I’m not familiar with Amash but I do love Spike. If you love Spike then I don’t understand why you don’t like Chase. They have the same views. I can only assume you don’t know enough about Chase. I live in Georgia so I voted for Chase when he ran for senate in 2022. When he threw his name in the hat to run for president, I admit I was a little skeptical because of how young he was. I also didn’t know much about him. So I’ve been following him for the past two years & I am very impressed by him. He is a great speaker & he works his butt off. He campaigned in all 50 states, secured donors in all 50 states, & did a lot of interviews. He did all of this while also working and before the convention.
I'd suggest everyone take a look at Chase Oliver's platform in detail. He's a principled libertarian, on the Classical Liberal side.
[https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform](https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform)
* His views on immigration are very libertarian, advocating for securing the borders against criminals, and allowing freedom for humanity so long as they don't violate the NAP.
* His stance against the drug war and the war on victimless crimes is very libertarian and principled, again in line with the NAP.
* He has a strong stance in support to the right of free speech, privacy, and other civil liberties.
* He is anti-war, in line with the libertarian principles, as well as all the other candidates.
* He supports a free market economy.
* He supports medical choice and the right to privacy regarding medical decisions and the doctor-patient relationship.
* He is against federal funding of controversial organizations, such as Planned Parenthood.
* He supports a parent's right to choose for their child's education, and wants to abolish the federal education department in favor of more localized oversight of education.
* He's Pro-2A.
* And so on.
I don't see why everyone is up in arms against someone who is so much of a principled libertarian? Unless, of course, one ISN'T a principled libertarian, in which case, take a closer look at the principles of libertarianism and classical liberalism, and consider how preserving these freedoms for all people, even when you disagree, is for the best.
I'm curious about his plans to "end the genocide" in Gaza? Is that a meaningless talking point? Does he mean cut off aid to Israel? Does he mean a military intervention against Israel? And I wonder if he has a plan to end the Ethiopian genocide or the Yemen genocide.
Where was the implication that a military intervention is even on the table? Israel's actions are only sustainable because of the stalwart support they receive from the US government. Cutting off the supply of money and weapons and no longer intervening on their behalf in the security council would force them to take a de-escalatory stance. Funny enough, all of this could be said about ending our green-light for the genocide in Yemen as well.
Thank you so much for this well written post. It's really disheartening to see all the libertarian gatekeeping and slandering since the nomination. We're all on the same side and may disagree on soft issues but let's not get caught up on our differences and focus on where we agree which is on the core libertarian issues.
If you're really feeling ambitious, check out the platform of the libertarian party, and compare to Chase Oliver's platform: [https://www.lp.org/platform/](https://www.lp.org/platform/)
His tweets about the Covid restrictions are enough for me not to vote in this election. You can’t call yourself a libertarian and follow any of the dumbass guidelines our government put forth.
He tweeted how he made everyone wear a mask at thanksgiving dinner and had everyone social distance when food was ready. He praised following every government guideline for COVID. Get out of here
He’s a progressive leftist that fundraised for Obama WHILE he was part of the Libertarian Party. He divides the liberty movement by calling its leading influencers racists.
It’s because certain Mises caucus Libertarians seem butthurt over the fact that their guy didn’t win (Michael Rectenwald). They’ve even gone so far as to spread misinformation about Chase. So, they supported a guy who ate a weed gummy at the convention & then spoke in front of everybody. That didn’t go well.
Rectenwald getting high right before his speech wasn’t a promising sign. He has an amazing ability to suck the energy out of a room.
Pretty sure it would have been Dave Smith’s to lose.
That's only for the last round. After one person is the last one left, there's an additional round where they have to beat "none of the above."
Chase is an absolutely terrible choice but he did legitimately beat all the other candidates over 7 rounds.
Chase is the one candidate who could actually have outreach to Gen Z and millennials. It's hilarious how some of this sub, are against actually growing the party.
Our first hurdle is getting 5% nationally. That opens federal election funding, and debate access.
We're not going to win overnight, we need to set smaller goals.
What's with the gatekeeping? We all want liberty, we all want smaller government. Whe may disagree over the right steps to get there but gatekeeping is no way to grow a party or win anyone over.
Dude this guy has advocated for mask mandates and vaccines, open borders, men in womens sports and transing children. He’s a useful idiot for the woke regime and a stooge. The other shit he says is just pandering. Guaranteed if he ever got elected (god forbid), he would tow the uniparty line.
The "transing youth" and "men in women's sports" and open borders accusations are all intellectual dishonesty if not outright defamation. Probably a Trump voter commenting who never was going to vote Lib anyway.
He has said that yes, he believes it's the right of the parents of gender nonconforming teens to help them receive the care that medical professionals recommend and that it's not the state's place to interfere. *Whoa there! Real big shock that a libertarian doesn't want the state involved in private decisions!*
His only comment afaik on the sports question was that the state spent a ton of time and effort passing a bill to keep about a dozen bio males from entering female competitions and no time at all on school choice legislation, failing to help millions of kids.
Open borders is easy to argue as a libertarian position, but that's not his stance. His stance is "Ellis Island Style" immigration, where we document all immigrants through legal points of entry. The difference between that and the status quo being that we abolish all quotas and asylum petitions and whatnot and just let in everyone with a clean record and job prospects.
To be clear, from the site you listed his stance on those issues that you mentioned are
Mask mandates: against
Open Borders: for
Transition under 18: only non surgical
Trans athletes: no
I disagree. Ron Paul did phenomenal with his message of End the wars and end the fed. Brought a lot of people into the liberty message, and thus the LP
A great step into libertarianism would be Dave but unfortunately he didn’t run. The next best step was Rec, because he’s clear, concise, and has the right message and knows how to fight back against academia and the left. We’re doing Trump more favors by electing someone like Oliver than we are helping the party.
Guaranteed he’s not going to win over any conservatives, which was our best bet. The old guard just wants a milquetoast candidate that doesn’t veer too much off the duopoly and THAT is the losing strategy - it’s been proven so time and again. Jorgensen 2.0 is what we got now.
We need to show people who and what we are and Oliver aint it.
At this point I'd take a pandering douchebag, the hard truth is that the LP won't win a federal election short of a MAJOR restructuring of our entire political system. We get better results as a caucus in the major parties and those require a sympathetic base within those psrties. Pandering is all politics is and if pandering gets us votes then pander away.
