Are the more moderate Republicans attempting to take over the Liberterian Party? 

Are the more moderate Republicans attempting to take over the Liberterian Party? 

Will Bill Weld (ex-Republican Governor of Massachusetts an supporter of Kasich just a few weeks ago be able to garner the attention of donors and mainstream media in time to ensure they are included in September's debates? 

It seems many in the Liberterian party are suspicious of him. Especially since: 

Johnson’s running mate, Weld, was thrown into jeopardy this weekend as activists raised concerns over Weld’s ideological bona fides. Weld was a state campaign chair for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign and many in the party viewed his recent addition to the ticket with suspicion. Many also expressed concerns over his decision in 2006 to leave the New York gubernatorial race after securing the Libertarian nomination, leaving the party without a candidate.

Weld’s attempt to stem the bleeding only made matters worse. In a debate on Friday, he voiced his support for the United Nations, a bête noire in libertarian circles. Exacerbating the situation, he said libertarians are often regarded as “unattractive people.”

On Saturday, when another attendee called for reducing the CIA’s presence overseas, Weld replied that he was possibly biased in the matter, name-checking Kermit Roosevelt Jr, his “great uncle in-law” and a leading CIA figure who helped depose a number of foreign governments, including the 1953 overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected leader, Mohammad Mosaddegh.

  Source: Huffington Post article


These nominations have seemed to capture the mainstream medias attention. Many Americans have become tired of the same old stories. Clinton's emails, Trump rally riots, Bernie crying foul! Perhaps, they see where a third party could escalate and create some new hype to exploit? 

Johnson/Weld are not the norm that I am used to seeing when I think of Liberterian Party. I agree, I always considered them to be looneys! Could the more moderate Republicans actually be attempting to take over an active party for themselves? 

If so, could it work and be effective in uniting the middle of the road disenfranchised Dems and Republicans? With funding and more media exposure, they could be a wrench in the established two party system this election. What do you think? I didn't think it was possible, but this election may get even more interesting?

I like Johnson, honestly, and a lot of what he says makes sense. Unfortunately, I can refute the entire libertarian platform with one simple analogy: --"all people live by a river."-- and their core philosophy breaks down completely.

But I am not surprised many core GOP'ers are giving the Libertarians a close look. The social conservatives aren't going to like what they find, of course, but -- when do they ever?

Lol's all around.

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
I like Johnson, honestly, and a lot of what he says makes sense. Unfortunately, I can refute the entire libertarian platform with one simple analogy: --"all people live by a river."-- and their core philosophy breaks down completely.

But I am not surprised many core GOP'ers are giving the Libertarians a close look. The social conservatives aren't going to like what they find, of course, but -- when do they ever?

Lol's all around.

True, though I have seen how the other 2 parties have changed and evolved with their core philosophies over the year. I was wondering if this is the evolutionary or revolutionary beginning change of the Liberterian Party itself. Basically, becoming more mainstream and not so far out?

a reply to: CynConcepts

I hope so.

We NEED a third way.

They better hope not.

Moderate Republicans are not interested in dismantling government that we have. They only think they can run it better.

A true libertarian party would be looking to pare what we have down to the bare minimum necessary.

To me that would seem to be incompatible with moderate Republicans.

a reply to: CynConcepts

I worked for Gov. Gary and the Libertarians during their last rodeo and it seemed to me that the party was mainly comprised of Republicans escaping the confines of the Christian Right GOP. And you called it....if they could get some big corporate backing with the accompanying media exposure; they could be as big a force as the Reform party was back in 96.

Still a fair amount of "Looneys" ......I'm one of em!!

“There’s back channel communication to suggest to the Koch brothers that the return on their political investment would be a lot higher in the Libertarian Party and we align better than their values than the Republican Party, where donors collectively threw $166 million into a hole and lit it on fire to try and nominate Jeb Bush,” said Mr. Sarwark.

Source: Washington Times article

Apparently, David Koch actually ran as a VP for the Liberterian ticket back in 1980. A few weeks ago, there were rumors about Koch Brothers backing Johnson...though Johnson and Koch brothers said that this wasn't true then. Will this change now that Johnson has Weld on his ticket too?

a reply to: CynConcepts

The Kochs are more libertarian.

So maybe we need to define what we mean by moderate Republicans and libertarian because I am sensing we aren't thinking the same thing. To me, the two concepts are worlds apart. For me, a moderate Republican is a GW-style Washington elite Republican.

a reply to: ketsuko

That's why I am speculating on the party being taken over. It has been active for 45 years and unable to truly connect with the mainstream America. It appears that this year, without the extreme Liberal agenda at all costs...they may find themselves in the debates come September!

a reply to: olaru12

As I just posted above, I was surprised to learn that David Koch (Koch Brothers) actually ran as a VP for the Liberterian party back in 1980!

a reply to: CynConcepts

To me a libertarian looks at the concept of basic, alienable rights, wants laws/government that protect those and wants the rest of the craziness to go away. No protecting people from themselves, only from each other.

