I bursted out laughing when it came to removing the "L" in "It is Lawful" and changing it to "It is Awful". I never thought of that happening. Man oh man, I love Remy.
Thank you, Remy -- and Reason -- for revealing how restrictive ballot access is in most states. Especially Illinois. Libertarians are forced to collect 3 to 5 times the threshold granted to Democrats and Republicans for Congressional, state legislative and statewide (statewide requires 25,000 minimum, often having to file 50,000+). Lesser political races where the Libertarian Party doesn't have major party status (currently only Kankakee and McLean counties have major party designations) require between 30 and 150 times the threshold set for the duopoly. As political director for the Libertarian Party of Illinois, I am working to changing that in 2020 by actively being in Springfield to support pending legislation to significantly reduce the threshold to equal that of the Democratic and Republican parties (e.g. 500-1,500 for state house, 1,500-3,000 for state senate, 5,000 for statewide, etc.) Next would be to slash the major party threshold from 5% to the Midwestern standard of 2%, which is the standard in pretty much all of our neighboring states.
I live in the heart of Trump country (Arkansas) but ever since I started voting in 96, we have always had 3rd parties on our ballots, voted for Nader in 00 and 04, Johnson in both 12 and 16, and have seen people I've never even heard of on the ballot... one of the few decent things about voting here
GayusSchwulius Sure, no problem. According to the Bible, Frankincense was one of the three gifts brought by the three “magi/kings/wise men” to Mary, Joseph, and Jesus after Jesus was born. The other two gifts were Gold and Myrrh. Gold is Money, of course, while Myrrh and Frankincense are pain relievers. In the song, “Frank incensed” is a play on Frankincense. When the man goes to the booth to vote, he is angry with his choices, so he, Frank (name), is “incensed” (another word for angry). Hope this helped!
This is Remy’s most important song. Ballot Access restrictions are the first hurdle to cross that can make a healthy democratic republics or a limited oligarchy. And in many places, there is no third party, no escape route.
@@thehillshaveaviators I don't think so. Even if you only get on one ballot, ranked voting will slow a candidate to win. Without it, even the smallest election is subject to tactical voting and that favours the two largest parties.
Manuel Barkhau I agree with you man! RCV is loads better than the current voting system we have, and I’d be in favor of it wholeheartedly. I’m just saying Ballot Access restrictions are an equally detrimental problem to third parties and minor candidates
@@thehillshaveaviators I know and I disagree. Universal ballot access is useless if nobody is going to vote for you because of tactical voting. RCV on the other hand is useful even if ballot access is restricted in Los of places.
I live in Indiana. "L" is a valid option here. Any party that gets at least 2% of the vote in the secretary of state race is listable. So, I always vote libertarian for that office.
There are only a few states like that. The LP spends so much of it's limited resources on ballot access that there's not enough left to recruit and train better candidates.
I remember once I had read that people should have to write in the name of the candidate they are voting for. Helps deal with those that vote only for a D, R, or even the rare L beside their name.
At least that's better than "non-partisan". I've voted once. I had a hard time trying to find out what all the "non-partisan" candidates stood for. I still didn't have too much of a clue.
@@justinlokere It works as you've explained, but alternatively, the expression "to be frank" means something like "to be bluntly honest", so he is honestly angry.
Well if we "Ls" could get a good person to run, we may actually stand a chance. I really liked Gary Johnson though, it's too bad that gaffe pummeled him to the ground
@@biot7175 It already does. You can't steal or murder, you're not allowed to use certain mind-altering substances but others are fine, and in many states, you cannot practice your religion if someone wants to force you to create art for them. How is forcing a florist, baker, or videographer to produce art for a same-sex marriage NOT promoting social values?
I'm a moderate who's registered Republican. I'm not a big fan of either the two big political parties. I have more in common with Libertarians than the other 2 except a few major things (which made me not become a Libertarian). Libertarian Party should rise and offer us new people who propose new ideas that wasn't possible before that both parties can't offer.
@@MilwaukeeF40C no, once you gain a libertarian perspective you start seeing reality and how shit really works and refuse to be part of "the machine." Of course there are a bunch of crazies that think they aren't part of any state or don't have to cooperate with people... But that isn't what the libertarian party is about. It's about liberty and maintaining your property and freedom to do as you wish. The state is an entity that can not control the individual and is the equivalent of a mafia trying to threaten and force protection money out of you.
