Mediaboss Marketing

Upon taking control of the Libertarian Party (L.P.) this May, leaders from the internal bloc known as the Mises Caucus quickly adopted "national divorce" as one of the retooled party's core rallying cries on Twitter. New national Chair Angela McArdle proudly tweeted that she was "organizing the LP like an insurgency and preparing for counter insurgency operations."

Over the past three weeks, minus the bloody violence part, the state Libertarian affiliates in New Mexico and Virginia have indeed divorced themselves from the party's national leadership. But the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) is not letting them go peacefully without a fight.

On August 25, the Libertarian Party of New Mexico (LPNM), which achieved major-party ballot-access status in 2018 thanks to the 9 percent presidential showing in 2016 in that state by former two-term Gov. Gary Johnson, announced that it was disaffiliating from the LNC.

"You have conspired, with a faction inimical to the principles of libertarianism, to impose upon us officers and governing documents foreign to our rules, unchosen by our members, and unacknowledged by the laws of our state," state Chairman Chris Luchini wrote, in a long bill of particulars. "You have adopted messaging and communications hostile to the principles for which the Libertarian Party was founded, serving no purpose other than to antagonize and embarrass."

At issue was an August 9 LNC letter declaring the New Mexico state party's July 12 Constitutional Convention to be "null and void" due to "multiple" procedural violations, involving the proper advance notice and the manner of the convention (electronic). In a phone interview last week, Luchini theorized that the LNC's real objection was to a bylaw change the LPNM made at that convention limiting the number of annual executive committee personnel changes to not more than two, thereby preventing the Mises Caucus (or any other bloc) from winning complete control of the state party in a single convention.

While Luchini granted procedural errors over advance notice on an earlier convention prior to the July one, he said the LNC's responses have been unduly and unreasonably punitive and harassing.* "Violate a procedural rule, God forbid, commit heresy against Robert's Rules of Order, they think us making a mistake justified any action on their part." Rather than submit to national discipline, the LPNM chose secession.

No, we break up with you, the LNC responded in a meeting this past Sunday night. The National Committee refused to recognize the LPNM's right to exit, and instead voted 141 (with two abstentions) to disaffiliate itself from the New Mexicans. But this divorce will come with a likely custody battleover the name.

"If state parties choose to disaffiliate and operate completely independent of the national LP," McArdle wrote to me this week, "they will need to come up with a new name."

Luchini, for one, finds it ironic that the LNC is threatening to sueuse state forceto protect its trademark over the term "Libertarian Party,"* especially considering that the LPNM had been in operation for decades before the LNC got around to trademarking the term in 2000.

The LNC anticipates that a new group of New Mexico Libertariansthe national party bylaws require just 10will arise to form a new state-level L.P. in New Mexico that the LNC will then recognize as an official affiliate. But the existing ballot access relationship with the state of New Mexico remains with the disaffiliated party for now. According to a special rule of order passed at that same LNC meeting Sunday night, "The petitioners [for such a new party must have] held a public meeting which was open to all current national Party members and immediately previous affiliate Party members," with reasonable notice.

That same day, the Virginia Libertarian Party's state central committee (SCC) announced that it had dissolved itself after a 75 vote (with one abstention), complaining that "the national image of the party" was now "functionally indistinct from other alt-right parties and movements." The party's website and Facebook page disappeared; its email addresses stopped working.

The move was illegal, LNC Secretary Caryn Ann Harlos says, though the Virginia State Corporation Commission issued a letter Tuesday stating that the dissolution complies "with the requirements of law." A parliamentarian consulted by the LNC countered that the dissolution required a vote of full party membership, while now-former Virginia L.P. chair Holly Ward believes that the SCC itself is the only relevant "members" who needed to approve. McArdle also said in a post to the LNC's business listserv that "corporate dissolution papers do not make or break an affiliate and lots of affiliates don't have corporate status." Technically, in Virginia another legal step known as "termination" must also occur, after the Virginia party's assets have been properly distributed.

Ward charged in a phone interview that the LNC has become a "fraud," properly backing neither Libertarian candidates nor Libertarian messaging, in a state whose party achieved a remarkable 6.5 percent running Robert Sarvis for governor in 2013 (and another exceptional-for-Libertarians 2.4 percent running Sarvis for Senate in 2014). The national party has made the Libertarian banner toxic to potential candidates, Ward claimed, which she thinks helps explain why there are no L.P. candidates on Virginia ballots this year. In doing candidate outreach, Ward says, she found "interested parties declined to run based on the current image and narrative of the national party."

Several local and regional Libertarian organizations in Virginia objected to the SCC's abrupt self-destruction, and the conflict is ongoing: Disgruntled Virginia L.P. members are being asked to write letters of complaint to the state government (a move Ward considers a potential use of state force to achieve a political goal, and thus a Libertarian no-no), and the Libertarian Party of Northern Virginia has been decrying the move and vowing to "continue to work with affiliates across the Commonwealth to conduct the business of the party," state party dissolution or not. There are various means for members to call for a new special convention and elect new officers who don't want to dissolve, Harlos says, working on the presumption that the dissolution motion should be considered illegitimate.

