You'd have to hope, Steve, that with the more votes for LP candidates, the more other parties need to speak and act libertarian to pull a percentage of those voters.
In the end, the only thing that matters is a shift in the public consciousness, as with all great change after a period of stagnation. Just as many believe the constitution can be interpreted, it will be interpreted the way the country thinks.
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I predict that this movement will complete the transition from a
revolutionary party trying to play politics, to a political party that
has forgotten where it came from ...
There were very good reasons for shifting away from early conventions
(to shorten the time devoted to specific Presidential campaigning, for
an office that was (and still is?) clearly beyond the grasp of any
realistic effort, and with media blockage and off-balanced regulations
to overcome; to take advantage of at least C-SPAN coverage, which IIRC
did not happen until then?; etc.)
There were also good reasons why we did not just rubber-stamp the
nonminee's choice for running mate (look up the MacBride confrontation
sometime), and why we did not just mimic the Duopoly way of doing
other things as well ...
I am not certain that it is isn't just time for all this change to
happen, as the LP attempts to become what I kept hoping someone else
would start -- a mainstream political party with at least a vague
underpinning of Bill of Rights and liberty-based ideology beneath it.
Had this happened, the LP could have continued to do what most of us
do best: be the watchdog over the system, and the guide dog to lead it
closer to the "light" ... of liberty and a sense of personal autonomy
instead of lockstep conformity with the factory system under which it
all now operates ,,,
Too bad, though ... A lot of good people will be walking away shaking
their heads ,,,
Good luck, folks!
--- In [email protected], "David Macko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Although it was a plausible theory to hold later conventions to
obtain more media coverage,
> we have since learned that the media is our enemy and the later
conventions had no such
> beneficial result.
>
> For life and liberty,
> David Macko
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Arnold & Linda
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;
[email protected] ; badnarik ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
; badnarik2006 ; [email protected] ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 9:54 AM
> Subject: [badnarik2004] Re: [Badnarik2004-discuss] Re:
[badnarik2008] Re: No National Convention in 2008!
>
>
> We used to do that, but then discovered we got better press
coverage having the nominating convention 4th of July. Otherwise the
only coverage we used to get was local. With our severely diminished
numbers, that might be all we can get now.
>
> Arnold
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Randy Langkraehr
> To: [email protected] ; badnarik ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; badnarik2006 ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected] ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ;
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2005 11:36 PM
> Subject: [Badnarik2004-discuss] Re: [badnarik2008] Re: No
National Convention in 2008!
>
>
> 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
>
Yahoo! Personals
Let fate take it's course directly to your email.
See who's waiting for you Yahoo! Personals
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
- Visit your group "badnarik2008" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