Me at the dinner table at the family during the holidays. Everyone in my family does not agree on how much the government should be involved in our lives. This has me on the least government and the rest going from there.
Oh man the Prince Andrew cracks were priceless! It must be easier for Libertarians to get on the ballot where I live. I regularly see them (and vote for them)
The way to solve this is with ranked choice voting. And ideally: With proportional representation, i.e. when a party gets 20% of the vote they get 20% of the seats. And then also parliamentary democracy, so rather than a strong president, the executive is elected by a majority of parliament, which can also replace him at any time In Europe, where we have both, the libertarians (called "liberals" here) have their own parties and are at about 10%-30% everywhere
Parliamentary republicanism, with a unitary system, leaves behind only the legislative and judicial branches as separate and counterbalanced. You get rid of the check provided by states and the executive. I also don't know I agree that liberals in the UK are all that similar to libertarians here. I mean, they're better than labour, but everyone's better than labour, and from what I've seen looking at the Liberal Democrats is that they have strong social democratic tendencies.
run as write in then campaign ike you are on the ballot. Indiana you can run on any party primary or without a primary with signatures. Also you can write in
Man this hurts so bad! Our last election we had no choices that were worth it. The incumbents both just voted to spend all the monies on all the stupid things, and I am grumpy!
The Libertarian Party spends most of their limited resources just to maintain or gain ballot access in most states. The requirements for minor parties are most of the time more difficult than Democrats or Republicans. It is often overlooked how much of an accomplishment it is for the LP to have had 50 state ballot access in most presidential elections.
@@nsarwark Sadly, funny as in strange that people hate Congress, yet nearly all are re-elected (pretend to hate it, then always vote for more of the same), and since these two non-constitutionally defined factions gerrymander and otherwise keep out any competition of ideas.
In multi party systems they just form coalitions anyway. The two party system is two coalitions. I think there could be some benefits to a multi-party system, but it wouldn't be that different.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 that's a good point. I think having a strong constitution that's actually followed matters more than anything. With a strong constitution and rights that can't be infringed as a result it doesn't matter who is in charge. There's only one way for things to go.
I’m a registered Republican waiting to vote for the next Ron Paul lol. Last person kind of worthy of a vote was Rand Paul in the 2016 primaries. I didn’t vote for Trump nor will I in 2020. Anyways I wish everyone a Merry Christmas 🎄
By not voting for Trump you're essentially increasing a Democrat's chances to become president. Do you really want a Democratic president? I mean, there are quite a few things about Trump to criticize, but he's still far better than any Democratic counterpart.
GayusSchwulius I understand, but I at least I can sleep at night knowing I didn’t vote for the guy who confiscates bumpstocks, continues the drug war and re-signed the the Patriot Act. It’s a matter of principle, something the world sorely lacks. Over 100 years of compromise is what lead to where we are now, and I don’t want to be a part of it.
@@ponraul1221 Your principles will get us nowhere. In an ideal world, I'd agree with you, but if I have to choose between measles and black plague, I rather choose measles.
GayusSchwulius Maybe a Black Death is what we need, to trigger a big response. By continuing to vote for compromising, mediocre candidates, you are only prolonging the inevitable; a re-watering of the tree of liberty. Choosing measles for over 100 years is why we’re here today. I’m not gonna participate in this charade. Don’t blame me for someone else’s vote. I’m not gonna vote for a little bit of tyranny over lots of tyranny.
That said, I've never seen a libertarian candidate going door to door trying to get support in my district. I think they really need to pick out some smaller state like New Hampshire or Vermont and throw everything they've got into turning one of those states yellow. Then whichever one they didn't turn yellow, they hit hard on the next election. Libertarians have this masochism fetish where they get 2% of the Presidential vote and call it a huge victory for Libertarians. Meanwhile what actually happens is a Democrat races toward a cliff or a Republican heads toward the same cliff, but at the legal speed limit.
There's absolutely no philosophical difference between a Democrat a liberal and a libertarian! All of them are idiots! The only thing that you should be is a constitutional conservative.
