2020 Libertarian Party Nomination Process Megathread

[Skjellyfetti]

The idea of 5% being some magical window, especially considering the idea that they qualify for public funding, is just a fantasy.

My point is that 5% isn't some magic number. It's set by the FEC. If they change it to 3%, then 3% becomes the target.

[GannonFan]

The idea of 5% being some magical window, especially considering the idea that they qualify for public funding, is just a fantasy.

My point is that 5% isn't some magic number. It's set by the FEC. If they change it to 3%, then 3% becomes the target.

I'm just saying that threshold, and the promise of public funding that comes with that, isn't of itself strong enough to overcome the other issues with 3rd party long term viability.

[Skjellyfetti]

I agree. But, they aren't going to get over all of them in one fell swoop.

Getting 5% should be the first target. Getting to 15% should be the next target. Next step would be >33.3% of the popular vote a presidential election. Next step would be 270 electoral votes.

They're not going to go straight to 270 electoral votes.

[Ibanez]

My point is that 5% isn't some magic number. It's set by the FEC. If they change it to 3%, then 3% becomes the target.

I'm just saying that threshold, and the promise of public funding that comes with that, isn't of itself strong enough to overcome the other issues with 3rd party long term viability.

https://freakonomics.com/podcast/politics-industry/

In their report, Gehl and Porter identify the “five key inputs to modern political competition: candidates, campaign talent, voter data, idea suppliers, and lobbyists.” Here’s what they write: “Increasingly, most everything required to run a modern campaign and govern is tied to or heavily influenced by one party or the other, including think tanks, voter data, and talent.”

[GannonFan]

I agree. But, they aren't going to get over all of them in one fell swoop.

Getting 5% should be the first target. Getting to 15% should be the next target. Next step would be >33.3% of the popular vote a presidential election. Next step would be 270 electoral votes.

They're not going to go straight to 270 electoral votes.

So you're saying it'll take at least 3-4 Presidential cycles to make this happen and step through all those mileposts. That's 12-16 years, at a minimum. When one of the current two political parties are outside of power that long they say there in the desert. But in reality neither of the two political parties have been outside of all power (legislative or Executive) that long in going on at least 80-90 years. And you expect a nascent, third party political party to stay together, and most importantly stay distinct enough policy-wise from one of the current two parties, for at least 12-16 years? And you think that sounds hopeful/likely?

[UNI88]

2020 might be just as fertile. Trump is still hated and while Biden isn't hated he is seen as an old, senile, creepy, lifetime politician. If Amash runs, Trump is going to attack him which will likely bring him a lot more attention than Johnson got in 2016. It's an opportunity for the Libertarians to take another step forward if they can stop being so obstinate.

I guess I'd ask the exact same question I asked in 2016... what is a step forward? Jelly was the only one who put a number to it back then. His magic number was 5% of the vote. What would a step forward look like for you?

5% or more is what I would like to see. Funding will help state and local candidates and that is where the real gains need to be made. 5-10% obviously doesn't win a presidential election but 5-10% of Congress or a state legislature is a powerful voting bloc.

[Ivytalk]

Unlike many “historians,” Ganny prefers not to have his work “peer reviewed.”

I also enjoy the aspect of being able to tell my "peers" that they're wrong in their review and how that reflects a shortcoming on them personally.

In other words, you’re not an academic. You’re a history minor who won a “major award” — like the Old Man in Christmas Story.

[Ivytalk]

Trump is already taking shots at Amash. “Oh, boy, is this great!”

[Skjellyfetti]

I agree. But, they aren't going to get over all of them in one fell swoop.

Getting 5% should be the first target. Getting to 15% should be the next target. Next step would be >33.3% of the popular vote a presidential election. Next step would be 270 electoral votes.

They're not going to go straight to 270 electoral votes.

So you're saying it'll take at least 3-4 Presidential cycles to make this happen and step through all those mileposts. That's 12-16 years, at a minimum. When one of the current two political parties are outside of power that long they say there in the desert. But in reality neither of the two political parties have been outside of all power (legislative or Executive) that long in going on at least 80-90 years. And you expect a nascent, third party political party to stay together, and most importantly stay distinct enough policy-wise from one of the current two parties, for at least 12-16 years? And you think that sounds hopeful/likely?

Did I say I was hopeful?

In fact, I said the opposite: I was hopeful in 2016 with the perfect storm of shit candidates. I'm no longer hopeful. Barring some sort of massive Whig-style implosion of one of the major parties, I'm not the least bit hopeful of a 3rd party breaking through in my lifetime.

[GannonFan]

I also enjoy the aspect of being able to tell my "peers" that they're wrong in their review and how that reflects a shortcoming on them personally.

In other words, you’re not an academic. You’re a history minor who won a “major award” — like the Old Man in Christmas Story.

Uh, yeah. Pretty sure I've been an engineer for something like 25 years now, being a historian academic flew by years ago. Still doesn't mean I'm wrong though.

