There still is, it’s the Libertarian Party, but unfortunately they’ve been controlled by some weird conservative-leaning people for a few years now.
Republicans were never really about letting companies do what they want, neither were Democrats. Both just wanted their variety of regulations. Screw both major parties, we need to eliminate FPTP and the spoiler effect to really know what the people want, and I don’t think it’s either major party.
the Libertarian Party, but unfortunately they’ve been controlled byobviously managed by the alt-right and the republican partysome weird conservative-leaning people for a few years nowdecades.
Ftfy.
The Libertarian Party has never been anything other.
There is no left to be found with the big L party. Who they support also directly contradicts anything resembling libertarian beliefs.
Eh, they kind of exist. Look at the last Presidential election, Chase Oliver won by beating the Mises Caucus’ preferred candidate, and Gary Johnson a couple elections before him was also kind of on the left. Both did a pretty good job of spreading libertarian ideas.
However, the leftmost people still in the LP are generally fairly centrist. They’re probably a bit left of the Democratic Party on many issues, but not really leftists in the grand scheme of things. And that’s really too bad, because there’s a lot of common ground between the left and right that could work under a single libertarian party.
I don’t really like the LP, but without the Mises Caucus in control, they’re generally pretty ok.
Gary Johnson - private prisons, school vouchers, killed collective bargaining for public employees, cutting funding for social programs, tax reductions for the rich, harsher sentencing laws, one of the most strict welfare reform programs…
His history is clear. Gary Johnson has never been left of the Republican party.
If that’s the best example of “the left” in the libertarian party, its much further to the right than Democrats.
For the record, Chase Oliver = spoiler. Nothing more. Georgia demonstrated it clearly.
Johnson followed up on this warning by threatening to let prisoners out of jail if the state can’t pay to house them.
He wanted more jail space, and the cheapest way to get that was private prisons. I’m personally not a fan, and the only way I’d ever be in favor of private prisons is if they are funded based on recidivism rate, not beds.
Fortunately he at least switched his position on the death penalty.
school vouchers
He increased education spending his first term as governor by nearly a third, and when that didn’t help with dropout rates and test scores, he moved to school vouchers in his second term.
The goal was better education. Increasing funding didn’t work, so he tried something else.
tax reductions for the rich
I’m not a fan of his tax policy. On that we can probably both agree.
I don’t know much about his changes to collective bargaining, but I know he reduced headcount among government employees. I’m pretty sure most libertarians would be a fan of that, and most libertarians would agree that collective bargaining should be a private affair (maybe that’s what you’re getting at?).
Gary Johnson has never been left of the Republican party.
Here are some examples:
support for TPP - Republicans were generally pretty opposed
opposed Citizens United
wants to cut military spending
supports abortion
He’s certainly left of the Republican Party, hence why he was able to win in New Mexico twice. But he’s not exactly left of the Democratic Party, other than on a handful of issues. He’s more on the centrist end, with a penchant for small government.
Chase Oliver = spoiler. Nothing more. Georgia demonstrated it clearly.
A spoiler for who? He pulled pretty evenly from both sides, neither candidate got over 50℅, so it went to a runoff.
Thats always the excuse, and it always ends up with increased costs later and a higher imprisonment rate.
The goal was better education. Increasing funding didn’t work, so he tried something else.
Same answer. Improvement takes time, its a strategy to funnel money into private education.
I’m not a fan of his tax policy. On that we can probably both agree.
It lines up perfectly with his actions in education and incarceration quite well.
I know he reduced headcount among government employees. I’m pretty sure most libertarians would be a fan of that, and most libertarians would agree that collective bargaining should be a private affair (maybe that’s what you’re getting at?).
Not remotely what I’m getting at, no. Collective bargaining should be a right for everyone, eliminating that is a very right wing thing. As is “reducing headcount”.
Everything these people do is no different than the republican party. They sometimes cover it up in different language, but its the same goals, make no mistake.
A spoiler for who? He pulled pretty evenly from both sides, neither candidate got over 50℅, so it went to a runoff.
