Reporters and political pundits will often claim that a particular third party hurts one major party more than the other. This argument because most popular during Nader’s 2000 run for President, as well as in Ross Perot’s two candidacies for that office, in 1992 and 1996 respectively. Mark Noble, one of the leaders in the Libertarian Party of Ohio, did an analysis of voting patterns in regards to the Libertarian Party primary in Franklin County, Ohio.
Analysis that has been done on this year’s Franklin County, Ohio primary election results shows a trend that isn’t surprising to the vast majority of Libertarians, but might be interesting to anyone who thinks Libertarian candidates hurt Republican candidates by pulling Republican voters: they pull Democratic voters at about the same rate.
After analyzing data from the Franklin County Board of Elections, which includes the capital of Columbus, it was found that 22% of this year’s Libertarian voters had voted Republican in the 2008 Primary, while 27% had voted Democrat. 41% didn’t even vote in the 2008 primary
The 2010 Libertarian Party primary in Ohio attracted between 4,100 and 6,150 voters for statewide primaries races.
24 responses so far ↓
1 Solomon Kleinsmith // Jun 21, 2010 at 1:48 am
Maybe this is because I was a Libertarian myself about ten years ago, but this doesn’t surprise me at all… and really shouldn’t surprise anyone who really understands libertarian thought.
This is gross oversimplification, but in a way libertarians are half extremely liberal democrats, on social issues mostly, and half very conservative republicans, on fiscal issues. Not to mention they have as many grey areas as any other ideology… with moderates, dem leaners and rep leaners, just like independents.
This only becomes hard to understand when you try to fit them into the half-baked, one dimensional, political ideological map most people use.
2 Ralph K. Swanson // Jun 21, 2010 at 6:25 am
Did a study on this years ago for the USLP and found the same. However, this also seems to support our finding that Libertarians drew out people who otherwise wouldn’t vote.
3 Mik Robertson // Jun 21, 2010 at 6:41 am
I think any time there are more choices, more people will come out and vote.
I have found that people look at libertarians differently depending on their own perspective, and the differences are usually spotted first.
Democrats tend to see the LP as ultra-conservative, even though it is very different from typical conservative and neoconservative thinking. Republicans tend to see anarchist/liberal social policies, although it is often correctly seen as being different from neoliberal thought.
When it comes to opposition to Libertarian Party candidates being on the ballot, that almost exclusively comes from the Republican Party.
4 Kevin Knedler // Jun 21, 2010 at 6:48 am
Agree with Mik # 3. I have had an eyeopening experience, in regards to comments from Republicans about the LP and LPO. They continue to think we should vote for THEM. They just don’t get it.
5 Vaughn // Jun 21, 2010 at 6:54 am
Boo on the left vs. right political spectrum.
6 Alexander S. Peak // Jun 21, 2010 at 10:05 am
Shouldn’t this post also be tagged under “Non-left/right parties,” given that it positions the LP as neither leftist nor rightist? I believe that one who clicks on the “Non-left/right parties” category ought to see this post pop up amongst the various other posts listed under that category.
Cheers,
Alex Peak
7 Gary // Jun 21, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Of the top 40 democratic nations in the world the USA ranks #36 in voter turnout with 54%. The reason is simple. Voters have no real choices or reasons to vote. Britain’s last election had 47 political parties with 10 parties elected to Parliament.
Free elections with many real choices. What a concept.
8 Vaughn // Jun 21, 2010 at 2:57 pm
Analysis from my county
11 registered Greens: 8 were former Democrats, 3 were independents
7 registered Libertarians: 1 Democrat, 3 Republicans, 3 independents
0 Socialists
Here is the weird part…
8 registered Constitutionalists (is this what they are called?): 7 former Democrats, 1 Republican.
9 Trent Hill // Jun 21, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Vaughn,
Yes that’s what they’re called.
