Winners & Losers

So, since I’m at my in-laws and got to see the Georgia Gang this week (Cox in Macon screws its viewers by offering the Atlanta Stations on the dial, but failing to actually broadcast what’s on them), let’s talk about winners and losers.

My winner this week is Casey Cagle. He’s getting lots of favorable media attention for his boldness in coming out to discuss novel initiatives in education and other areas of government.

My loser this week is the Republican party. Bob Barr, though he’s been rather fringe for the past several years, will probably launch a Presidential campaign as the Libertarian standard bearer and unless the GOP gets back to its small government roots, will peel enough voters away to significantly harm the GOP in two years.

4 comments

  1. David says:

    I wouldn’t be too hard on ol’ Bob. If he runs as a Libertarian he will hurt the Republicans but its their own damn fault. As a long time Republican myself, I don’t see a whit’s worth of difference between the two parties any longer. Both spend like drunken sailors. We all have expected the welfare state mentality from the socialist Dems for the last 40 years, anyway. If the Republicans don’t present a real alternative to that then three cheers for the Libertarians!! We need to strtaighten up our act and fast!

  2. Chris says:

    I don’t see Barr running for President under the LP banner. In fact, I’d put $50 down that Barr will distance himself from the LP soon.

    Barr is taking over as the South East representative to the Libertarian National Committee. I held that position (technically as the alternate) from May 04 to May 05. The mismanagment of that organization was comical, the petty fights over the limited resources were bitter and the crackpot fringe of the party made it impossible to recruit anyone of substance to run for office (although the fact Barr has joined up partially negates that last point).

    Barr is playing an interesting and dangerous game. He knows that the GOP’s chances of retaking the House or Senate are less than even. Rarely will a party hold the White House after 8 years. So any attempt to field a strong LP candidate in 2008 will most assuradly hand the election over to Hillary. I really don’t think the chief prosecutor of the (Bill) Clinton impeachment wants to see another Clinton in the White House.

    Strange Days lie ahead.

  3. Jason Pye says:

    Chris,

    With all due respect to you and the time you invested into the party…many things have changed. And things simply are as you would have people believe.

  4. DougieFresh says:

    JP,

    With all due respect, an organization does not change so dramatically in shuch a short time with the same members as part of the organization. I was also once involved with the Libertarians, and the crackpots and petty lords of the realm are adept at negating the party’s chances for any real success.

    I think the Libertarians’ image is hopelessly ruined by the crackpots (even if they are a thing of the past) that a name change may be required to save it.

    Does anyone think there is any chance of him running for Senate in 2008? It would be interesting. With Georgia’s runoff requirement, he can sell the point that it would not be a “wasted vote” as voting for him would lead to a runoff. If the Dem’s field a token candidate in 2008, he might even squeak into the runoff.

Comments are closed.