "party" to join. The whole thing seems to lead to what happens, you need to constantly bend your views in the interest of the party until they are thinking for you. I personally think the concept of libertarian and party are contradictory for that reason

It's not a matter of if I agree with your views or not, you're still shit out of luck.

Shit out of luck for what? I don't have an unfulfilled objective

Shit out of luck that you won't see a President who comes close to holding your political views.

Again, how can I be "shit out of luck" when I don't have that objective? We're way ahead of the Roman Empire in the speed of our fall, we're well on the way. I'm advocating my views, I have no expectation I will get them again in this country. The parasites won. Now it's just a question of how long it will take you to suck us dry

Yeah, every time you post I can't help but think you are shit out of luck.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Time for a 3rd party? We have more than 2, it's only a matter of voting for them.

A day late and a dollar short. Obviously the discussion is a viable third party. I mean duh, how did you not get that? You get asked that a lot, don't you?

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

 

[HappyJoy]

Time for a 3rd party? We have more than 2, it's only a matter of voting for them.

A day late and a dollar short. Obviously the discussion is a viable third party. I mean duh, how did you not get that? You get asked that a lot, don't you?

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

 

[kaz]

A day late and a dollar short. Obviously the discussion is a viable third party. I mean duh, how did you not get that? You get asked that a lot, don't you?

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

 

[ChrisL]

I actually think I am more a centrist than a libertarian. This actually describes my views almost perfectly.

What is Centrist/Centrism — The Centrist Party

Centrists don't have party lines. Centrists believe that solutions are more important than bias. While there is no set rule for what a Centrist is, there are some generally accepted guidelines that seem to depict the Centrist mode of thought. Centrism is a political ideology based on reason and pragmatism considerate of short and long term thinking - Centrism is not defined by compromise or moderation, it is considerate of them. Centrism is about achieving common sense solutions that appropriately address current and future needs; support the public trust; and serve the common good with consideration of risk and capacity in context of these needs.
Modern definitions sometimes conflate Centrism with moderation but the Centrist Party tenets generally oppose moderate views. Let's just call moderates 'moderates' and Centrists 'Centrist'.

Salient points about Centrism from the CP perspective:

• Centrism is not about doing what is popular, it is about doing what is right.
• Centrism is not moderate but rather supports strength, tradition, open mindedness and policy based on evidence not ideology.
• Centrism is not about compromise but rather allows for it as reasonable.

Centrists are independent thinkers. They gauge situations based on context and reason, consideration and probability. They are open minded and exercise conviction. Willing to fight for reason as opposed to ideology.

1. Ideology limits the capacity of reasoning
2. Centrist conviction is not limited by ideology
3. Reasoning is based on pragmatic reality and circumstance.

• Centrists are independent.
• Centrists argue based on reason and context to define relevance of a given point.
• Centrists tend to be pragmatic and avoid extremes whenever possible. Of course an extreme may be a required action so luckily Centrists tend to exercise reason in application.

• Centrists tend to dislike special interest influence and unfair practices. They don’t appreciate spin from candidates or news organizations.
• Centrists tend to believe that if we dealt with the facts and concentrated on working together we could fix a lot more problems than two polar opposite parties constantly embattled in their own agendas and ideologies.
• Centrists seek accountability in governance.
• Honor & Integrity - Centrists tend to believe that political spin erodes the integrity of the vote and certainly that of the politician.

Candidates

• To honor the electorate candidates should be motivated by the strength of their reasoning and the wisdom to know that convictions are merely perspectives based on current understanding and circumstance; and that learning is key to future solutions.
• Honor in intention: means not just being honest, but to be honorable. Not just saying "I did" or "did not" say "that" but "I mean "this" or "that". America is tired of being misled by politicians that handily word craft their way in and out of positions and rely on popularity polls to figure out what they need to say next, in order to pander to some special interest, or get more votes.

 

[Alex.]

a third party will solve nothing. Work with what you have and make that work for you.

Why? Do you know Einstein's definition of insanity?

Yes...reading your post.

I know I was just being goofy with you.

