| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > LP POINT 1
> >
> >
> >
> > Larry,
> > Can you please show me how wrong I am?
> >
> > Scott A
> >
> > From:
> > http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=7427
> >
> > =+=
> > > > I liked this, it pretty much sums up my view of the LP:
> > > >
> > > > Libertarians and their "I've got mine, Jack" philosphy are people who were
> > > > born on third base and think they've hit life's triple. In America's
> > > > egalitarian society it should surprise no one this cramped, neo-Victorian
> > > > philosophy has not caught on.
> > > > Russell Sadler, commentator, Jefferson Public Radio in Ashland, Oregon
> > >
> > > There are so many fallacies, errors, and ad hominem attacks in this one,
> > > it's hard to know where to begin. Is it your point, though? Is it the one
> > > you want to pick? It's pretty weak.
> >
> > So weak that you will not answer it? Show me this guy is wrong. Show me what
> > the support for LP is. Show me it is a representative cross section of the
> > US public.
>
> Clearly state the question, please, along with your assumptions.
>
> In the absence, though...
>
> I've never claimed that the LP has massive support among the voting populace
> as a political party.
That is not the point of my point:
"Show me it is a representative cross section of the US public."
I'm interested in breadth - not depth. Show me that all socio-economic
groups support the LP in a broadly representative manner - show me it is not
weighted towards "people who were born on third base and think they've hit
life's triple" as you asserted.
> If it did, we'd win a lot more elections than we do.
> Naturally, we're disappointed with our results in the last general election,
> who wouldn't be? We expected to do a lot better. Polls as late as the day
> before the election indicated that we'd outpoll Buchanan easily. And we
> almost did.
What you almost outpoll Buchanan easily? That implies you beat him? :)
> But the "don't throw away your vote" argument holds too much
> sway, unfortunately.
>
> What I *have* said is that small l libertarian ideas are on the ascendency,
> in the main, world wide. Do you dispute that point? Do you dispute that many
> countries in the world are moving in the direction of more personal and more
> economic freedom?
Yep, I read that Chilli is a prime example of your principles.
Scott A
> The UK certainly has, if one takes the beginning of the
> Thatcher government as one's starting point.
>
> ++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LP POINT 1
|
| (...) I'm not sure what that phrase means, exactly. It seems pejorative and seems to (along with phrases like "cramped, Victorian") show the speaker's bias and tendency to want to use ridicule instead of critical thinking. But I don't believe I (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP POINT 1
|
| (...) Clearly state the question, please, along with your assumptions. In the absence, though... I've never claimed that the LP has massive support among the voting populace as a political party. If it did, we'd win a lot more elections than we do. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
78 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
|
|
|
|
