Nonetheless I congratulate those who made an effort.

Which will never happen because the American people overwhelmingly do not want a libertarian govt.

This is what many libertarians refuse to face. The American people like words like “liberty” and “freedom” etc., but they don’t really want it. What they really want is to be taken care of.

It takes years of education to edge liberty forward by a slim margin. Then a single single crisis (9/11, the mortgage crisis, etc.) can set back libertarianism by decades, as the people demand financial handouts or “protection.”

All the LP can do is maintain the torch of liberty, educating and speaking truth to power, hoping that someday in the far future things will change.

I realize that many libertarians gripe that “Hey, I want to see some liberty in my own lifetime,” but that’s not gonna happen, no matter who the LP runs for president.

When will things change so that the country is “ripe for liberty”? It will take a massive crisis that the govt proves unable to fix. Sort of like the collapse of the entire economy in some East European communist countries some 18 years ago. Some of them (Poland, Czech Republic) adapted mostly free economies, because the economic crisis was so severe, they had no choice.

The LP can’t change anything by running candidates. It can only keep the torch of truth alive for that far future day when the nation becomes “ripe for liberty.”

Did anyone notice they cut Nader and Barr completely off even the cable stations (where not many viewers are) the closer the election got? Baldwin got to talk 40 seconds on Lou Dobbs one night, he did get some coverage on C-SPAN but not many “undecided” voters watch C-SPAN. And McKinney didn’t get much coverage anywhere either. And we are all dejected at such low totals. The messages were NOT rejected, the vast majority of the people didn’t hear the messages.

The corporate media has always and will always cover the corporate controlled candidates with MONTHS of free media and basicly blackout (and/or ridicule) the non-controlled candidates (except for one or two short interviews). I truly hope you who disagree will see the truth before you die. Barak Obama was handpicked. Watch who he places on his staff and cabinet. There will be no major CHANGE in the organizations to which these people belong from the Bush people. Same bunch behind the curtain…

The media is controlled http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPlvdSQ6cAM

The Illuminati and the New World Order http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKI6vrJG8yM&feature=channel

XXX-Mind Control – TV Education – Mass Media http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfdmpv48Rwo&feature=related

BARACK OBAMA: THE WOLF IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9P15YZrnv0&feature=related

Bases are built from the bottom up. You cannot build from the top down.

I’m also directing my post towards rational people who want to be part of the political process. Which probably disqualifies you.

LOL. Why would the media give half a shit about the LP if it is not on the ballot?

I’m saying don’t spend so much money on it. Focus on the easy states. If we have the right candidate they will still get media time like Barr did before the ballot drive was even finished.

What I find incredibly stupid is spending more than a million dollars on a campaign to not even hit 1%. Which is normal for the LP.

That money could be used to support local candidates and give money to state chapters to help recruit.

If the objective is education, then you need to get people’s attention. During an election year one of the things that gets people’s attention is politics. And the way to maximize that attention is to have candidates on the ballot. Which requires ballot access work.

There, fixed that for you.

As to the whole question of whether we should focus on base-building or the absurd “p00f” theory advocated by the radicals, I think it’s quite obvious now the correct approach to that. As this race has shown, there are a few candidates out there capable of pulling in more votes. They just need to escape the failed brand of the LP.

Nothing but inbreds, infighting, and instability.

LOL. Why would the media give half a shit about the LP if it is not on the ballot?

If that’s what you want to do, give your time/money to the Campaign for Liberty, Mises Institute, the Advocates, ISIL, Cato, or whatever non-party organizations you think are worthwhile. Start a new one if need be. Ballot access is a key part of why the LP exists as a party.

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Council_Foreign_Relations.htm

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm

I have seen the enemy, I hope you have TOO…

My main point was we need to focus on local politics. Libertarians around the country need to volunteer for every local city and state position possible. Otherwise we will continue to be doomed to failure.

Stupid. What, you think libertarians are going to get elected to dogcatcher and work their way up through the system and turn America into a libertarian utopia via electoral politics? That’s ridiculous.

There will never be any libertarianism on any real scale until this evil government is dissolved, and it won’t be through the actions of a benevolent president or Congress.

Funny how Zogby said Barr was polling double digits in NH and he actually got 0.3%…same with other states where they were reporting 5-9%.

You are correct. I should have clarified my statements. The LP should spend money on media, but not really waste money on ballot access drives.

Spreading the message is incredibly important. Vote totals are not.

My main point was we need to focus on local politics. Libertarians around the country need to volunteer for every local city and state position possible. Otherwise we will continue to be doomed to failure.

Look back at 2000 and 1996 and probably all of history. You will find 3rd party candidates for Senate that got 2-3% where the POTUS candidate for the same party had <1%.

Not true at all of Nader in 2000. One would have expected Barr to have been a similar case in ’08.

It’s odd that you preface that statement by arguing that the campaign helped the party generate interest.