Posted by Tom Knapp at Kn@ppster:
Wayne Allyn Root and I actually have a lot in common. We also disagree on some things. And sometimes, we disagree on what we have in common.
For example, Wayne likes to use the word “only” about himself, as in:
And:
The Only Home-school Dad on a Modern-Day Presidential Ticket
That last is from a new Root commentary which just landed in my inbox but doesn’t appear to be up on his site yet.
Three of the things that we have in common are:
1) We’re both small businessmen;
2) We both homeschool our children; and
3) We were both candidates for vice-president last year.
44 responses so far ↓
1 Gene Berkman // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Wayne Root and Tom Knapp have something else in common – I would not consider voting for either one.
2 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Would you like to spell out the reasons in each case?
3 Robert Milnes // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Clearly there is no shortage of rightists seeking the Lp nomination over the years. & they evidently usually prevail, although it took 6 ballots last year. Barr v Ruwart. Tom has an uphill battle here. & I wish him luck. But here’s what I’D LIKE to see happen. My Independent fusion ticket finally fills the slot for vp. Right now the only F.libertarian that is a radical that has not fawned over (supported) Ron Paul is evidently Susan H. NOT Mary R. or Karen K. The LP either nominates the ticket outright or endorses it. Hopefully it will also get the GP nomination/endorsement. But I’m not going to directly pursue either nomination. Like Nader I plan to proceed independently, but open to other party nominations/endorsements. With enough ballot access this ticket becomes viable because of the great potential of bloc voters it could possibly get. But I’m betting the LP will nominate some fool rightist, most probably Root. That is a victory for the GOP & Uncle Sam. The government has a vested interest in seeing a third party/independent ticket not succeed. But nobody has even come close so no problem.(with the possible exceptions of Perot 1992 & TR 1912). Root, if nominated, has very nearly zero chance of winning the election IMO.
4 Andy // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“Gene Berkman // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Wayne Root and Tom Knapp have something else in common – I would not consider voting for either one.”
Agreed!
5 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Comment 2 @ Comment 4, as well.
6 Gene Berkman // Sep 5, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Paulie – thanks for asking.
I met Wayne Root at the LPC Convention in 2008 and did not enjoy being in his presence, and I don’t think he understands libertarianism i the way I do. Also, he has no credentials to speak of as a national candidate, and running people with no credentials leads serious people to write the LP off from the git-go.
Tom Knapp similarly lacks credentials or name recognition for a national campaign. And in 2003, he called my Libertarian bona fides into question because he has decided party loyalty is some kind of libertarian principle, and I don’t agree with that.
It makes no sense for a party with a microscopic membership to promote the idea of party loyalty – we need defectors from the other parties to get any votes at all. And then in 2008 Mr Knapp showed his own “loyalty” when he publicly opposed the Libertarian ticket for President.
In sum, I don’t take either of them seriously – another thing they have in common.
7 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 5, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Gene,
I wouldn’t dream of asking you to support a candidate who doesn’t meet your standards.
On the other hand, I won’t hesitate to call you out when you falsely describe what I’ve written and said.
I’ve never described “party loyalty” as a “libertarian principle.” I described it as a reasonable expectation from party “leaders,” to the specific effect that when the LP has a candidate in a race, its “leaders” are betraying the trust inherent in party leadership positions when they publicly come out in support of that candidate’s Republican opponent.
In 2008, I held no office in the national LP whatsoever. I did hold party leadership positions at the state and local level — and I was probably among the top ten personal distributors of Barr/Root 2008 literature in Missouri.
Regards,
Tom Knapp
8 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 6:51 pm
I wish Tom Knapp would step up his campaign. I know he’s busy, but I’m planning to vote third party in 2012 and he’s the only Libertarian I’d consider supporting. Otherwise I will probably end up voting Green, or even Socialist (if they get their act together as a party). Can’t vote SWP or PSL because they’re too far left for me, and I’m obviously not Constitution Party material.
