TheAgitator.com
The reason Ballot
Wednesday, October 29th, 2008Over at my place of employment, we polled the reason universe about the election and a few other questions.
My answers:
1. Who are you voting for in November?
Bob Barr. He’s the first serious candidate the LP has run since I’ve been eligible to vote.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
Kerry in 2004. Bush in 2000.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
No. There’s too little difference between the major party candidates for there to be much riding on this election. It’s really only a matter of if you want a huge federal government undertaking grand leftist programs, or if you want a huge federal government undertaking grand rightist programs.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
As a libertarian journalist, they’ve given me plenty to write about.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded?
Woodrow Wilson. Jailed political dissenters, created the Federal Trade Commission, got us into World War I. He also enacted the first federal income tax, the first modern military draft, and the first federal drug prohibition. Wilson also re-segregated the federal government. When blacks protested, he told them to consider segregation a “benefit,” not a debasement. An all-around loathesome human being.
Heh…I’m getting ads encouraging me to consider a career in law enforcement on this site…
Bob Barr is not a Libertarian at heart.
Bob Barr. He’s the first serious candidate the LP has run since I’ve been eligible to vote.
This is either your first time to vote or that is a very sad statement about the Libertarian Parties ability to field cantidates.
Bob Barr is not a good libertarian candidate. Harry Browne was a great candidate. Nearly every libertarian I know was converted during the Browne campaigns of 1996 and 2000. I will not vote for Barr, and I’m going to post something on my site soon explaining all the reasons.
Actually, that’s not technically true. Lincoln did it in the Revenue Act of 1861 to help pay for the Civil War. It was repealed ten years later.
I agree with you about Woodrow Wilson, though the Great Centralizer Abe Lincoln has to be a very close second in my book. Both Roosevelts deserve a dunk as well.
What defines “serious candidate”? A former politician? A lawyer?
Dollars to doughnuts he’ll pull in a few more votes this year than Badnarik in 2004 (397,265 .39%), but I would guess only a few more. Is he more serious than Root or Rouwart were this year? Just curious on how you define it….
Also, Barr got thrown off the Connecticut ballot due to being 280 signatures short, according to the state. I’m gonna vote Nazi party or anything NOT Republican or Democrat.
Woodrow Wilson’s house is on my block!
Clearly there are only two issues here:
first, some of those responses on the reason list made me sad (not for their results, but their reasons, especially Pinker).
Second, we should all answer the questions too!
1. Who are you voting for in November?
I live in Oklahoma, so it’s academic, but I will not vote for either party’s candidate for any reason. Either way I am voting to expand the state.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
See above, substituting Virginia for Oklahoma.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
1980 appears more important now, but *before* the election there is no way to know.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
The apoplectic reactions of all of my lefty friends and acquaintances to virtually everything.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
None. Torture is coarsening to the torturer and harmful to the victim. No one should ever engage in it.
Good luck dunking Teddy:
http://www.cracked.com/article_15895_p5.html
I can somewhat understand not taking Badnarik seriously, but I really don’t understand the issue with Harry Browne not being “serious.”
Barr has a higher profile, but that’s about it. When it comes down to it his chances of being taken seriously by most people and having any effect on the race are about the same as Badnarik.
I honestly don’t see any stands Barr takes that make him a more serious. Is it because he has the experience of serving in Congress as an extreme Drug Warrior?
Hey, I’m not even voting this year. So maybe I don’t have room to talk. But it’s a little sad when libertarians only want to vote when the LP runs a conservative Republican ex-drug warrior who makes contributions to many anti-liberty Republicans and campaigns on ” I am the real conservative. The Republican Party left me. I didn’t leave it” stance.
If you add to that the way the campaign has been (mis)managed and the fact that Barr was out petitioned by freaking Chuck Baldwin ( who is terrible BTW), you could say Badnarik was MORE “serious” than Barr. Badnarik raised as much money as Barr and had less problems with ballot access.