"While the LNC has had to referee some internal party disputes recently," McArdle wrote in her email, "we're still focused on advancing the message of liberty, supporting candidates, and moving the needle in the direction of freedom. I appreciate how level-headed and calm the remaining LPVA officers have been and anticipate they will get their affiliate back in order quickly."

Virginia and New Mexico are not the only states experiencing Libertarian turmoil. Massachusetts now has two functioning parties using the name Libertarian, only one of which is recognized by the LNC.

The Bay State fight emanated from a Mises-associated bloc of members from the state party calling for a (bylaw-legal) special convention in December 2021, that the old guard attempted to quash in January 2022 by expelling from the party all who called for it. Competing conventions were then held in April and the newer, Mises-oriented bloc is the one the LNC now recognizes as an affiliate.

Still, all the Libertarian candidates on the Massachusetts ballot this year are the ones put forward by the older body, doing business as the "Libertarian Association of Massachusetts." Andrew Cordio, chair of the officially recognized "Libertarian Party of Massachusetts," said in a phone interview this week that he's currently more focused on membership and volunteer growth and outreach than candidates and ballot access.

In 2021, the Mises Caucus faction, then influential but not dominant on the LNC, was on the opposite side of a state-disaffiliation case, successfully blocking a move to break ties with a New Hampshire L.P. that was seen by the old guard as being too "toxic" for the national brand. (Roughly, some accuse the Mises side of hypocrisy, seeing the current New Mexico situation as analogous, except now the Mises crowd are for disaffiliating a state party that displeased them.) The attempted purge of the New Hampshire party, which has since attracted national attention for various inflammatory tweets, led directly in June 2021 to the resignation of thennational Chair Joseph Bishop-Henchman.

Harlos, consistently the LNC's most meticulous stickler for proper parliamentary procedure, explains that the national party is duty-bound to protect the rights of members, sometimes over the actions of their governing bodies. If the LNC seems to be interfering with a state party, she says, it's because "we have to determine who [the legitimate state affiliate] actually is," which has to include "if they conducted themselves within their own bylaws."

The LNC may be exerting a heavy hand of late in publicity and state affiliate management, but on the issues core to the functions of a political partyballot access and candidatesthe national party is largely irrelevant; the state parties do all the heavy lifting and have the legal relationships to their state's electoral officials. The national party's role is to occasionally offer financial, legal, promotional, and organizational support to either ballot access drives or (more rarely) candidates or candidate training.

The national party does pick a presidential ticket by majority delegate vote at its biannual convention in presidential election years, but every state affiliate has the legal power to ignore that choice and place its own preferred candidate. It almost never happens with any state party in happy affiliation with the LNC, but a rogue Arizona L.P. in 2000 did place science fiction writer L. Neil Smith on the presidential ballot in that state over national choice Harry Browne.

It seems overwhelmingly likely that whoever the Libertarian presidential nominee selected by the national convention delegates is in 2024, he or she will not be on the ballot in all 50 states, a threshold that the L.P. has achieved the past two presidential elections and six times total in its 50-year history.

Despite these state conflicts, including assertions that current national policies are hurting the brand, according to its August financial report the national party's number of active donors did begin rising after the May convention turnover in management, though as of August that number is lower than in any month in 2021 under the leadership displaced in Reno; August revenue is lower than the vast majority of months of the past year after a huge May rise that beat all but one month of the past year.

Luchini in an email this week said that there are plans to launch a new national organization of state Libertarian parties that do not wish to be affiliated with the current Mises-dominated LNC. While Luchini would not name any states specifically, he says he is confident from backchannel discussions that while New Mexico was "the first" to disaffiliate while still being recognized by the LNC, it certainly "won't be the last."

*CORRECTIONS: A previous version of this article was unclear about which convention Luchini granted notice errors on. A previous version of the article was unclear about precisely what term was trademarked by the LNC.

Read the original:
Libertarian Party Faces State Rebellions - Reason

BOISE A rift in the Idaho Libertarian Party has cost the party its best-known Idaho candidate, 1st Congressional District hopeful Joe Evans, who withdrew in late August and has now been replaced by a first-time candidate from Post Falls.

Evans was the partys top vote-getter in the 2020 election, receiving 16,453 votes, or 3.6%, in a three-way race for the same post, which was won by current GOP Congressman Russ Fulcher. Evans actually got more votes in Idaho that year than the Libertarian Partys presidential nominee, Jo Jorgensen, who received 16,404 votes or 1.9%.

The Libertarian Party counts 11,081 registered Libertarians in Idaho, according to August figures from the Idaho Secretary of States office; thats 1.1% of Idahos registered voters.

There was an ideological break between the previous board of the Libertarian Party of Idaho and the one thats currently in charge, Evans told the Idaho Press. And unfortunately, because of the size of the Libertarian Party in Idaho, a break between a significant candidate and the board is simply unsustainable.

He said he didnt want to campaign while they were coming in behind me and telling everybody that libertarianism stood for something else. So it wasnt worth my time to spend the next 60 days fighting over the issue.

Though the Idaho Libertarian Party held a convention and elected new officers in April, the election of a single precinct committeeman in Bannock County in the May primary with just five votes made that person, Todd Corsetti, the only official member of the state Central Committee, with the ability to appoint other members, according to the Idaho Secretary of States office. As the party was thrown into confusion, it tried to revert to its previous officers, a move the national Libertarian Party rejected.