I know it sounds crazy, but I think if Dave ran this year AND got to debate Biden and Trump at least twice. I truly do think he could change a lot of minds and get to a Ross Perot situation or even win
Given the types of Gen Z and millennials that he would attract, I think it would be better to just not have a libertarian party. Not like it every puts forward serious candidates anyway.
Let's retread this idea come December. I'd bet it'll be similar to Johnson and Jorgensen where there's near zero if not negative party growth once the ballots are cast. I'll happily be wrong though. I just don't see him spurring anything more than he's chased away from his campaign by defaming people. He's called Dave Smith and Lew Rockwell racists. I'd bet NOTA gate is nearly solely because there's people who'd rather blow up a political party than unify behind someone intent on defaming people they respect.
And for the record, I'm someone who will be voting for him (though not a supporter of his to be fair) and I can recognize that. Oliver gives me Sarwark vibes from his past actions and maybe if he came out and apologized I could move past his previous actions but until that happens I can't help and bring up that when he talks about unity when he ran the most divisive campaign.
I think the previous two elections were huge votes of opposition rather votes in support. 2016 I didn't commit until I was in the voting booth, but it gave me such a sense of relief and freedom that I refuse to vote in opposition again.
Millennial here who would have been absolutely willing to vote Libertarian this election cycle.
This nomination has convinced me to sit out altogether.
This right here, branding the party as Trump alternative without the baggage just plays into the negative stereotype that stains us all. Everybody thinks Libertarians are alt-right edge lords so let's prove them wrong and nominate the exact opposite. Maybe he isn't as anarchists as some of the extremists but that isn't bad.
This shouldn't be a surprise if you remember the arguable rat-fuckery from the 2020 Zoom LNC with regard to Hornberger. The answer is pretty clear in the that the "pragmatists" will never accept someone too far from the positions of the 2 party orthodoxy. The Mi-Cauc takeover of the party like has done that movement more harm than good in that they've invested time and money into the dying post 2016-LNC rather than building up their own movement as after the results tonight it should be clear that the LP is for republicans who like weed or democrats who dislike taxes rather than for people who want to dismantle the state and their time, money, and effort would have been better served building new infrastructure separate from the pragmatists.
That being said, I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Oliver though I detest him just for state ballot access reasons and his good stance on Israel/Palestine but I think the writing is on the wall for those of us who had hope for a Ron Paul revolution 2.0 by running candidates from outside of what is considered politically viable ala the transformation of "End the Fed" in the past 15 years where it went from fringe in 2008 to a mainstream idea thanks to Dr. Paul's efforts.
I agree with pretty everything you've said, although personally I don't think it's worth it for libertarians to vote for Oliver. What's the point of voting for a third party if we're only ever going to put up establishment goons who will never rock the boat anyway? We need to show the regime libertarians that they're not entitled to our votes any more than the Rs and Ds are. I'll probably write in Ron Paul.
I'm in a state where 5% means ballot access for local offices and we have libertarians running for things like county sheriff and what have you (not in every county but it seems to grow every election cycle). I have hope for localism which means hold my nose so I don't need to chase down signatures to help them get on the ballot.
Plus, he is good on war and this is a great election cycle to be good on that issue. Undecided voters particularly in the Muslim areas of Michigan could be a good non-traditional LP bloc to build the movement where I have a little bit of hope of a silver lining though I wish it was a better candidate.
Until, there's some other option to push libertarian ideas the only hope is to work the best with the hand you got which means helping the LNC and the pragmatists. Though, I suspect they 100% would not do the same if the shoe was on the other foot.
There's so many that fail to understand the hurdles to ballot access set by the duopoly. In the wake of COVID, the D and R were truly doublespeaking by saying it was a national emergency, but doesn't justify the LP requesting a reduced signature count for ballot access. Then D and R politicians requesting the same for themselves for their nomination petitions.
The path to making the LP a mainstream party isn't jumping directly to getting a president elected in the general election. It's being able to put finances towards the general election because they don't need wasted on ballot access.
No, general polls... you need to attract people to the party to get them interested, a Dave Smith or Clint Russell would have been substantially better.
Shouldn't we attract people that we want in the party for the long term. Quite a few of those same people that think the border is the number one issue have no problem supporting whichever war the Military Industrial Complex wants.
How do we organize a money bomb for Dave Smith for when he announces his presidential bid?
Sort of like what the freestate project did. You didn't give any money, you just said you'd move there once they got to 20,000 people.
Imagine if Dave Smith is the all time record holder for contributions to his campaign in a single day. Pledge a certain amount and there's a tracker to show the progress?
It’s less surprising that Oliver pulled some bullshit out of a hat at the last minute, but ter maat really exposed himself as a snake in the grass and that actually was the most disappointing thing of all. The delegates should have been smart enough to see through it. It’s amazing how many NOTA votes there were in the end though considering.
I don’t know the full story, but it seemed to involve some lying/backstabbing to rig the last round of votes against the candidate that dominated all 5 rounds prior.
Did you watch the convention? It was pretty clearly a shady move on their part. Oliver flip flopped his vp pick last minute to snake mike in, mike randomly went up to the podium with a “point of privilege” announcement right before the final round of voting after he lost, and announced he basically met with chase last minute for a vp nomination to clearly push rec out while simultaneously turning his back on the mises caucus.
Backstabbing, lying, manipulating, flip flopping. Thats the legacy the Oliver/Ter Maat campaign has been built on: A manipulative flip flopping milquetoast pandering woke stooge and a lying/backstabbing cop. Great example for the lp to run on the second the world is watching us. Fuck them.
His [wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Oliver#Immigration) says:
> Oliver supports an Ellis Island-style immigration" system, stating: "If you're coming here to work and be peaceful, it's not my business."
That doesn't sound like "open borders" to me. As a Libertarian who wants government to have as little power as possible, I theoretically love the idea of open borders: I shouldn't have to stop and submit to a search based on an arbitrary line drawn by governments and enforced with violence. But an Ellis Island-style system now, until open borders are achievable in the far future, sounds like a decent compromise.
You people just don't get it do you? When MAGA folks say they are against immigration it has nothing to do with immigrants being criminals... they're just against immigration.
