[Byrath]

If people actually knew what libertarians stand for, and did not worry about 'wasting their vote' on a 3rd party, how much of the popular vote do you think a libertarian presidential candidate could win?

I think easily 20-25% could be persuaded. Current republicans who favor low taxes and fiscal responsibility over moral issues could be persuaded .. democrats who favor social freedoms over government programs like social security ... and many people who do not vote at all currently, due to seeing little choice in our two party system, would like enough of the libertarian ideas to give them their vote.

[era o divertimento]

From what I know is that the Libertarians have basically drawn a line in the sand regarding their platform -- it is what it is and it won't change.

That's very noble, but it seems to make them virtually unelectable.

If I'm wrong, please correct me, of course. When I say Libertarians, I mean the U.S. Libertarian Party, not people who claim a Libertarian ideology.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

IMO the US Libertarian party should be disbanded.

Why? Because it has NO hope of ever having a successful presidential candidate. This is largely due to ballot access and campaign finance legislation.

I see nothing wrong with the LP being a pressure group. As a political party, it wouldn't get far in attaining actual representation.

[Noumenon]

Honestly, I think that we could only get 5 percent of the vote if everyone knew what we stood for. Many people would find something they like in our platform, but most would find something that they absolutely hate. That would only be at the beginning though. If we got the chance to influence the mainstream over a good period of time, people would start to adopt the philosophy of liberty. This would allow them to overcome the parts of our platform that they hate. It is kind of an unnatural way of thinking for many people; first adopt the principle, then consistently apply it to every topic. Most people just go with their initial feelings on a particular topic. That is why I think it would take some time to "convert" the masses.

IMO the US Libertarian party should be disbanded.

Why? Because it has NO hope of ever having a successful presidential candidate. This is largely due to ballot access and campaign finance legislation.

I see nothing wrong with the LP being a pressure group. As a political party, it wouldn't get far in attaining actual representation.

Very bad idea. Without the LP, there is nothing to unite libertarians. We would dissipate into separate "lone nuts," with little hope of ever influencing anything.

I don't think the main purpose of the LP at this point is to actually win office. We know its not going to happen on a presidential level. What we do know is that participating in the political system is a great tool for expanding our influence.

[futuristic]

IMO, libertarians have a better chance to convince educated people. The uneducated have problems with accepting new ideas, they are often don’t understand anything and horrified of changes. That’s why libertarians should try to push some kind of education reform to improve the situation.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

What we do know is that participating in the political system is a great tool for expanding our influence.

You don't need to be a political party to simply expand the influence of a cause or increase its awareness.

[Paradigm]

I think the LP would do very well if it wasn't for the two-party system, but changing that will require some major change in the voting system. In a sense, libertarianism is the perfect all-American ideology--liberty, self-government, and rugged individualism. There's some issues where the American public isn't likely to agree with us--gay marriage, drug policy, welfare--but I think history has taught us that Americans tend to vote out of their pocketbook, and that would certainly work to the advantage of the Libertarian Party. I personally consider myself a moderate geolibertarian with some slight liberal tendencies--I generally support the Libertarian platform, but I'm a bit skeptical of their policies on welfare and the environment. Nonetheless, I would have no problem turning these issues over to the states, and I think most Americans would be ok with that too.

Poll after poll has shown that Americans want less government, yet both major parties continue to expand it. There used to be a place for libertarians within the Republican party, but the neocons and religious Right have taken over. When I discuss libertarianism with others, most have never heard of it. What's interesting is that when I tell them how libertarians want to get the government out of people's lives, both liberals and conservatives feel like that's more aligned with their beliefs than the other side.

[Maxim Litvinov]

Well, you have to be very careful with polls...

I mean, if you talk about 'red tape' and 'bureaucracy' and highlight some public servant who is paid $200000 a year to do PR, and then in the next sentence ask people if they want 'less government' then they'll say - "Yes. Certainly".

But if you talk about people patrolling your borders or paying for troops and police, or administering roads and schools and then ask people whether they want less money devoted to these things publically they'll equivocate.

Even if you talk about MPs - if you describe their perquisites and the number of days they spend on the floor of the chamber you'll get cries that you need to get rid of them. Yet if you went through in detail all of the other work they did people would have a more rational point of view.

I realise that government is a dirty word for libertarians, but the popular view on government is much more complex than 'government = wasteful bureaucracy'.

[Saf]

The problem is that left-leaners in the US will dislike how business-friendly and self-helping libertarianism is, while right-leaners will dislike how it doesn't wage war on brown people and shove christianity down your throat. Contrary to my heavy-handed political nature, I actually would pick the libertarians if I could get any party in America elected. Social things are more important than the economy IMO, and the reps, dems and greens are all jokes.

[Ombrageux]

America's electoral system needs fixing. Until then the Libertarians (and every none-demoblican party) have no place except perhaps in local gov.

As always with electoral reform, very unlikely to happen. At most we could see proportional (rather than winner take all) in more states for the electoral collge.

[Comrade Ogilvy]

I realise that government is a dirty word for libertarians, but the popular view on government is much more complex than 'government = wasteful bureaucracy'.

Wrong. Government IS wasteful bureaucracy.