🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 15:06:03 -0500, Lady Libertarian
<Lady_Libertarian@FreeWorld.xxx> wrote:

>Mike Smith <mws@wt.net>  wrote :
>
>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2006 21:23:54 -0500, SteveR
>> <tex_driver@comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>In article <g4udnUg-MrnXwLLZnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@forethought.net>,
>>> Lady Libertarian <Lady_Libertarian@FreeWorld.xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>  wrote :
>>>> 
>>>> > In article <jfWdnQ3s1bqrrrLZRVn-uw@forethought.net>,
>>>> >  Lady Libertarian <Lady_Libertarian@FreeWorld.xxx> wrote:
>>>> > 
>>>> >> SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>  wrote :
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> > In article 
>>>> <wcudnZbl3bLoYbDZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@forethought.net>,
>>>> >> >  Lady Libertarian <Lady_Libertarian@FreeWorld.xxx>
>>>> >> >  wrote: 
>>>> >> > 
>>>> >> >> SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>  wrote :
>>>> >> >> 
>>>> >> >> > In article <rcqdnQ9rHceqLLHZRVn-rg@forethought.net>,
>>>> >> >> >  Lady Libertarian <Lady_Libertarian@FreeWorld.xxx>
>>>> >> >> >  wrote: 
>>>> >> >> > 
>>>> >> >> >> SteveR <tex_driver@comcast.net>  wrote :
>>>> >> >> > 
>>>> >> >> >> > I don't really care whether Clinton banged Babs,
>>>> >> >> >> > and loyal dem's are free to spend as they choose.
>>>> >> >> >> > The big money is on Hillary, all other monies
>>>> >> >> >> > seem to be 
>>>> flowing
>>>> >> >> >> > to the fringe which is based on verbal volume. 
>>>> >> >> >> 
>>>> >> >> >> Yeah well, ask Ross Perot how much a Presidential 
>>>> election
>>>> >> >> >> depends only on how much money you spend.
>>>> >> >> > 
>>>> >> >> > He spent nary a dime on advertising. His was a
>>>> >> >> > populist grassroots success, which fizzled when he
>>>> >> >> > began to appear kooky. Not a good illustration.
>>>> >> >> 
>>>> >> >> http://www.famoustexans.com/rossperot.htm
>>>> >> >> 
>>>> >> >> Nonetheless, on election day the $57 million of his
>>>> >> >> own 
>>>> money
>>>> >> >> spent on the campaign got him nineteen percent of the
>>>> >> >> vote, the highest percentage for a third party
>>>> >> >> candidate since Theodore Roosevelt.
>>>> >> > 
>>>> >> > Yep. My ex voted for him, even though it was vote for 
>>>> Clinton,
>>>> >> > so essentially, we both voted for Clinton.
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> Nope, she voted for Perot.
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> It's tough crap if the Republicrats can't attract enough 
>>>> people 
>>>> >> and a Demopublican wins.
>>>> > 
>>>> > True, think Nader/Gore.
>>>> > 
>>>> >> "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone,
>>>> >> and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your
>>>> >> vote is never lost."   -- John Quincy Adams
>>>> > 
>>>> > How eloquent. How Libertarian.
>>>> > 
>>>> > "We may lose, but by losing, we win" -- me.
>>>> > 
>>>> 
>>>> I just get so tired of the baiting bullshit, "voting your 
>>>> principles is really voting for so and so...". It's tired
>>>> old crap.
>>>
>>>But, like stereotype, it's based on facts.
>>>
>>>Maybe someday, a Libertarian majority may emerge, but in
>>>today's political structure, it's next to impossible.
>>>
>>>Unless Glen Reynolds runs for Pres... ya never know.
>> 
>> When libertarians start winning local races for city council,
>> mayor, county commissioner, state representative, etc, they
>> will begin to become a viable party. 
>> 
>> Until then, forget it.
>> 
>> Mike Smith
>> 
>
>You mean like the one on the Lakewood city council?


If you will carefully read what I posted, you will note that I was
referring to multiple wins, not a single race. 
{look for the plural words}

Mike Smith