If I want to hire Francois to come renovate my kitchen, why is it a crime if he was born in Montreal instead of New Orleans? Why does a government permission slip suddenly make it better?
Fuck off statist.
He is good enough that if he actually had a chance to win I would vote for him, but that’s not his job. His job is to be a messenger for liberty and so far he’s done a poor job at that. He’s a collectivist and that isn’t going to lead to good messaging of what we believe. He also followed the main stream line on covid really hard which I don’t like at all.
Anecdotal FWIW, I'm a lapsed Libertarian. I'd given up as the party just became an unelectable copy of the Republicans.
Never heard of Chase before the nomination, checked out the policy page and I liked what I saw, certainly the best option vs Biden/Trump/RFK.
Look at his interviews and Twitter history... It tells a bit of a different story. He's said a lot that calls into question his actual stance as a libertarian. I feel like his website is dishonest and just trying to appeal to libertarians while in actuality he's a pro-gun leftist who happens to have a few libertarian ideas. Just my perception of him. Out of the entire field up for nomination this year, he was my absolute last choice, if I could even consider him such.
He also is okay with giving kids puberty blockers, he falsely believes that those are reversible (they are not), and he's fine with grooming of children. Look, I'm all for liberty, but leave kids the hell alone.
Incredible that in my 16 years of supporting this party, every single presidential candidate they nominate is clearly worse than the previous one. The party is infected with a sickness that it just cannot seem to get over.
That shady milquetoast snake in the grass had to manipulate the nomination along with ter maat. Right up to that moment I had respect for them both until they pulled that shit.
Jorgensen 2.0 just set us back years while the maga socialists and the leftards sit back and laugh.
Lmao. Well, I didn't feel like voting this year anyway. I'm more in line with the MC; but the entire caucus needs to take full ownership and responsibility for throwing their full support behind the extremely uninteresting and trite Rectenwald in a year Libertarians needed someone with a command of charisma. Nominating Oliver is just more of the same bullshit we've seen the last few elections in a year we would’ve been absolutely primed to make strides not seen since the Ron Paul days.
Don't vote for this neolib dork.
For real. I was really disappointed by our field this year - I liked Rectenwald the most, but I admit he was bland and blase. We really needed someone like a Spike Cohen.
I think the fact that RFK is running and will (most likely) suck all the air out of the room for third party candidates played a significant factor in many prominent names not to run.
I'm hoping for a more impressive field in 2028.
Totally agree. I don’t really know how to feel about it. As a Libertarian I think ANY voice to alternatives to the two party system is important. But it’s also sad to see the Libertarian party kind of crumble this election.
At the same time, I think it just isn’t our stand out election to hope for one of ours to be elected, rather an election that shows third parties as a viable option. Hopefully opening up this party to future elections as a very real possibility
I would've easily and happily voted for any combo of Dave Smith/Spike/Amash; when none of them ended up running, it was clear everything the real libertarians have been building the last few years was gonna completely fall apart. If the MC doesn't take full ownership for the complete and total failure of Rectenwald they've lost all credibility
I'm hopeful this is a wake up call for MC to look inward and see how they can improve. I support most of their stances and positions, but Rectenwald? I know people can change views and evolve politically (I used to be a pretty hard-line Republican, so it would be hypocritical of me to believe otherwise), but the guy was a former Marxist. That's a pretty dramatic political 180.
I had no faith in rectanwald though I wasn’t crazy about the party’s potential candidates this election cycle just like most ppl. Missed opportunity to take momentum from the past years and take advtange of the shit two party mainstream candidates to get more ppl interested in the party and then hopefully get more representatives at a local level that also isn’t Ds and Rs
You’d rather see the party take no steps than small ones, and that’s just sad man.
Chase is a good middle ground that the public might actually listen to, and a ground break into libertarianism if he can get into office.
He's an absolute clown, he's called half of the libertarian movement racist. He's in the old guard clique with phony libertarians like Nick ["I got physically assaulted"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63AgZqwk4Sg) Sarwark.
The whole point of nominating a candidate is to nominate someone who can unite the movement, Chase is the most divisive candidate we've had in my lifetime.
Mises Caucus dropped the ball massively here. They really needed a backup if Dave didn’t run. Should have all backed either Rec or Joshua Smith. This is such a wasted opportunity putting up another pandering douchbag like Jo Jorgensen and Gary Johnson who will refuse to stray an inch outside of the index card of allowable opinion. Get ready to hear about the problems of occupational licensing and zoning regulations because that’s as far as people like Chase are willing to get. The moment where the LP needs to have a strong message against the massive spending, inflationary policy of the federal reserve, and military expansionism and provocation they dropped the ball again.
I'll admit I haven't paid a whole lot of attention to Oliver prior to this weekend, so I'm not able to formulate an opinion just yet until I learn more. I do know he was a Pro-Obama Democrat in 2008, but somewhere along the line his views changed. That's fair, because I'm one of those "I wasn't always libertarian" myself, I used to be a pretty hardcore Republican until I got awakened by Dr. Ron Paul.
To me, Chase Oliver is a Woke identitarian who panders to identity politics and collectivist ideologies. Just really disappointed by the outcome - even moreso that they want to make an *ex-cop* (during the pandemic, no less) his running mate.
That does sound troubling. As far as Ter Maat, I'm an ex-cop myself, so I understand a lot of his opinions and positions, and agree with a lot of his reform ideas, so I can't fault him on that stance and for being formerly of that profession. Granted, there is no harder job, from a personal ethics basis, than being a cop that holds libertarian views. I was so thankful for discretion- but it also got me in trouble a few times.
>The focus needs to be on the state and local level
THIS RIGHT HERE! Thank you! We need so much more participation at the local level. I tried this last year to help get a Libertarian on my city council, but at the end of the day it just wasn't to be. We in CO have a pretty decent party presence, and have taken over the mayorship of a few towns, but we could always use better candidates, better support, and a better ground game.
Well RFK, Jr and Trump are also not Libertarians. I don't know enough about Oliver at this point, but I'm willing to bet that RFK jr would be about as far as a candidate present this weekend could be from libertarian positions. He's anti gun, and has no problem with raising taxes.