9 GROW UP AND GET A LIFE // Sep 5, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Wayne Root has been successful, is getting the word out and making a positive stance in the libertarian party, than the libertarian party has done in all these past years. YOU PEOPLE who have nothing better to do except insult someone who has successfully done something that you couldn’t do or haven’t got the capability to do. We got bigger problems in this country and all you can do is lower yourselves to insult someone that is doing right by looking for something that isn’t there. The insults that you protray to someone shows the world the true intellegent that you lack as well as the true colors or your own selves.
10 Michael H. Wilson // Sep 5, 2009 at 8:25 pm
@ 9 GROW UP AND GET A LIFE. With those words you should be using your real name. Makes no sense to hide behind a sock puppet.
11 JT // Sep 5, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Jeremy: “I wish Tom Knapp would step up his campaign.”
Step up his campaign?? It’s 2009, dude. The 2012 presidential election is a long ways off. We haven’t even had the congressional mid-term elections yet! And the last thing we need is an even longer presidential campaign cycle. It’s already absurdly long.
12 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Yes, but Root is creating an image of inevitability. Some candidates — Bob Barr, Mary Ruwart, Michael Jingozian — might be able to step in at the last minute and puncture that image. Knapp is not one of those candidates. His stated goal in running is to make sure someone keeps pace with Root until the big guns step in, or else to become a big gun himself capable of taking out Root. But he is not doing that effectively. Granted, Root is hard to keep pace with, because he’s a little ball of energy. But still, I’d like to see a little more out of Knapp than just saying he’s a candidate. Maybe a website, maybe some position papers or even a book. He doesn’t have to spend a lot of money, but if he’s not going to put in a lot of time either, he just looks like he doesn’t care. And that’s bad news for me, because it reduces by one the number of potential candidates I can vote for in 2012.
13 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Knapp does have a campaign site:
http://knapp2012.com/
There are some position papers there, although I know he could do many more.
I think he may be working on a book. Not 100% sure on that.
He tried to start a radio show, but it seems to have not worked out.
14 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:02 pm
My understanding is that Knapp decomissioned that site because he didn’t think it looked professional enough. (A valid point, but then again Root’s site also looks decidedly unprofessional, and he actually has enough money to do something about it.)
I don’t see why Knapp’s radio show wouldn’t work. He has an excellent radio voice (as does Root). Steve Kubby, by contrast, had a horrible radio voice and still made a go of it.
15 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:06 pm
I want to clarify that this is friendly fire coming from me. I’m in no way a Libertarian, but I really do like Knapp’s integrity and I could easily vote for him in a Presidential election. Last cycle, the three third parties I’d consider voting for all had candidates I couldn’t stomach (the right-wing Barr, the seemingly crazed McKinney, and the well-meaning but decidedly lackluster Brian Moore). I did want to vote for Obama then because I wanted to help end Republican control, but now I’m more seriously in the market for a third-party alternative. So I’m hoping Knapp can be that alternative, just as I’m hoping Jesse Johnson or Rich Whitney will be that alternative in the Green Party. (I’ve pretty well given up on the Socialists unless they get their act together.)
16 Peter Orvetti // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:13 pm
It’s true that there is an “image of inevitability” around Wayne Root, but it is early and that could change. Bob Barr, Mike Gravel, and Mary Ruwart were all very late entrants in the last campaign, and there was talk of Tucker Carlson and Jesse Ventura up to the weekend of the convention.
17 George Phillies // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:13 pm
@10
I believe @9 is describing a pious hope not something necessarily likely to be accomplished by @9.
By the way, a lot of former Presidents and Presidential candidates had been small businessmen:
Harry Truman — haberdasher
John Adams — farmer
Thomas Jefferson — farmer
Benjamin Franklin, not a Presidential candidate, had been a printer.
Barry Goldwater owned a department store.
18 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Jeremy,
I don’t recall stating any intention of “keeping pace” with Wayne. My goals are somewhat more nuanced than that. I certainly have no intention of putting on three years of “Wayne Root bad” re-runs.
I thought I was pretty straightforward from the beginning in stating that 2009 would not be a heavy campaigning year for me.
I’m attending a few events (the next one will be the Illinois LP’s state convention next month).
I’m working on getting my teeth fixed this fall so that I’m not mistaken for Shane MacGowan and accused of being born in Kenya or something.
