The Libertarian Party has nominated Jo Jorgensen as its presidential nominee.  It took several ballots before she finally got a majority, which all took place online.

There was some controversy over whether having an online nominating convention violated the Libertarian Party (LP) bylaws, but it happened anyway.

My first choice was Jacob Hornberger, who came in second.  I think Hornberger could be a bit stronger in his messaging, especially in selling liberty to the American middle class.  But overall, Hornberger would have been a really good nominee, and I believe he would have stuck strong to libertarian principles.

I don’t know a lot about Jo Jorgensen.  She sold herself as a cross between the principled and the pragmatic.  I have no problem with this as long as she stays principled.  I think you can remain true to libertarian principles while also conveying a populist message, which is really what I was saying above about what Hornberger needed to do.

Jorgensen was the vice presidential nominee in 1996.  She was Harry Browne’s running mate.  When you are the vice presidential nominee for the LP, it doesn’t mean you necessarily fall in line with the presidential nominee.  The vice presidential candidate is nominated separately.  It isn’t like the Republicans and Democrats where the presumptive nominee picks his or her preferred person as a running mate.

The vice presidential nominee ended up being Spike Cohen.  He was endorsed by the Mises Caucus (the libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party).  He identifies himself as an anarchist.  This shows that the two nominees can and will often have differing opinions.  I have no problem with the vice presidential candidate being an anarchist, but I hope he is prepared to answer tough questions about it.  I hope Jorgensen is prepared to answer questions about her running mate.

Even though the two offices are nominated separately, it is a good sign that Jorgensen ran with Harry Browne.  Hopefully she picked up many of his good traits.  I believe Harry Browne is the strongest nominee the LP has ever had, and I say that knowing that Ron Paul was the nominee in 1988.

Ron Paul’s two runs as a Republican were far more influential than Harry Browne’s two presidential runs on the LP ticket.  But I believe that Harry Browne was one of the people who was critical in building a sold libertarian base that almost needed to exist when Ron Paul’s campaign took off in 2007.  I can speak for myself and say that Harry Browne was the most influential libertarian in my life.

It is also a good sign that Jorgensen has been around for so long.  She joined the LP in 1983.  When you’ve been in the LP for many decades, it is a reasonably good sign. The last three presidential cycles saw people coming from the Republican Party to the LP to run for president, without a lot of time in between.  It happened in 2008 with Bob Barr.  It happened in 2012 with Gary Johnson.  It happened in 2016 with Bill Weld running as Johnson’s VP. It almost happened again in 2020 with Justin Amash.  Even though Amash was an independent, it wasn’t long ago that he was a Republican.

So overall, I have reasonable expectations with Jorgensen.  I think she will likely be the best LP candidate since at least 2004, which is the last time I voted for the LP presidential candidate in the general election.  She doesn’t have to be perfect, but I want her to keep a principled message while trying to appeal to the average middle class American.  If she can remain principled, I may just vote for her in November.

Where are the Hillary Voters?

In 2016, I heard it said multiple times about how women should vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a woman.  I heard it said that everyone should vote for Hillary because she is a woman. I heard different variations of these themes.  I heard insinuations that it was sexist not to vote for Hillary Clinton.

In 2019 and 2020, there were several women running for the Democratic Party nomination.  This included Kamala Harris, Tulsi Gabbard, Elizabeth Warren, and Amy Klobuchar.  While none of them were really successful in the primaries, they did attract a decent number of women voters when you combine their numbers.

Now here we are in 2020 with a woman on the ballot.  But she is on the ballot for the Libertarian Party.  Unless Biden is dumped before the convention (which I think is a good possibility), then there will be no woman running for president on the Democratic ticket.  Biden has said he will pick a woman has his VP candidate.

I’m sure all of those women who voted for Hillary in 2016 because she is a woman will be flocking to vote for Jo Jorgensen in 2020.  Obviously that is sarcasm.

They don’t really care about voting for a woman.  They care about voting for a woman who promotes big government and establishment policies.  They care about voting for a woman who will talk about women’s rights, even when she couldn’t care less about bombing foreign countries into oblivion.  I guess women in Middle Eastern countries don’t count when it comes to Hillary and her supporters.

Just the same, many women, even on the Democrat side, would never support someone like Tulsi Gabbard because she dares to question the establishment narrative on war and foreign intervention.

There may be a few women who do vote for Jorgensen because she is a woman, but it isn’t going to be your typical Hillary voter.  They will vote for Biden, or whoever is the Democratic Party nominee.  They will say at the very least that we need to defeat Donald Trump.

Anyway, I do think it adds an interesting dynamic that the LP candidate is a female.  I do think it presents an opportunity to reach out to some women who are not libertarians but may be somewhat open to hearing the message.

My recommendation to Jorgensen is to remain strong in her principles because we don’t just want votes.  We want to move the needle of public opinion towards liberty.  We want to build on what Ron Paul did in his last two presidential campaigns, which was to convert tens of thousands of people towards radical libertarianism.

With that said, I also believe Jorgensen should have a populist message too (while remaining principled).  With all of the massive government spending, debt, and money creation just over the last few months, Americans will be hurting really bad.  She needs to explain that we need a drastic reduction in government in all areas of our life if we wish to significantly improve our living standards.

People will be receptive to this message.  I am cautiously optimistic that Jo Jorgensen can deliver this message. If she can deliver it effectively, then she will get my vote in November.