Bob Barr, former GOP congressman from Georgia, and a member of the Libertarian Party since 2006, is now the LP nominee for president.

He has four main political positions:

(1) Significantly reduce the size of government, (2) promote individual liberty, (3) a national defense based on non-intervention, and (4) ‘securing’ our borders (point 4 being a deliberately vague statement that leads to an anti-immigration interpretation.)

(There would have been a time when it would have been clear to a libertarian that free labor markets were America’s best course, and that immigration should be as free as possible. Those days have passed for the LP, and more so for many Republicans and Democrats. We’re a country in the thrall of a new version of mid-nineteenth century Know-Nothing rhetoric. There is little advocacy for liberalized immigration these days. There will be yet again, and when that time comes, those who have held fast to the principle of a free labor market will have been vindicated.)

Barr leads a party that has never won more than 1% of the vote in a presidential election. In the last few presidential races, the LP has fared far worse, winning only a few hundred thousand votes nationally, while Ralph Nader — as the Green Party nominee — has won more votes. (Even Pat Buchanan in 2000 won more votes than the LP nominee that year.)

A majority of LP delegates, and some party officials, think that Barr will bring more votes to the party than ever before. They’d like to see him double the party’s historic 1980 showing. If Barr does so, then he’ll be close to two million votes nationally.

(I know Barr says he’s in the race to win, but many in the LP would consider two million votes the very definition of victory.)

Barr won’t be a factor in Whitewater’s totals. Obama, or even Hillary Clinton, will carry Whitewater over McCain. Barr won’t change that result; even if Barr were to drain votes from the GOP, he would be draining votes from an already-losing local effort.

This is not the town, and surely not the year, for the GOP to expect a local majority to support the Republican presidential nominee.

Barr may change the result somewhere (and in many places if he receives two-million votes), just not Whitewater, Wisconsin.

The Libertarian Party has concluded its 2008 party convention, nominating former Republican representative Bob Barr on the sixth ballot. Barr defeated a field of six other candidates, some longstanding LP members, and many to the libertarian-left (as Barr is to the libertarian-right).

The Denver convention saw over 600 delegates listen, speak, debate, and vote on the choices before them. David Weigel of Reason magazine covered the convention in detail. (He also spoke occasionally during C-Span’s excellent coverage of the convention.)

The deciding and voting takes place at the convention — delegates do not come to the convention bound to vote for a candidate (it would be hard to see libertarians imposing that requirement at their political convention.) So, there is always real uncertainty, and real drama.

The convention was not, as you can guess, a major-party affair. It was decidedly low(er) tech — paper ballots and a single laptop to calculate and display the results. (When the laptop was being used to calculate a given ballot’s results, it was not available to display the previous ballot’s standings. There are small-company meetings that have better production values.)

I saw in a comment at Reason that watching party officials count through paper ballots near the head table was embarrassing to the commenter. Well, it’s a far cry from the major part conventions. It’s not different, though, from how American counted convention votes for most of her history. Low tech, but not unworthy of us.

From Reason magazine —

1) A discussion among some LP candidates, including LP presidential nominee Barr:

2) David Weigel’s assessment of the LP convention, entitled, “Live from the LP Convention: U-N-I-T-Y.”

3) Weigel’s story, “Citizen Bob,” on how former GOP congressman Bob Barr became the 2008 LP nominee.

Although millions of Americans identify themselves as libertarians, a far smaller number are registered members of the Libertarian Party (LP). The LP was founded on December 11th, 1971, in the home of David Nolan.

At the time, neither the Republican nor Democratic parties offered much for those committed to smaller government and peaceful commerce over military intervention.

(The Nixon Administration seldom found a government program, interference with private markets, or foreign policy entanglement it wouldn’t endorse. There were sound reasons for Goldwater and Reagan to see Nixon’s approach as bad for the Republican Party, and America.)

In that era of government expansion, and foreign war, some decided that a third party was the best place to advance a commitment to personal liberty, free markets, and peaceful trade with other nations.

The party has never done so well as the number of libertarians in America led activists to hope. Many libertarians, including those at prominent think tanks and universities, are unaffiliated with any political party. The LP has never received more than about one-percent of the vote in a presidential election. Millions more libertarians vote with one of America’s major political parties come election day.

The party’s official website, at LP.org, lacks the polish of a major party’s site, or even the polish of a typical congressional candidate’s website. It looks as though a few people designed it over a weekend. There’s nothing remotely corporate about it.

Members of the LP share a common commitment to individual liberty, but are otherwise an eclectic bunch. Some look as though they would be at home in any board room or office; others dress and speak in the manner of a sub-culture or counter-culture. Their common philosophical commitment keeps them together, but sometimes only barely.

Many are long-time activists, and sometimes their free personal expression in speech and dress makes them easy targets for stuffy outsiders. Although the LP delegates and activists are outspoken and confident, for each of them there are thousands more who share similar views but might not be so confident. Of that greater number, many are more comfortable living in the tall grass of private life. Watching an LP gathering, it’s easy to see how narrow-minded people might try to bully or marginalize some of the LP’s more colorful members.

I have always enjoyed their company, and listening to them. They’re typically sharp, thoughtful, sincere, and committed people. While the Republican Party balks at support for free trade if Ohio’s at stake, the LP stands for free commerce without flinching. While the Democratic Party hedges on equal marriage rights to make Missouri competitive, the LP is clear in its commitment to equal treatment for all citizens.

The members of the LP are more than party activists; they’re citizens who love America, and are willing to contend for their beliefs.

I would gladly prefer their company and policies to those of an arrogant, pinched majority seeking to cajole and compromise its way to ever-greater, undeserved power.

There are millions of self-identified libertarians in America, but a significantly smaller number of libertarians who are members of the Libertarian Party (LP). Over at the independent Cato Institute, David Boaz has a post, “Libertarian Voters and the Libertarian Party,” describing the number of libertarians in America and in the LP.

Boaz notes that the LP has never received more than about 900,000 votes in a presidential election (in 1980); by contrast, as many as 15-20% of Americans hold what Boaz describes as “broadly libertarian views.” (Boaz has an excellent analysis of the libertarian vote available online at Cato.)

Boaz holds out the possibility of more voters for the LP than ever before:

So the challenge for this year’s Libertarian nominee is this: There’s widespread disillusionment with both parties. Ron Paul tapped into some of that in the Republican primaries and demonstrated that a libertarian candidate could raise a lot of money. Some 15 to 20 percent of the voters — 18 million to 24 million voters in 2004 — hold libertarian views. Those libertarian voters have previously demonstrated their willingness to vote for third-party candidates. In 2006, they swung sharply away from Republican candidates, yet the leading Democrats aren’t offering much to libertarian-minded voters….So there would seem to be a huge potential audience for a Libertarian candidate who could raise money, get media attention, create online buzz, and present a compelling and articulate case for peace, freedom, and limited government.

It’s a tall order for a party that has not won over 1% of the presidential vote, but this may be a year for a significantly greater share for the LP.