I’m writing a campaign book for release next spring, and intend to build on that (use it to get booked for radio and TV interviews, etc.) to promote my candidacy through most of 2010.
Further deponent sayeth not.
19 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Yes, I must have missed that part. That seems like a viable strategy; I’m just not convinced it will work against Root. You’re hoping he’s the hare, and that slow and steady will win the race; I’m concerned he might be the Energize Bunny, and that if you give him a year’s head start out of the gate neither you nor anybody else will ever catch him. I hope I’m wrong.
20 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Jeremy,
Thank you for your (limited, for good reasons) support!
Yes, at one point I decommissioned my site and pointed it at my blog. Now I’ve got a better-looking site up, but not a lot of material on it. I’m going to want to carefully harmonize my position papers with, and possibly excerpt them from, my campaign book, so I wouldn’t expect to see a LOT of material there until early- to mid-2010.
My Internet radio show got off to a bad start due to multiple emergency guest cancellations and technical difficulties. I plan to give it another go some time soon, hopefully.
You have a much higher opinion of my radio voice than I do
21 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Jeremy (sorry for the back and forth here — I’ll make this my last comment for awhile, then come back and cover all subsequent material at once):
I don’t necessarily think that Wayne is the hare, and it may be that some of my choices are wrong, but:
I thought about rushing my campaign book to come out about the same time as his. After a lot of thought, I concluded there was no reason to do so:
- If he wrote a best-seller, better to follow that after its buzz had died down than go head-to-head with it.
- Best-seller or not (and if the Amazon sales rank means anything, the answer so far appears to be “not” — he’s not performing in the same league as Ron Paul or even Hayek, let alone Glenn Beck, who’s probably the closest “libertarian conservative” comparison), I’d rather have a hot new book out next spring, leading into the LP’s national convention, than be attempting to flog and/or riff on something that’s nearly a year old.
Without a book to discuss or something of the sort, it’s much harder to get face/air time. And a later schedule for the book fit in with my goal of getting my teeth fixed, losing some weight and putting on some muscle, etc. so that when and if I do score some media I can make the best impression.
Finally, I’m taking a bit of a gamble. I’m nowhere near as good at discrediting Root as Root is at discrediting himself. My bet, to put it as pointedly as possible, is that Root loses more support than he gains — even inside an historically rather credulous LP — when he makes transparently false claims about his uniqueness as a candidate, uses his claimed “front runner” status to flog multi-level marketing scams, continues to posture himself as a conservative modified with a libertarian “lean” rather than as an actual libertarian, etc.
At this particular point in time, I wouldn’t want to get in Wayne’s way. He’s moving his own candidacy in the direction I want to see it go, and he’s gaining speed.
Obviously, there’s a point at which I have to make my own case. I think I gain more freedom and time to do that by letting Wayne himself make the anti-Root case for me.
Regards,
Tom
22 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Tom, you’re most welcome. Integrity is a very hard thing to come by in politics, including, and surprisingly so, in major third parties. 2004 was a very good year in that all three major third-party nominees had integrity. In 2008, only Baldwin did, and I can’t ever vote Constitution Party no matter how much I respect and appreciate someone like Baldwin. I’m hoping 2012 will be better.
23 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:01 pm
In what way do you think Cynthia McKinney does not have integrity?
24 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:13 pm
Tom @ 21,
I think your strategy about the book makes sense. However, I do have some question about your theory that Root being Root will automatically discredit him. I think that was a correct strategy last cycle, but by 2012 Root will have been around for six years and he will have been successful at winning back people whom he initially turned off.
I do think that in the last campaign, Root turned off a lot of people. But in book reviews and elsewhere, we have seen some of those people giving him a second look. The general gist of what I’m seeing is that Libertarians are saying, “Yeah, Root’s a bit off sometimes and doesn’t really understand Libertarianism, but damn, he’s out there getting it done when no one else is.” They are impressed with his energy and his persistence, and with his ability to get media. The LP has not seen that combination of traits since, really, Harry Browne, and Browne was not as good at any of those things as Root is.
