PDA

View Full Version : Is Bob Barr the Next Ralph Nader?


Heisenberg
05-24-2008, 07:24 PM
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=4909551&page=1

Is Bob Barr the Next Ralph Nader?
Republican Running as Libertarian Could Spoil John McCain's Party
By LINDSAY HAMILTON
May 22, 2008—


As the Democratic race drags on, not one but two other parties have all but settled on their nominees. The presumptive Republican pick: Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. And the likely Libertarian choice: former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga.

The Libertarian Party gathers in Denver, Colo., Sunday to pick its candidate for the White House from among 14 contenders, and while the convention may not draw front-page coverage, the implications could be felt in the fall.

"Come November, Barr conceivably could be to John McCain what Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000  ruinous," wrote ABC News consultant and Newsweek columnist George Will in a recent commentary.


Spoiling the Party
At a Libertarian forum in Washington, D.C. this week, Barr, perhaps best known for his role as a House floor manager during the Clinton impeachment trial, and two other Libertarians, author Wayne Allyn Root and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, were introduced as the candidates who might just "Naderize" the Republicans in this year's general election.

Matt Welch, editor of the Libertarian magazine Reason, called this year "a Libertarian moment in the wake of the Ron Paul revolution."

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, declined the Libertarian Party nomination to continue to run in the Republican race.

He's surpassed one million votes and once raised more than $6 million in a single day by delivering a decidedly libertarian message, which includes being anti-war and favoring a drastically reduced federal government.

Despite McCain clinching the nomination months ago, Paul earned 15 percent of the vote in Oregon on Tuesday. Yet Paul's name won't be on the ballot in November, and Libertarians are hoping those votes will swing their way.

"The party leadership actually, I think, would like to spoil McCain," said David Weigel, an associate editor who covers politics for Reason. "Four years ago they were really pushing the idea that they would spoil it for Bush. The party leadership is going to get some attention by saying this."

Barr refuted the idea that his candidacy would "spoil" anyone, telling reporters, "I'm a contender, not a spoiler."

But the former Georgia Republican did acknowledge many of his votes would come from "Libertarian-leaning republicans" and "true conservative Republicans," as well as independents and first-time voters.

"We're not doing this to be a spoiler for anybody," said Libertarian Party chairman Bill Redpath, who then added, "I think that we don't mind being a spoiler."



Post-Paul Revolution
The Libertarian Party expects to get its candidate on more than 45 ballots come November, and Barr's campaign manager, Russ Verney, has a background in making third-party waves  he was an adviser to Ross Perot during his presidential bids.

"We're going to certainly build on the fact that there's deep dissatisfaction with the current two-party system, there is deep dissatisfaction with the political party of the incumbent president. There is deep dissatisfaction among many Republicans, who otherwise might be of a Libertarian variety or a true conservative variety, with the Republican nominee  and we're going to unashamedly let them know that they have a home," Barr said.

Matthew Dowd, a former Republican strategist and ABC News consultant, isn't certain that the Libertarian message will hurt Republicans more than Democrats.

"To me, a big part of Ron Paul support has been driven by anti-war," Dowd said. "I don't think it's definitive who it would affect more, whether it would affect John McCain or Barack Obama."

Thus far, Sen. McCain has stayed mum on the issue.

When asked if the Republican nominee-to-be had contacted him about his candidacy, Barr said, "I don't know that John McCain really reaches out to people, and he certainly hasn't reached out to me."

Heisenberg
05-24-2008, 07:26 PM
Don't think he'll make a bit of difference. I think Nader and him will both pull votes from their respective sides, but just enough to cancel each other out.

PosterChild
05-24-2008, 07:52 PM
I'm not sure what Barr is doing here. He has very little support. He's an odd duck too.

