On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:39:06 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Travis Pahl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part: > > >> >> BTW, for the record, I'm not a Republican either. I'm enrolled > >> >> Conservative. > > >> >Which is basically a third party that promotes republican ideas in NY > >> >since the NY republicans promote democrat ideas. If you are going to > >> >support a third party why not chose one that supports the same things > >> >you do? > > >> Because I'd rather be active in one that supports MUCH of the same stuff > I > >> do and has SOME influence than one that supports practically ALL the > same > >> stuff I do but has NO influence! . > > >They have no influence. > > Then why do political analysts in NY consistently cite the Conservative > Party as having influence disproportionate to our numbers?
Why does the media do alot of things it does? Who knows. But I do know they are wrong alot of times. > > They just chose candidates that the major > >parties will or have chosen to ensure they are recognized by the state > >for another couple years. > > You're referring there to candidates for governor & lt. governor only -- as > if those were the only elected offices in NY! But I guess you don't > remember a few elections back that the Conservative nominee for governor, > Herb London, almost beat the Republican nominee for 2nd place. Nor do you > realize that the Conservative nomination has a strong influence on who the > Republicans nominate for governor. It also has considerable influence on > who the Republicans (and in some cases the Democrats) nominate for many > other offices around the state. I am sure you beleive it does. And in fact it may some time. But I doubt it ever IMPROVES their selection to a more libertarian candidate. > >> And besides, my influence on LP is of > >> little consequence, because of that very agreement, while within the > >> Conservative Party my influence means something because they DON'T agree > >> with me about everything. > > >So why not join the republicans who agree with you even less and have > >even more power? Or better yet the democrats!!! > > Depends on several factors, often local and individual. I was an enrolled > Democrat before I changed enrollment to Conservative. I changed enrollment > briefly to the short-lived Freedom Party (to encourage libertarians to take > over a ballot line), then back to Conservative. > > I considered changing enrollment to Republican a few years ago. The major > consideration was what would put me in best position to determine Velella's > successor in the state senate. I think I made the right decision staying > Conservative and helping Kaufman beat Fleming this year for the nomination, > but maybe I was wrong and could've helped with the Republican primary > instead. > > >> How much more can I try to turn the "knob" of LP's ideology toward > liberty? > >> Practically none. However, I can try to influence the Conservative > Party > >> in a more libertarian direction, because their "knob" isn't already up > >> against the end post. And, as I've written in LPNY_discuss, I believe I > >> have influenced the Conservative Party. > > >Yeah, you may have influenced them. What good has it done? > > Well, it seems to have helped in getting them to take the lead on medical > marijuana, though the state party is still opposed. John Wilson (a > colleague on the Bronx Conservative Party executive committee) came out > with a press release for medical marijuana, and he won the Democratic > primary for civil court judge against the regular organization candidate > and is a shoo-in to be elected. You convinced this guy that medical marijuana was a good thing? Somehow I doubt it. And then you even admit that he is running as a democrat not a conservative. so again I ask... how did YOUR INFLUENCE on the CONSERVATIVE party do any good? > >> >After taking many different groups perspectives on the Republican > >> >party and Libertarian Party, I have come to the conclusion the > >> >Republicans are actively working against what I beleive the majority > >> >of the time and the Libertarians are actively working torwards what I > >> >beleive. > > But compare the average Republican to the average politically active > person, and I think you'll find the Republican to be working against you > less and for you more. You have to accept that as an extremist (in this > case a radical libertarian), you may perceive almost every politically > active person to be working against you. The average republican MAY be for many things I am for, but the average republican candidate is most CERTAINLY not. > >You may be correct. But if that is the case, then I will not change > >to your side for another 20 years or so, so it would probably be best > >in the meantime not try and make your arguements by trying to set > >yourself up in some superior position based on age but rather by using > >logic. > > You think this is just an exchange of e-mails between the 2 of us, and > nobody else will read any of it? If it were just between us 2, I'd've > stopped writing long ago! One of the problems with LP is going out of > one's way playing to an insignificant audience. The point is not just applicable to me in particular. If what you are saying is true, then myself and everyone else out there either has the experience you are saying and has realized the LP is worthless, or does not have it and does not realize it yet. Assuming that what you are saying is true, there is no point in you making these arguements to me or anyone else because we either have the expereince or do not, but in the end it is the experience that we need that you say comes with 20-30 years of being politically active that will lead us to give up on the LP. > >> Part of the problem is that many people with less experience with LP > think, > >> "But we've never tried THIS. Maybe it will make for a big improvement." > >> But the more experienced remember that they HAVE tried "THIS". > > >Yet you seem to be saying to me that we should try to work within the > >parties. Yet even in my 'naive' mind, I know that this has been > >tried. It is not successful. > > Uh, hello? The overwhelming majority of people with axes to grind > politically do it within larger parties, because they know it IS > successful. Look around you. How many interest groups and activists form > their own political parties? Which ones are successful? The ones looking for more government intervention will be successful working with the two major parties. They have in the past and will continue to be. Groups looking to reduce government will not be successful working within the two major parties. They have tried over and over and failed. Travis > In Your Sly Tribe, > Robert > _______________________________________________ > Libnw mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw > http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw > _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