Dude. C’mon. Warnock defeated Walker by 2.8% in the runoff, from a lead of 0.9% in the regular election.
Collective bargaining should be a right for everyone, eliminating that is a very right wing thing
And where did he eliminate the right to form a union?
My understanding is that unions are protected at the federal level, both through the constitutionally protected freedom of association and various union-related laws. Their power is diminished a bit by right to work laws, but you can still totally form a union if you want, you just might get replaced if you go on strike.
I don’t know what changes Gary Johnson made here, if any.
Everything these people do is no different than the republican party.
Gary Johnson was a Republican when he was governor, in a state dominated by Democrats. That means he appealed to a number of people who would otherwise vote Democrat. That strongly implies that he’s a bit left of the typical Republican, and you can see that in many of the positions he held. It’s inaccurate to call him a libertarian when he was governor, and he never claimed he was (quite the opposite).
He was fiscally conservative, and socially fairly liberal (and got more liberal as time went on). His primary focus as governor was to reduce the size of government, and he actually accomplished it, unlike most Republicans who just talk about it while being socially regressive. Reducing the size of government is a pretty libertarian thing to do.
Warnock defeated Walker by 2.8% in the runoff, from a lead of 0.9% in the regular election.
And? What you’re implying is that Chase Oliver, a Libertarian, appealed more to those on the left than the right in Georgia. Even if we take that as a given, it’s irrelevant because Georgia has runoff elections, so he didn’t spoil anything.
I thought you were talking about his presidential run. In 2024, Trump won the election without a runoff, and my understanding is that he pulled more or less evenly from both parties across the country.
Sorry, I have a lot of meetings today so I can’t hit point by point right now. A few short answers:
State jobs are different than private sector, so protections are not the same, including unions.
The Democratic Party is center/right, not left. Its only considered “the left” in the US.
I don’t care what Gary Johnson calls himself, then or now. Actions matter. I’m a “show, dont tell” kind of person. Gary Johnson has shown time and time again to be perfectly aligned with republicans in his actions.
Chase Oliver was intended to take enough of the votes that s runoff wouldn’t be needed. That it didnt work out that way is irrelevant.
Chase Oliver’s purpose in 2024 was the same. No different than the Green Party.
It’s impossible for a third party to do that, because a runoff happens when no candidate gets >50% of the vote. Taking votes away from the other candidate wouldn’t impact that.
A third party’s purpose is to get a message out. If they can force a runoff, their voice gets that much stronger. They don’t change election outcomes in runoff states.
Yes on some of your points, but Republicans made this a part of their ideology. They paid a lot of lip service to this and I can’t frankly think of when Democrats even uttered such things.
There still is, it’s the Libertarian Party, but unfortunately they’ve been controlled by some weird conservative-leaning people for a few years now.
Republicans were never really about letting companies do what they want, neither were Democrats. Both just wanted their variety of regulations. Screw both major parties, we need to eliminate FPTP and the spoiler effect to really know what the people want, and I don’t think it’s either major party.
Ftfy.
The Libertarian Party has never been anything other.
There is no left to be found with the big L party. Who they support also directly contradicts anything resembling libertarian beliefs.
Eh, they kind of exist. Look at the last Presidential election, Chase Oliver won by beating the Mises Caucus’ preferred candidate, and Gary Johnson a couple elections before him was also kind of on the left. Both did a pretty good job of spreading libertarian ideas.
However, the leftmost people still in the LP are generally fairly centrist. They’re probably a bit left of the Democratic Party on many issues, but not really leftists in the grand scheme of things. And that’s really too bad, because there’s a lot of common ground between the left and right that could work under a single libertarian party.
I don’t really like the LP, but without the Mises Caucus in control, they’re generally pretty ok.
Gary Johnson - private prisons, school vouchers, killed collective bargaining for public employees, cutting funding for social programs, tax reductions for the rich, harsher sentencing laws, one of the most strict welfare reform programs…
His history is clear. Gary Johnson has never been left of the Republican party.
