SPECIAL GUEST EDITORIALby Kevin Tracy
Take a look at Zogby’s predictions. President Bush dominated the electoral map throughout most of 2004 except for a few fringe polls out of Ohio and Florida that showed President Bush losing. But here in 2008, Barack Obama is painting the country blue and purple. Even my home state of Indiana isn’t safe for the Republican Presidential candidate for the first time in over four decades!
Part of the problem is Bob Barr, who is pulling between 5 and 10% in many of the competitive states that have gone heavy blue (like New Hampshire) and once safe Republican states that are going purple (like South Carolina).
I know there are those of you getting your talking points from the political commandos on the right (… I still get them) that seem to support the idea that wishful thinking will keep Bob Barr from making an impact in the race. But when John McCain loses in November, Bob Barr is going to have a lot of credit to take for his loss.
But Barr isn’t going to win either… so what is their end game?
Well, believe it or not, most of the world doesn’t live under a “two-party system.” In India, for example, there are countless political parties divided along political, ethnic, regional, and ideological lines.
As a result of the complex multi-party system, it is absolutely impossible for any single political party to take control of the government. So in order to accomplish anything, political parties have to come together, compromise, negotiate, and find a solid solution to whatever problem they are trying to solve.
At the same time, Indian politics still very much resemble ours. That’s because the largest political parties have organized “coalitions.”
In the United States, our political parties are very much set up the same way, only we have much greater unity. In the Republican Party, we have the Christian right, the fiscal conservatives, the war hawks, and the limited government Americans. In the Democratic Party, we have the pacifists, social liberals, socialists, communists, religious and ethnic minorities, and habitual drug users.
Most of these groups have their own political parties, but because the two party system is so strong, you’re almost always better off ignoring 3/4ths of the major party’s agenda and focusing on the 1/4th you support. Think about it, James Dobson really doesn’t care about foreign policy, the condition of our highways, NASA, social security, welfare reform, the structure of the Department of Homeland Security. But he’s still a Republican.
However, within the past 8 years of outrageous government growth, the Libertarian faction in the Republican Party has been pushed over the edge and given no choice but to begin fielding Libertarian Party candidates against Republicans, like Bob Barr, who could easily cost John McCain the election.
Most Republicans in leadership positions in our party, including many I respect, are warning the Libertarian-faction in the GOP that they could do more harm than good if they vote for Barr.
But as I stated before, the Republican Party has abandoned the Libertarian portion of it’s agenda with outrageous spending and government growth. For a Libertarian-Republican, it’s a Lose-Lose Situation. Either big government Democrats take over or big government Republicans take over.
When Bob Barr recently said, “McBama are two sides of the same coin,” this is what he was talking about. If you are a Libertarian, neither major candidate is much better than the other, so what difference does it make to them if they vote 3rd party? None at all.
But no matter what happens, Bob Barr isn’t going to win the election. He doesn’t have the personality or charisma necessary to lead a Libertarian revolution in this country. But, that doesn’t mean a vote for Bob Barr is wasted.
On the day after the election, November 5th, Republican leaders are going to meet behind closed doors to discuss what happened and they’re going to realize they lost states on election night that they haven’t lost in 40+ years because they didn’t have the Libertarian-Faction’s support in their “coalition”. They’re going to realize that a significant enough chunk of the Republican Party has been disenfranchised and the only way to repair that is to start focusing on the issues important to Libertarian Republicans.
And if John McCain loses the Presidency because of the Libertarian faction splitting from the Republican Party, you can sure as hell bet the Republican Party is going to try to appease them with a limited government agenda between now and 2012.
If the Republican Party wins the Presidency, then they’ll likely decide they can win elections without the Libertarian faction and we’ll have another 4 years of government growth under a Republican administration.
In other words, the only way the Libertarian faction is going to have an impact beyond 2008 is if John McCain loses. And the better Bob Barr does, the clearer the message delivered to the GOP will be.
