Comments on: Sizing Up Bob Barr

By: Erik

Erik — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:06:26 +0000

While I agree with Tom re: Barr’s waste of time/money on Clinton’s sex life, if he’s on the ballot what am I to do, vote for “warmonger” McCain or “change-nothing-that-matters” Obama ? So I’d hold my nose & vote for him as opposed to one of the other stinkers.

Also I disagree with Xenman; properly done the anti-war issue (and Barr’s statements opposing preventative war in general) has the possibility of igniting the kind of following that would be hard for the MSM to disregard. He doesn’t have to drop or soft-pedal his fiscal conservative views, or for that matter start sounding like C. Sheehan to become the preferred candidate of the strongly anti-Iraq war crowd. He just has to keep saying what he already is, and not back down.

It would be a shame if the apparently never-ending silly infighting in the LP doomed them to irrelevancy once again.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 06:14:27 +0000

Here’s a question. If (when?) the internet becomes overwhelmed by former Paul supporters who have joined the Bob Barr bandwagon, what do we call them?

(Keeping in mind that I kinda like the guy, that there is about a 90% chance I will vote for him, and that I think he is a much more credible candidate than Paul).

My proposal: Barr-istas.

But I’m willing to take further suggestions.

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 04:31:00 +0000

Today, when I learned that Bob Barr had launched an exploratory group, I visited his site, donated to his campaign, visited the Libertarian Party site, joined, and established a monthly contribution. I still support Ron Paul, but since he has no intent to run as a 3rd Party candidate, I’m now looking to Bob Barr. I’ve seen him speak and he exudes competency, libertarian values, and authority. He has been very supportive of Ron Paul himself. I hope to see Jesse Ventura join Bob Barr as his VP running mate.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 01:01:29 +0000

Tarran:
Whether or not the Fed is an important issue, the fact is that it’s not an issue that many voters have any knowledge about. By focusing his campaign so heavily on that issue, Paul mostly just made a number of voters aware that the Federal Reserve even exists. It was a terrible argument for his candidacy as a result; he did much better in terms of gaining supporters when he focused on more tangible issues like the war, torture, and – perhaps most of all – the size of the federal government.

I disagree with Paul on the Fed issue, but I don’t think his position is totally off-the-wall. My problem is that he spent an inordinate amount of valuable campaign time on an issue about which a microscopic portion of the population is concerned.

By: Xenman

Xenman — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 13:24:42 +0000

Barr needs to strike a balance between leftwing and rightwing Libertarians. So far, so good. But if the Anti-War zealots of the Libertarian Left get their claws into him, and force him to take Cindy Sheehan Anti-Military/Anti-Victory positions, Barr will lose a great deal of support among libertarian Republicans and potential conservative voters disgruntled with McCain.

There’s much more opportunity for Barr among “fiscally conservative/socially tolerant” Pro-Defense Goldwater-type voters, than with the Anti-War Blame America First crowd.

By: MikeF

MikeF — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 04:31:07 +0000

I agree Doug, mainstream Republicans didn’t want to hear it.

They now only care about how big your cross is.

By: Doug Mataconis

Doug Mataconis — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 20:03:08 +0000

Joshua,

And the people who are following a candidate like Obama are what ? Non mainstream voters ?

I think the real truth is that mainstream Republicans heard what Ron Paul had to say and rejected it.

By: Joshua Holmes

Joshua Holmes — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 19:58:48 +0000

I doubt Ron Paul ever got much notice from the mainstream voter beyond the ubiquitous banners on interstate overpasses. Mainstream voters just aren’t involved in the primary process.

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:45:49 +0000

The only thing I need to know about Bob Barr is that he wasted millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars to determine if the president got a blowjob. Nothing he does or says can ever take away that, because it goes beyond politics to show what kind of man he really is.

If Barr gets the LP nomination, I will not vote for him.

By: UCrawford

UCrawford — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:42:49 +0000

Shane,

As long as he avoids adding Mike Gravel to the ticket, Barr’s okay by me :)

By: Shane Savoie

Shane Savoie — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 15:43:35 +0000

Great article…This is one of surprisingly few LP friendly sites that isn’t glaring at Barr for being a Republican when that was what he was elected as. For all of his faults, Bob Barr is the best candidate for the LP this year. Whether or not it is a good idea for Barr is a better question, and he seems to be saying “Damn the torpedoes!”
If he’s willing to sacrifice his mainstream credibility to raise the profile of the LP and our issues, aren’t we a bit stupid to fight it?

By: UCrawford

UCrawford — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:58:21 +0000

tarran,

I think it hurt him with mainstream voters mainly because he harped on it all the time, made it a central issue of his campaign, and very few of them actually cared about it. You can make the argument that it’s an important issue all you want (and yes, it probably is) but if it’s not an issue the average voter cares about you might as well be running on a platform of building an interstellar defense system to protect us against alien invasion…you’re only going to appeal to a small subset of voters and most of the rest will ignore you.

For now, I’ll probably vote for Barr. He’s got as much credibility and experience as McCain or Obama and I like most of his issues.

By: tarran

tarran — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:11:52 +0000

In addition, he will not have the obsession with the Federal Reserve that Paul had, which hurt his ability to appeal to mainstream voters.

To me, this is not accurate. Ron Paul's obsession with the Federal Reserve did not hurt him with voters. It hurt him with pundits, who assume that the Federal Reserve is a needed institution and that only moonbats would question this proven thing. Most voters were willing to give him a hearing. I on the other hand think that Paul was right. In this post, I explained why.