1 - 1
Hunter, and most of you, are missing the biggest and most important point. We all seem to agree that government is too big and that fixing this- on the fiscal side- should take precedent over social issues like drugs and hookers. The challenge is getting conservatives and libertarians together on this. Please do not blame libertarians (and I'm sorry but the small "l" is important) for being purist and smug and happy to see liberals win over conservatives. First, Sarvis did not affect the Va governor election. Exit polls showed that if anything he hurt McAuliffe more than Cuccinelli. Here is the BIG POINT: For us all to get what we want- fiscal conservatism and smaller government, we must have a major party run a candidate in a general election who believes in this and can win. The problem is that the GOP is too conservative and a Gary Johnson (and unfortunately maybe even a Rand Paul) can never win a primary. So we get these ultra-conservative candidates from the GOP who have no prayer of winning the general election. IF the GOP ran someone who was for "drugs and hookers," they just might win a general election- and not because of the libertarian vote. The big-government Democrats win only because the Republicans are so conservative on social issues. Many if not most Democrat-voters would vote for smaller government if it came with "drugs and hookers." Most Americans, regardless of political affiliation, want a smaller government. But they want it smaller on both the spending side and the big brother side. And we have no one to vote for (from a major party in a general election).
1 - 1