They have a hard time getting precinct committeemen elected at all, said Jason Hancock, deputy Idaho secretary of state, because Idaho law requires at least five votes to elect someone to that position. Most Idaho precincts dont even have five registered Libertarians. In the May primary, seven candidates ran across the state; Corsetti was the only one to receive five votes.

Hancock said the election made Corsetti a county chair, and he appointed his wife as state precinct committeewoman for the county.

The state central committee of each political party consists of all of the county central committee chairs and all the state committeemen and women, he said. That was those two people at that point.

My understanding is that when the national Libertarian Party got involved, they ended up landing on the side of this elected group, I guess youd say, since they had kind of propagated themselves through the electoral process and state statute, Hancock said, as opposed to kind of the legacy group that had been in charge.

Corsetti then successfully petitioned the party to expel its previous chair and the newly elected chair, Jennifer and Robert Imhoff, and Jayson Sorensen, who had lost narrowly to Robert Imhoff for the party chairman post in April, was appointed as the new chairman.

Sorensen said, Theres a caucus called the Mises Caucus that basically ran the table in Reno and is a majority of the party now. Reno was where the partys national convention was held in May. This is kind of just the backlash to people that have been in power for a long time now losing that power, would be my take on it, Sorensen said.

The rift echoes similar splits that have happened in a half-dozen other states, as the Mises Caucus took over the national party, cementing its victory at this years national convention.

Corsetti is a member of the Mises Caucus, which is variously described as the paleo-libertarian or Ron Paul wing of the Libertarian Party, or by Paul himself in 2021 as the libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party. Formed in 2017, it opposed the more pragmatic positions taken by 2018 Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson, and opposes moves toward progressivism.

Theyre social conservatives, Evans said, though others in the party dispute that label. Some of the other members were very much part of the pro-life portion of the party, and they very much cheered the overturning of Roe v. Wade. They believe strongly in the state being able to enforce anti-abortion restrictions. Evans, who supports abortion rights, said that was the dividing line for him as a Libertarian.

The national Libertarian Partys platform included a plank advocating leaving decisions about abortion up to the individual until this year; it was removed at the party convention in May, leaving the platform silent on the issue.

Sorensen said he was sorry to lose Evans from the partys slate of candidates. He was a good candidate, he said. We were hoping that after the split, we would be able to work with everybody other than the two individuals who were removed, and it just didnt work out that way.

Sorensen, 32, a farmer from southeastern Idaho, said Corsettis election as a precinct committeeman in May was a first for the Idaho party.

I think were definitely going to grow, he said. My personal opinion is that the Libertarian Party of Idaho has been somewhat of a social club for a lot of years. My hope is that we grow and we continue to recruit members and work with other organizations in Idaho to build coalitions and grow the party.

On the day of the deadline to name a new candidate, the party named Darian Drake of Post Falls to replace Evans on the ballot for the 1st Congressional District seat.

Drake, 49, said hes a member of the Mises Caucus and he defines it as a pushback against progressivism, in the sense that its pushing back against collectivism and identity politics.

A resident of Idaho for five and a half years, Drake said his top issue is individual rights.

At an August meeting of the Libertarian National Committee, the committee voted 13-0 to uphold the April convention results from the Idaho party, and recognize officers elected then, and their successors, including Jayson Sorensen as interim chair, are the legitimate officers of the Libertarian Party of Idaho.

The Idaho Secretary of States office agreed. In a Sept. 6 letter to Sorensen, Secretary of State Lawerence Denney wrote, After consulting legal counsel, the office of the Idaho Secretary of State recognizes Jayson Sorensen as chair of the Libertarian Party of Idaho. As such, any appointments to fill federal or state vacancies will only be accepted from this individual.

Then, the office accepted the appointment of Drake to replace Evans on the ballot. He was in under the wire on that, said Hancock, who said Drake will appear on the November ballot.

Evans, 53, who ran as a Libertarian for the state Legislature in 2018 before his first run for Congress in 2020, said, The board was pretty much split in April. Then Todd Corsetti used his position to remove certain members giving the Mises Caucus dominance on the party.

Evans, a U.S. Army veteran, data engineer and web designer from Meridian, said he hopes to focus for now on ballot initiatives, including a 2024 medical marijuana proposal, rather than running for office. Im still pursuing libertarian goals, just not doing it as part of the party, he said.

Read the original post:
Idaho Libertarian congressional candidate withdraws, amid party upheaval - bigcountrynewsconnection.com

I am current reading an excellent book on zoning written by M. Nolan Gray, entitled Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How To Fix It. It might sound like a bland topic, but its a surprisingly easy and enjoyable read.

Most Americans have never given much thought to residential zoning, and have little idea as to what it is all about. Gray punctures many myths about zoning. For instance, zoning rules were not set up to prevent polluting factories from locating near residential neighborhoodsthere were already public nuisance rules against that sort of thing prior to the first zoning laws in 1916. Rather, zoning rules are aimed at making cities less dense than they would be in a free market, and imposing strict economic segregationbasically keeping the poor as far away as possible. Studies suggest that zoning regulations dramatically reduce Americas GDP by sharply increasing housing prices in our most productive areas, making the country significantly poorer than it would be with free housing market.

