Re: [badnarik2008] Re: No National Convention in 2008!

Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:38:24 -0800

I didn't approve David Macko's original message because I thought we should do away with the convention.
 
I do think however, some adjustment to the system is definitely in order. Not going to get into the chances of us winning, but I do think we are shooting ourselves in the foot when we wait till 6 months before the elections to choose our candidate. Gary Nolan and Michael Badnarik and for the part he was on the campaign trail Aaron Russo were forced to spend Summer of 2003 until Summer of 2004 carrying the water to the sea instead of to the desert by having to go around campaigning to Libertarians instead of campaigning to the public, months after the other parties had their candidates in place. If we could move the nominations up 6 months to a year, it would give the candidates time to lay foundations and I think it would have been good to have Michael out there talking to the public and the media rather than running around talking to state LP conventions.
 
Remember the big upheaval and panicky and rushed organizing that had to go on after the unexpected nomination in 2004? Why couldn't we make the decision spring/summer of 2007 giving our 2008 Presidential and VP candidates an additional year to build, organize and campaign, and use the 2008 campaign to rally and organize support for our candidates and try to get a little press? Why shoot ourselves in the foot by waiting till the 4th quarter to figure out the team to put in the game?

Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
David - There are two very good reasons why this proposal doesn't work:

1) In order to take advantage of it, we would have to attract someone
as a candidate who wanted to campaign full time, first for the
nomination and then for the election, beginning about 2-1/2 years
ahead of Nov 2008. As it is only one out of our last set of candidates
was willing to devote ALMOST that much of his life to such a purpose
(though admittedly Gary Nolan jumped in not too long thereafter). I
really doubt that given both the likelihood of election of a labeled
Libertarian, anywhere above a state legislator seat in a small
district in a small state, and the level of funding possible to even
pay the way for a road warrior like Michael showed he was ... anyone
else will be quite that self-sacrificing and congenial next time.

2) You said it yourself, we are not going to gain media coverage, no
matter what we do. The game is fixed and the dice are loaded. Why then
put any more effort and time into a sabre dive like the Presidential
nomination is? Far better to worry less about that, than about how
many laws we can change through local action and plebiscite where
possible, and by continuing to elect and raise issues with our
candidates at the local level...


--- In [email protected], "David Macko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The Libertarian Party should not have a National Convention in 2008!
> Now that I have your attention, let me assure everybody who is
reading this
> message that I am not a neocon saboteur hellbent on destroying the
Libertarian Party.
> I recommend that we hold our National Convention to nominate a
presidential candidate
> for 2008 in 2007.
> This was our practice from 1976 until 1996. The arguments for the
change seemed plausible at the
> time, including more publicity in an election year. Since then it
has been proven conclusively
> that the establishment media is our enemy and will not give us fair
coverage.
> The most blatant proof of the media bias is the fact that if two
presidential candidates had
> been arrested in Russia, Iraq or Iran it would have been front page
news and covered by all
> the networks. Yet when Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate
David Cobb became the
> first presidential candidates in American history to be arrested
while campaigning, not to mention
> that they were handcuffed and jailed for attempting to commit free
speech, even Libertarians
> without access to the internet did not know about this atrocity for
weeks.
> Nominating our candidates a year before the convention would give
them more time to campaign
> with unified party support. It would make petitioning easier in many
states with more time and
> less expense for paid petitioners where necessary since there is
less competition in odd-numbered years.
> Now is the time to promote this return to our original practice
through all available media, including LP News.
>
> For life and liberty,
> David Macko
>
> For life and liberty,
> David Macko
>


SPONSORED LINKS
E government Us government grants Conservative politics
Organizational politics Presidents of the united states of america American government and politics

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to