110207_ronpaul_2_605

The Liberty Conservative Endorses Writing In Ron Paul For President

in Politics by
   

We are just 5 weeks away from the general election, in the homestretch of what has been an awful campaign cycle for liberty activists. While there have been very bad cycles in the past, this is the first general election in my personal memory where I found every candidate to be wholly unappealing. Between the failure of the Rand Paul campaign to catch on, the ineptitude of the Johnson/Weld campaign and the general lack of alternative presidential candidates, many liberty conservatives and libertarians find themselves without a candidate who is genuinely deserving of their vote. They find themselves caught between three evils, many attempting to rationalize which is the truly lesser one. So, what is a liberty activist to do when faced with the choice of Gary Johnson, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

Most libertarians have decided to hold their nose for the Johnson/Weld campaign, a ticket which would produce disastrous consequences if they perform well enough in November to become the standard bearers of the liberty movement. The first major red flags that this ticket was going off the rails came during the Libertarian Party primary debates, when Gary Johnson couldn’t answer basic questions (or had terrible answers) about issues such as the non aggression principle, the definition of a right and freedom of association. That red flag, however, didn’t even compare to the indignity liberty activists have suffered by having Bill Weld shoved down our throats as the Libertarian Party VP nominee. This Patriot Act supporting, gun grabbing, Obama endorsing statist (who drew the ire of the great Murray Rothbard when he was governor of Massachusetts) is the antithesis of everything a liberty activist wants in a politician. Beyond the positions I just laid out Weld supports partial birth abortion, the death penalty and EPA mandates for electric cars. This is especially concerning when you consider that Gary Johnson has described Bill Weld as a “co-president” if they are to get elected, rather than a vice president. This means that Johnson and Weld view this as an equal partnership, not one where Gary has the final say. When you consider this alongside the fact that Weld has openly contradicted Gary Johnson on national television there are very serious and legitimate questions as to whether he would be the side of the executive branch most responsible for policy.

In effect, liberty activists have real questions over whether they’re voting for a slightly more liberal version of Mitt Romney by voting Johnson/Weld. Though some of our writers do support this ticket, we at The Liberty Conservative cannot endorse Johnson/Weld due to these inconsistencies with the liberty message that they were nominated to represent. If the Libertarian Party convention was any indicator, the nomination of Bill Weld will continue to be a dividing point between serious liberty activists of principle and the sort of “party first” hacks that are so ubiquitous in the GOP and Democrat Parties. With the party being left off the debate stage and therefore unlikely to match their polling numbers, liberty activists don’t have a reason based in party nor a reason based in principle to support this ticket. Furthermore, doing so sends the horrible message that this is the sort of liberty movement we would like to see going forward. We strongly urge our readers to reject Johnson/Weld.

This brings us to Donald Trump, and his campaign to “Make America Great Again”. This ticket has the support of the second largest group of liberty activists, with many liberty Republicans in particular deciding to support Trump. The idea of libertarian support for Donald Trump first gained major steam when Austrian economist Walter Block announced the formation of “libertarians for Trump”, a group of liberty activists (including some fairly prominent names) aiming to elect Donald Trump president, and as the Johnson/Weld ticket has crashed and burned many liberty activists are currently giving this ticket a second look. Unfortunately, despite the cultural libertarian revolution being triggered by the Trump campaign, the policy issues with this ticket are too much for The Liberty Conservative to offer Trump our support. Trump has flip flopped on raising interest rates, but when he has sided with the idea of keeping them artificially low he falls into the very trap that followers of the Austrian school of economics have been screaming about for decades. His plan to refinance US debt with the current historically low rates might make sense if you are developing real estate and have cash flow to put towards the debt, but every dime the government spends is eventually taxed from the people, printed by the treasury or borrowed by the federal reserve. This makes refinancing the debt a perilous and downright destructive notion, if done it would create even more of an imbalance between our skyrocketing national debt and our ability to pay off that debt. Trump has displayed a general lack of seriousness in addressing the debt problem, stating he would not be aggressive in paying down the debt due to our need to “rebuild our infrastructure and our military”.