People look at somebody like Mike Jingozian, who’s smart, likable, invested in the party, a real libertarian, and comes across like a wet noodle. In contrast, there’s Root on Mancow! There’s Root on Hannity! There’s Root at Barnes & Noble! Libertarians are hungry for success, and that is what Root promises. Of course, it’s an empty promise, just like Root is an empty suit, but when you’ve been hungry for so long, an empty suit starts to look like the real thing.
I don’t think you can beat Root just by discrediting him, or by allowing him to discredit himself. Delegates would probably rather go down in flames with someone like Root than run one more quiet under-the-radar campaign. You have to show people that not only are you a better Libertarian than Root is, but you can also get a whole lot of media and be really energetic like he can. You don’t necessarily have to do that in 2009, but I do think you have to do it well before the convention, or people are going to go with the empty suit who’s shown them he can get on the news.
25 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:14 pm
Paulie, I knew someone was going to call me on that. My feeling about McKinney is that either she’s a poseur or she really is as crazy as she sounds. In neither case could I vote for her or recommend her candidacy to others, though as I’ve said here before, I do think she may have been the correct choice for the GP in 2008 because of the circumstances of the party.
26 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Jeremy,
I don’t think she sounds all that crazy at all.
On the other hand, her campaign’s apparent decision to eschew mainstream corporate media was, as far as I can tell, a bad one. She probably could have done better on fundraising, ballot access, website management, and a whole host of other campaign aspects.
To the end, I remained undecided between McKinney and Barr (all theoretical, as I had very little interest in actually voting), but I presume that I spoke for more than just myself when I personally asked her why libertarians who were not happy with Barr should vote for her. I’m reasonably sure that she was easily capable of giving a better answer than the boilerplate non-answer she gave.
But, none of those things to me indicate a lack of integrity. Poor management, quite probably. Bad campaign team selection based on friendship rather than competence? Perhaps.
But integrity is one thing I think she had plenty of. If it wasn’t evident to anyone before the election, I think it should be now, with her missions to the middle east and putting herself physically on the line.
27 paulie // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:40 pm
Jeremy @ 24: I agree.
And Tom has heard me say it many, many times.
28 Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Paulie, what bothers me about McKinney is: 9/11 truther stuff, being absolutely convinced the government is out to get her, punching a security guard back when she was in Congress, and running a comically inept campaign. Also her father’s comments about Jews.
Ideologically I’m almost 100% Green on domestic policy, so that’s the party that fits my views the best (I’m a center-right Clintonian interventionist on foreign policy, so no third party is going to fit me there). So I am likely to vote Green if they nominate someone I don’t think is crazy, and if they’re on the ballot in my state (I don’t know what state I’m going to be in in 2012). I wish I had voted for Cobb in 2004, but I let people convince me that Arizona was a swing state and held my nose for Kerry. That one still burns.
29 paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 12:00 am
Paulie, what bothers me about McKinney is: 9/11 truther stuff,
That doesn’t bother me one bit. It’s not an obsession for me, but I don’t believe the official regime conspiracy theory, and I favor new investigation(s).
being absolutely convinced the government is out to get her,
Dunno. Maybe they are? With COINTELPRO, etc., there’s certainly plenty of precedent.
punching a security guard back when she was in Congress,
I think she may well have been provoked. I wouldn’t presume to know enough about the situation to say.
and running a comically inept campaign.
There, I tend to agree, but that is not a matter of integrity, and wouldn’t have influenced my vote had I voted.
Also her father’s comments about Jews.
I wouldn’t want to be held responsible for my father’s views on socialism (he’s for it), and he wouldn’t want to be held responsible for what he considers my reprehensible political views – much less my truly reprehensible actions on a number of past occasions.
I’ll afford Ms. McKinney the same courtesy.
Ideologically I’m almost 100% Green on domestic policy, so that’s the party that fits my views the best
I’m more apt to agree with their views on peace and civil liberties. There are, however, some areas where I like them better on economic issues; the LP has largely abandoned challenging corporate personhood and nonconcensual limited liability.
I’m a center-right Clintonian interventionist on foreign policy, so no third party is going to fit me there
Modern Whig Party?
I wish I had voted for Cobb in 2004, but I let people convince me that Arizona was a swing state and held my nose for Kerry. That one still burns.