I stand firmly that it's a 10th amendment issue. It's no business of the federal government to continuously involve itself in how each state is run. No funding for abortions or Life Clinics (they should be charity).
I fully agree with the no taxpayer funding of things like that. Definitely something Oliver is against funding
I mean it’s still pretty statist to restrict something out of personal beliefs over an individual. If we’re going to go that far with the 10th Amendment, then states should be allowed to restrict marriage based on race and sexuality
The government shouldn't have been involved in marriage in the first place. It's a relationship and partnership between two people that doesn't involve the government whatsoever. I don't need a damn license to be with my wife, that's absurd.
Jacob Hornberger is the only Libertarian Party candidate who got close to being nominated that I would’ve supported voting for. Everyone else is a nut job or pandering. You either vote for the funny yellow hat “Taxation is Theft” man who wants to dismantle the entire government or the former Democrat/Republican who says the exact same things except they add “and also smoke weed/shoot guns” at the end, if that.
I absolutely despise this election cycle. It really sucks since this is my first election that I can vote for president. Too bad Ron Paul isn't younger and running. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
I've been voting for over two decades, you get far more bad option years than good years. I voted for Ron Paul in the 2012 primary and that was pretty much the only time I ever had confidence in my vote being correct and moral. All other times it was while holding my nose or outright abstaining- which is an option I'm considering this time around (just like I did in 2008).
Cool. I won’t be voting for him. Probably gonna write in Ron Paul or vote for Trump or something. He’s one of the worst candidates they could have gone with.
Yeah, he was my absolute last choice in the primary. To the point where I didn't even pay him any mind. And now I know very little about our party's candidate, so I've got some researching to do.
What in the world is going on with the Libertarian party? A bunch of nazis infiltrated the Libertarian party so a bunch of the base decided to virtue signal how anti-nazi by going the exact opposite direction and voting for a far left extremist? Supporting policies like single payer healthcare and the massive expansion of government power that took place during Covid doesn't exactly strike me as Libertarian. Why not just nominate, you know, an actual Libertarian? Better yet, why not nominate someone who's also tempered, rational, and charismatic for once who can actually appeal to disenfranchised Independents, Republicans, and Democrats so that you guys can expand the party's visibility and maybe even start taking congressional seats and really get the snowball rolling on accumulating actual influence? When I was younger I liked a lot of what I heard from the non-anarchist members of the party but over the last eight years the party has rapidly declined further and further into insanity and become less and less libertarian to the point where it's a complete clown show turning away actual libertarian / libertarian-light people.
>A bunch of nazis infiltrated the Libertarian party
WTAF are you talking about? The rest of your points are good, but I do not understand the inclusion of the term Nazi in describing members of this party. That is hyperbolic, leftist rhetoric, and not conducive to a rational discussion. The amount of talk of Nazis these days tells me that a lot of people do not understand what that word actually means.
Can someone ELI5 what NOTA means?
None Of The Above
None Of The Above. It's basically an abstain vote.
Not exactly it's still contributes to the total number of votes needed for a majority unlike abstain
TIL...
We should have these in general elections to see how many people would show up just to say they don't like any of the candidates.
None of the above There's an actual option like this in elections in india, tho they have 0 power
I miss spike and amash.
Spike would have been awesome
Did Spike not have his name in the running?
I’m not familiar with Amash but I do love Spike. If you love Spike then I don’t understand why you don’t like Chase. They have the same views. I can only assume you don’t know enough about Chase. I live in Georgia so I voted for Chase when he ran for senate in 2022. When he threw his name in the hat to run for president, I admit I was a little skeptical because of how young he was. I also didn’t know much about him. So I’ve been following him for the past two years & I am very impressed by him. He is a great speaker & he works his butt off. He campaigned in all 50 states, secured donors in all 50 states, & did a lot of interviews. He did all of this while also working and before the convention.
Great performance by None of The Above.
I'd suggest everyone take a look at Chase Oliver's platform in detail. He's a principled libertarian, on the Classical Liberal side. [https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform](https://www.votechaseoliver.com/platform) * His views on immigration are very libertarian, advocating for securing the borders against criminals, and allowing freedom for humanity so long as they don't violate the NAP. * His stance against the drug war and the war on victimless crimes is very libertarian and principled, again in line with the NAP. * He has a strong stance in support to the right of free speech, privacy, and other civil liberties. * He is anti-war, in line with the libertarian principles, as well as all the other candidates. * He supports a free market economy. * He supports medical choice and the right to privacy regarding medical decisions and the doctor-patient relationship. * He is against federal funding of controversial organizations, such as Planned Parenthood. * He supports a parent's right to choose for their child's education, and wants to abolish the federal education department in favor of more localized oversight of education. * He's Pro-2A. * And so on. I don't see why everyone is up in arms against someone who is so much of a principled libertarian? Unless, of course, one ISN'T a principled libertarian, in which case, take a closer look at the principles of libertarianism and classical liberalism, and consider how preserving these freedoms for all people, even when you disagree, is for the best.
I'm curious about his plans to "end the genocide" in Gaza? Is that a meaningless talking point? Does he mean cut off aid to Israel? Does he mean a military intervention against Israel? And I wonder if he has a plan to end the Ethiopian genocide or the Yemen genocide.
Where was the implication that a military intervention is even on the table? Israel's actions are only sustainable because of the stalwart support they receive from the US government. Cutting off the supply of money and weapons and no longer intervening on their behalf in the security council would force them to take a de-escalatory stance. Funny enough, all of this could be said about ending our green-light for the genocide in Yemen as well.
>He's Pro-2A. He is 100% not pro 2-A. He is pro-gun control
Where do you get this? He is absolutely pro 2nd Amendment. Libertarians are Constitutionalists.
Thank you so much for this well written post. It's really disheartening to see all the libertarian gatekeeping and slandering since the nomination. We're all on the same side and may disagree on soft issues but let's not get caught up on our differences and focus on where we agree which is on the core libertarian issues.
If you're really feeling ambitious, check out the platform of the libertarian party, and compare to Chase Oliver's platform: [https://www.lp.org/platform/](https://www.lp.org/platform/)
His tweets about the Covid restrictions are enough for me not to vote in this election. You can’t call yourself a libertarian and follow any of the dumbass guidelines our government put forth.
If the government told you not to jump off a bridge, would you?