“Shouldn’t this post also be tagged under “Non-left/right parties,” given that it positions the LP as neither leftist nor rightist? I believe that one who clicks on the “Non-left/right parties” category ought to see this post pop up amongst the various other posts listed under that category.”
Alex–no. This is a story about the “Libertarian Party” and that is where it is categorized.
10 Jill Pyeatt // Jun 21, 2010 at 4:59 pm
I’m very glad to see this study posted here. I’m very concerned at the language a certain self-appointed Libertarian spokesman uses regarding anyone with any left-leaning views. He is downright insulting, and makes it sound they’re not welcome to our party. We are a better party when there’s a healthy balance between right and left-thinking Libertarians. I’ve spoken with Mr Root several times about this, but he continues to insult and offend. Anyone who can help communicate with Mr Root NOT to chase people away would be appreciated.
Let’s make this Libertarian party a huge tent party.
11 Concerned Citizen // Jun 21, 2010 at 5:25 pm
Vaughan, do you live in Traficante’s district? Wasn’t he a pretty right-wing Democrat whose supporters may be interested in the Constitution Party?
12 Vaughn // Jun 21, 2010 at 6:26 pm
I live in the 18th district, which is a huge district with the most moderate member of congress, Zack Space.
Traficant is hard to pin down. He’s been doing the Tea-party circuit.
13 JT // Jun 21, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Jill: “Let’s make this Libertarian party a huge tent party.”
Root says repeatedly that he does want the LP to be a big-tent party. He just doesn’t think it’s important (or desirable?) for that tent to include anyone from the left. It’s far more important to reach out to hardcore Christian, Reagan-loving, gun-toting grandmothers and not scare them with libertarian social views, obviously.
14 Mathew Erickson // Jun 21, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Just for the record, I am not a christian, Reagan lover, or gun-toting grandmother, and I think Root is great for the party! He obviously has conservative leanings, but I certainly think there is a point where arguing left vs right becomes more polarizing than helpful to the party. There are those within the party that can speak to left side, and there are those within the party who can speak to the right side. I don’t see the issue with letting Root do what he does best, convincing the right side that WE are the right (correct) side. Just like I don’t see any issues with anyone telling the left side that we are the right (correct) side.
15 JT // Jun 21, 2010 at 9:38 pm
Matthew: “I don’t see the issue with letting Root do what he does best, convincing the right side that WE are the right (correct) side. Just like I don’t see any issues with anyone telling the left side that we are the right (correct) side.”
Well, the issue is that those millions of people who hear him on radio/TV can easily and justifiably get the impression that the LP is welcoming to the right and not to the left. That’s not good for a party that needs to draw millions of people from the right AND the left. And the rationale that libertarian social views are repellent to most people while libertarian economic views are attractive to most people doesn’t fly. I’m sure libertarian social views do scare the living daylights out of some conservatives (hence the hardcore Christian, Reagan-loving, gun-toting grandmother remark), but those aren’t the people Libertarians should be tailoring our presentation to, IMO.
16 Steven R Linnabary // Jun 21, 2010 at 10:40 pm
I’m sure libertarian social views do scare the living daylights out of some conservatives (hence the hardcore Christian, Reagan-loving, gun-toting grandmother remark), but those aren’t the people Libertarians should be tailoring our presentation to, IMO.
This has long been my idea, that we won’t attract many “conservatives” regardless of what we do or don’t do. Liberals and conservatives will always flock back to their old parties as they are afraid of splitting the vote or don’t want to send a message by “wasting” their vote. OTOH, there is nothing wrong with flirting with them!
Our message IMHO, should be to attract the voters or NON voters that have given up on the system. I think this study bears out what I have been thinking and saying for years.
PEACE
17 Jill Pyeatt // Jun 22, 2010 at 12:22 am
Matthew, I actually agree that it would be okay for people on the right to recruit from the right, and those on the left to recruit left Libertarians. My problem is that Wayne goes out of his way to insult and demean “Liberals “or leftist-anarchist types” or progressives.
