Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required
Email Format


Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

Red Mass Group on Facebook

About Us
How To Format Posts
Email Us
RSS Feed
RMG Store
Fair Use Policy
RMG Mobile Site


Advanced Search

Event Calendar
October 2015
(view month)
* * * * 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
* * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Blog Roll
Massachusetts Conservatives Boston Maggie
The Capitol View Live
Critical Mass
FreeRepublic - Massachusetts
Miss Kelly

Mass Video Blogs Catch of the Day Video

Blue Mass Group
Left in Lowell
Hester Prynne
Mass Marrier

Non-Partisan Massachusetts Blogs
Preti Minahan
Mass Politics Profs

Garrett Quinn
Beacon Hill Institute Blog
Pioneer Institute Blog
Campaign For Liberty
Cato at Liberty
Young Americans for Liberty

Hyper Local
My Dedham
Universal Hub
View From Plymouth Rock
Worcester Herald

Mass. Media
The Lone Republican
Pundit Review
Dan Kennedy's "The Scrum"
WGBH's Adam Reilly
WGBH's "Beat The Press">
WGBH's "Greater Boston">
David Bernstein at Boston Magazine
NECN's "Broadside: with Jim Braude"

Ace of Spades
Big Hollywood
Daily Beast
Daily Kos
Daily Paul
Flynn Files
Hot Air
Little Green Footballs
National Review
Reason - Hit & Run
Red State

Why Should Libertarians Vote For Team Red In 2012?

by: Garrett Quinn

Mon Oct 08, 2012 at 06:00:00 AM EDT

As you probably know libertarians are estimated to make up somewhere around 10% of likely voters, not enough to win a majority but enough to sway an election. When it comes to actually showing up and voting libertarians have a recent history of going with the party that wins. In 2000 and 2004 the majority of the libertarian vote went with George W. Bush while in 2008 the bulk went with Barack Obama. Libertarians threw Republicans out of Congress in 2006 and tossed the Democrats on the street in 2010.

As we stare down another "most important election ever", it's a big question as to where libertarians will go. Most libertarians I know are planning on voting for the Libertarian Party's presidential nominee, former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, a guy I've spent much of the year covering on the trail for Reason. The consensus in Galt's Gulch seems to be that he is the most competent person the LP has ever put at the top of their ticket, which is saying something for a party that nominated a guy opposed to drivers licenses as recently as 2004.

Now, shelve the idea that Johnson is a viable option for voters in 48 states plus Washington, DC. I want you, the diarists of the hyper-partisan blogosphere, to sell libertarians on why they should vote for Team Red. It can be in 100 words, 500 words, or even 1,000 words. Don't limit your responses to just Mitt Romney, though. I want to hear why libertarians (that's with a small 'l') should vote for Scott Brown in the all-important US Senate race. Brown's a lock to repeal some of the worst excesses of the Obama administration and takes a typical northeast moderate approach to some social issues but what else does he have to offer libertarians that Elizabeth Warren doesn't?

The best responses from BMG and RMG will end up in a post at Reason and

Garrett Quinn :: Why Should Libertarians Vote For Team Red In 2012?
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Liz Warren should not be allowed anywhere near power (0.00 / 0)
She is an Italian-model economic(small f)fascist. Her entire ideology is based on everything to the state. She has enjoyed the fruits of corporatism and her platform is to increase the rules and regulations that enlarge and perpetuate the system.

That she is a fabulist with severe personality and character defects only adds to the danger she poses.

Scott Brown has voted for more liberty more often than not and is the most pro-liberty statewide candidate elected in YEARS. His reelection solidifies a shift towards more libertarian principles in a state that's been bogged down by a corrupt, single party, big government swamp for my entire life.

We are not New Mexico, we aren't even New Hampshire. But if we want to get there we need stepping stones. Scott Brown is that if nothing else.

There's a (5.00 / 2)
50% chance that Scott Brown will vote for giving more power to government. There's a 100% chance that Warren will. "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

How anyone who calls themselves a libertarian could vote for progressive democrats like Warren and Obama is beyond me. It seems to me that Progressivism is at complete odds with Libertarianism.

G.O.P. Growth. Opportunity. Prosperity. For all Americans.

Karl (TLC)Weld

Promises, promises (0.00 / 0)
Liberty means limited interference with your choices.

