“The Moderate Voice” Assistant Editor Endorses Barr for President
October 19th, 2008On October 18, Jazz Shaw, Assistant Editor of “The Moderate Voice”, endorsed Bob Barr for president in a lengthy, analytical essay, which can be read here. The web address for “The Moderate Voice” is http://themoderatevoice.com.
Barr will be interviewed on “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer” on Monday evening, October 20. This may be the first time the Lehrer show (or its predecessor, the McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour), has ever invited any Libertarian presidential nominee to appear on the show during an election campaign. Even Ed Clark in 1980 did not receive such an invitation, nor did Ron Paul in 1988.
October 19th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Barr might get 0.6%, but he won’t be a white knight. He is attractiving some conservative support but most libertarians I know have said this is the first time they aren’t voting LP, myself included. All Barr managed to do was drive libertarians away from the LP and in the end the party will be worse off.
October 19th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
I am predicting Barr to get about 1.5% of the vote nationally. If he does badly, I would say the low ball is 0.8%. On the high end, I would say 3%.
However, he needs to campaign where he has polled highest, in NH,GA,and NV. And, he needs to take part in the 3rd Party debate. These moves would easily get him the 1.5% I think.
October 19th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
If Barr could get 3% in Arkansas, the Libertarian Party would be a qualified party for the first time ever in that state. If he could get 2% in either or both Iowa and Kentucky, the Libertarian Party would be a qualified party for the first time ever in those two states. If he gets on in Connecticut and polls just 1%, the party will have permanent status for president for the first time in its history. If Barr just gets one-half of 1% in New Mexico, that will extend the party’s ballot status in that state for four more years. If he gets 1% in Maryland, that will extend the party’s status in that state for another two years. If either he or the party’s candidate for Governor of North Carolina gets 2%, that will extend the party’s qualified status for 4 years. If either he or the US Senate candidate in Massachusetts gets 3%, that will make the party ballot-qualified in that state. If he gets 1% in Nevada, that will extend the party’s qualified status another two years. If he or one of the other 3 statewide candidates in Pennsylvania gets 2% of the highest vote-getter’s total, that will bring back the party’s “qualified” status in that state (although that status isn’t very useful). If he or one of the party’s 3 candidates for statewide state office gets 2% in Utah, the party’s qualified status will extend another two years.
The rewards would be even greater if he got 5%.
October 19th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Which is exactly why I voted absentee for Bob Barr. Richard is right on target. If a vote for a nominee helps gain or maintain ballot status it is a powerful vote even if that particular nominee does not win. If the CP had made the ballot in PA I would have cast a vote for one of their statewide nominees for the same reason. The Greens were not on this year, either.
October 19th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Our Libertarian Meetup Group in Seoul, Korea has completed leafleting to pedestrians in the Itaewan Shopping District here to Americans who will be mostly voting by absentee ballot. We are doing our part to boost the Libertarian Party’s vote totals for Bob Barr. I was pleasantly surprised that some people had already voted for Barr. When passing out the leaflets we had a very brief time to speak. This seem to work well: “Here is some info on Bob Barr for President. No more bailouts, no more war.”
October 19th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
I’m supporting Baldwin myself, but I definitely think that Barr is the second-best choice, and would encourage anyone who leans libertarian to vote for him over McCain, Obama, or staying home.
October 19th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
I don’t understand how a true libertarian can vote for Baldwin – who is not libertarian. Paul is voting for Baldwin because he is a friend and supported his campaign.
Barr is the LP candidate – and has demonstrated a good knowledge of the issues. He was not my choice at the convention – but will get my vote in the general election. I don’t believe Barr’s candidacy will harm the long term viability of the LP. The failure of LP members to support their Party and candidates could have an impact – but that is the responsibility of the members, not the fault of the candidates.
October 19th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
I don’t understand how a true libertarian can vote for Baldwin – who is not libertarian.
Well, I am libertarianish, but not a pure libertarian by any means.
I am not a disgruntled LPer, voting for Baldwin as an alternative to Barr. I’ve been a CP supporter since 2000. Nonetheless, I like Barr far better than McCain or Obama.
October 20th, 2008 at 6:22 am
This may be the first time the Lehrer show (or its predecessor, the McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour), has ever invited any Libertarian presidential nominee to appear on the show during an election campaign.
Maybe my memory is hazy, but hasn’t NewsHour invited most of the “major” third party presidential candidates on the show for one-time-only interviews every four years? I’m pretty sure I recall seeing Browne, Badnairk and even Marrou on NewsHour back in the day (along with Peroutka, Hagelin, and all the other usual suspects)…?
October 20th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Barr was on Thom Hartmann on Air America this morning in the first half-hour, and did all right, even if he did botch the regulation question (but Hartmann thinks Browne was the focus of the party in 1983 and has little clue about libertarianism, so it was really a wash). Show is probably in the archives on Hartmann’s web site.