I applaud all of you who have gotten the info out there. Very cool!

If the GOP DOES NOT reach out to libertarians, fiscal conservatives, and independents who had enough of the war, stick a fork in them, they’re history like the Whig party.

I’ve traditionally been Republican. Ron Paul gets my vote.
Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Independant…
He is the only good candidate out there, period.

Sorry to see the facts don’t fit your world view. Please continue to ignore them. I don’t want you to get upset.

LiMP

:p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[sorry, no way I could resist that!]

Name this Voting Block.

Libertarian Minded Pragmatists – that’s how I typically describe myself.

FWIW I don’t buy into this notion at all. For me, the calculus is one of weighing relative risks against my priorities. Divided government outcome as classically understood is definitely a strong positive factor for a candidate. All other things being equal, divided government is always going to be superior as long as we have a party system.

Of course, all other things are not equal, and that’s why I’m having such trouble with this election. Yes, divided government is a plus. But so is the chance to hold these nerf herders who’ve sullied our constitution and perverted the definition of conservatism. For the most part I think the one cancels the other, and so it becomes the turd sandwich vs douchebag scenario for me. Hence I’ll just vote for Paul regardless, because he’s the best libertarian candidate right now, and a strong showing by him in the general will send a clear single that hey, there are a lot of libertarian votes out there!

OTOH, if the Dems nominate Hillary I’m voting for divided government no matter what, because I just don’t trust her to set things right or hold anyone accountable. Also, if the Republicans nominate McCain I may vote divided government, because I think he’d be honorable enough to at least push for power in the open, instead of secretly snatching it. Hence divided government would be more effective. In either of those hypotheticals I’d prefer Paul to stay home or work from the sidelines building a more robust libertarian movement.

I do want to clarify that I am not the one describing this group. They are described and quantified in the referenced Cato Institute Policy Analysis. I’m just invoking and proselytizing them in my argument.

In an evenly balanced highly polarized partisan electorate, I think they are the most important voting block in America, specifically because -

1) They are willing to change parties and if …
2) a plurality of this group vote in concert…
3) they determine the outcome of National elections.

The block is not big enough to elect their own candidate, but are big enough to pick the President.

I said at the beginning of this post that I often get my ideas in the comment threads. Here is a post idea:

Name this Voting Block.

Some suggested names so far…

Centrist of Average [Agnostick]
Moderate libertarian [mw]
libertarian leaning Moderate [mw]
Libertarian Disposed [David Frum]
Libertarian Center [Brink Lindsey]
Purplish, Libertarianish, Centrist [Brink Lindsey]
Figments of mw’s imagination [Jim S]
LSW (Libertarian Swing Vote) [David Boaz]
Others?

I consider myself a type of Centrist. That is to say, I’m not “in the middle” on every issue. I lean heavily to one side or the other on some issues, and when everything is weighed out, I’m in the middle. I’m a “Centrist of Averages,” I guess. :p

–Ag

They are real. They vote.

What do you want to call them?

FOX NEWS
Live from Iowa, a debate between select Republican presidential candidates. Hosted and moderated by Fox News infotainment personalities.

CNN
Larry King Live
Scheduled guest this hour: U.S. Representative Ron Paul (R-TX)

“… where your divided government idea breaks down is when it comes to the Oval Office and the use of military force.”

I’ve heard this argument before. What I find interesting, is that I’ve heard it from both sides for the same reason. From the right – We need united government because fighting the war is so important. From the left – We need united government because the ending the war is so important. Now from the moderate center with you – its a clean sweep. I just don’t buy it. If we had divided government in 2002, we would have probably found a different way to deal with Saddam. We always get better decisions with divided government. Even in matters of war.

“are you really sure that Dems are going to be voted in and have a super majority in the Senate?”

I am not sure that the Dems will achieve a supermajority in the Senate (60 seats). It is a real possibility, but I expect they will fall just short. I am sure that the Dems will expand their majority in the Senate. There are 33 Senate seats contested in 2008. Of these, 21 are held by Republicans and 12 by Democrats. Simple numbers lead to a simple conclusion – the Republicans have more at risk, and the Democrats have many more opportunities to take seats than Republicans. This is a crushing structural advantage for Democrats.Particularly with popular Republican incumbents like Warner and Hagel retiring putting their safe seats in play.

What if they only had a razor thin majority where the government was effectively divided anyway?

“Effectively divided’ does not count. As CRW said – “empirical evidence supports the divided government thesis.” Well, it only supports it if we use the same definition for divided government all the time. Not Republicans divided against themselves. Not Democrats divided against themselves. One definition – The party that controls the executive does not have a majority in both the Senate and the House. Change the definition, there is no empirical evidence.

“I’ve definitely always felt your thesis is intriguing, but when you stick hard and fast to any one ideal, there are bound to be flaws.”

