Isn't running against "business as usual" Obama's shtick?

Im surprised he spearheaded the Clinton impeachment.

You can't be a democratic national candidate and run against big business. You'd wind up like Kucinich. Obama is just as beholden to corporate America as McCain. He's just had only 2 years to feed at the troth as opposed to McCain's 407 years.

Barr is right, but still, that's just the way it is.

I think this guy could get my dad's vote. He's always going on and on about how the parties are the same and they are bought by the same interests, so while we're arguing over side issues special interests have taken over the country.

I do think business as usual is bad, and I agree that not every issue is two dimensional and having two parties makes it that way (how upset are we on here when the poll only has a few choices and we don't get to click one we want?) - there are also issues we probably aren't even discussing because the two parties aren't running on them.

true conservatives? True conservatives are NOT libertarians.

I just don't see how a third party candidate, unless people are convinced he or she is the messiah, could get anything done. Congress would always be balancing the good of either party versus what this outsider president wants done - do we have to please the voters who supported this guy, or do we create our own superstar opposition to run against him in 4 years? I'm all for building alternative parties, but from the bottom or the middle, up.

"Barr is right, but still, that's just the way it is."

such a pithy, wise raccoon.

I was really interested by this (as I am by the Libertarians.)

First, for me on Libertarians, I am eye to eye with them on many issues, but we are far off on foreign policy (among a few other items.)

I don't think they are an exact answer for "true conservatives," but on many issues they have come much closer than how far much of the GOP has drifted away.

As for throwing away a vote, at this point in time, I do believe it is a wasted vote. I believe, at this point in time, the Libertarians really need to focus on seating more members in local government, state government and pushing their way into Congress. Until the American public at large sees the party as an actual alternative, I do not see them being able to do anything in a Presidential election other than pull votes away from the two front runners.

If you have no interest what so ever in voting for McCain or Obama, I wouldn't call a vote for a third party wasted, but if you are voting to have a say in who our next president is, then I would say your vote could possibly have more of an impact elsewhere.

Oh, and if Libertarians were true Conservatives, why not just call themselves Conservatives instead of Libertarians.

I am considering why maybe it isn't a wasted vote, but it is a suicidal splinter vote. Like Perot or Nader or whomever else threatens to carry away the party base and get the other guy elected, it all depends on how greatly you believe the parties have abandoned their core.

If a voter really thinks either major is the same and their major issues aren't represented in the parties, it is a way to gain strength and recognition for your political ideology.

I think the impact could be an election, or at least a showing of strength in numbers (which politicians are always looking for), and maybe getting the party that lost your votes to consider you an important base in the future (a bloc vote that gets catered to).

That's why I think we need to go to an equal representative parliament where the percentage of the vote of the overall population is reflected directly in the government. Where if 5% of the electorate votes Green, then 5% of their party gets seats in the government. This winner take all is so childish and just means that every 4 years we have the chance to bounce back and forth between two different ideologies.

I agree with 3M and sy. As usual.

We should figure out how to address the endless campaign cycle - do something to get the focus on the here and now and not four years from now.

Interesting thought Rac.

This guy sounds like Ron Paul. Is he not eligible to run as a Libertarian since he hasn't given up as a Republican yet?

The main difference btwn Libertarians and Conversatives, imo, is the stance on social issues. Libertarians are big on letting consenting adults do whatever they want.

i know people vote for the lesser of two evils because it is usually a contest between two people. even with all the other people on the ballot, there is no organized effort to get them elected and there fore you put your vote to one of the two most likely to represent you. it's a flawed system but have you paid attention to other countries?

I don't believe in a wasted vote. It symbolizes how you think and feel about a candidate. People say Nader spoiled the election for Gore, but if Gore wanted Nader's votes, he should have represented their interests too.

For someone to come into the election at this stage - they have already lost, unless something major comes out about McCain or Obama. If Barr was going to be taken seriously as a candidate he needed to get his face out there back when McCain, Romney, Clinton and Obama were out campaigning their butt's off!

popgoestheworld, Ron Paul did run on the Libertarian ticket in 1988. He said he ran as a Republican this time because he got a lot more attention, which makes a lot of sense.