I know the waterboarding thing is a joke / not to be taken seriously, but waterboarding is legitimately a Very Serious Topic and I don’t think that making light of it in this way is beneficial. I wish Radley would have said, “No torture, but I would love to give a very hard kick in the ass to the following ex-President …”
I can’t fight my instinct on this one - Bob Barr is just too creepy looking to vote for.
I tend to view elections as having to pick the tallest midget. This year we get to choose between the smiling midget and the angry dwarf.
As for actual government implications, we get to choose between big, stupid government and big, completely idiotic, “I do not believe in an objective reality” government. Stupid is less bad than idiotic “I believe in fairies and trolls (I’m sorry, angels and demons,) so there’s my choice.
“5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded?”
His father, for not wearing a rubber.
(torture is always wrong tho and if i REALLY wanted to waterboard someone, it would make me no better than them)
Good call on Woodrow Wilson. FDR is my number one most shitty guy ever in the white house, but Wilson is a firm #2.
If you’re going to say Barr is not a real Libertarian at heart because of his past, I bet I can say can say the same thing about anyone one else claiming to be Libertarian currently. Sorry he wasn’t perfect with his previous political opinions. Name someone who has never had a questionable opinion and has never changed their mind on anything.
Harry Browne wasn’t perfect either. If I remember correctly, Perry Willis was censured by the LP becuase worked for his campaign while being director. If corruption is a sign of serious candidates, then I guess he does beat out Barr in that respect.
I really hate self-defeating libertarians. We agree on 99%, but that 1% we disagree on divides us and keeps us from coming together. I got that from Michael Badnarik.
Barr? Crawfished on Lautenberg when he’s had every chance there is to mea culpa.
I think the LP traded principle (full disclosure: I’ve never been a member, but I voted for Browne in 2000) for name recognition. It’s like the Reform Party nominating both Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader with a straight face: “Okay, who can get us on the ballot in Rhode Island?”
I am in complete agreement with you on Wilson, though. I’ve been saying all over the place that this election is 1912 if we’re lucky, 1860 if we’re not.
III
[...] QotD, embarrassing former APSA/US presidents edition Radley Balko picks my least favorite American president for dishonor: [...]
Sorry he wasn’t perfect with his previous political opinions. Name someone who has never had a questionable opinion and has never changed their mind on anything.
Well, I don’t think anyone expects perfection. I certainly don’t. Barr admits he made “mistakes,” but he doesn’t seem to know what a bigoted, hypocritical douchebag he was. As if his actions in congress weren’t enough (and I think they are, considering their number and the degree of wretched statism involved), he admires Scalia. He pretends there was reason to trust the government’s case for going to war in Iraq. He voted for the Patriot Act. And he supports the Georgia’s case against Genarlow Wilson.
Like I said, I don’t expect “perfection.” But I do expect “not a bigoted, authoritarian, statist douche.”
I’d like to vote for the LP, but in choosing name-recognition over principle, they’ve forced me to write in, “none of the above.”
Good choice on Wilson, an absolute fascist. FDR was a lousy president, but he was more of a boob than a fascist (though her certainly hired predominately fascists in his brain trust).
Bob Barr is a bigot? In what way?
He regrets voting for the Patriot Act and has stated so many times. He voted for the War in Iraq based on the evidnce given at the time. He has since stated that the evidence was poor and had he known that the claims were bullshit, he would not have voted for it. I don’t think that he still “pretends” that it was a good idea.
I’ve met Bob Barr many times since I have volunteered for his campaign. I specifically remember a conversation in which he stated that law that put Ganarlow Wilson in prison was never meant to be applied to consenting teenagers and that his conviction was a horrible decision.
Again, you are the kind of person who judges him for who he was and not what he is now. He is not a bigot, not an authoritarian, and not douche. If he was, he would still be a Republican or would have joined the Democrats. Maybe you think he just lying and saying what we all want to hear, but I just can’t imagine what he has to gain from it.
Well having read the above I just cant leave Jimmy Carter out of mix. Anyone here old enough to remember the recession and the “energy crisis” (that never really was a crisis)? Waiting in line to buy gas as if this were a third-world country or Europe or something?