So where are libertarians on this important issue? Heres Reason magazine, discussing a proposal by Leo Pustilnikov to build 2300 housing units at the site of a former power plant in Redondo Beach, California:

Leo is a pure speculator and its laughable that he would buy a piece of property and try to enforce his will onto this community, says Nehrenheim.

A registered Libertarian, Nehrenheim has twice now won elections on a platform of stopping overdevelopment and preventing the Santa Monica-ization of the city.

Its proven a popular message in Redondo Beach among an eclectic mix of supporters. His 2021 reelection campaign received donations from the local Sierra Club and the enthusiastic endorsement of theLibertarian Party Mises Caucus.

The Mises Caucus and the Sierra Club? Thats not quite Baptists and bootleggers, more like southern and west coast Baptists.

This seems part of a broader movement within the Mises Caucus:

Along with Rothbard, one of the biggest influences on prominent members of the Mises Caucus is the political theorist Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who disagreed with the pro-immigration views of Ludwig von Mises. Hewrotethat politicians have a perverse incentive to let in unproductive parasites, bums, and criminals and that the power to admit or exclude should be stripped from the hands of the central government and reassigned to the states, provinces, cities, towns, villages, residential districts, and ultimately to private property owners and their voluntary associations. Hoppe advocates for the Swiss model, where local assemblies, not the central government, determine who can and who cannot become a Swiss citizen. Hoppe has alsosuggestedthat democrats and communists will have to be physically separated and expelled from a libertarian society.

In fact, immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native born Americans.

Progressives often have more inclusionary rhetoric than the far right, but in practice their communities are some of the worst offenders. Gray suggests that the most extreme examples of government enforced economic segregation (which leads to de facto racial segregation) occur in progressive areas of the northeastern US and California.

PS. This picture shows the location of the power complex in Redondo Beach where the proposed residential development would occur. In the past, this proposal would almost certainly have been shot down. Today it has at least a fighting chance, due to some recent deregulation that makes it a bit easier to build multifamily buildings in California.

Read more:
The open society and its enemies - Econlib

This is an edition of Up for Debate, a newsletter by Conor Friedersdorf. On Wednesdays, he rounds up timely conversations and solicits reader responses to one thought-provoking question. Later, he publishes some thoughtful replies. Sign up for the newsletter here.

Last week, I asked readers to discuss how theyre thinking about the upcoming midterm elections in the United States. I am disappointed that I didnt hear from many current Republican voters, something that Ive found informative in the past and that Ill return to in future installments. I did get lots of responses from former Republicans, independents, and Democrats, and listening to them, Donald Trump seems like an albatross for the Republican Party.

Steve cast his first presidential vote for Ronald Reagan. Until President Trump, I was a lifelong Republican, he wrote. My major issue is whether a candidate supports Trump. He has crushed my vision of America. If a candidate even remotely supports Trump, they will never get my vote.

For correspondents alienated by the latest incarnation of the GOP, one issue loomed largest. Im an independent who was once a Republican, Michael writes. I left the party due to the January 6 insurrection and the GOP refusal to investigate it. The issue driving me is to defeat Trumpism.

Barbara has different ideological priors but the same focus:

I will vote for democracy. That means I will vote for those who uphold the rule of law, meaning that no one is above the law. I will vote for those who uphold our constitutional right to choose our representatives, and vote against those who are trying to restrict voting rights, or trying to give legislators the ability to throw out votes and choose their own winners. I will vote for those who support the peaceful transfer of power and against those who reject an election because they dont like the outcome. I will vote for legislators who work for their constituents and against those who work for their personal benefit. I will vote for legislators who uphold their oath of office.

Additionally, Barbara alluded to abortion, the issue that loomed next-largest among my correspondents, writing, I will vote for those who support a justice system where settled precedent and established rights are not overturned based on judges personal and political beliefs.

The same two issues stood out for Mark, though in a somewhat different manner. He writes:

1) I am pro-life to the core. To me, elective abortion is homicide and a loathsome evil. It can be justified only to save the life of the mother, oras a compromisein cases of rape or incest.

2) To me, the integrity of our Constitution, the institutions it mandates, and even our federal union is at risk. All of this has come to be because of Donald Trump, who never should have been voted in as president. This man is a criminal and for all I know either an ally or a dupe of Vladimir Putin. I will never vote for Mr. Trump. I will not knowingly vote for anyone who endorses him or his take on many positions on items such as election results.

From when I was first able to vote, in 1972, to 2016, I voted Republican nearly 100 percent. I did vote for a few (fewer than five) Democrats and regretted it every time. The issue was that of abortion, that monstrous machinery of death that Justice Harry Blackmun built on the infamous day of January 20, 1973. In particular, it was most discouraging to see Democrats proclaiming themselves to be pro-choice, including some who once were pro-life. Pro-life people were not welcome in the Democratic Party. So be it. So I voted Republican.

Things started to change when Donald Trump ran for president as a Republican. Knowing his unsavory character, I took the position that I MIGHT vote for him but if I did, it would be like eating a turd sandwich. In the spring of 2016, I moved to the position of not voting for Trump under any circumstances. I considered voting for Hillary Clinton until I saw her at the DNC pumping fists with Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood. So I didnt vote for her or Trump in 2016. I voted for Evan McMullin. After seeing Trumps COVID response and, worse, seeing his starting to whine about the election being stolen even before votes were cast, I made up my mind to vote for Joe Biden, which I did. I would have sat it out if ANY OTHER Democrat ran for president.

