Why would a Libertarian Vote for Romney?

There is plenty of time left until November, and I can't say with 100% certainty that I am going to vote for Mitt Romney, but I am not going to vote for Gary Johnson just to show my disapproval of the two party candidates. Here are few of the top reasons why.

I voted for Bob Barr in 2008, and absolutely nothing changed. Rep. Barr was supposed to be a new type of Libertarian candidate, someone with a real resume, connections and experiences that made him a viable candidate, a break from the list of radio personalities and national political light weights that the Libertarian party had marched out the previous elections. I didn't even mind that he scared me a little bit one the few times he grabbed some airtime on cable news by waiving a copy of the constitution around and not making any real points. But the day after Bob Barr came in 4th place in my home state of Iowa after the '08 election, not one bit of discussion occurred in any mainstream stage during or after the election. Contrast this to Ron Paul running for the Republican nomination, pushing an audit of the Fed and towards financial solvency on a timetable that may actually make it happen in our lifetimes. These things are much more likely in a Romney president. Then we can progress to another set of issues held near and dear to libertarians.

Gary Johnson will not be given a voice, even if a third party candidate obtained a spot on a national stage, such as Perot in '92, it still won't have any lasting effect, and then they would probably just change the criteria to be given. Such as Perot in '96, when they started the 15% polling criteria. There was nothing but regret and resentment in the '96 election towards Perot because so many people looked at him as nothing but a spoiler. The powers that be do not want a third candidate, be it Green party or Libertarian.

We don't need a third party, change can come to a party through other ways. Remember, up until a few months ago, the Democratic President was not in favor of same sex marriages. Change will take time, and I can appreciate the sense of urgency in fiscal policy, or the disappointment that the Republican party is still in the pocket of "Moral Majority" groups that take hypocritical stands on issues like marriage, where the state knows what's best for you in choosing who you fall in love with, but can't possibly know what's better for your families health decisions.

We can't win, I understand the analogy of so what? Just don't show up? Not at all, Let Gary Johnson run, let him bring up the issues that matter and swing some peoples way of thinking, but when you have a football team of high school students and and you are trying to play against the New England Patriots and the Chicago Bears, you don't measure your success by the number of points you put on the board, you write up a plan and you execute it, even it all you accomplish is a couple of first downs you learn from it and get better for next time, maybe even let one of your kids get drafted by the Bears if he's good enough. Taking pride in shaping that team a little bit as they play their "Big boy games". Carry the football analogy with the color barrier, at one point, African Americans where few and far between in football league, do you think that forming an all colored team and then beating an all white team would have made the masses of a closed minded people say, "Well, you got us, I guess we have no choice but to accept you and fully integrate." Or, do you think they would just make up some stupid reason why they can't play with them anymore.

And the last big truth is this, even if some oddity occurred and Johnson won the white house, what would he be able to do with it? Sure, he could balance the budget, bring thousands of our troops home, legalize pot, and half a dozen other things, but what would prevent the next president from undoing everything four years later? Unless the will of a majority of people is for these things, I feel a third party vote is a wasted one. There is a competent business man who is available to vote for, who I feel can at least turn the tides on economic front, who I feel will not look at government as a tool to dictate how we live our lives. A debate on if these last sentences are true is the debate I will have now. But, I will not get dragged into another debate on how there is no difference between an (R) and a (D). The battle towards true liberty in America is not fought from September to October during an election year, at least not any more then when it needs to be fought in the 48 months following a presidential election. And I strive for the day when the Libertarian doctrine is picked up by a majority of Americans, and not just a foot note in the morning after coverage of an election.

Don't forget, Ron Paul is a Republican still, and Gary Johnson was up until December, when he was pursuing the nomination for Libertarian Candidate.