@@faithreturns333 - Actually, there's no philosophical difference between a constitutional conservative and a libertarian. Conservatives and Libertarians are constitution. Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-personal freedoms. Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-private property. Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-leaving people alone if they aren't bothering anyone else. The only differences between a Conservative and a Libertarian from a philosophical level is "how many aircraft carriers do we need?" and "what constitutes leaving people alone if they aren't bothering anyone else?" Sure, there are a lot of libertarians who are pro drugs, pro abortion and anti death penalty. But there's a philosophical basis behind those positions. They aren't simply vote getting positions as the Democrats treat them. Conservatives and Libertarians can have intellectual discussions with each other because there's an actual sense of intellect. It's hard to do that with a Leftist because they have a fundamental lack of intellect. You put 50 Conservatives and 50 Libertarians in a room, leave them there for a week or so and you'll get yourself a mini-country club. Put 100 leftists in a room and after two or three hours you've got people complaining about using gendered language, a day after that you've got the rape allegations and a week after that you've got a war torn South American style banana republic. I'm more of a traditional conservative, but I consider Libertarians to be intellectual cousins to conservatives. Whereas Leftists are a different gene pool entirely.
EnhanceRaptor Conservatives are pretty different in things like criminalizing drugs and prostitution. Which are very anti-private property and anti-liberty. They don’t have an ultimate immovable principle like libertarians do. Conservatives are much more compromising and based on dynamic emotions, be it traditions or personal moral values. Libertarians simply look at something in its relation to the NAP, regardless of their own personal preferences. Like for example, I’m pro drug *legalization,* but not pro drug *use.* I’m don’t like the action of prostitution, but I still support its legalization. Hell, I don’t even smoke or drink. But that is my choice and others are free to make their own. I’m also for the punishment of death, but I don’t trust the state to reliably convict only guilty people. But anyways I do agree that libertarians and conservatives do get along better than libertarians would with “liberals” (more accurately leftist social democrats). As a libertarian, I do consider most conservatives as allies because I agree with them on many topics like gun ownership, abortion, welfare state (to an extent), and political correctness. If we were to disagree though, I explain and they often say: “huh, I never thought about it that way.”
@@ponraul1221 - You'd find most Conservatives would adopt your stance on drug legalization if we could end Leftism. The issue that I, as a Conservative, have with drug legalization is the lack of personal accountability that Leftists have. I'm okay with a person destroying their life with drugs, I just don't want to have to clean up the mess afterwards. Leftists get in the way by wanting to spend money on cleaning up other peoples' mistakes. Also, your last paragraph is the embodiment of the intellectual discussion with conservatives and libertarians.
Faith returns A “constitutional conservative” is a libertarian. Just look at Ron Paul. It’s impossible to fully support the Constitution without being a libertarian because both are founded upon the principles of life, liberty, and property. Just look at Ron Paul’s Presidential campaigns, he was the only constitutionalist there and the other Republicans called him a nut-job.
I've offered this advice to libertarians before: if they want to enter politics, they should join one of the two major parties, while retaining their libertarian ideals. It really doesn't matter which party. It's the "L" that makes them unelectable, not their ideas.
After spending more than 2 hours on the web searching without satifaction, I have come back here to ask: wtf is “L”? What is this secret American code?
@Jack Respeliers we don’t have that in my country, since there are roughly 30 political parties, and one letter would not suffice. So for instance, the labour party is “pvda” and the libertarian party is LP (which would be very confusing, since there was another one that had LP a decade ago) if they had ballot access, but they don’t) and the VVD(people’s party for freedom and democracy), CDA [christian democratic appèl), or D66 (Stands for Democrats 66, as it was founded in 1966) we almost never say full names out loud, since everyone knows what pvda or D66 are, but the libs don’t have ballot access, so for those types of small parties we have to, but who cares anyway right?
@@nathanroos4143 Ah. I see you are Dutch. The election is happening soon. I would say that a PR (proportional representation) system is always going to be very different than the USA's FPTP (first-past-the-post) and winner-takes-all system of voting. Libertarians are frequently on all the ballots because they have got organized but the Greens are often blocked (I think 34 states plus Washington DC in the last election)
@@quebeccityoliver4742 yes, I am dutch. I am a labour party member, so I really don’t mind that the LP (already getting tired of typing the whole thing out) will not get any seats. As long as RUTTE 4 doesn’t happen, and Wilders 1 doesnt either I’m relieved, but it looks like the VVD will grow still. Despite the scandals, they are expected to do very well.