We come to the here and now.

The attempted coup of January 6, 2021, and the revelations of Trumps involvement and, worse, the Republicans continuing to excuse Trump have made it so I will not vote for any Republican unless (like Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney), he or she denounces and renounces Trump and his positions on things like our elections, race, Putin, and other strong leaders. However, in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the Democrats are apparently running EXCLUSIVELY on protecting the right to choose death before birth for babies. The Republicans have handed them so many issues on which they could run, and maybe even secure my vote: issues like protecting our elections; our republican institutions; and our foreign policy, especially concerning Russia and Ukraine. But are Democrats running on those issues? No, of course not. Rather, they are running to protect a monstrous evil of abortion. On that, I will NOT vote.

So in 2022, I might consider it my patriotic duty to stay home. I may vote for some Democrats, but there are no guarantees. I even might vote for some Republicans if I see them dropping Trump.

CG, another voter who objects to Trumps efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, is torn about whether his fellow Democrats should talk about abortion when they talk about democracy.

He writes:

The most important issue to me is stopping the MAGA candidates who still promote lies about election fraud. Im torn by how the Democratic Party has approached this election. I think abortion is a much more complex issue than a right being stripped away, and dislike that its such a focus this year. I think that collapsing critiques of authoritarian tendencies within Republican/conservative leaders and voters with critiques of anti-abortion, anti-gay, and anti-climate science positions cloud the issue. I also dislike spending money in Republican primaries to elevate the crazy people because theyre easier to beat. Its so dangerous; these crazy Republican candidates might win!

On the other hand, winning in November is really important. Even normal conservatives like Senator Sasse refused to impeach Trump. Normal conservatives supported McCarthys submission to Trump and punished Cheney for refusing to ignore that Trump tried to use deceit, fraud, and violence to stay in power. So Im not sure theres much of a difference between a normal conservative in Congress and a MAGA conservative. In which case, generating turnout by focusing on the Dobbs decision makes sense. Spending money to support repugnant, but weaker general-election candidates is justified. It might also have been necessary to highlight extreme positions earlier so that these candidates could not pretend to be normal now during the general election.

Read: Who knows what Putin will do next?

Lucretia is energized by the fight to protect legal abortion:

Womens right to bodily integritytheir place as a person, not just a human beingis under assault. That a party that saw the COVID vaccines as a denial of personal freedom would put itself in the position of controlling the most personal and female functions of more than half the population is a matter of mind-numbing hubris. I will vote Democratic.

B. concurs:

Im not usually a one-issue voter, but this year there is no contest: I will be voting for a womans right to control her own body. Im 87. I remember well what life for women was like before Roe. I joined second-wave feminism in the 1970s. I marched on the National Mall. I even shook Justice Blackmuns hand to thank him for the Supreme Court decision. I cant believe we are having to relive what women like me fought so hard for 50 years ago.

Jen shares the same values but isnt going to vote:

As a woman, abortion is the most important issue to me. I have never voted. I have always felt voters have never really mattered in the political system. You get only a selection of candidates pre-chosen for you, so its a selection, not an election. And none of the candidates seems to have the socioeconomic status of their voters, who are mostly low-income or middle-class.

James is a likely nonvoter, too:

At 35, Ive lost all sense of political identity or ideology. I see the harms in untruths across the spectrum, and I find it difficult to be on board with anything anymore. Sanity and reason never feel like theyre on the ballot. So much of our society, across the political spectrum, appears consumed by an ever-growing movement to make an authoritarian religion out of their personal and political identity. It feels deeply wrong to me. This isnt what a self-governing society, or life, should be about. I want to vote. I just dont know if I can bring myself to.

Climate change is the issue Sam cares about more than any other:

It will continue to be the most important issue for the rest of our lives. It is the most important issue in the history of our species. The economy is important, but nothing is more important than the future of all life on Earth. I care about this issue not just because of my daughter, but also because of me. I hope to have 50 more years of life on this planet, and the climate situation is currently dire. If any Republicans would put forth a real plan to address climate change, I might consider voting for them. They havent and they wont.

Trump alienated Marty from the Republican Party:

I am 80. I have been a registered GOP voter most of my life. I could not vote for Hillary and I never voted for Trump. I voted for Biden, unhappily, because I could not vote for Trump.

I consider myself to be conservative on fiscal matters and liberal on social matters. As a partial libertarian, my view is that people should be allowed to do what they want to do so long as they dont ask others to clean up their mess. There is simply no political party that represents my views. I am not in the MAGA camp. I cannot register as a Democrat because of fiscal irresponsibility and the ghastly failure of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. I will vote for Val Demings instead of Marco Rubio for the United States Senate. Unless someone like Mitt Romney is nominated for the GOP in 2024, I will most likely vote Democratic. I am appalled at the Supreme Courts destruction of Roe v. Wade. We need to legalize abortion and work to reduce unwanted pregnancies. I strongly believe we and the West should provide Ukraine with aircraft, Western tanks, and strong air-defense systems at an accelerated level. If we gave Ukraine these weapons quickly, I believe it could truly win this war. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for all the values we claim to support, so what is the problem?

