Trump 2020

[SubGod22]

One thing that would help tremendously would be the repeal of the 17th amendment. Give the States back their voice and representation.

[Shockm]

One thing that would help tremendously would be the repeal of the 17th amendment. Give the States back their voice and representation.

Are you sure it would help tremendously? There may be some unintended consequences to the repeal and not help, as you wish. It's too bad because the Federal Government has too much power, and with Biden in power, it is liable to cost Kansas taxpayers dearly.

[SubGod22]

Are you sure it would help tremendously? There may be some unintended consequences to the repeal and not help, as you wish. It's too bad because the Federal Government has too much power, and with Biden in power, it is liable to cost Kansas taxpayers dearly.

I think the States having actual representation would go a long way in bringing some balance back to DC. They would be more likely to be held accountable by the State than they are by voters. It would also do more than term limits ever would.

I'm not sure how the States ever gave up their representation willingly. It was a huge mistake.

[Shockm]

I think the States having actual representation would go a long way in bringing some balance back to DC. They would be more likely to be held accountable by the State than they are by voters. It would also do more than term limits ever would.

I'm not sure how the States ever gave up their representation willingly. It was a huge mistake.

Well, the State Governments gave it up to allow the individual people more power instead of elected State Legislators.

[wufan]

One thing that would help tremendously would be the repeal of the 17th amendment. Give the States back their voice and representation.

Love this!

[wufan]

Well, the State Governments gave it up to allow the individual people more power instead of elected State Legislators.

Just get it a LITTLE closer to rule by mob.

[shoxlax]

I don't adhere to your tribal politics. Neither of your sides is right or wrong as a whole. So why pick one? I'll go with what I believe is right and wrong regardless of who or what party it comes from.

I will forever take principles over blindly following any one man or party.

Anyone who takes a stance on any topic that leads to individual liberty or a smaller government interaction gets my support. Neither of the two old parties have a lock on that. Both of them generally take the opposite approach to most issues and believe in the power of government over the people.

Both old parties are more alike than not and I do not have to "pick a side" when they're both more wrong than right. The belief that one has to pick one of the two is a big reason this country is where it is right now and so divided. It's sad, especially considering most people don't really fall into one side or the other.

That was an outstanding summation of how many of us feel.

[Shockm]

That was an outstanding summation of how many of us feel.

If Conservatives don’t maintain a coalition, it could hasten bad results for our children and grandchildren. Socialism seems far away, but it’s really not that far, if our universities continue on their present path without any push back from Conservatives. Are libertarians more liberal than conservative? The ones I personally know don’t seem to be, so I didn’t think so but they may be.

[SubGod22]

If Conservatives don’t maintain a coalition, it could hasten bad results for our children and grandchildren. Socialism seems far away, but it’s really not that far, if our universities continue on their present path without any push back from Conservatives. Are libertarians more liberal than conservative? The ones I personally know don’t seem to be, so I didn’t think so but they may be.

libertarians are pretty evenly split with who leans which way. But they pretty unanimously agree on individual liberty and small/limited government. Probably why many describe libertarians as socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Both of those leanings would lead to less government and more freedom. It mostly comes down to which aspects are most important to you on an individual level as to which side you would appear to lean.

I will say that amongst libertarians, if one of the old parties was to right its course and start appealing more to libertarians, it's the GOP. I think this is because conservatives at least claim to want a more responsible government in regards to spending and over regulation. However, conservatives have yet to show that they're willing to give up control in other areas, and lets be honest, they talk about shrinking government and overreach but you see little on it after an election. Liberals tend to get those who focus more on social aspects, but the Dems are so in love with government programs and government providing for everyone that I think most libertarians feel they have a much longer way to go to move to a more libertarian stance than conservatives.

These are just my thoughts based on interactions with libertarians both in real life and online. Neither the R or D have an overwhelming amount of support though. A lot of people will simply not vote if their only options are R and D and those options are both people who are in love with the power of government. Honestly, I would probably skip that portion of a ballot as well.

And for the record, I have voted in the past for four or five different parties based on who was running and what they were running on. Not all libertarian candidates I can get behind, but for the most part, it's hard not to vote for them as they generally represent me on at least 90% of issues. Republicans and Democrats tend to be much lower.

This past election, the two old parties both nominated horrible candidates in my view. I couldn't in good conscience vote for either. But, I don't condemn those that feel one of them better represented them than any other candidates. The problem lies in the fact that polls showed that roughly 40% of those who cast votes for Biden and Trump were not voting for either, but against the other. That's roughly 62M people who didn't vote for someone. Who didn't use their voice to support someone. Who didn't vote for what they believed in and voted out of fear instead. Obviously, we have a long way to go before that ends, but I'm hopeful it will eventually. If those 62M people found a candidate that actually represents them, at least on most issues, it would be a game changer at every level. If that were the Libertarian Party, Green, Constitution or another, it would have major rammifications on how we are governed by those elected as it would show that they don't truly have all the power and influence and have to be careful about what they try to force through.

Instead, we keep voting for people we don't like and they take that as a "mandate" to govern as they wish even though many who voted for them oppose a lot of what they want to do. But few are held accountable because of the two party blindness.

So, if an R or D runs that I feel represents me, I'll absolutely vote for them. I may be registered as a Libertarian, but I won't blindly follow them no matter what. There were a couple of potential LP candidates that I know I couldn't have supported had they won the nomination. Things aren't black and white. They rarely are.

