[Editor's Note: Not everyone was happy with my take on the election. Eh so what else is new? Here's another take on the election from Matt Morrison. Needless to say, I disagree with some of his points and conclusions. However Mr. Morrison makes a coherent argument and one with which I suspect many in the Freedom Movement agree. As always send comments to info@richmondliberty.org]
Matt Morrison’s Election Summation
PRESIDENT
A few nights ago, I was watching the debate on CSPAN2 between Chuck Baldwin and Ralph Nader. That’s the Chuck Baldwin who was endorsed by Ron Paul and yet received almost no media attention, and the Ralph Nader whose most memorable moment was when the press picked on him for saying Barack Obama “talks white” because he’s not a real liberal.
By the way isn’t it funny how Ralph Nader is an actual Arab, and the American people are mature enough to handle that, yet a Kenyan/Caucasian candidate is all but blatantly accused of dabbing in terrorism and Islam? It just goes to show that many attacks on Obama are really just cleverly disguised appeals to race fear. Shouldn’t it be easy enough to attack his record on FISA, education, firearms, “affordable housing” (read: mortgages for people who can’t afford them), protectionism, and general leftist egalitarianism?
I guess not since the Right isn’t even intelligent enough to point out the problems with protectionism and the fact that lowering the corporate tax rate is the most surefire way to bring in jobs without raising prices. They also can’t figure out the problems with supporting the public education system; hence their rhetoric is uncannily similar on that subject with the Left and it was only brought up briefly in the “debates.” Best not dwell on issues with which Obama and McCain mostly agree, it might just lead people to asking for another choice *gasp*!
But I digress. Anyway, I really enjoyed the third-party debate, and it was far more erudite than any moment of the four CPD-sanctioned events. Constitutional matters were brought up, unconventional angles were put forth on most issues (especially by Nader), and the moderator asked what seemed like three part questions at times, yet they were always tackled and never dodged by the candidates. I applaud the job moderator Chris Hedges did despite his obvious bias in favor of Nader (for a decent article on the debate, see here). The Nader-Baldwin debate left me wishing we all had seen something so useful during the major parties’ campaign season, and also feeling very impressed with Ralph Nader. While I disagree with him on many things, it is hard for me to criticize him strongly because his positions make logical sense and are much more cerebral than anything Barack Obama will ever dream of.
Finally I wish I could have seen so dazzling a performance by Bob Barr; alas, he did not attend because of an engagement at Georgia Tech, which I understand. The Barr campaign has made many blunders in my opinion though, including, but not limited to: disinterest in any debate with anyone besides McBombya, poor fundraising, trash talking Ron Paul (while it was somewhat justified, it was bad for business), flip flopping on some issues depending on the media appearance, weakness in his delivery of the libertarian message, lack of Libertarian branding, and the sole focus towards conservatives who dislike McCain (this alone probably cost him half his potential votes). I blame his campaign manager, Russ Verney, for much of the poor strategy, but still I think we have a historic opportunity to get the largest amount of votes for any Libertarian candidate to date. While I have my problems with Bob Barr, I will be voting for him because essentially when you vote for someone who doesn’t have a chance at winning, you vote for a chance for their party to get automatic ballot access in the future. Also I honestly believe he is the best choice on the Virginia ballot; I’d rather not vote for a pro-drug warrior like Chuck Baldwin and help out the Indy Greens. [Editor's Note: Baldwin is on the ballot in Virginia, not as the Constitution Party's nominee, but as the Independent Green Party's nominee]
U.S. SENATE
Now let’s look at the U.S. Senate race. Mark Warner is going to win folks, plain and simple. He supported the bailout boondoggle though and really doesn’t mind lying through his teeth about taxes. Also he’s a businessman to the core and treats his political career that way, so he will bend the truth to promote himself if dishonesty be necessary.
Then there’s Mr. Gilmore. Ahh yes, I knew one of his sons quite well in elementary and middle school. Through him and my dad’s former position as State Corporation Commissioner, I can honestly tell you Jim Gilmore is an idiot, pure and simple. Aside from the Car Tax issue, one of his worst moments was when he went to court to prevent a feeding tube from being removed from Hugh Finn. Any man who exploits his position as governor for such a purpose is a person who does not care about anyone’s privacy and separation from government power. Such a man is truly more vile than a vaccine.