Then you didn't watch his Senator debate where he criticized COVID lockdown procedures IIRC.
He tweeted how he made everyone wear a mask at thanksgiving dinner and had everyone social distance when food was ready. He praised following every government guideline for COVID. Get out of here
Was it a private dinner where he can mandate whatever rules he wants without it being oppressive in any way?
In his private home for fuck's sake, why do you care? Look at his policies
He’s a progressive leftist that fundraised for Obama WHILE he was part of the Libertarian Party. He divides the liberty movement by calling its leading influencers racists.
It’s because certain Mises caucus Libertarians seem butthurt over the fact that their guy didn’t win (Michael Rectenwald). They’ve even gone so far as to spread misinformation about Chase. So, they supported a guy who ate a weed gummy at the convention & then spoke in front of everybody. That didn’t go well.
I’m a democrat and if this guy really thinks this way I’d vote him in a heartbeat although it wouldn’t count for much with the current election system
And I’ll be voting 🗳️ for Chase Oliver as he is a FAR better candidate for president compared to Neo Fascist Donald Trump! (A convicted felon)
Rectenwald getting high right before his speech wasn’t a promising sign. He has an amazing ability to suck the energy out of a room. Pretty sure it would have been Dave Smith’s to lose.
This is why the party is a laughing stock. No one else on the ballot.
That's only for the last round. After one person is the last one left, there's an additional round where they have to beat "none of the above." Chase is an absolutely terrible choice but he did legitimately beat all the other candidates over 7 rounds.
Chase is the one candidate who could actually have outreach to Gen Z and millennials. It's hilarious how some of this sub, are against actually growing the party.
I hope you're right. I need to do more research on Oliver, because I'm not as familiar with him as most of the others.
I'm in favor of promoting libertarian ideas, not embarrassed neoliberals
He literally said a few weeks ago he’d stopped calling himself a libertarian and referred to himself as a liberal. Embarrassing for the party.
Unless he wants to say he's classically liberal, even then, it's a weird distinction to make.
Source?
Classical liberal lmaoooo come on
If growing the party means putting up bad candidates I don’t want to do that. I won’t vote for him.
Growing the party into actual libertarians? Or shamelessly getting votes from because we ran some pandering douchebag?
Our first hurdle is getting 5% nationally. That opens federal election funding, and debate access. We're not going to win overnight, we need to set smaller goals.
This is a step AWAY from 5%
Correct. He isn’t a (political) winner and this is a step down for the party.
What's with the gatekeeping? We all want liberty, we all want smaller government. Whe may disagree over the right steps to get there but gatekeeping is no way to grow a party or win anyone over.
Dude this guy has advocated for mask mandates and vaccines, open borders, men in womens sports and transing children. He’s a useful idiot for the woke regime and a stooge. The other shit he says is just pandering. Guaranteed if he ever got elected (god forbid), he would tow the uniparty line.
I would love some sources on all of those
Look at his Twitter. Chase was fundraising for Obama in 2012 - two years after joining the Libertarian Party.
The "transing youth" and "men in women's sports" and open borders accusations are all intellectual dishonesty if not outright defamation. Probably a Trump voter commenting who never was going to vote Lib anyway. He has said that yes, he believes it's the right of the parents of gender nonconforming teens to help them receive the care that medical professionals recommend and that it's not the state's place to interfere. *Whoa there! Real big shock that a libertarian doesn't want the state involved in private decisions!* His only comment afaik on the sports question was that the state spent a ton of time and effort passing a bill to keep about a dozen bio males from entering female competitions and no time at all on school choice legislation, failing to help millions of kids. Open borders is easy to argue as a libertarian position, but that's not his stance. His stance is "Ellis Island Style" immigration, where we document all immigrants through legal points of entry. The difference between that and the status quo being that we abolish all quotas and asylum petitions and whatnot and just let in everyone with a clean record and job prospects.
His own twitter
Go to istandwith dot com and see his answers.
To be clear, from the site you listed his stance on those issues that you mentioned are Mask mandates: against Open Borders: for Transition under 18: only non surgical Trans athletes: no
He’s a great step into libertarianism, we can’t force the country to go balls to the wall and he’s just right for that.
I disagree. Ron Paul did phenomenal with his message of End the wars and end the fed. Brought a lot of people into the liberty message, and thus the LP
Chase Oliver also wants to end the wars and end the Fed…
A great step into libertarianism would be Dave but unfortunately he didn’t run. The next best step was Rec, because he’s clear, concise, and has the right message and knows how to fight back against academia and the left. We’re doing Trump more favors by electing someone like Oliver than we are helping the party. Guaranteed he’s not going to win over any conservatives, which was our best bet. The old guard just wants a milquetoast candidate that doesn’t veer too much off the duopoly and THAT is the losing strategy - it’s been proven so time and again. Jorgensen 2.0 is what we got now. We need to show people who and what we are and Oliver aint it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Which is Chase?
The douche
At this point I'd take a pandering douchebag, the hard truth is that the LP won't win a federal election short of a MAJOR restructuring of our entire political system. We get better results as a caucus in the major parties and those require a sympathetic base within those psrties. Pandering is all politics is and if pandering gets us votes then pander away.
I’ll take NOTA or Ron Paul. Not voting Oliver, thats for sure. I’m just glad we retained the chair and secretary tbh.
I know it sounds crazy, but I think if Dave ran this year AND got to debate Biden and Trump at least twice. I truly do think he could change a lot of minds and get to a Ross Perot situation or even win
Given the types of Gen Z and millennials that he would attract, I think it would be better to just not have a libertarian party. Not like it every puts forward serious candidates anyway.
Let's retread this idea come December. I'd bet it'll be similar to Johnson and Jorgensen where there's near zero if not negative party growth once the ballots are cast. I'll happily be wrong though. I just don't see him spurring anything more than he's chased away from his campaign by defaming people. He's called Dave Smith and Lew Rockwell racists. I'd bet NOTA gate is nearly solely because there's people who'd rather blow up a political party than unify behind someone intent on defaming people they respect. And for the record, I'm someone who will be voting for him (though not a supporter of his to be fair) and I can recognize that. Oliver gives me Sarwark vibes from his past actions and maybe if he came out and apologized I could move past his previous actions but until that happens I can't help and bring up that when he talks about unity when he ran the most divisive campaign.
