Libertarian Party of Arkansas Places U.S. Senate Candidate on 2020 Ballot - Maybe

[KenH]

“I try not to question people’s intentions, but two plus two equals four. Act 164 was passed in large part to keep Libertarians off the ballot. Their 3% might affect some close race somewhere.

This is the most partisan environment in my 50 years, and not just in Washington. Everyone seems to be fired up. But even in these divided times – or especially in them – the way we conduct the process is more important than who wins.

Issues change, candidates come and go, and political parties shift and even trade positions. What must endure is for voters to have their say, and to have choices.

Incumbents and the political elite already have so many enormous advantages that voters should resist any of their efforts to create new ones. We don’t need 25 candidates on the ballot. But it won’t hurt us to have three or four.”

Another Senate candidate - maybe - independentarkansas.com

 

[Shoostie]

Ken, do you think maybe this presidential election, the Libertarian fascist Party will choose a candidate who doesn't want the government to round up all the Christians and shoot them in their heads? Naaa, they're fascists.

Their Arkansas senate candidate, "[An] African American, and when he returned to Arkansas, he said he was stopped by police for driving 35 miles per hour in a 40 mph zone." LPs love agitating, racist liars, all the better to inflame emotions to strip us of our liberty. Cop's don't pull people over for not speeding. That whole article is fascist, along with the candidate.

I tend to disfavor the 3% law, but I have no sympathy for your fascist party and their attempts to spoil elections for Republicans by falsely claiming to be a party of liberty and small government. While we can't get any true small-government Republicans into the White House, we can get small-government Republicans into state and local offices.

 

[KenH]

Ken, do you think maybe this presidential election, the Libertarian fascist Party will choose a candidate who doesn't want the government to round up all the Christians and shoot them in their heads

The Libertarian Party has never nominated such a candidate for president and it never will, as to do so would be nowhere near libertarianism.

Cop's don't pull people over for not speeding.

Were you present at this incident? If not, then you have no basis on which to call the man a liar.

 

[Salty]

“I try not to question people’s intentions, but two plus two equals four.

Unless you are a democrat!

A Dem has $4 and trys to spend only $10 of it.

 

[KenH]

Be honest. Their last presidential candidate, Gary the fascist slimball Johnson, said he wants "all discrimination" banned (discrimination is liberty) and that religious freedom is equivalent to letting people commit murder. And, you know, the government enforces laws with a gun, which is why real libertarians are anti-government.

1) Only an idiot would believe it, given how absurd it is and how often the Left lies about police.
2) If it's true, it not in the least representative of policing activity, which still makes it a lie because it's being used to represent policing.
3) It's a claim made to facilitate an agenda of oppression.

(unnecessary reference to a BB member)

"You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies." - John 8:44(ESV)

 

[Salty]

... for your fascist party and their attempts to spoil elections for Republicans by falsely claiming to be a party of liberty and small government. While we can't get any true small-government Republicans into the White House, we can get small-government Republicans into state and local offices.

First of all - Shoostie - there is no need to call the party facist (and I am NOT a Libertiarian)

As far as spoiling elections - couple of ways to look at it.
First if a minor party does spoil the election -it's because that major party is not adressing the needs of the majority of voters
Here in NY State - the Conservative Party will often endorse the Republican canidate. (NY has the fusion vote) - but there are times
that if the Republicn is too liberal we will put up our own candidate - and if he causes the Republican to loos - than so be it. Next time,
they tend to listen to the Conservative Party. Back in 1970, the Republicans put up a liberal for US Senate, but in this case, the Conservative
actutally won in a 3 way race. James Buckley did a great job. 1970 United States Senate election in New York - Wikipedia

2) I would like to see instant runoff voting.

 

[Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin]

As a ConservaBaptiPopitarian I take issue with the idea that the Libertarian party is fascist.

 

[Shoostie]

As a ConservaBaptiPopitarian I take issue with the idea that the Libertarian party is fascist.

Your "taking issue" is not noted, given that you didn't respond to the evidence I presented.

 

[Salty]

Your "taking issue" is not noted, given that you didn't respond to the evidence I presented.

Shoostie, are you going to respond to post # 6 ???

 

[KenH]

The Libertarian Party is fascist, as I have demonstrated.

No, you haven't...and you can't.

 

[KenH]

Third parties at best have no effect on election outcome.

Minor parties and independent candidates give more people a chance to vote for someone they think is better than one of the Duopoly candidates. If a Duopoly candidate fails to convince someone to vote for him, then that's the fault of the Duopoly candidate, not the minor party or independent candidate.

 

[KenH]

The Libertarian Party seems to exist mostly to strip votes from Republican candidates

False. The best of the studies on the subject I have seen show that the Libertarian Party candidate draws about equally from potential votes for the Democrat and the Republican in a race where all three are involved.

 

[Shoostie]

Were you present at this incident? If not, then you have no basis on which to call the man a liar.

Yeah, I have a basis of calling him (uncalled name calling ) No one is pulled over for not speeding, as he claims. Did the cop give him a warning that he better not not speed again, or did the cop give him a non-speeding ticket? LOL!

You continue to diligently miss the big picture. He makes this claim, true or not, because he it's emotionally inflammatory, feeding into the Left's identity politics, which serves as a mechanism to take away our liberties. It's a demand for more government social engineering and dictating how we live.

 

[KenH]

Yeah, I have a basis of calling him a liar.

No, you don't.

"For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity.” - Acts 8:23 (ESV)

 

[Shoostie]

No, you don't.

It's pathetic of people to come up with "personal evidence" and think people have an obligation to believe them, no matter how absurd and void of any evidence that can be examined. He's a liar.

 

[KenH]

He's a liar.

Prove it.

 

[Salty]

, or did the cop give him a non-speeding ticket? LOL!.

He would then be given a WARNING - which is the same thing that BB mods and admins do

 

[Salty]

Thread is closed - getting out of hand