Then there’s Bill Redpath though. Okay, he may have problems with ONE issue, an issue that hasn’t even come up in this campaign and hasn’t really been mentioned by him since 2001. That issue is of course gun rights. If you’re not voting for him because of that issue, then I want to crash at your place when the next revolution comes since you probably have “The Deepest Shelter in Town,” as one British song from the 1940‘s would say.
Seriously though, he’s promoting some of the best things imaginable in his campaign literature as well as his public appearances. A Flat Tax, free trade, non-interventionism, and ending prosecution, or rather persecution, of consensual crimes - aren’t these some of our key points as Libertarians? He puts forth our platform in a reasonable and digestible manner as well. If one doesn’t vote for Redpath, then I don’t see how one votes for Barr, since the former is by far more of a “true” libertarian and promotes the LP more accurately. Really, how could he not promote it accurately when you think about it; I mean he’s the bloody National Chairman! Also from a practical standpoint, many voters don’t care so much about their Senate vote and also may be thinking they like Warner on the issues but don’t want to give so much power to the Democrats in Virginia. Therefore it’s possible that Redpath could get more consideration from Virginians than Bob Barr, as people don’t usually want to “throw away” their Presidential vote. So if Redpath were to get the highest percentage of any LPVA candidate in this election, wouldn’t you want to make it as high as possible?
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Now for Congress, I’m registered in the First District, so my candidate list may look different than most readers’. Republican Rob Wittman is running for reelection after serving only a year - he succeeded Jo Ann Davis in a special election after her death. Largely projected to be the winner, he seems to highly dislike immigration, wants to expand the war on terror, and supports the Fairtax (which, by its very definition as a tax on consumption, would curb economic growth). [Editor's note: I'm trying to resist commenting since I doubt Morrison will have time to respond (and I've proud I've made it almost all the way through). However, I do have to point out: all taxes curb economic growth - the question is how much of an invasion of privacy do you want and what special interest(s) do you want to benefit from the tax code.]
Bill Day, the Democratic opponent, is very foggy on most issues and is not big on specifics (see here). He seems obsessed with attacking the Bush administration and linking his opponent to Bush, when Wittman is running for his first full term. It just seems downright immature to me. Also he sounds a lot like his opponent on a couple issues, so as usual, this seems like a case of the major parties striving to look different from one another despite similarities so they may “divide and conquer” the electorate for themselves. This election is a no-brainer for me, I’m voting for Libertarian Nathan Larson for Congress despite his apparent abrasiveness as a total Anarcho-Capitalist.
SUMMARY
So here’s how my entire ballot will look (because there are no local elections going on in Williamsburg):
President: Bob Barr
Senate: William Redpath
House: Larson
This reminds me of something: while canvassing for Redpath today I talked to an ACLU member who said she remembered voting in Pennsylvania with lever machines a number of years ago. There was a lever the labor union members were fond of pulling that would let you automatically vote for all the candidates running as a Democrat or Republican. Well, this time around I’ll be fortunate enough to essentially be pulling the Libertarian lever! I really am getting tired of the major parties at this point; all their candidates are starting to sound alike.
Well I’m not hoping for any miracles; I’m laying off that Kool-Aid. But I do think we could achieve automatic ballot access, which might fire up more Libertarians in the future, save us resources, and lead us down the path towards greater electoral success. One office in particular for which I hope we field a candidate is the 25th Senate district. Creigh Deeds occupies the seat and is now running for governor, so if he’s elected there will have to be a special election around December 2009/January 2010. Due to the strength of the Jefferson Area Libertarians in the district which includes Charlottesville, I would love to see us gear up for a focused campaign for that seat if it looks like Deeds will win.
On Saturday the National Debt Clock ran out of digits. The clock was put up by the late real estate mogul Seymour Durst in 1989 when the U.S. government's debt was a mere $2.7 trillion. In 2009 the clock with be replaced with one that can track the national debt up to 1 quadrillion dollars (that's a 1 followed by 15zeros). For now a non-digital 1 has been tacked on to help it represent the $10.2 trillion figure.