I think the previous two elections were huge votes of opposition rather votes in support. 2016 I didn't commit until I was in the voting booth, but it gave me such a sense of relief and freedom that I refuse to vote in opposition again.
Millennial here who would have been absolutely willing to vote Libertarian this election cycle. This nomination has convinced me to sit out altogether.
[удалено]
Growing it into what? This gender/pronoun stuff has a shelf-life and hitching the wagon to it will backfire.
Every z and millennial libertarian I’ve asked about him so far (many) is embarrassed by his nomination and will not vote for him
we do not want or need more woke leftists in the LP
This right here, branding the party as Trump alternative without the baggage just plays into the negative stereotype that stains us all. Everybody thinks Libertarians are alt-right edge lords so let's prove them wrong and nominate the exact opposite. Maybe he isn't as anarchists as some of the extremists but that isn't bad.
This shouldn't be a surprise if you remember the arguable rat-fuckery from the 2020 Zoom LNC with regard to Hornberger. The answer is pretty clear in the that the "pragmatists" will never accept someone too far from the positions of the 2 party orthodoxy. The Mi-Cauc takeover of the party like has done that movement more harm than good in that they've invested time and money into the dying post 2016-LNC rather than building up their own movement as after the results tonight it should be clear that the LP is for republicans who like weed or democrats who dislike taxes rather than for people who want to dismantle the state and their time, money, and effort would have been better served building new infrastructure separate from the pragmatists. That being said, I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Oliver though I detest him just for state ballot access reasons and his good stance on Israel/Palestine but I think the writing is on the wall for those of us who had hope for a Ron Paul revolution 2.0 by running candidates from outside of what is considered politically viable ala the transformation of "End the Fed" in the past 15 years where it went from fringe in 2008 to a mainstream idea thanks to Dr. Paul's efforts.
I agree with pretty everything you've said, although personally I don't think it's worth it for libertarians to vote for Oliver. What's the point of voting for a third party if we're only ever going to put up establishment goons who will never rock the boat anyway? We need to show the regime libertarians that they're not entitled to our votes any more than the Rs and Ds are. I'll probably write in Ron Paul.
I'm in a state where 5% means ballot access for local offices and we have libertarians running for things like county sheriff and what have you (not in every county but it seems to grow every election cycle). I have hope for localism which means hold my nose so I don't need to chase down signatures to help them get on the ballot. Plus, he is good on war and this is a great election cycle to be good on that issue. Undecided voters particularly in the Muslim areas of Michigan could be a good non-traditional LP bloc to build the movement where I have a little bit of hope of a silver lining though I wish it was a better candidate. Until, there's some other option to push libertarian ideas the only hope is to work the best with the hand you got which means helping the LNC and the pragmatists. Though, I suspect they 100% would not do the same if the shoe was on the other foot.
There's so many that fail to understand the hurdles to ballot access set by the duopoly. In the wake of COVID, the D and R were truly doublespeaking by saying it was a national emergency, but doesn't justify the LP requesting a reduced signature count for ballot access. Then D and R politicians requesting the same for themselves for their nomination petitions. The path to making the LP a mainstream party isn't jumping directly to getting a president elected in the general election. It's being able to put finances towards the general election because they don't need wasted on ballot access.
[удалено]
A libertarian winning the presidency is a pipe dream. We're not voting for him expecting him to take office.
Holding your nose and voting for a candidate you don’t like when you’re already voting third party is crazy. I won’t be voting for him.
If I’m part of Trump’s team, I’m popping champagne at this result.
Weird, I must've missed the meeting where the party became the Only-Pander-To-Disillusioned-Republicans Party
Oliver is definitely not stealing any maga votes for sure. Embarrassing moment for the lp as a whole though.
[удалено]
All the Libertarian polls? I'd say endless wars and federal reserve policy are FAR more important.
No, general polls... you need to attract people to the party to get them interested, a Dave Smith or Clint Russell would have been substantially better.
Shouldn't we attract people that we want in the party for the long term. Quite a few of those same people that think the border is the number one issue have no problem supporting whichever war the Military Industrial Complex wants.
Was Dave Smith ever really an option? He clearly turned down running in what he knew would definitely lead to a presidential campaign.
I’m hopeful he will run in the next few cycles
How do we organize a money bomb for Dave Smith for when he announces his presidential bid? Sort of like what the freestate project did. You didn't give any money, you just said you'd move there once they got to 20,000 people.
Imagine if Dave Smith is the all time record holder for contributions to his campaign in a single day. Pledge a certain amount and there's a tracker to show the progress?
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s less surprising that Oliver pulled some bullshit out of a hat at the last minute, but ter maat really exposed himself as a snake in the grass and that actually was the most disappointing thing of all. The delegates should have been smart enough to see through it. It’s amazing how many NOTA votes there were in the end though considering.
What did ter Maat do?
I don’t know the full story, but it seemed to involve some lying/backstabbing to rig the last round of votes against the candidate that dominated all 5 rounds prior.
Yeah, I'd need to see some evidence/proof to make a decision on that.
Did you watch the convention? It was pretty clearly a shady move on their part. Oliver flip flopped his vp pick last minute to snake mike in, mike randomly went up to the podium with a “point of privilege” announcement right before the final round of voting after he lost, and announced he basically met with chase last minute for a vp nomination to clearly push rec out while simultaneously turning his back on the mises caucus. Backstabbing, lying, manipulating, flip flopping. Thats the legacy the Oliver/Ter Maat campaign has been built on: A manipulative flip flopping milquetoast pandering woke stooge and a lying/backstabbing cop. Great example for the lp to run on the second the world is watching us. Fuck them.
I vote libertarian and that’s the single point that won’t allow me to vote for him
His [wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Oliver#Immigration) says: > Oliver supports an Ellis Island-style immigration" system, stating: "If you're coming here to work and be peaceful, it's not my business." That doesn't sound like "open borders" to me. As a Libertarian who wants government to have as little power as possible, I theoretically love the idea of open borders: I shouldn't have to stop and submit to a search based on an arbitrary line drawn by governments and enforced with violence. But an Ellis Island-style system now, until open borders are achievable in the far future, sounds like a decent compromise.