But I do believe if the LP made some headway in elections, it would force all sides to come together as they would kind of be the middle ground on a lot of issues and hopefully prevent either party from having a majority so they can just ram through things as they wish. That does nobody any good. I also know we're a ways from that being possible. But one can dream.

Sorry for the length.

[WuDrWu]

Roughly 2.4 TRILLION per year (and rising way faster than inflation) goes to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And we're about to turn over even more to Medicare and Medicaid. Social Security is running a 10% deficit that's only going to grow.

Nobody is going to address these concerns, so WTF? Does it even matter how fiscally responsible we are with the rest?

[wufan]

Roughly 2.4 TRILLION per year (and rising way faster than inflation) goes to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And we're about to turn over even more to Medicare and Medicaid. Social Security is running a 10% deficit that's only going to grow.

Nobody is going to address these concerns, so WTF? Does it even matter how fiscally responsible we are with the rest?

I thought Coronavirus was supposed to put social security and Medicare back in the black.

[wufan]

If Conservatives don’t maintain a coalition, it could hasten bad results for our children and grandchildren. Socialism seems far away, but it’s really not that far, if our universities continue on their present path without any push back from Conservatives. Are libertarians more liberal than conservative? The ones I personally know don’t seem to be, so I didn’t think so but they may be.

The Conservatives have to build a coalition that’s worth maintaining. Supporting 2A will keep the base and at least entice libertarians, but that’s not nearly enough.

A hard stance on pro-life will rally the base, but will push away a big chunk of libertarians. Have to soften the stance a little and lean into the “do no harm” principle to get a real look, but even still that’s not going to be enough.

Deregulation brings both groups together, but you’d also have to get your conservative base to stick with you as you legalize drugs, decrease prison sentences, and pull back on foreign military.

Its tough to get through a Republican primary when you shrink the military, are soft on crime, and wushu-washy on abortion.

[SubGod22]

Just to follow up on wufan's points, libertarians are very much for a strong military and national defense. They typically just don't like us policing the world and being in 150 different countries and constantly fighting wars with no end game. There are a number of countries we could pull out of today and they'd be absolutely fine. There are countries where a slow withdrawal of troops would be prudent to allow them time to build up their own defenses. There are countries we're in where things are hopeless and we're doing nobody any good anyway.

Do you have any idea how much money, and lives, we could save, assuming Congress wouldn't just reallocate it elsewhere, if we stopped the massive expansion of our military and being the worlds police and defense force?

And Republicans would only be soft on crime if they feel it should be a crime for someone to willfully and intentionally choose to ingest a substance into their own body after making a consensual transaction with another adult to purchase said substance. Real crimes, like rape, murder, assault, theft, and any other action that infringes on another persons rights are fully supported for punishment amongst libertarians.

And while libertarians are pretty split on the abortion issue, it's not a top issue for most and we all pretty much agree that the government shouldn't be endorcing or enforcing anything and definitely not be giving money to those who perform them. Though we're pretty much against the government handing out money to most any organization as it's not the function of government to do such things.

[wufan]

Just to follow up on wufan's points, libertarians are very much for a strong military and national defense. They typically just don't like us policing the world and being in 150 different countries and constantly fighting wars with no end game. There are a number of countries we could pull out of today and they'd be absolutely fine. There are countries where a slow withdrawal of troops would be prudent to allow them time to build up their own defenses. There are countries we're in where things are hopeless and we're doing nobody any good anyway.

Do you have any idea how much money, and lives, we could save, assuming Congress wouldn't just reallocate it elsewhere, if we stopped the massive expansion of our military and being the worlds police and defense force?

Any major sticking points I missed for a conservative/libertarian coalition?

[SubGod22]

Any major sticking points I missed for a conservative/libertarian coalition?

Conservatives/Republicans seem to embrace corporate welfare which is something libertarians generally dislike. If a business can't survive on its own, it needs to die. Others will rise and fill the gap or better options will present themselves. Government shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers.

I'm not 100 on where they stand with green energy and the environment. Libertarians generally believe everything should be on the table but there is a need to find cleaner energy and it needs to be affordable. That's where Dems typically lose a lot of libertarians as they seem to want to kill oil and gas immediately and transition to things that aren't yet proven on a large scale or affordable to the average American. Nuclear energy seems to be highly supported in most libertarian circles. It's relatively cheap and efficient energy with a small amount of waste over long periods and I recall something about technology getting to the point where that waste is somehow reused, or can be, for something. I'd have to go back and look that up as it's been a while. Nuclear power plants are also very safe and contain a lot of safety redundancies in order to be even safer.

Stop supporting the surveillance state and the PATRIOT ACT. Due process should matter. Both parties as a whole keep supporting these things with few objections. There are a number of programs and agencies we generally believe need to be done away with. Audit the Fed. Simplify the tax code, or do away with it. There's a lot of disdain for the income tax in general. I think most libertarians, outside of the more anarchist wing, could support some sort of reasonable consumption tax on things that aren't essentials like food. The government doesn't deserve 30%+ of our income off the top, only to take more in other fees and taxes after the fact. I know this one is harder for most to grasp, but if we did away with a lot of the waste that government shouldn't even be involved in, there wouldn't be a need to keep raising so much money from the citizenry either. But, we generally believe if people have more of their own money, they can spend, save, invest more wisely and be more comfortable and it would actually benefit the economy. But baby steps. I admit this is the one most would find more drastic, but is a big deal to most libertarians.

Off the top of my head, that's all i have at the moment for bigger issues. So yeah, basically support personal freedoms/liberties, smaller government and the Non Aggression Principle and we'd be good. There's obviously some give and take on a number of issues, but these are the basics for most of us.