*Note - Kevin Tracy is a Republican Political Consultant. He has a highly rated political prognosticating blog from a "Catholic Conservative perspective." It can be found at: http://ktracy.com
Posts
21 comments:
It is plain to see that John McCain is not a conservative Republican and if the Republican Party doesn't wake up to the fact that Bob Barr is the true conservative in this race, they may very well just let McCain be the spoiler for Barr and hand the presidency over to a Marxist bent Obama.
Anonymous,
(Please include your name with your next post.)
You're right.
My theory is that there will come a point when Barr is rising in the polls, and McCain is declining or staying stagnant, that all of a sudden Barr will appear as the more viable candidate for the Right.
Not sure of the number, but my guess is that if Barr reaches the low 20s in the polls, that will play out.
And if that happens, the Right will rally to Barr, and he could actually win this thing.
Beside the fact that Bob Barr is a Constitutional Lawyer, he has a handle on economics and what it would take to get the US economy back on track.
I agree with anonymous.
I've decided that I'm going to vote for who I want to vote for regardless of the political electoral strategy. There seems to be little difference in how the government operates between the major parties, so I've become disenfranchised by both. Why does the Republican party believe that they are owed the vote of Libertarian leaning people?
Forgot to publish my ID with my last post -- Jay
Jay said:
"wake up to the fact that Bob Barr is the true conservative in this race,"
Eric said:
" the Right will rally to Barr, and he could actually win this thing."
This logic leaves me scratching my head. Is Congressman Barr a conservative, or is he a libertarian? I ask this because even his supporters seemed confused.
I like the ticket, don't get me wrong, it is the strongest ticket (and most sane) the LP has had in its history, however, how will the Right rally to Barr if he is expected to support traditional libertarian issues such as medicinal marijuana, a hands-off approach to the issue of homosexual marriage from the government, euthanasia,etc.
I can see fiscal conservatives rallying to Barr, but he can't mantain that kind of balancing act when policy conflicts arise on fundamental issues between libertarians and conservatives. Libertarianism and Conservatism are not two sides of the same coin.
He goes to far to the Right, Barr risks losing libertarians, if he drifts to far toward Libertarianism, he risks losing the Right.
The basis of conservativism calls for smaller government control in the lives of the public.
This aspect of the LP is in keeping with the conservative Republican Party, and is what attracted Barr to the RP in the first place.
Bob Barr was a member of the Republican Congress at one time, but that doesn't mean that he is not a Libertarian at heart.
Barr is the perfect person to get the Libertarian principles out to both Blue Dog Democrats and Blue Collar Republicans as well as Independent voters, so the LP had better get over the fact that Bob Barr was once a Repulican in name only and get solidly behind him because if we get a McCain or an Obama it will be disastrous for America.
Most Americans, by their displeasure of the way that both Congress and the Executive branches are handling things, are ready to put Libertarian principles to test in both the Executive and Judicial branches.
I was unaware of the "IF" part, in "even if he loses".
Of course he's going to lose, and if he peels off more would be McCain voters than Obama voters he's aiding Socialism in America and electing the most radical Dem to ever run on many issues.
It is plain to see that John McCain is not a conservative Republican and if the Republican Party doesn't wake up to the fact that Bob Barr is the true conservative in this race, they may very well just let McCain be the spoiler for Barr and hand the presidency over to a Marxist bent Obama.
I am impressed with all the blogers that profess to be mystic seers.
When anyone says that they defenitely know the outcome of a future event they either posse's mystic powers or they are delusional.
Bob Barr can make this country move to the point that neither of the two parties can. Hopefully he can get into the debates to prove just that. Check out my post on that matter
http://conservativeforchange.blogspot.com/2008/07/bob-barr-setting-his-sights-on-debates.html
And if John McCain loses the Presidency because of the Libertarian faction splitting from the Republican Party, you can sure as hell bet the Republican Party is going to try to appease them with a limited government agenda between now and 2012.
If the Republican Party wins the Presidency, then they’ll likely decide they can win elections without the Libertarian faction and we’ll have another 4 years of government growth under a Republican administration.
In other words, the only way the Libertarian faction is going to have an impact beyond 2008 is if John McCain loses. And the better Bob Barr does, the clearer the message delivered to the GOP will be.