I wish Ron Paul was here.
Barr is a recovering religious wacko with a political record that should be abhorrent to libertarians. He repeatedly tried to stop medicinal marijuana legislation, opposed abortion (including in cases of rape) and wrote the Defense of Marriage Act.
He also lead the impeachment of Bill Clinton, which was an absurd waste of time, taxpayer dollars and energy. He’s the libertarian’s John McCain - running on the party ticket, but nowhere close to the real thing.
Les — But that’s all in the past. More recently, Barr has come out against the drug war, and has campaigned against the State of Georgia’s planned execution of Troy Anthony Davis.
I’m sympathetic to Barr because I used to be a hardcore conservative kinda guy, and I saw the light. So I can accept when somebody changes their mind.
Mattocracy,
I honestly don’t know if Barr is still a bigot, but he certainly was when he was in Congress, as demonstrated by his hostility towards homosexuals and non-Christians. In every article or interview I’ve read about his change of heart, he never talks about how horrible his attitudes were and where those attitudes came from. He never really takes responsibility for what he said and did.
He wanted not only to put medical marijuana providers and users in prison, but even limit the ability for proponents to put messages on buses. He wanted to deny to Wiccans in the military the same rights Christians in the military have. His attitude towards homosexuals was equally notorious and hypocritical.
Now, I can believe that people change. People do change. But unless Mr. Barr is willing (or able) to explain - in ways more precise than, “I realized that too much government is bad,” - what motivated him to want to use the government to enforce his own bigotry and deny citizens their most basic rights, I will be skeptical of his claims to have changed.
In terms of our invasion of Iraq, his excuse is the same as Hillary Clinton’s. There were plenty of sources of information available to people who weren’t even in congress that called into serious question the claims the Bush administration was making. That he claims to have been unaware of this information makes him, in my opinion, unfit for the job of President.
In regards to Ganarlow Wilson, he wrote an article here:
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/articles/41/us-justice-has-no-business-in-georgias-genarlow-wilson-case
From his article:
…an attempt by some to transform the case from one involving child molestation into the latest great civil rights crusade.
and
As distressing as are the continuing efforts by many community leaders to clothe Wilson with the halo of victim-hero…
Nowhere does Barr condemn the case and he only defends the state’s actions. If you have a link of Barr condemning the state’s prosecution of Wilson, I’d appreciate it.
Maybe he’s really changed. It’s absolutely possible. But he hasn’t convinced me yet.
And here I thought I was the only person in America who thought Wilson was a horrible president.
…and he voted for the Patriot Act.
Sorry, but he just doesn’t add up.
When people change, it’s usually because they’ve seen the light.
When politicians change, it’s usually because they’ve seen an opportunity.
The fact that libertarian influence will never amount to anything is proven by the fact that about 1/2 the Reason employees in that poll flatly stated that they never vote.
Wasn’t it a Reason columnist who wrote an article detailing why it is irrational to vote? I agreed with the column, but it appears that libertarians are taking the advice too well.
People who watch polls should pay more attention to the dancers.
Hemorrhoids are serious too, but I wouldn’t vote so that Americans would have to put up with them for four years.
I might just vote for Harry Browne again this year - we could all rest in peace for four years if he won. Barr makes me nervous and I don’t trust him. His running mate, Root, has no business being in politics and should be re-selling time-shares somewhere in Mississippi.
[...] Radley Balko [...]
1. Who are you voting for in November?
Bob Barr, he isn’t ideal, but we all know there is no way he’s winning. The only way to send a message to the Republicans is to vote for a Libertarian. Voting for Obama would just tell them they need to be more liberal.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
Couldn’t vote, but I hate to admit I probably would have voted for Bush at the time.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
No, they’re two sides of the same coin. I have a feeling we have a very important one coming up in the next 4-8 years.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
No easy target. Although either one of the major party candidates would probably provide us with plenty of fodder.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
Nixon
About Wilson: Why does he get stuck with the “First modern military draft”? The Civil War era isn’t modern? The WWI draft was objectionable in some way that the Civil War draft wasn’t?