With Nader, he's an ideologue, and guys like that are easy to suss out..they can't help but run.:)

the fake norm hitzges
05-25-2008, 02:31 AM
even though i admire barr for attempting to remove klinton from office.i dont like the fact that he was an advisor to the athiest communist liberals united(aclu)

dacarmelking210
05-25-2008, 10:20 AM
even though i admire barr for attempting to remove klinton from office.i dont like the fact that he was an advisor to the athiest communist liberals united(aclu)


Why do you care about the religious beliefs of a candidate? Do you think he will be any worse of a candidate because he's an atheist (or as it is claimed)? Hell, I kind of wish all of our leaders were atheists because it would save us from the "God told me to do this or that" bull**** and our good, righteous, not hypocritical AT ALL friend, Pat Robertson, from making an impact on American politics.

Aikbach
05-26-2008, 05:28 PM
Once McCain selects Bobby Jindal as his runningmate conservatives will be galvanized to the Republican ticket knowing a true conservative is the heir apparent to the party's leadership and nomination.

dacarmelking210
05-27-2008, 01:48 AM
I spoke to 5 Ron Paul supporters in ATlanta today, who all voted for Bush in the previous election, and they told me they are leaning towards voting for Barr in the next election. While they may not be representative of all Ron Paul supporters, their beliefs indicate that Barr's presence will harm McCain's chances in SOME WAY (not sure how much, but I feel as if it will).

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 08:16 AM
I hate to see Barr in the race. I agree he will not pull that many votes away but in a close election every vote is big.

BrAinPaiNt
05-27-2008, 08:40 AM
I hate to see Barr in the race. I agree he will not pull that many votes away but in a close election every vote is big.

I think anyone that wants to run should run, even if they don't have a shot at it.

Anything to take even the smallest amount of votes away from the two parties in charge is a good thing IMO.

burmafrd
05-27-2008, 09:16 AM
This sort of thing ensures the two party stranglehold on politics here.
Voting libertarian or anything other then for the two biggies is throwing your vote away. The only viable 3rd party candidate in the last 100 years was Teddy Roosevelt. Perot in 92 came close= if he had not pulled out and just kept running instead of the in and out mess he made, its very possible that the election would not have been settled untill the House voted.

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 09:26 AM
I think anyone that wants to run should run, even if they don't have a shot at it.

Anything to take even the smallest amount of votes away from the two parties in charge is a good thing IMO.

True but then you really don't care who wins. You seem more interested in how many people can run over any true candidate.

Barr and Nadar can run for all I care but they will not win the most they will do is take votes away from McCain and Obama they will help play the role of the spoiler nothing more than that.

As for their right to run of course I respect that but it just seems stupid to run a race you can't win. if a 3rd party actually had the backing of the general public it would make more sense but they don't add to that they are very disorganized and constantly wait until the last min. to jump in the race. Exception was Perot and I think that is why he has done better than any 3rd party candidate who has ran.

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 09:30 AM
This sort of thing ensures the two party stranglehold on politics here.
Voting libertarian or anything other then for the two biggies is throwing your vote away. The only viable 3rd party candidate in the last 100 years was Teddy Roosevelt. Perot in 92 came close= if he had not pulled out and just kept running instead of the in and out mess he made, its very possible that the election would not have been settled untill the House voted.

Thing is the libertarian party has been around a long time now and the general public evidently does not believe in them or the candidates they throw out there. I think it easy for people to blame the republicans and democrat but these other parties have to take some responsibility for the lack of getting people interested in them.

AtlCB
05-27-2008, 09:39 AM
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=4909551&page=1

Spoiling the Party
At a Libertarian forum in Washington, D.C. this week, Barr, perhaps best known for his role as a House floor manager during the Clinton impeachment trial, and two other Libertarians, author Wayne Allyn Root and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel, were introduced as the candidates who might just "Naderize" the Republicans in this year's general election.
Mike Gravel is about as libertarian as I am totalitarian. :rolleyes:

BrAinPaiNt
05-27-2008, 10:07 AM
True but then you really don't care who wins. You seem more interested in how many people can run over any true candidate.

Barr and Nadar can run for all I care but they will not win the most they will do is take votes away from McCain and Obama they will help play the role of the spoiler nothing more than that.