Libertarians should have a bigger voice. I support you. But if you cannot get your libertarian vote then do the next best thing. Make a democra-terian party that bring some more level headed democrats to the libertarian side and a republi-tarian party to bring some republicans too. Once those parties exist you can bridge the gap with libertarian and BOOM from 2 parties we get 5 with a great % of people wanting less government.
If you're a libertarian in 2020, just run as a Republican. The Republican's domestic policy has been completely conquered by libertarians, and other than the President, you'll have so little influence over foreign policy it doesn't matter much anyway. The Libertarian party is dying because the Republicans are a stronger vehicle for right leaning libertarians and a large contingent of left leaning libertarians would unironically ask if the child consents.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 CGP Gray did some excellent videos where he substituted animals for parties to hand wave the partisan crap away. You'd have proportional representation as in "you vote for the people in your district" as they'd be the ones that were supposedly there to specifically represent you. Having some rando from New York having sway over your reps in your district would be garbage. ua-cam.com/video/QT0I-sdoSXU/v-deo.html
I was disappointed when I saw that I was the 4th view. The fact that mine was only the second like was a heart-wrenching defeat. But I'll be damned if I'm not the first to post a comment.
The song is mostly about Andrew Cuomo raising ballot thresholds in NYS to kill third parties. If you want to support LPNY's legal challenge, I urge you to donate. lpny.org/donate/
If an actual libertarian, like Dave Smith or someone from the Mises Caucus, was running, I'd be inclined to push for inclusion. But if it's _Libertarianism+_ , i.e. Reason's left libertarianism/the LP today with a smattering of Social Justice, no thanks. Seeking to minimize state intervention and protect freedom of assn means that libertarianism cannot, by definition, use govt to remedy racism, sexism, etc., nor can libertarianism necessarily take as a default that abortion must be a protected right (it's competing interests of mother & child).
@@biot7175 And if you truly believed in individual freedoms, you wouldn't believe that. At least the OP recognizes that there can be competing individual rights but rarely do society's rights override the individuals' rights. Certainly not for something as fundamental as choosing to reproduce* - I certainly do not trust others to tell me which "certain kinds of people" should be allowed or forbidden. *Obviously the eugenics movement showed this was not the case in the past - though forced birthing in Romania was also an utter disaster.
Just sit back enjoy the false binary political structure. Will Stillspendit is the perfect GOP name, although I do vote for them depending on the guy I want to disappoint me. Even the L guys tend to turn around and disappoint too so what can you do. 🤷
I bursted out laughing when it came to removing the "L" in "It is Lawful" and changing it to "It is Awful". I never thought of that happening. Man oh man, I love Remy.
That's what most laws and regulations are, awful!
Reminds me of the anti littering signs in Texas that say "littering is unlawful" with the unl much smaller.
But wouldn’t it be awfu?
Thank you, Remy -- and Reason -- for revealing how restrictive ballot access is in most states. Especially Illinois. Libertarians are forced to collect 3 to 5 times the threshold granted to Democrats and Republicans for Congressional, state legislative and statewide (statewide requires 25,000 minimum, often having to file 50,000+). Lesser political races where the Libertarian Party doesn't have major party status (currently only Kankakee and McLean counties have major party designations) require between 30 and 150 times the threshold set for the duopoly.
As political director for the Libertarian Party of Illinois, I am working to changing that in 2020 by actively being in Springfield to support pending legislation to significantly reduce the threshold to equal that of the Democratic and Republican parties (e.g. 500-1,500 for state house, 1,500-3,000 for state senate, 5,000 for statewide, etc.) Next would be to slash the major party threshold from 5% to the Midwestern standard of 2%, which is the standard in pretty much all of our neighboring states.
I live in the heart of Trump country (Arkansas) but ever since I started voting in 96, we have always had 3rd parties on our ballots, voted for Nader in 00 and 04, Johnson in both 12 and 16, and have seen people I've never even heard of on the ballot... one of the few decent things about voting here
Remy proving yet again why so many consider him to be a national treasure. Thank you, Remy!!! Cheers!
"Frank incensed" is the most ingenious line I've heard in quite a while.
Danny Sullivan Music since" dropping more Jacksons than Conrad Murray " 😂🤣😂🤣🤗
Sorry, could you explain that to me? I'm not a native speaker and I unfortunately don't understand that line.