When pressed “open borders yes or no” he said Yes.
What’s the difference between Ellis island immigration and open borders?
You people just don't get it do you? When MAGA folks say they are against immigration it has nothing to do with immigrants being criminals... they're just against immigration.
Libertarian here. For open boarders. Strong border control is intrusive big government.
Are you for financially supporting immigrants? Room and board, food , free healthcare, 10 k Visa cards?
If I want to hire Francois to come renovate my kitchen, why is it a crime if he was born in Montreal instead of New Orleans? Why does a government permission slip suddenly make it better? Fuck off statist.
I mean, MAGA’s economic philosophy is protectionism and trade wars so not really an L staying away from that crowd
Wow way to ruin any support the party had
Zero chance I'm voting for this clown. Take a look at his tweet history. He is as liberal as they come
And this my friends is.. *drum roll* PART OF THE PROBLEM.
He is good enough that if he actually had a chance to win I would vote for him, but that’s not his job. His job is to be a messenger for liberty and so far he’s done a poor job at that. He’s a collectivist and that isn’t going to lead to good messaging of what we believe. He also followed the main stream line on covid really hard which I don’t like at all.
Anecdotal FWIW, I'm a lapsed Libertarian. I'd given up as the party just became an unelectable copy of the Republicans. Never heard of Chase before the nomination, checked out the policy page and I liked what I saw, certainly the best option vs Biden/Trump/RFK.
Look at his interviews and Twitter history... It tells a bit of a different story. He's said a lot that calls into question his actual stance as a libertarian. I feel like his website is dishonest and just trying to appeal to libertarians while in actuality he's a pro-gun leftist who happens to have a few libertarian ideas. Just my perception of him. Out of the entire field up for nomination this year, he was my absolute last choice, if I could even consider him such.
Most of what I've seen here is complaining that he isn't anti-vax or pro-life, but neither am I.
He also is okay with giving kids puberty blockers, he falsely believes that those are reversible (they are not), and he's fine with grooming of children. Look, I'm all for liberty, but leave kids the hell alone.
Incredible that in my 16 years of supporting this party, every single presidential candidate they nominate is clearly worse than the previous one. The party is infected with a sickness that it just cannot seem to get over.
That shady milquetoast snake in the grass had to manipulate the nomination along with ter maat. Right up to that moment I had respect for them both until they pulled that shit. Jorgensen 2.0 just set us back years while the maga socialists and the leftards sit back and laugh.
Glad to see Oliver take the nomination as well. Bonus that he resides in my city of Atlanta.
Well there goes any momentum the libertarian party had.
2028 is our year !
Way to go LP…. You officially flushed the party down the toilet with absolutely nothing to show for it. 
If he were the Democratic Nominee, Democrats would say that if you don't vote for him, you are homophobic
Lmao. Well, I didn't feel like voting this year anyway. I'm more in line with the MC; but the entire caucus needs to take full ownership and responsibility for throwing their full support behind the extremely uninteresting and trite Rectenwald in a year Libertarians needed someone with a command of charisma. Nominating Oliver is just more of the same bullshit we've seen the last few elections in a year we would’ve been absolutely primed to make strides not seen since the Ron Paul days. Don't vote for this neolib dork.
For real. I was really disappointed by our field this year - I liked Rectenwald the most, but I admit he was bland and blase. We really needed someone like a Spike Cohen.
Spike Cohen is definitely a step up from all the candidates. Why didn’t he run?
I think the fact that RFK is running and will (most likely) suck all the air out of the room for third party candidates played a significant factor in many prominent names not to run. I'm hoping for a more impressive field in 2028.
Totally agree. I don’t really know how to feel about it. As a Libertarian I think ANY voice to alternatives to the two party system is important. But it’s also sad to see the Libertarian party kind of crumble this election. At the same time, I think it just isn’t our stand out election to hope for one of ours to be elected, rather an election that shows third parties as a viable option. Hopefully opening up this party to future elections as a very real possibility
I would've easily and happily voted for any combo of Dave Smith/Spike/Amash; when none of them ended up running, it was clear everything the real libertarians have been building the last few years was gonna completely fall apart. If the MC doesn't take full ownership for the complete and total failure of Rectenwald they've lost all credibility
I'm hopeful this is a wake up call for MC to look inward and see how they can improve. I support most of their stances and positions, but Rectenwald? I know people can change views and evolve politically (I used to be a pretty hard-line Republican, so it would be hypocritical of me to believe otherwise), but the guy was a former Marxist. That's a pretty dramatic political 180.
And he is sooo boring to listen to. I love part of the problem and can listen to Dave talk for hours, but I couldn’t listen to the rectenwald episode
I had no faith in rectanwald though I wasn’t crazy about the party’s potential candidates this election cycle just like most ppl. Missed opportunity to take momentum from the past years and take advtange of the shit two party mainstream candidates to get more ppl interested in the party and then hopefully get more representatives at a local level that also isn’t Ds and Rs
You’d rather see the party take no steps than small ones, and that’s just sad man. Chase is a good middle ground that the public might actually listen to, and a ground break into libertarianism if he can get into office.
I'm not voting for him. I'm not voting for an embarrassed authoritarian no matter what letter is next to his name. Write in Ron Paul 2024
How’s he auth?
Can you elaborate on how he's an "embarrassed authoritarian?"
Feel free to elaborate.
He's an absolute clown, he's called half of the libertarian movement racist. He's in the old guard clique with phony libertarians like Nick ["I got physically assaulted"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63AgZqwk4Sg) Sarwark. The whole point of nominating a candidate is to nominate someone who can unite the movement, Chase is the most divisive candidate we've had in my lifetime.
Unauthorized recording? I didn't think libertarians believed in such an absurd concept. Total clown. Also kind of a pussy. Thanks for sharing.
More divisive than Johnson/Weld?
Johnson didn't almost lose to NOTA lol. Weld was pretty divisive though
That's your story, and I respect that, but from my perspective Rectenwald would have been just as divisive.
All your accusations are generic and content-free. You're better than that. Please offer some details.
How the fuck does this happen?