I haven't heard too many good things about Bob Barr, but I haven't done any research myself.

My understanding of true Libertarianism is to keep the government out of people's lives unless it is to protect them. They are social liberals and economic conservatives.

Thanks for posting this!

I agree with 3M completely. While I am not a Libertarian, the party does interest me a great deal. No vote is wasted, and I truly believe that the current politicians in this country (for the most part) need a real wake up call, however that happens. It makes me sad to think that we realize that things are broken in Washington, but we feel powerless to change it. That is what Glenn Beck talks about a lot, and I think it's one of the reasons he had Bob Barr on his program. As a Conservative, I don't agree with the Libertarian party on everything, but I think a lot of their ideas are good ones.

I've actually always thought that Bob Barr was one Republican I can stand. I've seen him in many committee hearings and I liked what he had to say.

I think if he ran he would pull an equal amount of Dems and Rep. to his side.

Barr wouldnt have been my choice for the libertarian nominee but hes got my vote anyways. The only real "wasted vote" is voting for the lesser of two evils. I would rather continue to give my vote to the party that most conforms with my beliefs, even if all i can do is help them go from 4% of the vote to 5%. If that number keeps going up every year, soon they might actually have a chance at some attention. Although I do believe with mellowman that the party would benefit more from local/state campaigns at this time.

I dont believe libertarians are true conservatives, but I do believe that true conservatives can identify with libertarians better than they can identify with the Republican party at this time.

I think the only true wasted vote is one thats not cast.

I agree cabaker.

And just to vent - couldnt he have shaved the mustache before campaigning?

I thought the mustach makes him look distinguished. He looks an awful lot like Alex Trebec from "Jeopardy"

Ugh. In a perfect world, I would never heard the words "wasted vote" ever again. If only people would actually vote their conscience and stop buying into the "wasted vote" propaganda that lifelong career Democrats and Republicans drone on about, then maybe our politicians wouldn't waste so much time playing politics and maybe we could actually get something done in Washington. For once.

Alex Trebek hasn't been the same since he shaved the mustache. His mojo was in that facial hair.

Ok I see the trebek resemblance a little bit with the mustache. But I feel like he has such intense eyes that arent getting any attention because the mustache is drawing your eyes towards his lips.

Yeah maybe Trebek in 10 years.

bob barr is the biggest hypocrite around, he claims to be libertarian but he is pro life, he claims to be pro life but his wife had an abortion. he claims to be againist the war on drugs but he was a huge opponet to legalizing medical marijuana so much so that a law he created was struck down by the supreme court as unconstitutional. he also authored the defense of marriage act which denies federal recognition for gay marriage. if the basis of being libertarian is individual freedoms, why the hell did bob barr work so hard to deny them?

Shout out to a law school alum! BB got his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 1977! Hoya Saxa baby!

So in the research that got me that detail, he does seem to have a very conservative history - in 2002, he was described as "the idol of the gun-toting, abortion-fighting, IRS-hating hard right wing of American politics". Huge proponent of the War on Drugs. I find it interesting that the Libertarian Party was part of the reason he lost his Congressional seat - a mix of redistricting and Libertarian ads against him, attacking his opposition to medical marijuana.

Then again, at the same time he was called "one of libertarianism's few friends in Congress" by J. Bradley Jansen, vice chair of the Libertarian Party in DC.

People's ideals can evolve and change over time.

In an interview with Stephen Colbert on the Colbert Report on June 4, 2008, Barr confirmed that he now supports ending marijuana prohibition, as well as the War on Drugs for which he once vehemently fought. If he now believes it, like any of the people that have switched parties, it is better he run on that platform...

(gotta love Wikipedia)

I think the interesting part of his choice in his jump to Libertarian probably wasn't a change in his beliefs on the issues - prob still anti-abortion, anti-drug, anti-gay marriage - but is now thinking the govt should stay out of it. It moves the debate from the issue, back a step and asking instead whether the govt have its hand in that issue (something the govt really should ask itself more often)...

