- The candidate must argue for shrinking government significantly.
- The candidate must not argue for growing government in any area at the level at which he is running (e.g. a candidate who argued for State regulation of abortion would be acceptable as a candidate for Federal office, but not at the State leve.)
- The candidate must not have any clear mental incapacity, such as bigotry.
- The party platform must be acceptable.
- If the election of the leader in question is likely, he must have sufficient credibility to convince me that he is likely govern as he campaigned.
- Ron Paul -- Write-In
- Chuck Baldwin. -- Constitution Party
- Bob Barr -- Libertarian Party
Clearly, neither Obama nor McCain deserve a second thought. Each has devoted his life to the growth of government, albeit in slightly different directions. If I'm on a jury considering their fate, I might vote for them -- to hang -- but that's the only way they'll get a vote from me without changing virtually every position they hold.
Paul is not a candidate, and although I would frankly prefer him to either of the others on the list, I will not write-in a candidate. It's cheaper and easier to simply stay home on election day. Write-ins are meaningless — they will not be counted, tabulated, recorded, or announced. Nobody will ever know how many people write in Paul's name, or anybody else's for that matter.
Baldwin fails #2, and #4. His party’s platform welcomes only Christians, which is unacceptable to me, both as a matter of policy and a matter of strategy. He also wants the Federal government to control abortion. This does not mean that I consider him a bad guy. I consider him to be a generally Liberty oriented candidate. None the less, I cannot support him.
Barr meets all my criteria. He is the only candidate who does, and therefore, I can elide the more subjective process of choosing between multiple acceptable candidates.
There have been some recent criticisms of Barr, which deserve consideration, so I'll address those briefly.
-
Barr is a recent convert to Libertarian who may not be sincere
This would be a serious issue, if it was likely that Barr would be elected. It is much less important in this election. It will be at least a couple more cycles before we have grown the party enough to have to worry about that. I'm looking forward to it! -
Barr is a recent convert to Libertarian who may not have the best interests of the party in mind.
This is an important issue during the primary season. It does not much matter at this point. Barr's what we've got. Votes for Barr will not make him president, but they will make our party credible, if they arrive in sufficient number. -
Barr is a recent convert to Libertarian who may not have the best interests of the party in mind.
This is an important issue during the primary season. It does not much matter at this point. Barr's what we've got. Votes for Barr will not make him president, but they will make our party credible, if they arrive in sufficient number. -
Barr's strategy has been poor when dealing with Ron Paul and/or the Campaign for Liberty.
This is an important issue during the primary season. It does not much matter at this point. Barr's what we've got. Votes for Barr will not make him president, but they will make our party credible, if they arrive in sufficient number.
The bottom line, as I see it, is that we who value freedom must rally behind Barr, regardless of whether we supported his nomination, because he is the nominee we have. For this election cycle, he's the only nominee we have. It is what it is.
Never forget, as you consider your vote in the next election, the words of a wise Libertarian thinker, Ron Paul:
It's not about me, it's about the MESSAGE.
