Comments on: Mary Ruwart May Seek Libertarian Presidential Nomination

By: James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

James Ogle [Free Parliamentary] — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:02:23 +0000

The US Parliament would certainly welcome Dr. Ruwart as president, prime minister or both. She returned a phone call, so at least she is in better communication than any other names mentioned here. Since the Free Parliamentary Party is a tiny splinter group, we are interested in integrating our operation, as our candidates are not permitted to run for president. Neither us not many of the “parties with one seat”.

We’d love to be on her team, or whomever our president and vice presidential nominees may be, be it Independent, Libertarian, or Peace and Freedom,
or even Democratic or Republican. As long as the names are elected under our policies; 1)free 2)liberty to self categorize 3) 100 “seats” elected with 1% each.

–James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
530.589.5294

By: Simon Girty

Simon Girty — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:44:19 +0000

I think this says less about Mary Ruwart as it does about the shortage of serious candidates seeking the nominating. None of the many people currently running seem to be able to generate any traction.
This could have been a good year for the LP because it seems like the same thing is happening in the other two partys. If only we were in position to capitalize on it.
Having said that, I would still be very happy with Mary Ruwart as the nominee. The best reason to run a candidate for president is to build the party, and she is committed to that. Over the last several years it seems the LP has become more fractured than normal and she could help pull it back together.
Forget healing the world, Mary, heal the party.

By: Richard

Richard — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:38:47 +0000

My source was Sean Haugh.

By: Gene Hawkridge

Gene Hawkridge — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:18:59 +0000

I would welcome Dr. Mary Ruwart as a candidate. She is mature, articulate, and thoroughly libertarian in her thinking. The Party does not need cranky old men, uncommunitive and disorganized candidates, or inexperienced, naive candidates.

By: Lance Brown

Lance Brown — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 08:55:37 +0000

Tom,

I actually agree that George Phillies, who I’m also in agreement with on a good many things, is not a strong candidate. I was just zinging you a bit, based on a pattern I’ve been noticing here and there.

On the Ron Paul issue…while it may be the case that many LPers supported Paul’s campaign and would be inclined to support an LP candidate who did the same, I think it’s hard to argue that having endorsed a candidate from the opposition party makes for a stronger LP presidential candidate overall. Should we end up with a Paul-endorser as our torch-bearer, I guess we’ll just have to hope that the reporters who cover our candidate aren’t smart enough to figure that out. Otherwise half of each interview will end up being about Ron Paul and the Republican Party.

Be well, be free,

Lance

By: Thomas L. Knapp

Thomas L. Knapp — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:59:47 +0000

Lance,

You’re correct: Steve Kubby endorsed Ron Paul for the Republican presidential nomination, and pledged to withdraw from the LP race and urge the party to nominate NOTA if Paul won that nomination.

While I was not a Paul supporter and wasn’t especially happy about Kubby’s decision to endorse Paul, you seem to think that that endorsment was a weak political move. I disagree. A high percentage of both LP leaders and LP rank and file supported Paul. Now that Paul is effectively out of the race, those LP members who supported Paul are, in my opinion, more likely to support an LP candidate who also supported Paul.

On the matter of Ron Paul, I am largely in agreement with George Phillies. For that matter, I’ve been in agreement with George Phillies on a good many things, going back to 2000 when I ran for LNC on the “Clean Slate,” with George as that slate’s candidate for party chair. One thing we DISagree on is whether he’s a credible presidential candidate. IMO, even in the context of a third party, he is not.

Regards,
Tom Knapp

By: Lance Brown

Lance Brown — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:14:04 +0000

Personally, I’d like to hear a little more of the news behind this supposed “news” story. She may seek it? She’s considering it? Based on….? Did she say something in public? In private to Richard Winger?

I just want to know how real this is. If it’s got substance, it’s one of the most interesting bits of news to hit the 2008 LP race in quite some time. I think she would enter as the presumptive frontrunner, at least of the LP candidates who didn’t endorse a Republican for president this election cycle.

(That last sentence is just to give Tom Knapp something to try and talk his way around… a.k.a, the Tom Challenge – try to promote Steve Kubby and diss George Phillies in the context of any given blog comment.)

By: Kelly

Kelly — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:41:26 +0000

Wayne Root has had considerable face time on TV and is a master self promoter. Root would have the best chance of growing the LP.

By: Eric Sundwall

Eric Sundwall — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:41:01 +0000

tisk tisk gentlemen from whence did this word come from ? Was it in Henderson ? Was it Ruwart ?

By: Thomas L. Knapp

Thomas L. Knapp — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:27:51 +0000

NewFederalist:

You’re absolutely right — “top tier” has nothing to do with the LP primaries. It has to do with general name recognition, political accomplishments, and reputation within the party.

Right now, the “top tier” in the LP race is Steve Kubby. Disclosure: I support Kubby and am a member of his campaign team, so please take everything I say with a grain of salt and investigate factual claims yourself.

Dr. Ruwart would probably be in the “top tier” with Kubby if she jumped into the race, primarily on the basis of that last factor. She’s not as generally well-known or as politically accomplished as Kubby [1], but she’s been active on the LP speaking circuit for many years — prospective LP delegates know her, like her and are comfortable with her — and she presents herself well.

The “second tier” is harder to discern. Wayne Root, George Phillies and Christine Smith all have plausible claims to it, but there are also good arguments for putting Phillies and Smith in the “third tier.”

Regards,
Tom Knapp

Note 1. A Google search on “Mary Ruwart” returns 7,950 results. A Google search on “Steve Kubby” returns more than 50,000. Both of Kubby’s books are far more popular, as measured by Amazon.Com sales rank, than any of Dr. Ruwart’s three books. I’ve seen no claims that Dr. Ruwart has ever played a key role in the election of any candidate to office or in the passage of any legislation, where Kubby has.