Any work that supports our own goals is hard and sometimes does not come to fruition, but when it does that victory is sweet. Seems to me that if you have a gender issue, a PC agenda or just want to shove a bunch of social nonsense down the throats of others, in my experience, staying within your own party is the way to get things accomplished

 

[Alex.]

a third party will solve nothing. Work with what you have and make that work for you.

Disagreed. I've voted for the "lesser of two evils" several times and it solved nothing. In fact, things got worse. Now we're left with two of the most controversial and hated candidates in modern history. Which one are you voting for? Do you really support them or, like many others, are you really just voting against the other candidate?

Sorry, but as kaz just pointed out, it's crazy to keep doing the same thing expecting a different result. I can't bring myself to vote for either Clinton nor Trump. I also am a strong advocate of voting as a civic duty. Ergo, I'm voting for the candidate who best represents our nation's interests. In this case, it will probably be Gary Johnson or whomever the LP selects as their nominee. Sure, you may get your choice of Hillary or the Donald, but I can't hold my nose and vote for either of them.

http://www.economist.com/news/unite...ibertarians-big-third-party-run-guns-weed-and
AS THE likely presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party, Gary Johnson has a lot to be modest about; and he is. “Everybody I meet seems to like me,” says the two-term former Republican governor of New Mexico. “But I’m a Libertarian, so doesn’t that denote there are some loose screws out there?” He leaves the question hanging.

Tiny, electorally trifling and obsessed with guns and weed, cherished emblems of its 11,000 members’ freedom, the party has never mattered in national politics. It is by some measures America’s third-biggest—yet not flattered by that comparison. In 2012 Mitt Romney crashed to defeat with 61m votes; Mr Johnson, who ran for the Libertarians after failing to be noticed in the Republican primaries, won 1.3m. Yet he could be about to improve on that.

Mr Johnson and his running-mate, Bill Weld, a former governor of Massachusetts, are expected to emerge from the Libertarians’ convention in Orlando on 30th May with the party’s ticket. If so, he could feasibly launch the biggest third-party run since Ralph Nader won almost 3% of the vote for the Green Party in 2000—including 100,000 votes in Florida that may have cost Al Gore the presidency. Or he could do better; a poll by Monmouth University put Mr Johnson on 11% in a three-way race with Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. That was especially creditable given how little he is known; he figured in almost no national polls in 2012. It has encouraged Mr Johnson to think he could register the 15% vote-share that would guarantee him inclusion in this year’s televised debates.

With publicity, he could catch on. He has the accomplishments of a chest-beating conservative hero—he is a self-made millionaire, triathlete and razor-beaked deficit hawk; he vetoed 750 spending bills in New Mexico. He is also a sometime dope smoker (he resparked his youthful habit in 2005 to manage the pain from a paragliding accident), who comes across as almost goofily unaffected. He speaks in horror of the disdain many Americans show for Mexican immigrants—whom he calls “the cream of the crop”—as if it were borne of some crazy misunderstanding, rather than embedded nativist resentment and economic anxiety. Voters sick of political polish might like the mix: he really is authentic. Yet Mr Johnson’s main cause for hope is the unpopularity of the likely Republican and Democratic alternatives.

Around 60% of voters dislike Donald Trump and 55% Hillary Clinton. That should encourage more Americans to vote as freely of the old duopoly as they increasingly claim to be; 42% say they are independent voters, up from 30% a decade ago. And the Libertarians’ voguish message of fiscal conservatism, social liberalism and anti-interventionism has something for the disaffected of both big parties. Compared with a straightforward Trump-Clinton match-up, the Monmouth poll suggested Mr Johnson could take 6% of the vote from Mrs Clinton and 4% from Mr Trump.

The particular unease of many Republicans with their presumptive candidate—along with their failure hitherto to launch a conservative rival to him—explains a surge of interest in the Libertarian confab in Orlando. After Mr Trump sewed up their nomination in Indiana this month, Google reported a 5,000-fold increase in online searches for Mr Johnson. He is not to all Republican tastes; Mr Trump’s most outspoken critics in the party tend to hold neoconservative views on security. Yet even they hope he might bring disenchanted Republicans to the polls in November, and thereby retain their support for Republican candidates in the coterminous congressional contests.

