On the whole LP nomination run, it was pretty clear he wasn’t a libertarian (not that I mind, neither am I really) in the LP sense, and simply was running in an chance to get on the ballot, and continue to run his campaign to spread word on the N4ID (also heard he was trying to raise more money to get out of debt from his democratic primary run, but that’s unconfirmed). Honestly, I thought that the run was a mistake, I knew the libertarians would not be accepting of his platform, given the extreme anti tax/any government regulation/social program views of the right wing libertarian movement. He’s also when asked, said he no longer associates himself with any party.

Personally, I am excited for the show. I hope it does well.

Now that “My President is Bartlett” bumperstickers are mostly gone, will we soon see “My President is Gravel” bumperstickers in the future?

PEACE

I believe a Nader/Gravel ticket would have done a lot better than the ticket of Nader/Gonzalez for a few reasons.

1) Gravel has some sort of personality compared to the very dry Ralph Nader, I have heard he isn’t as dry as the mass media makes him sound.

2) The Gravel team already, with little to no Demoncratic backing, was able to raise up to 500k.

3) Gravel already had a team of people in a few states and at the national level.

4) Gravel had previously debated Clinton and Obama which would have gained him some serious coverage during the end of the primaries and during October.

5) Gravel was a former Senator which would make the argument for a more fair three way debate easier.

Of course this all speculation, but if we are going to discuss how Gravel could have ran in 2008 that, to me , was the best option given.

Gravel wasn’t going to win the White House for the LP, but he could have been an effective spokesman for libertarianism — if he wanted to. However, he seemed more interested in being a spokesman for his National Initiative.

I believed him when he promised that . Also , he has an actual history of standing up against the government and calling our corruption where he sees it . Plus he would have been a strong pull from the left , whereas the LP has almost exclusively drawn from the right for some time now. these are the reasons Necvada voted for him at convention.

having said that , there is NO WAY Barr is more Libertarian. Barr has actually denied people freedom and put them in cages for crimes that should never be crimes. Gravel has not. Sometimes you gotta step away from what people say and look at what they do .

Gravel would have made an excellent candidate and I hope he tries again.

Just because Gravel has some liberal instincts, doesn’t mean that he is a liberal. I would argue that he is certainly more libertarian then Kucinich, who I also liked during the 2008 election. Anyone who is for peace and civil liberties can obtain my vote.

No candidate will ever be perfect.

I originally thought you had no chance in the LP race when you announced your switch, as I had assumed you advocate socialized health care and socialized public schools. Then I saw your videos on health care and education. Delegates will want to hear you emphasize competition, markets, and consumer choice. A lot of us moderates favor vouchers as an improvement over the status quo, but LP radicals consider vouchers to be socialism. Radicals also oppose pollution/carbon taxes, but we moderates are fighting to make the LP tolerant of such market-based policies. Radicals oppose the FairTax, but many LP members and delegates are fans of it. Most delegates will be skeptical of the National Initiative. The best spin would be to claim that it can be used to repeal old laws and not just write new laws.