TheAgitator.com
Living Free
Sunday, October 19th, 2003The Free State project grows less loony every day. I think New Hampshire was an excellent selection, and lends new credibility to the idea. The American Spectator’s all-star intern Shawn Macomber, a native New Hampshire-ite, thinks a libertarian immigration to the Granite State might actually be able to effect some change or, at the very least, counter the influx of Massachusetts lefties who are moving to New Hampshire to escape high taxes, then promtly turning around and voting for — more social programs and higher taxes.
And as Gene Healy points out, adding five or ten thousand politically active libertarians to the small state that holds enormous influence over both parties’ presidential primaries could have significant national rammifications as well. Imagine how much more attentive Howard Dean’s campaign might be to libertarian flirtations with him if he knew that in a year where the Republican nominee was a given, he might be able to sway three or four or five thousand libertarian votes to his camp by actually touting his record of fiscal restraint as governor of Vermont instead of burrying it. He might rethink his position on Liberia, or on funding the nation buiding project in Iraq.
Sure, you might say, but that’s New Hampshire. What about the rest of the Democrat primaries? Running to the right to win New Hampshire would kill the nominee down the road. Maybe. But remember that the next big primariy after New Hampshire is South Carolina, hardly a bastion of leftist extremism. Win both of those, and you’re officially the frontrunner. You’ve got big mo.
And in a year when the Republican nomination is up for grabs, a strong libertoid presence in New Hampshire would prove even more influential.
This free state idea is starting to make some sense to me.
So if Ben Shapiro ought to be drafted for his hawkish foriegn policy views — as you argued a week ago — can we assume you’ll be signing up for the big move to NH, as a Free State Project advocate?
If not, why not?
Radley, if you’d taken the hikes I’ve taken in the last month (Moose Mountain, Boston Lot Lake, and Mount Cardigan), and seen the foliage I’ve seen, you’d be even more thrilled with the prospect of moving up here.
Drew:
Well, who knows where I’ll be in five years. I just may hop on board.
But I don’t think your Shapiro logic really holds. I wrote that I don’t think the Free State Project sound as crazy as it once did. I’m not sure that exactly marries me to the cause.
Shapiro has advocated invading just about every Muslim country on earth. He has written that civilian casualties don’t concern him in the least. If the U.S. were to adopt Shapiro’s foreign policy advice, thousands of American men and women Shapiro’s age would die, not to mention thousands of innocent Muslims.
I think its perfectly legitimate to find fault with an able-bodied nineteen year old who advocates such a staunchly militaristic, imperialist position in newspapers across the country, but hasn’t the guts to do any of the actual fighting or dying himself.
It’s fine to support or oppose a war without actually becoming a soldier. It’s find to oppose the drug war without actually doing drugs yourself.
It’s the degree and totality of Shapiro’s bloodlust that’s troubling.
Why don’t you all just move to Somalia? I don’t think they have any government there. What’s the problem with that?
The republican nomination for what? President? If that is how serious this blog is, then I think it speaks to the tin foil crowd.
Bush is among the most popular presidents in history, he is far more popular at this stage than his father, Clinton, or Reagan. To replace an incumbant in the primary would require for him to be UN popular.
Wow, the kook crowd; I am glad that you folk are so deluded, do you also wonder if you are really in the Matrix?
Dustin,
Did you even read the post?
I said that the Republican nomination is a “given.” Which means that if there were a few thousand libertarians in New Hampshire, they’d likely try to use their influence to sway the Democrat primary.
Also, you’re pretty much dead wrong on your history. Bush is polling at about 55%. That represents the highest he’s been since the end of the war. The last matchup poll had him losing to Kerry, Clark and Lieberman, but beating Dean.
It’s hardly “tinfoil” to suggest that Bush could be vulnerable next year.
Hey, troll, didya ever stop to think that Radley might have been thinking a little farther down the road than 2004 when he wrote about Free-State participants potentially influencing a Republican nomination? Your knee-jerk slobbering, bowing and scraping for Bush is duly noted, but since the Free-Staters aren’t even moving until they reach a membership of 20k (ostensibly not before the 2004 primaries, but maybe sometime in the next 4-5 years), you don’t have to get your panties all twisted over the notion that there might some day be another POTUS not named GW. As hard as the concept of presidential term limits might be to wrap your head around, the sad fact is, one day GW WON’T get to be President any more, short of a change to the Constitution, or martial law I suppose. Either way, THAT is the election cycle I assume that New Hampshire could influence, if it has a base of activist libertarian-minded people getting involved in the process.
The suggestion that The Dean might be able to sway a few thousand liberatraran votes in NH by touting his fiscal restraint as Gov. of VT is one of the Stupidest lines of thinking I have ever read. New Hampshire routinely laughs at VT’s excessive taxes. Calling The Dean’s record in VT fiscal restraint is just plain old ignorance. During a few lean years where there was little money and almost no options, The Dean went slightly to the right of the most extremist leftist money pigs in the VT house and senate and claimed he had controlled spending and was a “fiscal conservative”. As soon as the state had tax revenue again he spent it as fast as he could and built a massive buearacracy and “not-for-profit” shadow government. His regulatory and tax policies are even worse.
Dean could attempt to sway a few hypothetical lib. voters in NH. But they would never fall for it. People from NH are far too intelligent. And yes that was a Vermonter actually complimenting his neighbors to the east. That is almost as hard to belive as The Dean’s fiscal restraint.
I voted for Wyoming, personally. Though New Hampshire is a cool state, the problem is that in 5-10 years when the Free State Project gets enough members to move, New Hampshire will be much bigger than it is today, and the core idea of the Project is to work the ratios. Even today, there are more Greens (22,000) than the Project is planning on moving with (20,000), this is why I didnt vote for New Hampshire and am actually less inclined to think it will work than before.
Your point about the effect on National Politics is probably correct, which is cool. However, the effect on local government is also important when thinking about the point of the Free State Project.
What Kate Said.
WOW! Just imagine the thrill of having a president in January 2005 who in the NH primary 11 months earlier had changed his position on Liberia or funding for Iraq to get the votes of Libertarians voting in the Democratic primary.
I dunno. We may be getting our hopes up a little too high.
Hi there.
I just wanted to say to Karen that I did vote for NH, because in spite of the presence of the Greens- you say 22,000, and I will accept your word on that- the rest of the population is already very accepting of libertarian philosophy, so it probably won’t be too great an effort to convince them to vote with the Free Staters. The Greens, I understand are a bit of an anomoly, concentrated in a few of the cities.