- 1
- 2
A Libertarian Surge?
Barr's personality is an acquired taste. The 2002 edition of The Almanac of American Politics said that that Barr is "humorless, pessimistic, sarcastic, to the point that his wife beeps him when he is on TV, 'Smile, honey.' He says he has no close friends on Capitol Hill and usually sleeps in his office."
Ron Paul, like Barr, has a sandpapery persona, and his Republican presidential campaign has been a mixed blessing for the Libertarian Party, whose presidential candidate he was in 1988. Paul has energized and enlarged the latent libertarian constituency. But his monetary fixations (trying to restore the gold standard and to inflame the public against the 1913 Federal Reserve Act) have deepened libertarianism's taint of quirkiness. And his money needs have competed with the Libertarian Party's: Its online fund-raising has declined 70 percent since he announced his run for the Republican nomination. But the party's membership has increased 20 percent since 2007.
Barr's new party (he joined in 2006) also is handicapped by John McCain's handiwork. One wealthy libertarian would give $1 million if the McCain-Feingold law regulating political participation did not ban contributions of more than $28,500 to national parties. Another wealthy libertarian—he is dead, so he has none of the supposedly corrupt purposes that make McCain so cross—bequeathed more than $200,000 to the party. That would fund the ballot access struggles, but it is in escrow because of McCain-Feingold. If libertarian voters cost McCain the presidency, that will be condign punishment.
© 2008
- 1
- 2


Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: KYJurisDoctor @ 05/26/2008 2:15:29 PM
Comment: I agree with George Will. This could be a REPEAT of 2000, and Bob Barr will most likely "bar" John McCain from the White House!
Posted By: bemmerton @ 04/18/2008 8:37:57 AM
Comment: I wonder if Ralph Nader's bid in 2000 was the most consequential 3rd party race in American history. Seems to me that Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose candidacy, in 1912, did pretty well, as Roosevelt came in 2nd, beating the Republican, William Howard Taft, allowing Woodrow Wilson's victory, an unintended consequence.
Posted By: opiper @ 04/18/2008 2:04:28 AM
Comment: Shame on George Will for blaming Ralph Nader???s 2000 presidential candidacy for Al Gore???s loss to George Bush.
Gore lost to Bush because at least 600 registered Democrats in Florida sat home on election day, too apathetic to participate in our democratic process.
Voting only works if you do it, so any registered voter who voted for ANYONE should be proud of themselves for voting, period. And hopefully they voted their conscience, not their fears.