If that’s the best example of “the left” in the libertarian party, its much further to the right than Democrats.
For the record, Chase Oliver = spoiler. Nothing more. Georgia demonstrated it clearly.
That was to save money. Here’s an awesome quote from an article about budget negotiations in his second term:
He wanted more jail space, and the cheapest way to get that was private prisons. I’m personally not a fan, and the only way I’d ever be in favor of private prisons is if they are funded based on recidivism rate, not beds.
Fortunately he at least switched his position on the death penalty.
He increased education spending his first term as governor by nearly a third, and when that didn’t help with dropout rates and test scores, he moved to school vouchers in his second term.
The goal was better education. Increasing funding didn’t work, so he tried something else.
I’m not a fan of his tax policy. On that we can probably both agree.
I don’t know much about his changes to collective bargaining, but I know he reduced headcount among government employees. I’m pretty sure most libertarians would be a fan of that, and most libertarians would agree that collective bargaining should be a private affair (maybe that’s what you’re getting at?).
Here are some examples:
He’s certainly left of the Republican Party, hence why he was able to win in New Mexico twice. But he’s not exactly left of the Democratic Party, other than on a handful of issues. He’s more on the centrist end, with a penchant for small government.
A spoiler for who? He pulled pretty evenly from both sides, neither candidate got over 50℅, so it went to a runoff.
Thats always the excuse, and it always ends up with increased costs later and a higher imprisonment rate.
Same answer. Improvement takes time, its a strategy to funnel money into private education.
It lines up perfectly with his actions in education and incarceration quite well.
Not remotely what I’m getting at, no. Collective bargaining should be a right for everyone, eliminating that is a very right wing thing. As is “reducing headcount”.
Everything these people do is no different than the republican party. They sometimes cover it up in different language, but its the same goals, make no mistake.
Dude. C’mon. Warnock defeated Walker by 2.8% in the runoff, from a lead of 0.9% in the regular election.
The math ain’t hard.
And where did he eliminate the right to form a union?
My understanding is that unions are protected at the federal level, both through the constitutionally protected freedom of association and various union-related laws. Their power is diminished a bit by right to work laws, but you can still totally form a union if you want, you just might get replaced if you go on strike.
I don’t know what changes Gary Johnson made here, if any.
Gary Johnson was a Republican when he was governor, in a state dominated by Democrats. That means he appealed to a number of people who would otherwise vote Democrat. That strongly implies that he’s a bit left of the typical Republican, and you can see that in many of the positions he held. It’s inaccurate to call him a libertarian when he was governor, and he never claimed he was (quite the opposite).
He was fiscally conservative, and socially fairly liberal (and got more liberal as time went on). His primary focus as governor was to reduce the size of government, and he actually accomplished it, unlike most Republicans who just talk about it while being socially regressive. Reducing the size of government is a pretty libertarian thing to do.
And? What you’re implying is that Chase Oliver, a Libertarian, appealed more to those on the left than the right in Georgia. Even if we take that as a given, it’s irrelevant because Georgia has runoff elections, so he didn’t spoil anything.
I thought you were talking about his presidential run. In 2024, Trump won the election without a runoff, and my understanding is that he pulled more or less evenly from both parties across the country.
Still is.
Sorry, I have a lot of meetings today so I can’t hit point by point right now. A few short answers:
It’s impossible for a third party to do that, because a runoff happens when no candidate gets >50% of the vote. Taking votes away from the other candidate wouldn’t impact that.
A third party’s purpose is to get a message out. If they can force a runoff, their voice gets that much stronger. They don’t change election outcomes in runoff states.
Yes on some of your points, but Republicans made this a part of their ideology. They paid a lot of lip service to this and I can’t frankly think of when Democrats even uttered such things.
Democrats have honestly done a better job of deregulating than Republicans, just look at Carter and Clinton.
Yeah, they talk a big game, but when it comes down to passing laws, they are just as bad as Democrats in making companies do what they want.