Mr Johnson rejects Mr Trump utterly: “There’s nothing about Donald Trump that appeals to me.” Yet he sounds most hopeful of picking up support from disaffected Democrats, especially followers of Senator Bernie Sanders, whom he says he agrees with on almost everything—including the evil of crony capitalism and virtues of pot—except the economy. Yet how would he woo them?

Mr Johnson’s suggestion is unconventional. On the basis that, he argues, with some support from surveys, Americans are more libertarian than they know, he would point them to an online quiz, “Isidewith.com”, to help them work out where they stand. “I say, “Take the quiz, and whoever you pair up with, I think you should knock yourself out over them.” His own experience with the quiz, he sweetly relates, suggest he agrees with 73% of Mr Sanders’s proposals, 63% of Mrs Clinton’s and 57% of Mr Trump’s

Not lesser of two evils, but ACTUALLY WORK within the party for those change you wish to see happen.

I did. After 32 years, I gave up.

..and I helped write a revision to the US TAX Code that spoke to my best interests.

Good. I was a career military officer supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

I was on the same track but my service connected injuries prevented that career from happening. So I chose to continue to serve my country on a different front.

 

[ChrisL]

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

I can't follow the libertarian platforms. Some of them are just too far fetched and kind of cold hearted for me to be able to believe in.

 

[HappyJoy]

Viable to whom? To many the Libertarian Party is viable....I mean, to libertarians if they'd just vote for the party they agree with the most. But, what they end up doing is voting for the Republicans. (fuck being socially liberal, amiright?)

What you really want is someone else to create a party that can compete with the Democrats and Republicans that you can plant your viability flag on. Lazy.

A niche party that you magically agree with 100% of the time and is competitive does not and will not ever exist. The viable parties are out there, you just have to get used to the fact that your second favorite party is going to lose a lot.

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

Libertarianism is based on a wet dream that humans are always kind and fair to each other.

 

[HappyJoy]

I've voted Libertarian 3 of the 5 elections since I considered myself libertarian. Unfortunately the last two they were attention whoring and nominated conservatives who weren't libertarian. Gary Johnson changed his positions after being nominated, but that doesn't have credibility with me.

Also, the Libertarians have too many purity tests. They are more party than libertarian. I'm not sure how they are viable, I don't think they want to be viable. They like looking down their noses at everyone. And they stupid shit like comparing Trump's immigration policies to the Nazis. It's hard to take them seriously

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

I can't follow the libertarian platforms. Some of them are just too far fetched and kind of cold hearted for me to be able to believe in.

Oh-oh, that viable 3rd party is drifting further and further away, you just lost the libertarians.

 

[ChrisL]

I do agree that some of their views are "far out" but they are better than the alternatives, IMO.

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

I can't follow the libertarian platforms. Some of them are just too far fetched and kind of cold hearted for me to be able to believe in.

Oh-oh, that viable 3rd party is drifting further and further away, you just lost the libertarians.

There are libertarian candidates whose views are not far from my own.

 

[HappyJoy]

The Libertarian Party has some common characteristics of the late 60's, Turn on, Tune in, Drop out. It is iconoclastic + utopian - pragmatic thought, IMO.

If everybody acted with the best of intentions then a Libertarianism would be just fine. However, that is not the real world.

Bull, it's the other way around. Libertarianism is based on actual human nature. People act in their own interest. So let's just have a government that protects us from each other. Liberalism is based on the lie that people will act in someone else's interest. no one does, especially liberals

I can't follow the libertarian platforms. Some of them are just too far fetched and kind of cold hearted for me to be able to believe in.

Oh-oh, that viable 3rd party is drifting further and further away, you just lost the libertarians.

There are libertarian candidates whose views are not far from my own.

Yeah, what about them do you like? For starters, they are in the Libertarian party.

 

[ChrisL]

Centrists are independent thinkers. They gauge situations based on context and reason, consideration and probability. They are open minded and exercise conviction. Willing to fight for reason as opposed to ideology.

I especially like the above quoted. That really applies to my views. I hate ideological political viewpoints, such as those given to us by both the major parties who monopolize our government.