Not that I like or respect Wilson; a miserable twit of a President who got us into WWI as soon as he could - not that the Germans didn’t make it easy for him, what with that business with Mexico. I just don’t believe in dumping blame on people for things they didn’t do, when they’re already going to hell for things they DID do.
1. Who are you voting for in November?
Bob Barr - we need to break the two party duopoly. I don’t think Barr is perfect, but with his flaws he’s FAR BETTER than the major candidates.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
2000 - Harry Browne (in NC)
2004 - Bush (in Ohio) - truly the most revolting vote I’ve ever made, and I felt that way at the time. My only solace is that I’m STILL convinced that Kerry would have been worse. And whenever I start to second guess myself, Kerry says something and I feel better again. If I were to do it again, I’d vote Cthulhu.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime?
NO!! The elections seem to be less and less important as the candidates move closer together. 1980 was the most important I’ve been involved in. Reagan and his reform of the monetary system have made the subsequent 20+ years of economic success possible.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
Nothing now. I’m sure in a couple of years I’ll look back at the Bush years as the “good old days” as the federal beast continues to grow. I honestly believe it’s just going to get worse regardless of which of the morons is elected president.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
While I agree that waterboarding would be overboard, answering in the spirit of the question I’d choose FDR - 4 terms - laid a lasting foundation for an imperial presidency and invasive national bureaucracy.
harry browne was serious.
tom blanton,
while i’d like to have a dead president elected, barr i better than the departed harry browne.
1. Who are you voting for in November?
Bob Barr. I don’t really care for Barr that much, for most of the reasons others have already shared, but… he’s not going to win anyway, so who gives a shit? I’m supporting the LP.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
Harry Browne in 2000, and I was in Australia for 2004 and couldn’t be bothered to vote.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime:
In MY lifetime? Maybe, but I was born in 1982.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
The fact that I was right from the beginning. I hated Bush before it was popular. There’s nothing like being a trendsetter.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
Any of the dead ones will do. Waterboarding is a horrible thing, but the idea of doing it to a corpse is funny to me somehow.
I’m a libertarian who first voted for David Bergland (I met him at my community college while he was running) and has voted for the LP presidential candidate with no apologies ever since. I’m torn about voting for Barr. I wish Ruwart or Kubby had been picked, but that’s water under the bridge. I have read several people’s reasons to vote FOR Barr in spite of all their caveats about the man, but I also have read people I respect give reasons why the LP does NOT deserve the vote this year - partially because of Barr and Root .
But…Bob is kind of right in those two quotes you used. Bob did not say Wilson was a definite child molester, simply that this case is about child molestation and not about civil rights. To dress it up as civil rights takes away from the fact that this is bad law for everyone.
Wilson wasn’t a hero, simply a victim. He wasn’t a victim because of his race, he was victim becuase of bad law prohibiting certain actions.
The article is defending the state’s actions…the actions of releasing the videotape to the public that was used to convict him. The Feds came in and stated that the state of Georgia could not do that becuase it amounted to pornography distribution. How was Wilson supposed to get a fair retrail if the Justice Department decidedes to trump state law and keep evidence from the public?
Thanks for pointing this out Radley. You made my decision as to whether renew my Reason subscription much much easier. I will not renew.
I’m not saying McCain is the perfect candidate, but compared to Obama’s one party rule, huge entitlements, higher taxes, and stifling of free speech issues, he is a dream.
I could see voting for Barr. That is acceptable. But anyone who calls themselves a Libertarian and votes for Obama is simply a Liberal too ashamed to call themselves one.
Mattocracy,
I know that Barr was speaking mostly about the legal technicalities. But he didn’t just mock the idea of Wilson being a hero, but of being a victim, as well. He could have added one sentence in that article condemning the law and the state’s prosecution of Wilson, but he didn’t.
Like I said, it’s not so much what Barr is saying now (besides things like admiring Scalia), but what he’s not saying, in terms of taking responsibility for his absolutely horrendous, bigoted, authoritarian behavior in congress.
