Last updated on 2013.09.22
The standard punchline to anyone's call for an effective third party in South Dakota is, "Heck, it'd be nice if we had a two-party system."
Now that that's out of our system, let's talk about the Libertarian Party and the return of Kurt Evans as a Libertarian candidate for Senate.
The Libertarian Party of South Dakota has yet to show any sign of being able to put together an effective campaign organization. I suspect that's a genetic flaw: Libertarians believe things just happen, by the Invisible Hand, luck, what have you, so they just can't bring themselves to build a political party with officers and rules and formal procedures for raising money and getting out the vote.
Nonetheless, Kurt Evans wants to try again. We could speculate about his motives and mental state (now, be nice: I'll bet any of the other declared candidates will tell you that you have to be a little crazy to subject yourself to a statewide campaign), but let's take the Evans candidacy at face value. Let's assume Evans wants to promote the ideals of liberty and limited government that drive him to identify as a Libertarian. Let's say also that his intentions include building the Libertarian Party into an effective political force.
Instead of waiting until the last week of the election, Kurt Evans should suspend his Senate campaign now and actively support Rep. Stace Nelson in the GOP primary. Here's how this works for the Libertarian Party's goals:
- Stace Nelson already has a bunch of Ron Paul Libertarians (like my crazy cousin Aaron) on his team. His rhetoric and record are the closest to Libertarianism of any declared Republican in the race.
- Nelson is the most inclined of the GOP candidates to reach out to other parties. Rhoden is a creature of the party machine. Rounds is the machine. Nelson has built his reputation on challenging the machine and putting principle over party. He'll accept any help Evans can offer.
- Nelson has a better chance of beating Rounds in June than Evans does of beating Rounds in November. Efforts on behalf of Nelson in the primary are more likely to pay off.
- Evans can build his party by organizing existing Libertarians and recruiting new members to put up signs, go door to door, and get out the vote for Nelson in June.
- If Nelson wins in June, the Libertarians build on their organizing momentum and enjoy the gratitude of a GOP underdog who beat the big money machine with their help.
- If Nelson loses, the Libertarians still run Evans and run better because of the networking and campaign practice of the primary season. They massively increase their vote count by appealing to all those disappointed and principled Nelson voters with whom they made friends in the spring.
Huh? Nelson doesn't have a prayer against the NRSC. Libertarians and American Indians helped elect at least two Democrats in Montana last cycle. The LP candidates historically take 5 votes from the earth hater party for every 3 votes from Democrats.
Send Evans some money after he files.
Did Nelson write that for you? That sounds like a big win for Nelson but definitely not for Evans even with the reasoning you provide. How weak would Evans look backing someone else instead of focusing his time 100% on his own campaign? He might as well make a statement saying he's running even though he knows he has no chance whatsoever of winning so in the meantime, I'll back someone else. How bad would he look by flipping? There's just a whole bunch of other wrong in there but I'll stop at that.
I think Evans should run as a Libertarian. Nelson can do enough damage to Rounds in the primary without Evans. I don't think Nelson has a prayer in defeating Rounds (with or without Evans's help) as long as there are three or four Republican Senate candidates who are to the right of Rounds, so just let Nelson do his part to soften Rounds by June, and then Weiland with the help of Evans can hopefully finish-off Rounds in the fall.
On an other note, I saw Weiland speak today at the SD Democratic State Central Committee Meeting. He gave a great speech. Unfortunately, he was only preaching to the choir. l trust he is giving this same successful delivery across the entire state to South Dakotans of all walks of life, I hope... keep it up Rick!
Right now I'm preparing for a difficult petition drive and a possible Libertarian primary, but I'm hoping to discuss these ideas with the members of the executive committee. Thanks, Cory.
The dilemma of voting for what you like or voting for the lesser of two evils than might win. Having both a primary and a general election does give the option of doing both. But that might end up like Egypt where they got morsi because they did not like the other guy and then Morsi becomes a dictator.
To bad that rational discussion does not bring more concensus, because then we could have both the chance to vote for the one we want and the winner at the same time. But at the moment we have a hard line partisan attitude in this country that has developed into a lack of trust in government.
I do not agree with Nelson on everything of course, but he is more partisan as you say, and he thinks after listening and sees good in some new and different views once he thinks things trough. Then he sticks with what he decided. A combination of thinking and sticking with the program is a good thing.
Voters self-identifying as 'independent' have an opportunity to send a strong message about cannabis rights, closing imperial military bases, tribal sovereignty and reproductive liberties by supporting the Libertarian candidate over a GOP that loathes the Earth, women and diversity.
Nelson isn't the most libertarian. He is the most conservative. For nearly all of my political years in the party, the tension was not liberal/moderate/conservative but libertarian/conservative.
On the libertarian scale, Bosworth and Rhoden are most alike. Rounds and Nelson are actually the most non-libertarian. While Aurora County is east river, culturally it is virtually west river. Hughes and Hanson County are east river.
Libertarians oppose government everywhere. Conservatives oppose it in most cases but they like it in some places, like the military or police. Libertarians don't in general trumpet military service as character building- too conformist. They sound like hippies when talking about law enforcement.
Granted, there is on the surface some coming together. Conservatives don't trust their government (IRS, Obamacare, Benghazi, etc.) while libertarians don't like their government. But, at their core they are not coming from the same angle. One is experiencial and the other is philosophical.
Funny, Troy: whistling in the graveyard seems so unlike you.
Interesting, Troy: my crazy cousin Aaron and Dan Willard are both ex-military, and they lean Lib/Paul as well.