Then you have flavors that think we ought to have the social safety net but that libertarian means simply they get all their favorite vices legalized - prostitution, drugs, gambling, etc. - so that if they suffer the worst consequences of the latter the former can pick up their pieces.

Then you have people who think it means less business restrictions like the Kochs but don't necessarily seem to get much beyond that because it isn't their primary concern. Kochs are getting in bed with whomever they think will further their business interests the most.

The moderate Republicans are simply, desperately looking for any way to NOT LOSE. They haven't become libertarian and any libertarian who would win with them as allies would govern exactly like a Bush or McCain or a Romney. In other words, if the libertarians "win" like this, it will kill their party for all time.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: CynConcepts

The Kochs are more libertarian.

So maybe we need to define what we mean by moderate Republicans and libertarian because I am sensing we aren't thinking the same thing. To me, the two concepts are worlds apart. For me, a moderate Republican is a GW-style Washington elite Republican.

True, to avoid any misunderstanding on my perspective. Moderate Republicans and Moderate Democrats run along the middle ground of liking some issues from both sides of our two party system. A blending of socialism and capitalism moderately applied. Most people I talk to usually fall within this line, yet are forced to say R or D depending on the scale they balance their issues on.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Donald Trump is the best thing that has ever happened for the Libertarians.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: CynConcepts

To me a libertarian looks at the concept of basic, alienable rights, wants laws/government that protect those and wants the rest of the craziness to go away. No protecting people from themselves, only from each other.

Then you have flavors that think we ought to have the social safety net but that libertarian means simply they get all their favorite vices legalized - prostitution, drugs, gambling, etc. - so that if they suffer the worst consequences of the latter the former can pick up their pieces.

Then you have people who think it means less business restrictions like the Kochs but don't necessarily seem to get much beyond that because it isn't their primary concern. Kochs are getting in bed with whomever they think will further their business interests the most.

The moderate Republicans are simply, desperately looking for any way to NOT LOSE. They haven't become libertarian and any libertarian who would win with them as allies would govern exactly like a Bush or McCain or a Romney. In other words, if the libertarians "win" like this, it will kill their party for all time.

The Liberterian Party has been at this for 45 years with no real results or recognition! I believe Ron Paul was one who began to get some attention, but he still was too extreme! Johnson seems to have some common sense. Most folks would love smaller government, but realize that you can't throw the baby out with the bath water! Baby steps are needed.

a reply to: CynConcepts

Its possible.

They co-opted the Tea Party portraying it as some kind of anti-Obama movement.

The Tea Party began with the Ron Paul movement, specifically in 2007 when on the anniversary of the original Tea Party, Ron Paul supporters threw tea into Boston harbor and scheduled an online "money bomb" raising $4.2 million.

Ron Paul raises millions in today's Boston Tea Party event.

The Tea Party rose out of frustration towards Republicans who under Bush greatly expanded the size of government, increased spending and violated the Constitution.

Its my understanding that Johnson was booed over his VP selection.

a reply to: CynConcepts

With the abysmal numbers Congress is getting, I very much think you could throw out some of the baby.

If you want Congress to do it's job again, remove some of the alphabets they allowed their jobs to be delegated to. At this point, they are really more of a glorified debate society.

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: CynConcepts

Donald Trump is the best thing that has ever happened for the Libertarians.

Honestly, I would say, so his Hillary! Even if she had to drop out due to criminal charges...Bernie is too far left for most moderates to vote for. Hillary supporters are the moderate Dems. They wouldn't stomach Trump, but a like Johnson/Weld ticket may be more viable option and less queasy at the polls.

a reply to: CynConcepts

I don't know, but to me, libertarianism is even LESS moderate than conservative when it comes to issues of government because the libertarian wants to scrap even more of it.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: CynConcepts

Its my understanding that Johnson was booed over his VP selection.

That is true. Both Johnson and Weld needed 2 separate bids to win the 50% nomination! That makes sense since they don't seem to have the extreme all or nothing mindset of the Liberterian Party. Their past governor records show they were able to play both sides of the two party system.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: CynConcepts

With the abysmal numbers Congress is getting, I very much think you could throw out some of the baby.

If you want Congress to do it's job again, remove some of the alphabets they allowed their jobs to be delegated to. At this point, they are really more of a glorified debate society.

I think that is why America NEEDS to have an established third party. Congress would evolve naturally by legitimatizing another party. Win/Win for the longterm.