GayusSchwulius
Sure, no problem.
According to the Bible, Frankincense was one of the three gifts brought by the three “magi/kings/wise men” to Mary, Joseph, and Jesus after Jesus was born. The other two gifts were Gold and Myrrh. Gold is Money, of course, while Myrrh and Frankincense are pain relievers.
In the song, “Frank incensed” is a play on Frankincense. When the man goes to the booth to vote, he is angry with his choices, so he, Frank (name), is “incensed” (another word for angry).
Hope this helped!
@@justinlokere Aaaahh, ok, that makes sense. Thanks!
Merry Christmas to All but Prince Andrew.
And Epstein didn't hang himself.
Lol! I know, no wonder Fergie divorced him.
@@12vscience Nope Trump had him killed to keep him from telling on him!
This is Remy’s most important song. Ballot Access restrictions are the first hurdle to cross that can make a healthy democratic republics or a limited oligarchy. And in many places, there is no third party, no escape route.
Ballet access is useless without some kind of preferential/ranked voting.
@@ManuelBTC21 Ranked and Preferential Voting systems are useless if ballot access is restricted to two candidates.
@@thehillshaveaviators I don't think so. Even if you only get on one ballot, ranked voting will slow a candidate to win. Without it, even the smallest election is subject to tactical voting and that favours the two largest parties.
Manuel Barkhau I agree with you man! RCV is loads better than the current voting system we have, and I’d be in favor of it wholeheartedly. I’m just saying Ballot Access restrictions are an equally detrimental problem to third parties and minor candidates
@@thehillshaveaviators I know and I disagree. Universal ballot access is useless if nobody is going to vote for you because of tactical voting. RCV on the other hand is useful even if ballot access is restricted in Los of places.
I live in Indiana. "L" is a valid option here. Any party that gets at least 2% of the vote in the secretary of state race is listable. So, I always vote libertarian for that office.
There are only a few states like that. The LP spends so much of it's limited resources on ballot access that there's not enough left to recruit and train better candidates.
@Sam Thuttamoosh Fuck off.
I remember once I had read that people should have to write in the name of the candidate they are voting for. Helps deal with those that vote only for a D, R, or even the rare L beside their name.
At least that's better than "non-partisan". I've voted once. I had a hard time trying to find out what all the "non-partisan" candidates stood for. I still didn't have too much of a clue.
Remy, you are a gifted lyricist. When will you write a musical?
omg a libertarian musical is what I've dreamed of
1:02 The balanced budget proposal appears to be composed of trading cards.
Kudos for the brilliant frankincense pun.
Can you explain?
@@jeremyscungio16 at about 1:16 "to be frank, incensed" sounds quite like "to be frankincensed"
jeremy scungio When he goes to the ballot booth, he, Frank, is incensed, or angry, with his choices.
@@justinlokere It works as you've explained, but alternatively, the expression "to be frank" means something like "to be bluntly honest", so he is honestly angry.
Seriously, how creepy is Prince Andrew? LMAO
Remy really doesn’t like that guy, like every video has a joke about him.
How has this not been demonetized by the Royal Family yet?
"to be frank, incensed"
Legendary
And that is why I "throw away my vote" on third party candidates...Ballot Access!
That and the major party I used to vote for is all talk no action.
We need to replace our outdated voting method. If we start using STAR Voting, we won't have to ever throw away our vote again!
This may be the only reason I'm subscribed to this channel anymore
Yeah, Stossel left, now Remy's the main reason I stay.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 stossel left?
And that's why us Minnesota libertarians are suing the state! Look up our BAIB lawsuit!
George Washington wanted two things! Don't get involved in other countries' conflicts, and don't have a 2-party system.
Washington warned against political parties, period. Not just a two-party system.
Remy is awesome! I don't even really know who he is but all his songs are great! 👍😂
Well if we "Ls" could get a good person to run, we may actually stand a chance.
I really liked Gary Johnson though, it's too bad that gaffe pummeled him to the ground
What happened to Rand Paul? I assume he’s too old now
You "Ls" would do better to infiltrate the Republicans and take them farther right. What do you think happened to the Democrats?
As a Libertarian-leaning conservative, I must tell you that the LP rejection of social conservatism dooms it to third-party status.
@@freethebirds3578 You mean not willing to enact paternalism? That's a pretty fucking fundamental thing.