Unfortunately, economics is probably the place where Trump has had the most positive to say. On the civil liberties front Trump has called for nationwide stop and frisk, executing libertarian hero Edward Snowden, NSA spying and expanding libel laws (particularly against journalists). These four stances alone are reason enough for any principled liberty activist to reject the candidacy of Donald Trump. We do have writers who have endorsed Donald Trump and I understand their reasoning for it. I hate the cultural rot the left has imposed upon us as much as anybody. But as much as he is a one man wrecking crew against the Cultural Marxism of the American left, Donald Trump’s proposals would make our nation less free and less economically prosperous. Endorsing Donald Trump would signify that culture matters more than policy, and though culture has certainly become a central issue in recent years the policies are still the primary factor in choosing a president. We find the policies of Donald Trump, on the whole, to be an affront to the notion of civil liberties and free market economics, and therefore urge you to use your vote elsewhere.

Finally, this brings us to Hillary Clinton. Between the Benghazi scandal, the email scandal, the health cover up and the rigging of the Democrat primary, we have never had a major party nominee who was so obviously involved in criminal activity. Her policy mix is bad enough, including her lack of seriousness in regards to approaching the debt of her predecessor, combined with her heinous remarks on foreign policy and civil liberties. This all being said, the major case against Hillary Clinton is not a policy based case. To be frank, all three candidates who are on the ballot in all fifty states are horrible on policy. The case against Hillary Clinton comes down to basic personal morality and what type of a person you want to be. If you are the type of person who is willing to overlook when people you support commit crimes simply so you can defeat the “evil other side”, vote for Hillary Clinton. If you are the type of person who thinks it’s okay to harass rape victims, has no questions about the string of mysterious killings surrounding Hillary Clinton and thinks it’s okay to run guns to terrorists in Syria in violation of international law, Hillary is your candidate. If you are the type of person who expects your leaders to handle sensitive documents with extreme carelessness and put themselves above the law, Hillary is your candidate. If you are the type of person who thinks it is okay to rig elections so the establishment wins Hillary is your candidate. I cannot imagine a more personally deplorable decision a person could make with their vote than to cast it for Hillary Clinton. To do so is to scream out to the world “morality and decency does not matter to me!”.

In an election cycle where all three of the candidates who are on the ballot in every state are unacceptable, most of us are resigned to either voting for the lesser of evils or writing in a candidate. Write in candidates tend to be considered a throw away vote, yet a vote for any of the major party candidates moves the ball in the wrong direction for the liberty movement. Because of this, due to his consistent track record of principled advocacy for libertarian ideas, The Liberty Conservative has chosen to endorse writing in Ron Paul for President this November. Dr Paul represents the sort of liberty movement which all activists should strive towards creating; one which embraces high moral character and casts these decisions surrounding policy as moral decisions which deserve to be viewed through the prism of the non aggression principle and protection of property rights. Dr Paul rejects the libertinism of many in the Johnson/Weld camp while also rejecting the big government statism of Trump and Clinton. His is a shining example which all liberty activists should strive to follow, and the way he ran his 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns is currently the best example of how to run a libertarian campaign that attracts national attention.

We wish we could suggest a candidate who is actually running for president, but in the absence of a decent one the best option is to send a message with your vote as to the exact kind of person you want to support. Choose principle on November 8th and send a message to the libertarian establishment as well as the DC machine about the kind of person it is going to take to draw your support. Write in Ron Paul for president, and together we will send a message that is loud and clear to millions of people across this country.

  • Ron Paul is my fav, but this suggestion is counterproductive to spreading liberty & a statist couldn’t think of a better plan.

    I am a Republican, not a Libertarian, but I think pushing Johnson at this juncture accomplishes many of our goals.

    Even thought I think the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), & every liberty movement, should be supported it is still a basic facet of liberty that we have 3rd party rights.

    We have options for everything in America, but not with the all important topic of politics.