Russell is a former Republican, too:

I am 62 years old and have voted in every election since I was 18. I voted for Ronald Reagan for president twice. While it has often been said that the stakes couldnt be higher, it is my belief that this time that is empirically true. Republicans need to lose elections at every level, nationwide, regardless of integrity, to send a clear and unmistakable message that the present-day Republican ethos is unacceptable in a democracy. Millions of Republicans state out loud that my vote for Joe Biden should not count. Apathy is no longer an option for those who claim there is no difference between the two parties, unless they really do not care if they themselves are subjugated.

Meredith is a Gen X military spouse, a practicing Christian, a political independent, and a never-Trumper. She writes:

As a voter in North Carolina, I am heavily in support of Judge Cheri Beasley for Senate and will be turning out to vote for her. Beyond the fact that her opponent is awash in Trumpism, I genuinely like her for her character, compassion, and experience within the justice system. I am hoping we will see the first African American woman to represent NC in the Senate, because she is the most qualified person to fill the seat.

I used to believe in good-faith disagreements that led to understanding and compromise and would have considered myself a moderate Republican. But I no longer find a home in either party. We independents generally understand the deeper complexity involved in policy making and avoid the shallow, reductionist views that push the margins toward extreme tribalism. I hold many priorities in tension and find it difficult selecting one overriding issue. I care as deeply about police reform as I do about better support and advocacy for veterans. I am alarmed at the rate at which our society is trending authoritarian and want to protect voting rights and access for all citizens.

Democrats might enjoy my vote for the moment, but I am not naive about the influence of power on either party. Right now, the focus is on salvaging the executive processes that buffered the trend toward extremism and reforming a declining legislative branch.

Chuck is a married father in his 50s. He writes:

I strongly believe that voting is a civic duty and have voted in pretty much every election-special, primary, and generalsince I was 18. I was raised in a Roman Catholic, country-club-Republican family and supported the Republican candidate in most elections in my late teens and early 20s, but began thinking of myself as more of an independent in my mid-20s ... While the Democrats are not perfect, I am concerned about the trend in the Republican Party to win at all costs, even if that means perverting the normal ruleswritten and unwrittenthat govern our elections. It concerns me greatly that so many Republican candidates are repeating the Big Lie that Trump was the true winner of the 2020 election and that Biden and the Democrats stole the election. I will not only be voting but will also be sending contributions to Democratic candidates in close elections around the country, especially Senate candidates facing beatable, Trump-endorsed Republicans with minimal qualifications and wacky ideas about the election, nonexistent voter fraud, and outlawing all abortions.

Kristinia is unaligned and feels that the major parties are not a viable vehicle to advance her foremost priority: a negotiated end to the Ukraine-Russia conflict, instead of escalating it by sending billions of our tax dollars for weaponry. This will push me to vote for third parties, as I often do.

She writes:

Like soldiers anywhere in the dark abyss of war, most do not want to be part of their leaders madness and would welcome any escape possible. That would be a negotiated truce, a pause in the fighting to work toward an imperfect settlement whereby both Russia and Ukraine can save face before more horrific loss of life occurs, before nuclear weapons are used, before the meltdown of a nuclear power plant. We hear nothing of that option for negotiation from Democrats or liberals, and only a few extremist, isolationist Republicans oppose the war spending, but for the wrong reasons. The U.S. government, the Pentagon, the war planners, and the neoliberals are hell-bent on making sure they achieve a unipolar world with the West at the helm, a proxy war with the ends justify the means goal of regime change, weakening Russia.

It is not understood by the U.S. populace that one can hold two thoughts (or more) at the same time: Putins aggression is wrong and imperialist, and the U.S. response in keeping the war hot is wrong and imperialist. One can believe both conceptions and push for the option of stopping the war, and still be in support of the Ukrainian people. Thus Ill be voting for candidates who have the courage to speak in favor of ending the war. Ill be voting my conscience. Because our flawed system is stacked against third parties, my candidates wont win, but I will sleep at night knowing I voted to end the slaughter, for peace, for humanity.

B.A. is a single-issue voter, too, but his issue is the environment:

I am feeling the inflation, but in the long run, the loss of the planet were living on is apocalyptic. If there were a candidate with enough drive and power to introduce serious changes, Id be voting for him or her. If this candidate opposed abortion, Id still vote in their favor. Were in a desperate situation, and there must be a dozen articles every day that emphasize the losses we are in the middle of, but there seems to be a kind of lassitude about it in the country. I no longer think my recycling efforts and all the other things individuals can do to make things better are going to make any difference until we massively alter our country. I know other countries like China are contributing to emissions, but thats no excuse for Americas inaction. Ill give up stuffIll pay morebut I need someone to take charge.

Read: 19 readers on the rise of dating apps

The same issue alienated Ryan from the GOP:

Politically Ive been mostly independent in my life and have voted for candidates from both parties. That is until recent years, and the most important reason for this is the Republican Party's refusal to accept/engage in climate change. There are many topics that are important, but its hard to compare the importance of this or that with the issue of whether we will have a viable and sustainable planet to inhabit and share with all its wondrous life forms.