Seems the choice is pretty clear if you believe that the libertarian ideology is one that emphasizes choice.

Elizabeth Warren:

- Seeks to reinstitute the Federal ban on assault weapons.

- Continue the individual mandate for health insurance.

- Wants Equal pay federal statutes.  An employer can be sued if he choose to pay a woman more than a man, or visa versa even if the employee agrees to the wage?

- Opposition to "right to work" laws under which an employee can actually choose to not join a union.

- Federal Refinancing mandates for homes underwater, i.e. compel lenders/investors to eat the loss.  Wonder how that will affect future lending?

-  She says, "So long as we rely on oil and gas, we also threaten our national security. Reliance on oil and gas puts us at the mercy of OPEC."  Look, they have oil; we want oil.  If it's cheaper there, then we buy it.

Elizabeth Warren: a bankruptcy professor, bankrupt of ideas

What else? (0.00 / 0)
Brown's a lock to repeal some of the worst excesses of the Obama administration

The only thing I can think of is the mandate.  Scott has made clear that that is the only part of Obamacare he will cut.  What other worst excesses am I missing?

I'm also curious how cutting the part of Obamacare that funds the rest of it make fiscal sense.  Doesn't this balloon deficit spending?

No spam. Mobile friendly.
Follow @AltercateMA

What else (0.00 / 0)

-Stimulus:  cash for clunkers, first time homebuyers credit, energy/renewable spending
-GM Bailout
-Cap and trade regs via executive order

I don't see how eliminating the mandate will ballon(er) the deficit spending given that the deficit ballooned.  Potentially, the worse case scenarios aren't that the deficit will ballon but rather that the exchange premiums, will be about 20-25% higher.


Elizabeth Warren: a bankruptcy professor, bankrupt of ideas

[ Parent ]
I'm sorry but this is such a gay thread . . . (2.50 / 2)
Hey guys what do you think about XYZ? ... the winning essay will be spotlighted on ...

Garrett, get off you ass and start writing!  Real writing ... like a man!  Non of this "Holiday Monday / Slow News Weekend" crap.  Be a MAN!


Molon Labe

Really? (0.00 / 0)

"The prediction here is that RMG will peter out in a couple of months." - Adam Reilly, 2/28/2007

[ Parent ]
why libertarians should vote for social cons (0.00 / 0)
Not to pick any particular race out, but, in my opinion, though their positions are very much at odds with each other, every libertarian who has the opportunity to do so should vote for the most socially conservative candidate in each election, particularly in Senate elections (and especially in Republican primaries).

The reason I say this is that its the socially moderate Republicans that will be most likely to cross the aisle and vote with Democrats; its a rare occasion when the parties come together to decrease the government's intrusion into our personal liberties (as I say, bipartisanship is when politicians put aside their differences and come together on what they agree upon: screw the constituents).  The more conservative, in any way shape or form, a Republican office holder is, the less likely it is that he will ever agree with any Democrat, so long as the Democrats are the liberal/progressive party.

Thus, electing social conservatives will increase partisan gridlock, which every true libertarian (small l or big l) should love.

I'd rather not have their vote (0.00 / 0)
I think libertarians should vote for the Libertarians and not try to influence the Democratic and Republican parties.

I started at the end of 2009 with the purpose of kicking the libertarians out of the two parties because they have pushed the two main parties to extremes and are the cause of the partisan gridlock, both in government and in the blogosphere. They aren't some middle ground, they are the two extremes, the reason we haven't been able to come together to have effective government working on our common problems. I let the Soapblox subscription run out because it wasn't getting any use, and started to get it going again with Wordpress like BMG did, but got discouraged. The original one looked so cool.

Here's an entry that won't win ... (0.00 / 0)
Come on guys. After a lifetime of watching your blood pressure click up 15 points every time you are forced to hear one of "representatives" speak, hasn't it been a real treat to get the occasional break with Scott Brown in the senate? Do you really want to risk restoring the "Kennedy seat" to it's role as the source of a lifetimes worth of infuriating blather? Make it stop! Please vote for Scott!

Stat Counter

Red Mass Group is owned and operated by Robert Eno. It is not authorized or paid for by any candidate or committee.
Powered by: SoapBlox