Steve G.

Delaware LP holds state convention, nominates three candidates

In Activism, Libertarian, Libertarian Convention, Libertarian Party-US, Libertarian Politics, Local Politics, Politics, Press Release, Republican on August 23, 2008 at 11:22 pm

For Immediate Release

Libertarian Party of Delaware holds state convention, nominates three candidates

For further information, contact LPD State Chair Jim Rash
jim@rashteam.com

“It’s time for government to stop regulating the American people,” said attorney Tyler Nixon, accepting the Libertarian Party of Delaware’s fusion nomination in the 4th House District (Wilmington), “and time for the American people to start regulating their government.” Nixon, already the Republican candidate for the seat, was one of three individuals nominated by the Libertarians at their annual convention on Saturday in Newark. He identified government transparency, eminent domain abuse, and renewable energy as key campaign themes.

Fusion nominations, legal in Delaware despite an attempt to kill the practice last year, allow candidates to accept the endorsement of two or more parties in the same race.

Nearly two dozen delegates also voted to nominate Mark Anthony Parks of New Castle County as the Libertarian candidate for the US House of Representatives. “Ron Paul’s candidacy energized me,” he said. “His campaign convinced me that people would respond to the message of personal freedom.” Delegate Brad Thomas called Parks “a man who thinks carefully about the government’s impact on the lives and freedoms of everyday citizens.”

“I’m going to wage as vigorous a campaign as my resources will allow,” Parks promised.

Jesse Priester, the GOP candidate in the 23rd House District in Newark also received a fusion nomination from the LPD. “The Libertarian ideal is personal freedom,” Preister said, “and that’s my ideal as well.” He cautioned that effective politicians must work with the system as they find it, however, not as they would like it to be. “That’s why I’m making the establishment of Sunday bus service into Newark one of my issues.”

The convention elected Jim Rash of Milford as State Chair, Paul Thompson of Pike Creek as Vice Chair, and re-elected Brad Thomas of Newark as Secretary-Treasurer.

“We’ve built a strong foundation today for communicating our message of personal freedom and limited government,” Rash told delegates. “From this point forward we need to be a strong presence in policy debates at every level.”

In May, Vice Chair Thompson represented Delaware at the national Libertarian Party convention in Denver, where the party nominated former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr for President. Barr, who broke ranks with the GOP several years ago, has become an advocate of curtailing government intrusions against individual civil liberties and a critic of Bush administration foreign policy.

Criticizing both major party candidates for not protecting the freedoms of American citizens, Barr is polling 3% nationwide, but scores 5-11% in ten “battleground” states, where only a slim margin separates Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain.

Pointing to Ron Paul’s internet-based fundraising, “Libertarians across the state and across the nation will have to depend heavily on new media,” said Steve Newton, publisher of the Delaware Libertarian blog.. “Libertarians in North Carolina and Texas are proving the power of blogs and meet-ups to challenge the major parties.”

Convention delegates also chose Rash, Thompson, and Brian Shields of Seaford as presidential electors.

Established in 1970, the Libertarian Party is the nation’s third-largest political party.

  1. This is a very smart course for the Delaware LP. The Rhode Island LP is doing something similar.

    Great news for Libertarian Republicans. Bad news for Leftwing Libertarians.

  2. maybe, eric. of course, left wing Ls could have fusions with the Ds, BTP or others. of course, this is a mere tactic that should be monitored.

  3. Robert,
    As much as a few Ds in DE would like to do fusion with the LPD it isn’t going to happen anytime soon. The DE Dem Party made a concerted effort to kill fusion last year, and will not support any candidate who goes the fusion route.

    As for this is a mere tactic that should be monitored, I don’t know quite what you mean. Monitored for effectiveness? We’ll certainly be doing that. Monitored for ideological purity? Not sure who’d be doing that, or what they’d use as their brief to so intrude.

    Other than a visit by LNC member Jim Lash to our convention, you’d be hard put to find any evidence that national LP headquarters knows we exist.

    As for the mere tactic part: Tyler Nixon is a stronger Libertarian on the issues than most of the people who comment here; we’re fortunate to have him working with us.

  4. steve,
    by tactic, I mean it in a broader sense. if fusionism advances liberty, i’m for it. I personally would not want to see any LP endorse a McCain or an Obama, as they do not in my judgment advance liberty.

    I wasn’t commenting on the specific facts in DE. hope it works out for y’all.

  5. What LPDE does is obviously up to them, and I wish them good luck with it (And I think Steve does a great job on his blog BTW)

    However I’m somewhat concerned about fusion candidates from a long term LP growth standpoint, especially when the other party fused with is the R’s (same would apply if it were a D)…

    I will grant, for the sake of discussion if nothing else, that the fusion candidates are reasonably consistent with Libertarian values, to at least the low standard set by the Barr campaign, thus presumably their running will put pressure in the direction of smaller gov’t. This satisfies the “Moving public policy in a libertarian direction” part of the LP function, but what does it do for enhancing the LP?

    However will they be running primarily as R’s or as L’s? If they get elected will they be seated as R’s or as L’s? If they successfully reduce or eliminate a tax / gov’t program, etc. who gets the credit – the R’s or the L’s?

    Continue with all sorts of questions along this line, and you end up with the bottom line question of what is in this for the LPDE or the LP in general?

    Not saying I’m opposed to the idea, but just want to know what we get out of it once this election cycle is over…

    ART

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: