-->

Conservative Daily News - The best news, analysis and opinion articles written by a collection of citizen journalists. Covering a range of important topics in blogs, op-ed, and news posts, these upstanding patriots are bringing back American exceptionalism with every entry..

Why The GOP Shouldn’t Ignore Libertarians

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Why The GOP Shouldn’t Ignore Libertarians”.

Conservative Daily News allows a great deal of latitude in the topics contributors choose and their approaches to the content. This is due to our approach that citizens have a voice, not only the mass media. Readers will likely not agree with every contributor or every post, but find reasons to think about the topic and respond with comments. We value differing opinions as well as those that agree. Opinions of contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of CDN, Anomalous Media or staff. Click here if you'd like to write for CDN.
Put This Story in your Circles and Share with your Friends

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Brent says:

    Eric,
    You say, “The GOP can’t pander to a very, very, very small amount of people… the 5% of the country who are libertarians? Change their entire policy for libertarians?”
    It is sad that it seems only a “very, very, very small amount of people” believe in adherence to the U.S. Constitution, which should be the guiding principle of ALL parties, so in truth there is no reason to change the “entire policy for libertarians.”
    I appreciate that this is a conservative site, but you imply there is a substantial difference between Romney and Obama. Personally, I’m concerned that anyone that heavily supported by the Koch Brothers and with Romney’s uber-privileged background will represent the American people – not just the “very, very, very small amount of people” that make as much or more money than he does.
    Finally, I agree with you that it’s going too far to call social conservatism tyranny, but it isn’t far from the truth, as more government regulation means less personal liberty, and it absolutely repels potential voters. Without question.
    Fiscal conservatism matters — it affects us all, but social issues are exactly that and should be regulated by the individual, not the government. Otherwise we end up paying more taxes for a the “privilege” of a bigger government to regulate our freedoms away from us. Many more Americans would join the Republican/fiscal conservative bandwagon if A) it was consistently true (e.g. Bush Jr. didn’t grow government expense in a huge way), and B) there weren’t non-related strings attached (e.g. abortion and other social issues that repel voters and distract from balancing the budget).
    Libertarianism is about small government and fiscal responsibility and personal liberty and free market. It follows the constitution, is fiscally responsible (more conservative than conservative), and allows for religious and other freedoms.
    Reagan has been the posterboy for what the Republican ideal can achieve. He had it right: “If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism.” Please take a closer look and you’ll see that it’s not “insignificant” or “psycho.”

  2. James says:

    The GOP doesn’t want the libertarians in it. That’s just the facts of things. I wish it weren’t so, but since they make no attempt to bridge the gap with libertarians, don’t be surprised if they lose this election by the libertarian margin (AKA Gary Johnson) this election cycle.

    The biggest problem with the GOP, as I see it, is they have steadily clung to social conservatism, even in the face of party destruction. Religion, in particular, has killed the liberty movement within, because every libertarian sees the social conservatism brand for what it is: tyranny from the right.

    • Eye Desert says:

      Sometimes you’ve got to beat them (kindly) over the head. Mike Lee, Rand Paul and Pat Toomney prove it.

      Cruz could too if he wins general election.

    • Eric says:

      The GOP can’t pander to a very, very, very small amount of people. What do you want them to do for the 5% of the country who are libertarians? Change their entire policy for libertarians? And the fact that libertarians would risk another 4 years under Obama by NOT voting for Romney is ridiculous and stupid. You’d rather have Obama destroy our economy, just to prove a point? That basically is saying “I don’t care about the country, I just care about my principles”.

      And as an agnostic, I don’t think Religion has done anything to hurt the Republican party, or the country for that matter. Notably because 95% of the world prescribes to one religion or another. And calling social conservatism tyranny…that makes no sense. Especially since America was founded on Christian principles, with Christianity being fully ingrained in the government from the beginning. That’s why it’s “Freedom of religion” not “Freedom from religion”. So no, religion hasn’t hurt this country or the Republican party at all.

      I love Ron Paul for his views on the economy. That’s where it ends. He is a nut job. Actually, he is a f*cking psycho. He is a 9/11 truther. He’s completely insignificant and barely worth talking about. And if that’s the best you can do for a Presidential nominee, that’s embarrassing.