I admit that I am disappointed by the number of people who answered that they were voting for Obama, however, I still love Reason. Tom, I agree that libertarians SHOULDN’T vote for Obama (and I really wish they wouldn’t), but that doesn’t mean that they are secret liberals if they do.
Plenty of fine Reason writers are not planning to vote for Obama, as you should note. It’s still a great magazine, one of the most worthwhile magazines there is. I would pay for it, if I didn’t just steal my dad’s copies. I also want to write for it someday.
Speaking of my dad, is it weird that I learned of that fact that he didn’t vote the last eight years from Reason.com? Yes it is.
I am surprised he didn’t vote for Harry Browne, though.
Radley, props for your Wilson pick. I was pleased to read so much support for loathing the man. My anarchist cousin (not anarcho-capitalist, mind you) might be alarmed to agree with all you dirty capitalists; Wilson was always his pick for worst favorite.
Since I’m bored…
1. Who are you voting for in November?
Barr, because he’s the best of what’s out there, even though he’s not perfect.
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
Voted for Browne in 2000 but supported Bush among the major-party candidates. Voted Badnarik in 2004 but supported Kerry simply to have a split party government.
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime:
No. They’re all “the most important” when they happen, then they fade into obscurity.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
I’m gonna miss the comedy it created. That’s about it.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
I’ll be evil and say Abraham Lincoln, for being the most overrated President ever, especially when it comes to his distaste for civil liberties (i.e. revocation of habeas corpus)
1. Who are you voting for in November?
John McCain
2. Who did you vote for in 2004 and 2000?
Bush in 2000, and Bush is 2004. 2004 for Bush only because Kerry pissed me off with his comments against the Vietnam War vets
3. Is this the most important election in your lifetime:
No, 1980 was bigger. But this is damned close. The thought of a Obama Presidency with total Dem control of both houses of congress keep me up at night.
4. What will you miss about the Bush administration?
The Bush Daughters.
5. Leaving George W. Bush out of consideration, what former U.S. president would you most like to have waterboarded and why?
I’ll be even more evil and say John Adams for his signing of the Alien and Sedition Acts. Setting precedent for elimination of Civil Liberties.
Woodrow Wilson… An all-around loathesome human being.
And an academic poobah!
I was looking for a reson to be able to blow up about this matter…I think that any Libertarian that is planning on voting for Bob Barr should be ashamed of themselves. NOBODY goes on that long being a bigitous, Constitution-trampling, douche-bag just to turn their outlook on life around in a matter of a few years. How convenient that your political positions change after you’ve got no other options but to be a figurehead for a 3rd party. This is the LP selling their souls to the devil for the sake of a known face and name. If, when I first joined the LP 11 years ago, you had told me the Bob freakin Barr would ever be a candidate for any office(even dog catcher) with them, I would have never joined. The day his nomination was announced, I took my LP card out of my wallet and tore it up into little pieces. Their lack of any progress and unpalleteable approach have bothered me for years, but this was the final straw. A right-wing looney toon as MY candidate? Hell no! SCREW YOU LP, YOU SELLOUTS!! Oh, and thanks for doing your part to make sure I have nobody to vote for as President this year, a$$holes. Party of Principle???? What a f’ing joke. I will continue to vote for actual LIBERTARIAN candidates, but the LP itself has lost any support I could provide. Once again for good measure- SCREW YOU LP!
Actually, it’s not even “non-technically” true. Grover Cleveland allowed a second federal income tax, the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act (no, the “Wilson” in that law wasn’t Woodrow) to become law without his signature in 1894, and the Supreme Court struck down in 1895. It was largely in response to the Pollock decision that the Sixteenth Amendment was passed (a process that doesn’t involve Presidents).
Wilson may have been a crappy President all around, but to single him out on income tax strikes me as more than a bit odd. The worst that can be said of Wilson on this front is that he was the third U.S. President to sign a federal income tax into law, and the first to sign a constitutional one.