This is not necessary, and, IMO, absolutely uncalled for. He can say exactly what he wants to say without inserting those insults. Since he is allowed to be the spokesman for our party by many people (not me), I believe offending people on purpose cannot be tolerated.
I can find many examples of what I’m speaking of, but a thread on his Facebook page from Saturday evening is a good example. It’s a little hard to use the thread as a link, but if you go to his page starting at 7:14 PM Saturday, the thread about “the Liberal mindset that abounds in the White House” is a recent example. The post isn’t my problem, it’s his interacting with the people making comments I have a problem with.
In my view, he makes it very clear that anyone with left views are not welcome. Since non-interventions wars, gay rights, ending drug prohibition are key issues for Libertarians, I believe that tone is unacceptable, coming from someone who claims to be representing the Libertarian party.
18 Right side or Conservative // Jun 22, 2010 at 10:12 am
Right side or do you mean conservative. Conservative are close to libertarian views, not all of it. Like lower taxes, and other things. Liberals is more close to socialistic views, communism. So who would be easier to get the people who are closest to us or trying to convince the ones that are furthest from us.
I think the repulicans should really split up as there are liberal repulipuk and conservative repulipuk. It you think about it. It should be the party of Conservative. Liberals and Liberarians, something like that. Just because a person is a repulican doesn’t mean he is for freedom either, so the person can really be a democrap under a repulipuk name because that person is a liberal.
19 Jill Pyeatt // Jun 22, 2010 at 12:07 pm
I believe Wayne’s speech is directed toward the right, not necessarily the conservatives. I agree conservatives are close to Libertarian views, but that’s not my point. It’s one thing for Wayne to court his type. It’s another that he is deliberately insulting anyone who does not share his particular brand of “Reagan Libertarian” (which frankly, seems like an oxymoron to me).
20 kevin knedler // Jun 22, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Mr. Linnabary is wise beyond his years.
21 Switch Hitter // Jun 22, 2010 at 1:08 pm
If you ask me, we want our Libertarians from the right to sell to the left, and vice versa.
Imagine what would happen if a progressive ran into a WAR who sold them proactively on the social value of local charities over centralized redistribution. Or imagine WAR selling drug decriminalization to MJ activists because of the social cost of the drug war.
Imagine Starchild selling currency deregulation to bankers (…wait he does that already)
The magic in the libertarian ethic is that the same principles attributed by the “Right” to freedom, are the same principles as the issues more identified as being the domain of the “Left”. It blows people’s minds when someone breaks the sterotype and they listen.
The “gap” that many of us ignore as we concentrate on one side or the other really where the political profit is.
We should remember however that WAR is a showman, and he has a schtick and he has an audience. Expecting him to change his act on a dime is unreasonable from any point of view, and psychotic, if you express it with some sort of authority.
22 LibertarianGirl // Jun 22, 2010 at 1:20 pm
I have left views big time , my big issue is ending the drug war and Wayne has never made me feel unwelcome . In fact he’s hosting a fundraising dinner at his house for LP candidates Sunday after Freedom Fest.
23 JT // Jun 22, 2010 at 6:21 pm
Jill: “I believe Wayne’s speech is directed toward the right, not necessarily the conservatives. I agree conservatives are close to Libertarian views, but that’s not my point.”
What do you consider “the right” that isn’t conservatives? In U.S. politics, “right” and “left” mean “conservative” and “liberal”, respectively. And conservatives aren’t any closer to libertarians than liberals are. For every conservative stance you can name that libertarians can support, I can name a liberal stance that libertarians can support.
24 Observation // Jun 22, 2010 at 6:28 pm
@23: I usually use conservatives and “right” as interchangeable positions, and I agree with everything you said. That comment was trying to answer the question in 18, although now that I re-read it is seems lame.
Again, the point I’m trying to make is that our party draws from both conservatives and liberals, and I don’t think a self-appointed spokesman should insult those on the left simply because his issues are primarily the right side of our spectrum.
Leave a Comment