Last (and first) time I fell for that one was 1988, although I was still active in DP primaries in 1992 (for Jerry Brown).
30 Jeremy Young // Sep 6, 2009 at 1:04 am
I’m all about new investigations of 9/11 too, but not because I question the official story — just because I think the more investigations, the better. Nevertheless, there are ways to say that that don’t make you seem like a kook. McKinney apparently doesn’t know them.
It is very much against the government’s best interest to go after a fringe candidate like McKinney. Back when irrational actors like Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover were running the secret organizations, maybe. But today? If they’re going to try to discredit anyone, it would be someone powerful. The more McKinney says they’re after her, the crazier she seems.
McKinney punched the guy because he asked her for her badge and ran after her when she wouldn’t show it to him. She had recently changed her hairstyle and felt it was disrespectful that he didn’t recognize her, and asked her for her badge. I don’t see that as appropriate provocation.
McKinney’s father’s views wouldn’t be an issue, if he hadn’t been her campaign manager at the time…and if she hadn’t refused to denounce those views or fire (or even penalize) him.
Not going to vote for the Modern Whigs. I’m all about encouraging new third parties, but the small socialist ones are as tiny as I’m willing to go when casting a Presidential vote. My goal is to destabilize, and eventually destroy, the political party system in the United States in favor of a no-party system. I think promoting one or more large third parties to prominence is a more effective first step than creating a bunch of small ineffective parties.
31 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 2:58 am
“but I really do like Knapp’s integrity and I could easily vote for him in a Presidential election. ”
BAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
32 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 3:03 am
“and I was probably among the top ten personal distributors of Barr/Root 2008 literature in Missouri.”
I handed out lots of literature for Harry Browne, Michael Badnarik, and Ron Paul, but I did NOT to that for Bob Barr.
33 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 3:07 am
“Jeremy Young // Sep 5, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Paulie, what bothers me about McKinney is: 9/11 truther stuff, ”
That’s one of the things that I like the most about McKinney. She may not be a libertarian, but she got a pretty good record on several civil liberties issues and has been pretty anti-war. She also issued articles of impeachment against Bush shortly before her last term in Congress was over. She’s not bad for a Green.
34 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 3:16 am
“The LP has not seen that combination of traits since, really, Harry Browne, and Browne was not as good at any of those things as Root is.”
Harry Browne was a much better candidate than Wayne Root. Harry Browne was a better candidate than anyone who ran for the LP nomination in 2008.
35 Jeremy Young // Sep 6, 2009 at 4:46 am
I didn’t say Harry Browne wasn’t a better candidate than Wayne Root. I said he was not as energetic, persistent, or good at getting media as Root. I think those things are true.
For the record, I deeply dislike Root, and I have no opinion of Harry Browne, since I was not following third-party politics at that point.
36 paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 9:34 am
Harry Browne was better ideologically than Root. Root is better at getting media, especially this early in the cycle.
37 paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 9:46 am
I’m all about new investigations of 9/11 too, but not because I question the official story — just because I think the more investigations, the better. Nevertheless, there are ways to say that that don’t make you seem like a kook. McKinney apparently doesn’t know them.
If she said anything that made her sound like a kook about 9/11, I missed it. The 5,000 allegedly killed in Katrina seemed like a tall order on the surface, but I did some digging and wouldn’t dismiss it out of hand.
It is very much against the government’s best interest to go after a fringe candidate like McKinney. Back when irrational actors like Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover were running the secret organizations, maybe. But today? If they’re going to try to discredit anyone, it would be someone powerful. The more McKinney says they’re after her, the crazier she seems.
There’s a good deal of evidence that the feds are still up to their old COINTELPRO tricks. Nazi radio host Hal Turner has said in court that he was getting paid by the FBI just recently to incite political violence. There are pictures and video that demonstrate that supposed anarchist violence instigators at globally managed trade conference protests were actually undercover police. It is entirely plausible that are government efforts underway to destabilize opposition movements of all sorts.
McKinney punched the guy because he asked her for her badge and ran after her when she wouldn’t show it to him. She had recently changed her hairstyle and felt it was disrespectful that he didn’t recognize her, and asked her for her badge. I don’t see that as appropriate provocation.