Note to Megnmac: Go Hoyas!

Note to flutter: I always thought the Libertarian stance was pro-choice but apparently the party is pretty much split down the middle on this issue. Ron Paul is also pro-life.

It's the same basic split for them as for the rest of us. Some of the Libertarians think the right of the individual extend to the fetus and other's don't.

its really not just abortion, my boyfriend is pro life but he supports repealing gun laws, supports gay marriage (actually he could care less about it) and pretty much supports as little of governement as possible. this makes him a pretty standard libertarian. and i find it interesting that barrs ideas and views evolved over time around the same time he was fighting with the republican party over the patriot act, which is around the same time he was praised by the party. to me barr saw in opportunity to be a conservative answer to john mccain but it irritates me that he decided to label himself a libertarian because it suited his cause not because he believed in the partys cause

Well, since I'm in the Los Angeles area, my vote is already pointless. If I vote Dem, I'm so much in the majority it doesn't matter. If I vote Republican, I'm so much in the minority it doesn't even register in the statistics. One of my oldest (and most intelligent, thoughtful and well-informed) friends says she hasn't voted for either of the two major parties since the seventies!

So if there was ever an election to cast a protest vote, this might be it. However, the mere thought that I might indirectly contribute to an Obama White House terrifies me--more than anything else, I think he's woefully unprepared for international affairs and national security. While I hate McCain's stance on some other issues, IMO security is his strong point, and I consider it an absolutely critical issue.

Aside from hiring all his dad's friends, how was George Bush better prepared for international affairs or national security? Is a president's whole family capable of running the country after dad has held the oval office?

lainetm-one of the reasons why bob barr seperated from the republican party, he is now for troop withdrawal and regrets his vote for the patriot act. he has also publicly chastized bush for wiretapping. to be honest he is similar to obama in his view on the war.

Stephley: Having one substandard president doesn't justify electing another one. At least Bush Jr. knew he needed experienced advisors: I get the impression Obama thinks he's an all-around genius--no sarcasm intended--and doesn't need much advice. That's really scary, IMHO.

I'm actually fairly open-minded. I'd vote for a Democrat, if the party would run a decent one. They have suicided the last two elections.

flutterpie: Thanks for the information. I'm not sure who I would vote for, if it were not a major-party candidate. Still a little time to observe and decide, I guess.

Obama does have a team of advisers, and I'm not sure Jim Baker was ever better than nothing, but I'll bow to your thoughts.

Definitely not a Barr supporter. I agreed with some of his points on the Colbert Report last week, but there's just something I don't like about him, and I don't know what.

Like said before, a wasted vote is one that is never cast. I say vote for whoever you want. If you really don't want McCain or Obama to be president, don't vote for them. If you want Bob Barr to be president, vote for Bob Barr.

I agree with 3M and Raciccarone.

I routinely cast votes for third party candidates if a) they are my top pick, b) I'm indifferent between the major party candidates or c) don't like either of the major party candidates. None of those apply in this presidential election.

I, too, think we would be best served by a parliamentary system. Forcing everybody to subscribe to one of two fairly rigid partylines does NOT represent most individuals. And, frankly, I think it shuts down debate and discussion by creating a kind of "you're either with us or against us" mentality.

I can see the benefit of national publicity in a presidential campaign, but I really think Libertarians and other third parties stand to gain more ground by focusing on smaller campaigns and becoming a force in state and local governments.

Hey Rac,

Did ya see that? Someone agreed with both of us at the same time. I believe the world might be ending today......

i am all for a third party system, nadar pisses me off to no end but i feel he is a true independent with a true following. barr is a wolf in sheeps clothing, he is a conservative who always voted conservative, who always followed all the conservative credos. and when it suited his political career, he called himself a libertarian. i think the only thing he is honest about is his opposal to the patriot act and the war besides that he is a republican through and through.

Don't be fooled. Barr is not a true Lib. He just wanted to run for president. Catfish '08!

Seriously though, I would bet a lot of conservative Republicans would vote for Barr based on his past record.