[89Hen]

5-10% of Congress or a state legislature is a powerful voting bloc.

That ought to lock things up even further in DC.

[kalm]

Yep that’s me.

Btw, Ganny, I was agreeing with YOU and alluding to attacks on my link to economic study that compares covid to 1918.

Eh, sometimes it's hard for me to remember which side of a topic you were on (or at least which side you finally ended up on after going back and forth) and how that may or may not play into a snarky rejoinder on another poster. Plus I'm at work (essential employee - holding up the tax base for all you guys) so I was just shooting from the hip rather than figuring all that out.

Cripes, Ganny, it’s sometimes tough for ME to remember which side of a topic I was on. And that’s a good thing in my book.

[UNI88]

5-10% of Congress or a state legislature is a powerful voting bloc.

That ought to lock things up even further in DC.

The less Congress does, the less damage it does.

Seriously though if the Libertarians have 10% of a chamber with the Dems and Reps both having less than 50% then Libertarian support would be required to pass any legislation. Both parties would have to make concessions to gain Libertarian support. This would be yuge for fiscal responsibility, privacy, etc.

[kalm]

That ought to lock things up even further in DC.

The less Congress does, the less damage it does.

Seriously though if the Libertarians have 10% of a chamber with the Dems and Reps both having less than 50% then Libertarian support would be required to pass any legislation. Both parties would have to make concessions to gain Libertarian support. This would be yuge for fiscal responsibility, privacy, etc.

[Ivytalk]

That ought to lock things up even further in DC.

The less Congress does, the less damage it does.

Seriously though if the Libertarians have 10% of a chamber with the Dems and Reps both having less than 50% then Libertarian support would be required to pass any legislation. Both parties would have to make concessions to gain Libertarian support. This would be yuge for fiscal responsibility, privacy, etc.

Heck, let’s switch to a parliamentary system right now! Coalitions with minority parties, no-confidence votes to sack prime ministers that you don’t like, snap elections. What’s not to like?

[Ivytalk]

In other words, you’re not an academic. You’re a history minor who won a “major award” — like the Old Man in Christmas Story.

Uh, yeah. Pretty sure I've been an engineer for something like 25 years now, being a historian academic flew by years ago. Still doesn't mean I'm wrong though.

For an “essential employee,” you spend a helluva lot of time on here, playing the frustrated historian. What engineering projects are you working on...when you actually work?

[89Hen]

That ought to lock things up even further in DC.

The less Congress does, the less damage it does.

Seriously though if the Libertarians have 10% of a chamber with the Dems and Reps both having less than 50% then Libertarian support would be required to pass any legislation. Both parties would have to make concessions to gain Libertarian support. This would be yuge for fiscal responsibility, privacy, etc.

Almost like breaking records for vetoes.

[Ivytalk]

The less Congress does, the less damage it does.

Seriously though if the Libertarians have 10% of a chamber with the Dems and Reps both having less than 50% then Libertarian support would be required to pass any legislation. Both parties would have to make concessions to gain Libertarian support. This would be yuge for fiscal responsibility, privacy, etc.

Almost like breaking records for vetoes.

Depends on who controls the executive, you mugwump.

[JohnStOnge]

I may vote for Amash if he ends up being the Libertarian Party candidate. That is assuming the situation is as it's expected to be: Louisiana will not be in play and Trump will win by a landslide in this State. If it comes to who I would like to be President between Amash, Biden, and Trump it's Amash .

But if it turns out that it looks like Louisiana is in play I am voting for Biden unless by some much GREATER miracle it looks like Amash has a chance to actually win the Presidency.

[89Hen]

Almost like breaking records for vetoes.

Depends on who controls the executive, you mugwump.

Guess you missed that one

[Ivytalk]

Depends on who controls the executive, you mugwump.

Guess you missed that one

Whatever, Eeyore. Always finding problems, never suggesting solutions.

[89Hen]

Guess you missed that one

Whatever, Eeyore. Always finding problems, never suggesting solutions.

Says grumpy Gus

[Ivytalk]

Whatever, Eeyore. Always finding problems, never suggesting solutions.

Says grumpy Gus

Grumpy? Do you really want to compare outlook on life, or sense of humor, on this site? On either score, you’re going down. Go ahead. Set up a poll on it.

Although the funniest guys on here are Flaggy and 93, for my money.

[89Hen]

Says grumpy Gus

Grumpy? Do you really want to compare outlook on life, or sense of humor, on this site? On either score, you’re going down. Go ahead. Set up a poll on it.

Although the funniest guys on here are Flaggy and 93, for my money.

Today... you're the grump gramps.

[Ivytalk]

Grumpy? Do you really want to compare outlook on life, or sense of humor, on this site? On either score, you’re going down. Go ahead. Set up a poll on it.

Although the funniest guys on here are Flaggy and 93, for my money.

Today... you're the grump gramps.

This is one of your more typical posts whenever people disagree with you, even in fun. Too bad. Maybe a Sambo’s trip would loosen you up.