Harold is disgusted by the GOP on behalf of Trump supporters he believes it has manipulated and harmed:

I have always considered myself politically moderate. In the past I even identified as a conservative, and likely still would, had someone like John Kasich won the Republican nomination in 2016. Instead I voted for Hillary Clinton and split the rest of the ticket, voting for Patrick Toomey for Senate. Since then, I have voted only for Democrats in each subsequent election. Perhaps there are Democrats who are equally disillusioned by their party as I am with Republicans. We are prisoners of our experiences, and I can speak only of the failings I see in a group I once identified as being a part of. For me those failures are so great that the party needs to be destroyed and rebuilt from the ground up. Once it stood for principle and character. Now those in charge are opportunistic blobs preying off of people genuinely struggling for a sense of purpose. They have access to the truth, but they feed lies to their supporters. Countless livelihoods were ruined as they were sent off to fulfill quixotic fantasies of overthrowing the government on January 6 or defeating the deep state as they charged FBI field offices We all deserve better, and therefore I will never vote Republican again so long as this sickness prevails. Something this broken can be found only in the crushed hopes, dreams, and lives of the individuals they trample on to ascend to power. It has to stop.

GE pledged to vote for the candidates who embrace individual freedom instead of central government:

This nation has 50 states, and each state is very different. The people in those states have different needs and desires. Allowing maximal freedom for local and state populations to decide on which laws will dictate social behavior seems more logical than a central government forcing a one-size-fits-all policy across 330 million people. I have no problem voting for any candidate regardless of party if they come down more on the side of individual freedoms.

Holly will vote for a losing candidate:

I intend to throw away my vote. By that I mean that I will vote for the candidates who show the most libertarian tendencies, in the vain hope that we can turn away from the lefts abiding faith that more regulations and government meddling will solve our problems, and from the rights abandonment of free trade and of faith in individuals ability to serve their own best interests. Very few candidates have anything that could remotely be considered a libertarian point of view. Free speech and freedom of association have fallen victim to the intolerance of both left and right. Im afraid my choices this November will be pretty limited, but I cant bring myself to abstain from voting.

And Dorothy is an undecided voter:

This is one of the hardest election seasons to make sense of in my lifetime. I am 60, female, and highly educated, and have been registered as Democrat, independent, and Republican at different times. I abhor party politics in general, because I regard parties as marketing ploys. They are based only very loosely, if at all, on principle. Mostly, they are based on changes in where the wind is blowing at any given moment, with only the most macro, overarching concepts a constant. Republicans dont like centralized authority; Democrats dont like concentrations of wealth. Republicans think that government writ large is the problem; Democrats think it is a solution. The rest is up for grabs.

For what it is worth, I believe that government, as it actually exists in 3-D, is a huge problem. It invades spaces that should be left to private decision making, negotiation, and exploration. It is a barrier we all must cross, and nine times out of 10, there is little to no payoff for the impediments it throws in our way. We need regulation and law enforcement, but we most certainly do not need a bloated, corrupt, sluggish, inefficient bureaucracy that any sentient human can see now exists to protect its empire and feed itself.

I speak from some experience. I spent years living in Washington at the beginning of a legal career and later worked on Capitol Hill. I despise politics as religion, which it clearly has become. Both parties have come unhinged, and neither really cares about how its actions or words affect the country. They care about preserving and growing their power.

With that as the background, abortion rights (and other civil liberties) and the economy are tied in my mind as the most important issues in the upcoming election. That means I am in a bit of a pickle. I am too smart to fall for the comical justifications and falsehoods the Democrats offer for their endless tax-and-spend policies, which are hurting us very badly and will continue to do so. No household or company could afford to operate in such a fiscally irresponsible manner, and it is a massive betrayal of trust that our elected officials do so on a regular basis (with other peoples money) while draping themselves in the appearance of virtue. And I am far too principled and worried about our freedom to love whom we please and do what we like with our adult bodies to ever throw myself behind the piggish, repulsive desires of the Republicans who want to impose their own Leave It to Beaver fantasies on those of us who live in the real world.

I have no idea what will drive my vote this year. I will vote for whichever candidates are willing to do the hard work of governing with fairness, intelligence, and independence of thought.

I could publish a half-dozen more notes from former Republicans turned off by Trump and Trumpism, but were running long already. Thank you to everyone who wrote regardless of perspective, and if youre voting for Republicans this November, I would love to hear from you, too.

See the original post:
The Weight of Trump - The Atlantic

Michelle Kwock is running for public office, but you wouldnt know from talking to her. Sometimes even she forgets.

My chance of winning is extremely slim, she says.

Shes not wrong. Kwocks running as a nonpartisan, meaning shes not affiliated with any political party in Hawaii.

Looking back to 1992, the earliest available data, no independent candidate in Hawaii has won office while running in a partisan race.

I dont have to win, said Kwock, whos a candidate for Senate District 13, covering Chinatown and Pacific Heights. Im throwing out a few ideas out there for consideration.

Shes up against Democratic incumbent Karl Rhoads, whos represented the area as a senator since 2016 and was the House member for the area for a decade beforehand. Matthew Tinay is the Republican in the race and Kapono Souza is on the ballot for the Green Party.

Kwock is one of two nonpartisan candidates who survived Hawais primary and will be on the ballot for the Nov. 8 general election.

The other isBrian Ley, a candidate in House District 4, which covers a chunk of the Big Island including Leilani Estates and Hawaiian Paradise Park.

