From the Economist:
16:42 GMT +00:00
Libertarians emerge as a force
Posted by:
Economist.com NEW YORK
Categories:
Third parties
GLUM Republicans might turn their attention to the Libertarian Party to vent their anger. Libertarians are a generally Republican-leaning constituency, but over the last few years, their discontent has grown plain. It isn't just the war, which some libertarians supported, but the corruption and insider dealing, and particularly the massive expansion of spending. Mr Bush's much-vaunted prescription drug benefit for seniors, they fume, has opened up another gaping hole in America's fiscal situation, while the only issue that really seemed to energise congress was passing special laws to keep a brain-damaged woman on life support.
In two of the seats where control looks likely to switch, Missouri and Montana, the Libertarian party pulled more votes than the Democratic margin of victory. Considerably more, in Montana. If the Libertarian party hadn't been on the ballot, and the three percent of voters who pulled the "Libertarian" lever had broken only moderately Republican, Mr Burns would now be in office.
Does this mean that the libertarians are becoming a force in national elections, much as Ralph Nader managed to cost Al Gore a victory in 2000? Hope springs eternal among third party afficionadoes, but the nature of the American electoral system, which directly elects representatives in a first-past-the-post system, makes it nearly impossible for third parties to gain traction. The last time it happened was in the 1850's, when the Whig party dissolved over internal disputes about slavery, opening the way for the emerging Republican party to put Abraham Lincoln in office. And acting as a spoiler is dubiously effective at achieving one's goals. In theory, it could pull the Repubicans towards the Libertarians, but in practice, it may just elect Democrats, pushing the nation's economic policy leftwards.
(From InstaPundit, who seems skeptical, via PM, with thanks!)
1 comment:
The Economist brings up a good point, but this is only part of the story. There are many lower case "l" libertarians, who don't affiliate or even vote with the party. Whereas the vast majority of these libertarians used to vote for the Republican party, it's pretty certain that many went Democrat this election; so, in Montana, libertarians probably had more than a three percent difference in the vote. And, of course, there are the states where the Libertarian party wasn't on the ballot: in that case, libertarians probably made a difference as well, in swinging the vote to Democrats.
Post a Comment