I no longer remember all the details, but I remember reading her account of it at the time, and it made sense. The media portrayal appeared to me to be one-sided.
McKinney’s father’s views wouldn’t be an issue, if he hadn’t been her campaign manager at the time…and if she hadn’t refused to denounce those views or fire (or even penalize) him.
Well, yes, that’s a good point. But he’s her father, so maybe that was difficult for her to do emotionally. I won’t presume that she agrees with what he said unless I hear her say it.
Not going to vote for the Modern Whigs. I’m all about encouraging new third parties, but the small socialist ones are as tiny as I’m willing to go when casting a Presidential vote. My goal is to destabilize, and eventually destroy, the political party system in the United States in favor of a no-party system. I think promoting one or more large third parties to prominence is a more effective first step than creating a bunch of small ineffective parties.
Fair enough, and I wouldn’t suggest you vote for them, presuming there’s even a them for you to vote for. It was merely a comment that your foreign policy views as you describe them might line up with theirs, and response to you saying they don’t line up with any alternative party.
38 paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 9:48 am
McKinney. She may not be a libertarian, but she got a pretty good record on several civil liberties issues and has been pretty anti-war. She also issued articles of impeachment against Bush shortly before her last term in Congress was over.
I considered voting for (well, supporting) her for those reasons. However, since she was not on my ballot, I would have almost certainly voted for Barr had I actually voted.
39 JT // Sep 6, 2009 at 11:19 am
Jeremy: Yes, but Root is creating an image of inevitability. Some candidates — Bob Barr, Mary Ruwart, Michael Jingozian — might be able to step in at the last minute and puncture that image. Knapp is not one of those candidates. His stated goal in running is to make sure someone keeps pace with Root until the big guns step in, or else to become a big gun himself capable of taking out Root.”
Impossible. No Libertarian candidate could come close to keeping pace with Root right now. Might as well accept that.
However, that doesn’t mean Root as the Libertarian nominee is inevitable. A LOT can change in three years, or even in six months. It may have seemed inevitable that Howard Dean was going to win the Democratic nomination in 2004. It may have seemed inevitable that Hillary Clinton was going to win the Democratic nomination in 2008. It may have seemed inevitable that Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney was going to win the Republican nomination in 2008.
Things change. No point in worrying about the 2012 Libertarian presidential nominee in 2009.
40 Robert Milnes // Sep 6, 2009 at 11:56 am
There is a way to get a libertarian comparable msm as root now: Agree on an independent GP/LP fusion ticket & publicize it & do some polling. It will poll VERY well & THAT would get msm attention.
41 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 6:52 pm
“35 Jeremy Young // Sep 6, 2009 at 4:46 am
I didn’t say Harry Browne wasn’t a better candidate than Wayne Root. I said he was not as energetic, persistent, or good at getting media as Root. I think those things are true.
paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 9:34 am
Harry Browne was better ideologically than Root. Root is better at getting media, especially this early in the cycle.”
Harry Browne got quite a bit of media coverage by Libertarian Party standards. He was on The O’Reilly Factor, Hannity & Colmes, Tim Russert, MTV News, PBS, C-SPAN, as well as other TV appearances. Harry Browne was also on a lot of talk radio shows.
I’ll give Root credit for having a good, energetic speaking style, but Harry Browne was a good speaker as well. Harry Browne was very smoothe and quick with one-liners whereas Wayne Root is like a used car salesman. I’ll call them even when it came to speaking.
Harry Browne was a better writer than Root and he was also better when it came to political ideaology and knowledge of issues.
42 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 6:54 pm
“I considered voting for (well, supporting) her for those reasons. However, since she was not on my ballot, I would have almost certainly voted for Barr had I actually voted.”
Barr & McKinney were both on my ballot and I cast a write in vote for Ron Paul.
43 paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Yes, but you voted in a state which actually counted those write-in votes.
44 Andy // Sep 6, 2009 at 7:06 pm
“paulie // Sep 6, 2009 at 6:55 pm
Yes, but you voted in a state which actually counted those write-in votes.”
If Ron Paul’s write in vote hadn’t counted then I probably wouldn’t have voted in the Presidential race.
Leave a Comment