He has a different goal: Winning, he said.

Leys running against Rep. Greggor Ilagan, the incumbent Democrat who won his seat in 2020, Republican Kekilani Ho and Libertarian Candace Linton.

Its a high hurdle. Nonpartisan candidates run in Hawaiis primaries each election cycle, with varied levels of success. This year, two of the nine hopefuls made it to the general, about the same as 2020 when two out of seven advanced. Actually winning office remains a challenge but however short their time in the limelight, nonpartisan candidates are keen to use it.

In Hawaii, candidates run without party designation for mayor, prosecuting attorney, county councils and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

But in partisan races for governor, lieutenant governor, and the state and federal legislatures candidates dont do well with voters unless theyre affiliated with a party.

This is because Hawaiis election rules say you can only advance to the general election as an independent candidate if you get at least 10% of the total votes, or if you get more votes than the least popular partisan candidate.

Kwock only got 61 votes in the primary, but that was more than the 42 votes received by Green Party candidate Kapono Souza. And Ley only got 45 primary votes, but the Libertarian candidate in his race, Candace Linton, did worse with only 22 votes.

The only reason I made it this far is because of the Green Party, Kwock said.

Now shes headed to the general.

The rules make it hard to advance evenIlagan, the incumbent who Leys challenging, gives Ley big respect for managing to do it.

But Ley wasnt surprised at the result. Linton is his ex-wife, and she ran as a Libertarian, as a favor, to help him advance.

This wasnt Leys first run as a nonpartisan candidate for the district.

Hes a passionate hunter and serves on the Big Islands Game Management Advisory Commission, focusing on issues related to animal habitats and advocating for the use of feral pigs to help stem Hawaiis food insecurity.

Ley explained that hed contacted legislators to express some of these opinions, but was frustrated when he didnt hear back.

And I just said, You know what, if theyre not even going to talk to me, Im just going to run for office, he said.

Most of the time Im in the middle. Brian Ley

His first attempt in 2020 didnt get very far.

Ley mistakenly believed that hed automatically advance to the general, since he was the only nonpartisan candidate in his race, so he told people to feel free to vote for another partys candidates in the primary. He was surprised when his name didnt appear on the general ballot.

I didnt read the fine print on nonpartisan, he said.

Different states take different approaches in handling nonpartisan candidates, and Ley had misunderstood Hawaiis rules.

In Illinois, for example, independent and third party candidates must pass a threshold of petition signatures, which automatically puts them on the ballot for the general. In California and Washington, jungle primaries are used to advance the top two candidates regardless of party.

Despite the challenges nonpartisanship brings, Ley decided to try again in 2022.

He describes his views as sometimes left, sometimes right, though most of the time Im in the middle, he said.

In his view, party politics make it hard to maintain this independent streak. Politicians, he said, are not answering to the people anymore. Theyre answering to the party.

As an example, Ley pointed to Democratic efforts to abolish cash bail, which passed the Legislature earlier this year before being vetoed by Gov. David Ige.

And Republicans?

Theyre the same thing as the Democrats, just the other end of the spectrum, he said.

Kwock, 30, said her motivation was to give voters the option to vote for a younger candidate.

If you look at all the candidates, theyre mostly middle-aged males, she said.

As a younger, female, Asian candidate one who gets around her urban district without a car, opting instead for a folding bike she feels she represents a different demographic than Rhoads, the incumbent.

Rhoads, who also doesnt own a car and has introduced pedestrian-friendly legislation, congratulates Kwock for advancing, and said that hell see her on the campaign trail.

Other than a few years at Boston University, where she studied biology and public health, Kwock has spent most of her life in the district.

She works for the Hawaii Department of Health as a national strategic stockpile planner, andis a strong proponent of car-less alternatives and health.

The victim of 10 bike thefts, by her estimate, Kwock has written guest essays for Civil Beat that argue for better bike parking options, as well as embracing telework as a new normal. One of her biggest priorities as a candidate is advocating for a better long-term care system, where caretakers dont need to be employed 30 hours per week to qualify for state aid.

She doesnt jibe with the Republican party Donald Trumps policies caused too much chaos, she said. Meanwhile, Democrats are always elected in Hawaii, and she wanted to represent something new.

I am pretty sure my chance is really slim. Michelle Kwock

Im not too familiar with any of the other minor parties, so thats why I decided, why not run as a nonpartisan? she said.

Her decision to run was mostly spontaneous, though commenters on her pieces had also encouraged her to run, which helped.

Both candidates declared that theyd collect and spend no more than $1,000 for their campaigns, so theyre exempt from submitting regular finance reports to the Campaign Spending Commission, other than a final report at the end of the election cycle.

Previous election results show that nonpartisans who make it this far typically end up polling no more than 15% in the general.

Leys hoping to overcome these odds, but while Kwock said itd be great if she wins, shes not really considering it a possibility.

She was surprised she made it this far at all. And anyway, if she were to win, she doesnt know what shed do with her job at the health department.

Ill have to think about it, after November, she said. I am pretty sure my chance is really slim.

Sign Up

Sorry. That's an invalid e-mail.

Thanks! We'll send you a confirmation e-mail shortly.

Continued here:
It's Tough To Win An Election As An Independent Candidate In Hawaii - Honolulu Civil Beat