    Gary Johnson is not only pushing 3rd party rights further than any time in this era but is the only person on the national stage that is highlighting less war, limited government, less taxes/regulations, & auditing the fed.

    Next election I hope to work with the GOP if Rand Paul or Justin Amash runs, but I also want to be able to work with the CP or LP to continue liberty ideals after the GOP establishment ensures that the RLC fails.

  • The stupid is so strong in this post

  • Philip Haddad

    Ron Paul is my fav, but this suggestion is counterproductive to spreading liberty & a statist couldn’t think of a better plan.

    I am a Republican, not a Libertarian, but I think pushing Johnson at this juncture accomplishes many of our goals.

    Even thought I think the Republican Liberty Caucus (RLC), & every liberty movement, should be supported it is still a basic facet of liberty that we have 3rd party rights.

    We have options for everything in America, but not with the all important topic of politics.

    Gary Johnson is not only pushing 3rd party rights further than any time in this era but is the only person on the national stage that is highlighting less war, limited government, less taxes/regulations, & auditing the fed.

    Next election I hope to work with the GOP if Rand Paul or Justin Amash runs, but I also want to be able to work with the CP or LP to continue liberty ideals after the GOP establishment ensures that the RLC fails.

  • I’ll save everyone the trouble and just vote for Hillary.

    • Just when I thought no one could post something more stupid than the original post.

    • Thanks for your inciteful opinion.

    • You’re vote is one of millions and the millions are brainwashed…

    • Better than a vote wasted on Gary.

  • To accomplish what exactly?!

  • For all the nonsense I’ve seen from this page, not a bad endorsement.

  • Patrick Prentice

  • Adam Greer

  • Gary is too far left for me. Read his stand on the issues at
    OnTheIssues.org

    • The big picture remains: Gary Johnson is not only pushing 3rd party rights further than any time in this era but is the only person on the national stage that is highlighting less war, limited government, less taxes/regulations, & auditing the fed.

  • In 2008, Ron endorsed Darrell Castle when he ran for vice-president and I voted for him. This year Darrell is running for president and people in 48 states will be able to vote for him if they choose.

    Castle2016.com

    • Ron didn’t endorse Darrell, he endorsed Chuck Baldwin.
      The larger CP point remains though.

    • Ron endorsed Baldwin-Castle on September 24, long after Darrell was nominated to the ticket.

    • I understand, and I think picking the CP was the best thing for Ron to do but it was because of his connection to long time supporter Baldwin & not Castle, Castle simply happened to be attached.

    • I heard that it had a lot to do with Bob Barr’s campaign constantly badgering him for an endorsement – that he did it just to get them to stop.

    • Yeah, if I recall correctly Ron Paul actually endorsed anyone that would agree to a few simply principles: less interventionist foreign policy, audit the fed, & pro-civil liberties (no warrant-less wiretapping, Patriot Act, etc.)
      These issues are so common sense that the endorsement covered the LP, CP, & GP.

      However, Barr was so incensed that he didn’t get the personal endorsement that he acted like a jerk & Paul went with Chuck Baldwin.

  • We need more constitution! I will vote for Castle.

  • Valerie

    http://Www.constitutionparty.com. There is another option, his name is Darrell Castle! He is pro-life, a veteran, wants to get out of foreign affairs and focus locally. He wants the government to get out of our church. On the ballot or qualified write-in for all but OK, NC, and MA. Check him out at castle2016.com!

  • http://Www.constitutionparty.com. There is another option, his name is Darrell Castle! He is pro-life, a veteran, wants to get out of foreign affairs and focus locally. He wants the government to get out of our church. On the ballot or qualified write-in for all but OK, NC, and MA. Check him out at castle2016.com!

  • More constitution = more better! Castle for Pres….

  • The Liberty Conservative please retract your endorsement and endorse Darrell Castle For President 2016

  • On the ballot or eligible as write-in in 48 states, a true Constitutionalist – Darrell Castle! Castle2016.com

  • Saulius

    Writing in any candidate is the same as not voting. I love Ron Paul dearly, but by writing him in in no way will you be telling the voters or politicians that you do not approve of their actions.