Exactly. The neocons MUST be denied.
Carter 2.0 will be a much-needed (albeit painful) reminder of how horrible the Democrat Party's brand of socialism really is, for the country and for all Americans.
...if he peels off more would be McCain voters than Obama voters he's aiding Socialism in America and electing the most radical Dem to ever run on many issues.
Wah!
Actually, Jonathan, you neocons only have yourselves to blame. You squandered whatever goodwill the GOP had with your rabid interventionism, your stupid never-ending wars, shitting all over the Constitution, and bankrupting this country.
Besides, what Barr voter would ever be a McCain voter? That's the problem with you neocons. You think you own the world and everyone in it.
Threatening and preemptively blaming the electorate for yet another one of your failures is so typical of the neocons though.
Own your epic failures. They're all yours, including the '08 election.
And if you're that afraid of an Obama presidency, then I suggest you and yours vote for Barr to prevent it!
Because you know, if you don't vote for Barr, you'll be "aiding Socialism in America and electing the most radical Dem to ever run on many issues."
I see no one has still answered my question. If Bob Barr runs as a "small government conservative" as suggested by someone, he will alienate libertarians, if he runs as a full stop moderate libertarian, he will alienate libertarians within the LP. McCain is in a similar situation with the social cons and moderates, Independents.
Here's my answer:
Bob should continue to run as a moderate libertarian, as he is doing. It appears to be working quite well.
If he wasn't doing well in the polls, than there'd be an argument from the Radical Libertarians. But as it is, they have no argument now, since Barr is doing so well.
As I sit down to my cup of coffee and newspaper in the morning I can't help but reflect on how totally biased the news media are, it would seem that they think we only have two political parties to choose from in the United States.
Our two party system is the real conspiracy in this country. Bob Barr said to watch the way Democrat's and Republican's try to resolve the problems that our country is in, is a joke, because they are the problem!
I have to stop watching TV and get on with my life because I think my brain is turning to pudding.
One more thing; if I hear about government mandates (ie, you have to: turn down the thermostst, drive less, buy health insurance, use less water when you flush or buy those stupid little flourescent light bulbs, etc., etc.), I think that I'll have to get down and dust off my trusty old cannon!
I watched on Tuesday July 15, 2008 John McCain conduct a Town Hall meeting in New Mexico
and I have to say that Mr. McCain was impresive on his dialogue about the issues facing America,
and listening through the whole meeting I was at the point of wanting to vote for him, but after reflecting
on what was asked to Mr. McCain, I realized that there were no follow-up quetions, for example:
when he was asked what he would do to help Small Business's in America, he responded by saying
that he would help them by giving them tax incentives, no one asked his viewpoint about his recommendation
for a 'Tax and Cap Bill'. and what effect this bill would have on Small Business's and their tax obligations.
Some one asked Mr.McCain about our illegal immigrant problem and he confirmed his stance on
'Immigrant Reform', and the major problem of killings and drugs comming into our country,
his response was that we need to send more money to Mexico to help combat this problem,
but he did not mention the fact that we are reducing the amount of financial aid to our own
enforcement officials on the United States side of the border.
The people who posed the questions to Mr. McCain asked some very important questions
and they sounded like very educated people, but I can not help but think that the poser of
these questions were paid stand in's.
Huckfan, why would you assume that just because several individuals ask an educated question, that they are a paid stand-in's?
Ryan, my comment is only an assumption, but it is my assumption, because I believe that I still have the right to voice my opinion.
The reason I thought the question poser's might be stand in's was not because they sounded intelegent, but because they asked questions that played into McCain's hand and there were no counter questions, such as the ones that I posed in my statement.
No need to get defensive, Huckfan. I was only asking how you would arrive at the theory that because your follow up questions were not asked, therefore the questions must be planted.
Huckfan stated:
"Ryan, my comment is only an assumption, but it is my assumption, because I believe that I still have the right to voice my opinion"
You are indeed entitled to your own opinions and assumptions. You are not entilted to your own facts however
Ryan, is your last statement an opinion or a fact?
It's a statement of fact.
Post a Comment