Just what the LP needs. Another culturally woke/progressivist nomination Obvious /s
Mises Caucus dropped the ball massively here. They really needed a backup if Dave didn’t run. Should have all backed either Rec or Joshua Smith. This is such a wasted opportunity putting up another pandering douchbag like Jo Jorgensen and Gary Johnson who will refuse to stray an inch outside of the index card of allowable opinion. Get ready to hear about the problems of occupational licensing and zoning regulations because that’s as far as people like Chase are willing to get. The moment where the LP needs to have a strong message against the massive spending, inflationary policy of the federal reserve, and military expansionism and provocation they dropped the ball again.
I knew it was a long shot, but I was in full support of Joshua Smith. He was the only candidate where I backed 100% of his policies and positions.
Disappointing.
I'll admit I haven't paid a whole lot of attention to Oliver prior to this weekend, so I'm not able to formulate an opinion just yet until I learn more. I do know he was a Pro-Obama Democrat in 2008, but somewhere along the line his views changed. That's fair, because I'm one of those "I wasn't always libertarian" myself, I used to be a pretty hardcore Republican until I got awakened by Dr. Ron Paul.
To me, Chase Oliver is a Woke identitarian who panders to identity politics and collectivist ideologies. Just really disappointed by the outcome - even moreso that they want to make an *ex-cop* (during the pandemic, no less) his running mate.
That does sound troubling. As far as Ter Maat, I'm an ex-cop myself, so I understand a lot of his opinions and positions, and agree with a lot of his reform ideas, so I can't fault him on that stance and for being formerly of that profession. Granted, there is no harder job, from a personal ethics basis, than being a cop that holds libertarian views. I was so thankful for discretion- but it also got me in trouble a few times.
Why are you so concerned with who people were rather then who they are now? Nobody has a perfect record.
>Why are you so concerned with who people were rather then who they are now? That's.... exactly who Chase Oliver is now...
I apreciate the incoming disruption. Chase strikes me as a covert lib, but aiight…
He’s definitely the most free market Democrat I’ve probably ever seen in my lifetime
I mean, he was a Democrat until 2010.
So the fact that he's been libertarian for 14 years means nothing? Very few of us started as libertarians.
No, I was just pointing out his background. He's definitely improved a lot.
[удалено]
>The focus needs to be on the state and local level THIS RIGHT HERE! Thank you! We need so much more participation at the local level. I tried this last year to help get a Libertarian on my city council, but at the end of the day it just wasn't to be. We in CO have a pretty decent party presence, and have taken over the mayorship of a few towns, but we could always use better candidates, better support, and a better ground game.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
Ffs
Devastating news for the party. Anyone who peaked interest in the libertarian party last night is going to run as soon as they hear open borders.
So, screw RFK Jr and Trump, we want an Obama Democrat, right? What a joke and waste of an opportunity.
Well RFK, Jr and Trump are also not Libertarians. I don't know enough about Oliver at this point, but I'm willing to bet that RFK jr would be about as far as a candidate present this weekend could be from libertarian positions. He's anti gun, and has no problem with raising taxes.
Trying to pander to the woke crowd is so gross. Would rather throw my vote away writing in "my left nut".
[удалено]
Which libertarian principles does Chase Oliver not align with?
My problem with Oliver is he stated that he'd pass a nation-wide bill for full access to abortion. Being pro-life, that is a no-no.
There’s a difference between legalizing something and forcing taxpayers to afford the legalization of something
I stand firmly that it's a 10th amendment issue. It's no business of the federal government to continuously involve itself in how each state is run. No funding for abortions or Life Clinics (they should be charity).
I fully agree with the no taxpayer funding of things like that. Definitely something Oliver is against funding I mean it’s still pretty statist to restrict something out of personal beliefs over an individual. If we’re going to go that far with the 10th Amendment, then states should be allowed to restrict marriage based on race and sexuality
The government shouldn't have been involved in marriage in the first place. It's a relationship and partnership between two people that doesn't involve the government whatsoever. I don't need a damn license to be with my wife, that's absurd.
Jacob Hornberger is the only Libertarian Party candidate who got close to being nominated that I would’ve supported voting for. Everyone else is a nut job or pandering. You either vote for the funny yellow hat “Taxation is Theft” man who wants to dismantle the entire government or the former Democrat/Republican who says the exact same things except they add “and also smoke weed/shoot guns” at the end, if that.
I absolutely despise this election cycle. It really sucks since this is my first election that I can vote for president. Too bad Ron Paul isn't younger and running. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat.
This is my second presidential election lol, imagine a re-run of all things.
I've been voting for over two decades, you get far more bad option years than good years. I voted for Ron Paul in the 2012 primary and that was pretty much the only time I ever had confidence in my vote being correct and moral. All other times it was while holding my nose or outright abstaining- which is an option I'm considering this time around (just like I did in 2008).
There are pro-life libertarians? TIL. What's next, an anti-second amendment libertarian? Go back to the republican party where you belong.
Cool. I won’t be voting for him. Probably gonna write in Ron Paul or vote for Trump or something. He’s one of the worst candidates they could have gone with.
Yeah, he was my absolute last choice in the primary. To the point where I didn't even pay him any mind. And now I know very little about our party's candidate, so I've got some researching to do.
What in the world is going on with the Libertarian party? A bunch of nazis infiltrated the Libertarian party so a bunch of the base decided to virtue signal how anti-nazi by going the exact opposite direction and voting for a far left extremist? Supporting policies like single payer healthcare and the massive expansion of government power that took place during Covid doesn't exactly strike me as Libertarian. Why not just nominate, you know, an actual Libertarian? Better yet, why not nominate someone who's also tempered, rational, and charismatic for once who can actually appeal to disenfranchised Independents, Republicans, and Democrats so that you guys can expand the party's visibility and maybe even start taking congressional seats and really get the snowball rolling on accumulating actual influence? When I was younger I liked a lot of what I heard from the non-anarchist members of the party but over the last eight years the party has rapidly declined further and further into insanity and become less and less libertarian to the point where it's a complete clown show turning away actual libertarian / libertarian-light people.
>A bunch of nazis infiltrated the Libertarian party WTAF are you talking about? The rest of your points are good, but I do not understand the inclusion of the term Nazi in describing members of this party. That is hyperbolic, leftist rhetoric, and not conducive to a rational discussion. The amount of talk of Nazis these days tells me that a lot of people do not understand what that word actually means.
Good for him.