Sure. I argue the thesis strongly in posts and comments, but I do not think that divided government is the be-all end-all. It is after all, simply a “means” to a moderate libertarian “end”, and it is the “end” that is important. I’ll quote myself here from one of the Donklephant lost posts:”Ultimately, I see this voting tactic as highly effective, but short-term and self-limiting. Maintaining divided government has real benefits in terms of governance, and the primary benefit of successfully implementing this voting tactic is to move the country toward libertarian objectives. As a side benefit, it could serve to establish the moderate libertarian center as a self-aware, broadly recognized and organized voting block [The Ron Paul candidacy is doing the same thing]. Objectively, divided government only slows the growth of the state, with no evidence that it can actually begin to reduce it. One way to describe the situation is that the “Divided Government vote” stands down when the “Moderate/Centrist/Libertarian vote” stands up. Ultimately, if the divided government constituency is co-opted and eroded because Democrats and/or Republicans are wrestling with each other to prove who are the better, more effective moderate/libertarians, and can prove this to a skeptical, rational, empirical moderate/libertarian swing vote … well then our job here is done.”

“Again, I think you should work to pull the Libertarians out of both parties so you can achieve true divided government.

Even if you could pull this 12% into a 3rd party, it would either pull more from Republicans [in 2008], thereby act as a spoiler to elect a united Democratic government, or pull equally from both parties and render the libertarian swing vote politically impotent. It is only by getting this vote to consciously swing between parties based on libertarian objectives, that this constituency can achieve real political clout, and only when there is a highly polarized, roughly balanced partisan electorate. Like, um … now.

If the changes that Paul is advocating don’t come about during the next term local politics won’t be making much difference in the overall scheme of things. It will be more than five years from now before another administration takes office, and believe me, by then it will be too late for a lot of things.

republican leaders over the past 7 years, along with the majority of republican politicans should be ashamed of themselves as they have shot the credability of the party, something Ron Paul is working overtime on trying to rebuild. I also place the blame on “conservative” talk radio, those air heads have dumbed down the base and dumbed down the debate in this country, especially that clown sean hannity.

republican leaders over the past 7 years, along with the majority of republican politicans should be ashamed of themselves as they have shot the credability of the party, something Ron Paul is working overtime on trying to rebuild. I also place the blame on “conservative” talk radio, those air heads have dumbed down the base, and dumbed down the debate in this country, especially that clown sean hannity.

With even a cursory understanding of how language in the law itself has undermined our supposed, once proudly-held values of individual freedom, it becomes clear we’re being set up to be co-opted by elitists hell-bent on totalitarian control over all of us – including our money… privacy… and, eventually, even our property.

Their dreams of empire and one-world government are on a fast track. So let me be as straightforward as I can: Under our present circumstances, Ron Paul is more-than-likely the LAST best “hope for America” – just as his campaign says.

The times are indeed calling for meaningful action NOW… to alert the controlled mainstream news media… to the fact of our constant displeasure for its obvious biases… and to alert an ever-distracted, complacent, or confused citizenry too… of the “clear and present danger” before us.

Therefore, I contend a Paul presidency matters in more ways than even the most astute observers among us truly realize.

And George Wallace, for all his faults, was right: “There is not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties!” (1968 – American Independent Party)

A review of American history since the illegal 1913 enactment of the 16th Amendment will reveal this essential truth: This nation is in the clutches of a secretive, closed-door cabal of international financiers led by the Fed – - who’ve been allowed to literally print money out of thin air… for all this time since.

I guess any one of us could lead a one-world government if we had this enormously fortuitous license to steal, couldn’t we?

“Besides,” they might say, “who needs the competition anyway?”

IMHO, it merely prevents their overall objective… of controlling our disquieted minds… completely.

With even a cursory understanding of how language in the law itself has undermined our supposed, once proudly-held values of individual freedom, it becomes clear we’re being set up to be co-opted by elitists hell-bent on totalitarian control over all of us – including our money… privacy… and, eventually, even our property.

Their dreams of empire and one-world government are on a fast track. So let me be as straightforward as I can: Under our present circumstances, Ron Paul is more-than-likely the LAST best “hope for America” – just as his campaign says.

The times are indeed calling for meaningful action NOW… to alert the controlled mainstream news media… to the fact of our constant displeasure for its obvious biases… and to alert an ever-distracted, complacent, or confused citizenry too… of the “clear and present danger” before us.

Therefore, I contend a Paul presidency matters in more ways than even the most astute observers among us truly realize.

And George Wallace, for all his faults, was right: “There is not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican Parties!” (1968 – American Independent Party)

A review of American history since the illegal 1913 enactment of the 16th Amendment will reveal this essential truth: This nation is in the clutches of a secretive, closed-door cabal of international financiers led by the Fed – - who’ve been allowed to literally print money out of thin air… for all this time since.

I guess any one of us could lead a one-world government if we had this enormously fortuitous license to steal, couldn’t we?

“Besides,” they might say, “who needs the competition anyway?”

IMHO, it merely prevents their overall objective… of controlling our disquieted minds… completely.