@@biot7175 It already does. You can't steal or murder, you're not allowed to use certain mind-altering substances but others are fine, and in many states, you cannot practice your religion if someone wants to force you to create art for them. How is forcing a florist, baker, or videographer to produce art for a same-sex marriage NOT promoting social values?
I'm a moderate who's registered Republican. I'm not a big fan of either the two big political parties. I have more in common with Libertarians than the other 2 except a few major things (which made me not become a Libertarian). Libertarian Party should rise and offer us new people who propose new ideas that wasn't possible before that both parties can't offer.
might i ask what are the major issues you have with the libertarian party might i ask?
@JC הֵילֵל Good luck with that not paying taxes part.
@JC הֵילֵל and they say the Libertarian Party attracts crazies!
@@owlblocksdavid4955 That would be wrong. Once you gain a libertarian perspective you start to go crazy.
@@MilwaukeeF40C no, once you gain a libertarian perspective you start seeing reality and how shit really works and refuse to be part of "the machine." Of course there are a bunch of crazies that think they aren't part of any state or don't have to cooperate with people... But that isn't what the libertarian party is about. It's about liberty and maintaining your property and freedom to do as you wish.
The state is an entity that can not control the individual and is the equivalent of a mafia trying to threaten and force protection money out of you.
Good ol' Remy for Christmas. Love it!
Yet another holiday classic from Remy
No L, it's really awful not lawful
Shouldn't it be "awfu" instead? No L, rather than one L?
Me at the dinner table at the family during the holidays. Everyone in my family does not agree on how much the government should be involved in our lives. This has me on the least government and the rest going from there.
Oh man the Prince Andrew cracks were priceless! It must be easier for Libertarians to get on the ballot where I live. I regularly see them (and vote for them)
Balanced Budget!? We can't have that!
Well done...BRAVO !!#WinningGold !!!!
This is BRILLIANT and OH SO TRUE ... No "L" .... Luv It.
I had to re-watch this video just so I could get it. This is brilliant.
We did our part in 17 and got the libertarian permanently on the ballots
Come on it's been about 7 weeks now we MUST be due for another Remy😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
Never knew Remy was from McLean, Va where I'm from. Keep representing Va Remy!
The way to solve this is with ranked choice voting.
And ideally: With proportional representation, i.e. when a party gets 20% of the vote they get 20% of the seats.
And then also parliamentary democracy, so rather than a strong president, the executive is elected by a majority of parliament, which can also replace him at any time
In Europe, where we have both, the libertarians (called "liberals" here) have their own parties and are at about 10%-30% everywhere
And the UK/EU shows a strong demand for libertarian thought?
@@homewall744 Not that much (the Lib Dems got like 15%, but under a PR system that's enough to be kingmaker, since usually nobody has a 50% majority
The way to solve this is to stop pretending popularity contests justify the murder and extortion called the State.
Parliamentary republicanism, with a unitary system, leaves behind only the legislative and judicial branches as separate and counterbalanced. You get rid of the check provided by states and the executive.
I also don't know I agree that liberals in the UK are all that similar to libertarians here. I mean, they're better than labour, but everyone's better than labour, and from what I've seen looking at the Liberal Democrats is that they have strong social democratic tendencies.
@@nustada Before democracy, states also existed, nustada. Only then they treated their citizens much worse
Another priceless treasure, thank you Remy
Vote NO ONE 2020!
I identify with this so strongly. I am politically homeless in this country.
Clever
run as write in then campaign ike you are on the ballot. Indiana you can run on any party primary or without a primary with signatures. Also you can write in
Glad tidings to all for unto us is given a fresh satirical gem from the Amazing Remy!
Wow these get so much better
Man this hurts so bad! Our last election we had no choices that were worth it. The incumbents both just voted to spend all the monies on all the stupid things, and I am grumpy!
Loved the application for candidacy in the Commonwealth of Virginia: Come. See. Do Blackface. Too funny.
Is that serious? I thought it was just the major debates, third parties can't get on the ballot in some places?
DeDraconis it’s pretty hard in some places, with much more difficult requirements than for Democratic and Republican candidates.
The Libertarian Party spends most of their limited resources just to maintain or gain ballot access in most states. The requirements for minor parties are most of the time more difficult than Democrats or Republicans. It is often overlooked how much of an accomplishment it is for the LP to have had 50 state ballot access in most presidential elections.