As for their right to run of course I respect that but it just seems stupid to run a race you can't win. if a 3rd party actually had the backing of the general public it would make more sense but they don't add to that they are very disorganized and constantly wait until the last min. to jump in the race. Exception was Perot and I think that is why he has done better than any 3rd party candidate who has ran.

I usually find it funny because if it was just nadar running some supporting one group would be just dandy with it. If it was just barr running people of the other group would be just dandy with it.

The way I see it they will cancel each other out concerning taking away votes from the two parties.

So I say go for it.

People have their heads too far up their own parties butts and just want to complain if any indy comes out that could take a few votes away from them.

I don't care if it is seen as throwing your vote away, if there was someone on an indy ticket I liked I would vote for him on principle alone. If Ron Paul would have ran on an indy ticket this time around I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 10:35 AM
I usually find it funny because if it was just nadar running some supporting one group would be just dandy with it. If it was just barr running people of the other group would be just dandy with it.

The way I see it they will cancel each other out concerning taking away votes from the two parties.

So I say go for it.

People have their heads too far up their own parties butts and just want to complain if any indy comes out that could take a few votes away from them.

I don't care if it is seen as throwing your vote away, if there was someone on an indy ticket I liked I would vote for him on principle alone. If Ron Paul would have ran on an indy ticket this time around I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

I'm not against them running it will have an effect how much of one is anyone guess. As for the 3rd party I don't have an issue with them other than they are unorganized and do a poor job of promoting their party. It is easy to blame it on the Dems or Rep. but the fact is they do a poor job of running any type of campaign and getting the word out. It is hard to take them seriously when they constantly come up with last min. candidate.

BrAinPaiNt
05-27-2008, 11:38 AM
I'm not against them running it will have an effect how much of one is anyone guess. As for the 3rd party I don't have an issue with them other than they are unorganized and do a poor job of promoting their party. It is easy to blame it on the Dems or Rep. but the fact is they do a poor job of running any type of campaign and getting the word out. It is hard to take them seriously when they constantly come up with last min. candidate.

Because that is not where the money is. The money is with the two party system and the media, and campaign gurus know it and exploit it.

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 11:47 AM
Because that is not where the money is. The money is with the two party system and the media, and campaign gurus know it and exploit it.

Please don't blame the Dems and Rep for a poor job done by some of these 3rd party groups. They do not have the backing of the people and as long as that is the case they will be behind the 8 ball it is not as if most Americans have not heard of the green party or the libertarians they have been around for a while.

You ever think that just maybe the platform they run is something that many Americans disagree with? I know it is easier to blame the 2 parties but don’t these groups share in some of their own failures?

BrAinPaiNt
05-27-2008, 11:49 AM
Please don't blame the Dems and Rep for a poor job done by some of these 3rd party groups. They do not have the backing of the people and as long as that is the case they will be behind the 8 ball it is not as if most Americans have not heard of the green party or the libertarians they have been around for a while.

You ever think that just maybe the platform they run is something that many Americans disagree with? I know it is easier to blame the 2 parties but don’t these groups share in some of their own failures?

Sure they have some responsibility, but to act like we should not also blame the two major parties like they are innocent of shaping WHO gets the spotlight is a bit naive IMO.

Doomsday101
05-27-2008, 11:58 AM
Sure they have some responsibility, but to act like we should not also blame the two major parties like they are innocent of shaping WHO gets the spotlight is a bit naive IMO.

Sorry I don't think the parties are to blame, it is not their job to make sure some 3rd party gets their act together or helps them raise money. These groups have been around and do a poor job of organizing and many Americans find some of their platform pretty far out in left field.

Thus far the only 3rd party candidate who even seemed to have his act together was Perot and despite his time in the limelight and the money they were able to come up with many Americans frankly felt the man was goofy. Since then no other 3rd party candidate has done anything to take up where Perot left off. Hell if you can't keep your own base interested then you got problems.

BrAinPaiNt
05-27-2008, 05:02 PM
Forgot about it until I seen a link on another site.

Bob Barr was in the Borat movie.

Do a youtube search Barr Borat, probably nsfw so you might want to be at home and without little ears around.