Subject:
|
Re: Can Harry Browne do it?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 6 Nov 2000 07:17:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
322 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> Todd asks:
> > How many of the ~1400 LP candidates currently running
> > in this coming election are expected to win?
>
> Good question. Anyone else out there know these kind of projections? I would
> guess around 1%, but I'm really just pulling that out of my butt.
I think 1% is low but not by much. The LP has said that it has had between
200 and 400 officeholders nationally. Many of them were elected in smaller
elections (not the national general election) or appointed.
I am guessing too. One thing that makes it hard is the underreporting. A lot
of the national organizations get raw results with multiparty candidates,
but turn those results into two party outcomes... even when the multiparty
candidate almost wins. I know one example of a three way race that had real
votes something like this
D: 36%
L: 33%
R: 31%
which was reported as
D: 54%
R: 46%
with no mention of the L candidate at all. Not "newsworthy" to report on the
L. This is patently false because in this case the L candidate was a major
factor (may well have caused the D to win instead of the R, possibly).
But it's not in the national media interest to see the L party rise, partly
because it's more work to report on real issues and explain them sensibly,
and more work to cover more candidates, and partly because many (not all) in
the national media have a bias in favor of many ideas the LP espouses.
Nader, on the other hand, gets disproportionate coverage since he's their
kind of candidate. Buchanan, on the other hand, gets disproportionate
coverage, since he's a media personallity and many of his ideas are so
laughable that they make easy lampooning targets. (it's much harder to make
fun of genuinely GOOD ideas).
BTW even though the reform party isn't, I was sad to see it destroyed by
Buchanan, the Ventura wing was destroyed.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Can Harry Browne do it?
|
| (...) Yup. It was quite a national argument too. The proponents of a federal income tax eventually got it passed by assuring (though not writing it into law) the skeptics that it could never go over something like 3% of income. (...) I never thought (...) (24 years ago, 6-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
27 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