Three words.Ranked choice voting.
You had me early on but sold it with the sign.
Remy is the only reason im subbed to his channel
Noel = No “L” lol
Love me some Remy! keep it up!
Brings a tear to my eye
The two party system is a joke.
But not a funny one.
@@nsarwark Sadly, funny as in strange that people hate Congress, yet nearly all are re-elected (pretend to hate it, then always vote for more of the same), and since these two non-constitutionally defined factions gerrymander and otherwise keep out any competition of ideas.
Gotta get some ranked choice voting
In multi party systems they just form coalitions anyway. The two party system is two coalitions. I think there could be some benefits to a multi-party system, but it wouldn't be that different.
@@owlblocksdavid4955 that's a good point. I think having a strong constitution that's actually followed matters more than anything. With a strong constitution and rights that can't be infringed as a result it doesn't matter who is in charge. There's only one way for things to go.
Possibly the best one yet 😂😂
It's like you wrote this about Arizona.
And Tennessee. And Illinois. And any state that requires more than 10,000 signatures to get on the ballot.
Love it!!!
I’m a registered Republican waiting to vote for the next Ron Paul lol. Last person kind of worthy of a vote was Rand Paul in the 2016 primaries. I didn’t vote for Trump nor will I in 2020. Anyways I wish everyone a Merry Christmas 🎄
I for one welcome our new Democrat overlords
By not voting for Trump you're essentially increasing a Democrat's chances to become president. Do you really want a Democratic president? I mean, there are quite a few things about Trump to criticize, but he's still far better than any Democratic counterpart.
GayusSchwulius I understand, but I at least I can sleep at night knowing I didn’t vote for the guy who confiscates bumpstocks, continues the drug war and re-signed the the Patriot Act. It’s a matter of principle, something the world sorely lacks. Over 100 years of compromise is what lead to where we are now, and I don’t want to be a part of it.
@@ponraul1221 Your principles will get us nowhere. In an ideal world, I'd agree with you, but if I have to choose between measles and black plague, I rather choose measles.
GayusSchwulius Maybe a Black Death is what we need, to trigger a big response. By continuing to vote for compromising, mediocre candidates, you are only prolonging the inevitable; a re-watering of the tree of liberty. Choosing measles for over 100 years is why we’re here today. I’m not gonna participate in this charade. Don’t blame me for someone else’s vote. I’m not gonna vote for a little bit of tyranny over lots of tyranny.
Nice your back
YES! REMY!
love it, another banger
No "L"!!! That's awesome
Commonwealth of Virginia: come, see, do blackface (TM) anybody else catch that little gem in the candidacy application form?
Kudos
Why u habe a new channel? Didnu forget your password from goremy?
He's partnered with Reason for quite some time.
Yes, D Frank is incensed! Well done.
Remy made me a Libertarian
Remy for president 2020!
Merry Christmas
EPSTEIN DIDN'T KILL HIMSELF
At 0:28: "Commonwealth of Virginia. Come. See. Do Blackface. TM"
Missed opportunity to rhyme "no L" with Epstein didn't kill himself.
My thoughts and prayers Remy
When you buy your wife an exercise bike, you are saying she’s fat. That’s the “hidden message.”
That said, I've never seen a libertarian candidate going door to door trying to get support in my district.
I think they really need to pick out some smaller state like New Hampshire or Vermont and throw everything they've got into turning one of those states yellow. Then whichever one they didn't turn yellow, they hit hard on the next election.
Libertarians have this masochism fetish where they get 2% of the Presidential vote and call it a huge victory for Libertarians. Meanwhile what actually happens is a Democrat races toward a cliff or a Republican heads toward the same cliff, but at the legal speed limit.
There's absolutely no philosophical difference between a Democrat a liberal and a libertarian! All of them are idiots! The only thing that you should be is a constitutional conservative.
@@faithreturns333 - Actually, there's no philosophical difference between a constitutional conservative and a libertarian.
Conservatives and Libertarians are constitution.
Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-personal freedoms.
Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-private property.
Conservatives and Libertarians are pro-leaving people alone if they aren't bothering anyone else.
The only differences between a Conservative and a Libertarian from a philosophical level is "how many aircraft carriers do we need?" and "what constitutes leaving people alone if they aren't bothering anyone else?"