    When people voted for Ross Perot, the votes were counted. He got about 20%. His message was balancing the budget. And the politicians listened. The first balanced budget was implemented with the Clinton administration.

    So voting for a third party can have an effect.

    If you want change in any positive direction, you should vote for Gary Johnson.

    • Geddy Friedman

      Thank you. Finally someone with sense. Good God these people are stupid!!

  • Rusty Shackleford

    I wrote in Ron Paul in 2012. Hillary has no chance of winning Texas, so I’ll probably do it again. Where the race is tight, I would likely vote for Trump. Why? Because he’s good on a handful of issues and virtually the same on others. Hillary, on the other hand, is wrong and horrible on everything.

  • Mr. Lucente, what do you think of Darrell Castle? I agree with your reasons for not voting for Johnson, Clinton, and Trump, but Castle seems like a sensible alternative, and he is actually on the ballot in many states.

  • Going with the LP. Gary will come and go.

  • If Ron were actually registered with any states as a write-in candidate, I would write him in. Being that he is not, all votes for him, just disappear and are never counted, so it doesn’t even send a message as a protest vote. Darrell Castle is an official write-in candidate in nearly every state that he is not on the ballot on, making him a better choice.

  • I’m in!

    • Geddy Friedman

      Like a lemming off the edge of a cliff.

  • An excellent idea, and as a side benefit I won’t have buyer’s remorse later on. I wrote him in once, time to do it again.

    • Geddy Friedman

      We’ll talk remorse next month when your heroic act of futility ascertains Clinton or Trump in the white house for 4 years. So much for #LetGaryDebate.

  • Yeah, I can’t condone this….this is the epitome of horrible as far as ideas go. I’m pretty sure not even Ron Paul would endorse this idea.

  • Geddy Friedman

    REALITY CHECK PEOPLE: RON PAUL IS NOT RUNNING. HIS POLITICAL CAREER IS LONG SINCE OVER. WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU DOING?

    I give up. We’re doomed.

  • Geddy Friedman

    REALITY CHECK PEOPLE: RON PAUL IS NOT RUNNING. HIS POLITICAL CAREER IS LONG SINCE OVER. WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU DOING?

    What ever happened to #LetGaryDebate?

    Never mind. I give up. We’re doomed.

  • Consider instead a Constitutional Conservative candidate for whom you can vote in 48 states: Darrell Castle of the Constitution Party.
    http://www.castle2016.com

    • tjoes

      I went to his website. I was hit with the wrong issue first in my opinion and I didn’t get too excited after that.

      Sorry, as much as I hate it, the vote has to be Trump. With Hillary…. we are voting for WW3 and he is the only viable alternative. Can he keep his peter in his and his own wife’s pants for 4 years….otherwise he compromises himself AND the USA people to blackmail (as they did against Bill Clinton).

      KEEP YOUR SEX APPETITE TO YOUR LOVELY WIFE TRUMP…Make the pledge to US !!!

  • CiAtT

    Only in 7 states can write Ron Paul, who didn’t sign up for write-in candidate. Conservatives, libertarians, and proConstitution people should be voting for Castle/Bradley, who is on the ballot and as write in in 47 states. Castle2016.com. The Grand Inquirer and Liberty Hangout endorsed Castle.

  • Orthodeb

    I wasn’t going to vote because I’ve awakened to the fact that our presidents are selected not elected. Anyone who doesn’t know this by now is ignorant. I wrote in Ron Paul out of principle to make a statement that I refuse to sell out to this media created fake democracy. Only the people can make change by changing what they do instead of believing they can vote for change. We have solutions, but only a few are actually actively doing what is necessary to bring change. If you tell the truth or provide real solutions, they will try to shut you up by using the media to discredit you, but if millions of people suddenly reject our current monetary system, then they cannot continue the scam. #writeinronpaul, #karatbarsrevolution