I recently succeeded from the Democratic party.
I voted for Kerry with full blinders on, but when watching the 2008 elections I felt as if the blinders miraculously disappeared! I didn't vote that election! I decided to become an independent voter. I fealt as if my political views more so reflected that of the republican party than that of the "New Dems"!
However; I cannot/will not pledge my allegiance to the Republican party. I feel that neither parties properly represent my political views. I did vote for Romney this election because I feel that our current administration bombed with a fat "F". I feel that a president (regardless of party) should be fired by the people with such a poor record (loyalists from both sides will never allow this).
All of this has lead me to looking into the Libertarian party. I have done a little research on the party, but would like to hear some thoughts from both sides as to the pros/cons.
I know my petty vote doesn't hold much clout, but feel that making a statement for my disappointment for both parties may be worth its weight in gold!
Libertarians have a lot to say that I like.
However, in essence and strategically speaking, their overall stance is rather oxymoron-ish.
They want fiscal responsibility while still being veiwed as socially moderate or even socially liberal.
Unfortunately, caring about social issues includes spending money to fix what's broke or to support rescue entitlements.
Can't have your cake and eat it to.
Unelectable. Although perhaps being "socially liberal" is one of those "depends on what you mean by that" things.
However, I do really like thier views on our loss of liberties and freedoms.
How about the Constitution party?
Many on this forum are libertarians (or closet libertarians).
I'm a libertarian. But I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party.
The Libertarian Party is too isolationist for me. They want to minimize our influence in world affairs.
I'm all for reducing the number of US bases around the world and cutting military waste, but I think we need to keep a hand in the game (to put it mildly).
I used to think of myself as a fiscally conservative independent. (I voted for Anderson in 1980, who wanted to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.) But I couldn't find a place for my views on the Lib-Con spectrum, because there was no place for the concepts of statism and small government. Then I found out about the libertarian spectrum, and the pieces of the puzzle came together.
For more on the libertarian spectrum, see this simple quiz, the "World's Smallest Political Quiz": http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz
Why must people put themselves into a box or group or classification? Look around you, find the facts, listen to what the candidates are saying and read between the lines. Ignore those who would have the people divided and fighting amongst one another over petty non-issues. Vote accordingly.
Many of us are dissatisfied with the application of the Lib-Con spectrum as political map. We disagree with those who attempt to pigeonhole themselves and others on this line and/or along various Democrat-Republican Party spectra. It's like trying to put a sane person in a straitjacket, or like drawing a map of the US on a piece of pine straw instead of a sheet of paper.
Originally Posted by Tech Rob
When you have discussions with family members about the things in life that are important to you (other than politics), do you imagine yourself taking a position on some sort of all-purpose us-them line? Of course not. There is no such line. There can't be. It wouldn't fit your application. It would be far too narrow. (Or if you do, your family is probably pretty dysfunctional, because you always argue about things that are relatively unimportant, and the important things never get handled. Right?)
When you go to a large shopping mall to make a few specific purchases and look on the directory to see where you are in relation to the stores located there, you look for the the little sign on the floor plan that says "You are here." Would you do this if instead of a floor plan there was only a straight line representing a path between the two stores at either end of the mall?
What if someone came over to you when you walked up to the mall directory and pointed to a position on this simple straight line and said "You are here"? Would you thank him? What for?
What if there were no mall directory? Would you wander aimlessly until you found something that caught your attention? You would if you were a teenager, right? It would be an adventure! But it would take too much time and be too frustrating for a responsible adult with little free time.
When you tell someone where you are from, you usually tell them what state you are from, right? You don't limit yourself to a choice between two states, California and Maine, or two coasts, east and west, do you? If you are from Wisconsin, you don't say "I'm from Maine," or "I'm from the east coast." In most instances, it wouldn't make sense, and it would be a silly way to pigeonhole yourself. With a choice between east and west, you could only say something like "I'm not from the east or the west. I'm from somewhere in between."
A two-dimensional map is what you need. It shows you north and south as well as east and west, and a few points in between. It fills your requirements far better than any other device. It's complex enough to provide references to your position and your prospects, yet so simple that it can answer your basic questions in a few seconds. It does so without pigeonholing you the way a left-right categorization does, yet it is specific enough to help you find your way.
To see a two-dimensional political map, go to http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz
For more info, see