Oh, That Libertarian Revolution Part 2
Alex Knapp addresses the call for a shift entitled LIBERTARIANS AND DEMOCRATS, TOGETHER AT LAST? The question mark at the end of the title should be bigger.
The calling of Libertarians into the Democratic fold stems from recent civil liberties issues. It is worth pointing out that such a shift likely won’t occur because of the significance of gun control to Libertarians and Democratic nannyism. Seems as though Libertarians’ choices are to pick which civil liberties matter more. I think that is crap.
Via Alex comes this dated article stating:
. . . hardly anybody has noticed how Libertarians have put Republicans on the brink of losing the Senate. In both 1998 and 2000, a Republican candidate for Senate lost to a Democrat by a margin much less than the Libertarian’s total vote.
The most recent victim was Slade Gorton of Washington. In a final tally that took weeks to add up and confirm, he lost to Maria Cantwell by 2,228 votes. A Libertarian candidate, Jeff Jared, hauled in 64,734 votes. Two years earlier, Republican John Ensign lost to incumbent Democrat Harry Reid in Nevada by a measly 428 votes, in a race that saw Libertarian Michael Cloud draw 8,044 votes. If Ensign had won that race — beating a man who is the second-ranking Senate Democrat, no less — and another Republican had picked up the seat Ensign came back to win last year, there would be two more Republicans and two fewer Democrats in the chamber. Instead of a 50-50 split, Republicans would have a 52-48 majority. There would be no morbid Strom Thurmond death watch.
People often ask me if I would be willing to let the Democrats (instead of the lesser of two evils) win to teach the Republicans a lesson. Absolutely.