Sure, there are a lot of libertarians who are pro drugs, pro abortion and anti death penalty. But there's a philosophical basis behind those positions. They aren't simply vote getting positions as the Democrats treat them. Conservatives and Libertarians can have intellectual discussions with each other because there's an actual sense of intellect. It's hard to do that with a Leftist because they have a fundamental lack of intellect.
You put 50 Conservatives and 50 Libertarians in a room, leave them there for a week or so and you'll get yourself a mini-country club. Put 100 leftists in a room and after two or three hours you've got people complaining about using gendered language, a day after that you've got the rape allegations and a week after that you've got a war torn South American style banana republic.
I'm more of a traditional conservative, but I consider Libertarians to be intellectual cousins to conservatives. Whereas Leftists are a different gene pool entirely.
EnhanceRaptor Conservatives are pretty different in things like criminalizing drugs and prostitution. Which are very anti-private property and anti-liberty. They don’t have an ultimate immovable principle like libertarians do. Conservatives are much more compromising and based on dynamic emotions, be it traditions or personal moral values. Libertarians simply look at something in its relation to the NAP, regardless of their own personal preferences. Like for example, I’m pro drug *legalization,* but not pro drug *use.* I’m don’t like the action of prostitution, but I still support its legalization. Hell, I don’t even smoke or drink. But that is my choice and others are free to make their own. I’m also for the punishment of death, but I don’t trust the state to reliably convict only guilty people.
But anyways I do agree that libertarians and conservatives do get along better than libertarians would with “liberals” (more accurately leftist social democrats). As a libertarian, I do consider most conservatives as allies because I agree with them on many topics like gun ownership, abortion, welfare state (to an extent), and political correctness. If we were to disagree though, I explain and they often say: “huh, I never thought about it that way.”
@@ponraul1221 - You'd find most Conservatives would adopt your stance on drug legalization if we could end Leftism. The issue that I, as a Conservative, have with drug legalization is the lack of personal accountability that Leftists have. I'm okay with a person destroying their life with drugs, I just don't want to have to clean up the mess afterwards. Leftists get in the way by wanting to spend money on cleaning up other peoples' mistakes.
Also, your last paragraph is the embodiment of the intellectual discussion with conservatives and libertarians.
Faith returns A “constitutional conservative” is a libertarian. Just look at Ron Paul. It’s impossible to fully support the Constitution without being a libertarian because both are founded upon the principles of life, liberty, and property. Just look at Ron Paul’s Presidential campaigns, he was the only constitutionalist there and the other Republicans called him a nut-job.
Well this is why we need to change our political system
What wife wouldn't want an exercise bike for Christmas?!?
Exercise bikes are gay. Get a real bike.
Never thought that the libertarian animal would be a porcupine
No L, that is great, and sad.
I wish he actually would run for president.
I've offered this advice to libertarians before: if they want to enter politics, they should join one of the two major parties, while retaining their libertarian ideals. It really doesn't matter which party. It's the "L" that makes them unelectable, not their ideas.
Unfortunately people don't seem to realize that primaries exist, and you're allowed to vote for a candidate you support WITHIN a party.
After spending more than 2 hours on the web searching without satifaction, I have come back here to ask: wtf is “L”? What is this secret American code?
@Jack Respeliers ah. The L’s do have full ballot access now, right? Since the last election?
@Jack Respeliers (thought so, since the Libs had full access in the general election when Jorgensen ran, which was a first because of that)
@Jack Respeliers we don’t have that in my country, since there are roughly 30 political parties, and one letter would not suffice. So for instance, the labour party is “pvda” and the libertarian party is LP (which would be very confusing, since there was another one that had LP a decade ago) if they had ballot access, but they don’t) and the VVD(people’s party for freedom and democracy), CDA [christian democratic appèl), or D66 (Stands for Democrats 66, as it was founded in 1966) we almost never say full names out loud, since everyone knows what pvda or D66 are, but the libs don’t have ballot access, so for those types of small parties we have to, but who cares anyway right?
@@nathanroos4143 Ah. I see you are Dutch. The election is happening soon. I would say that a PR (proportional representation) system is always going to be very different than the USA's FPTP (first-past-the-post) and winner-takes-all system of voting.
Libertarians are frequently on all the ballots because they have got organized but the Greens are often blocked (I think 34 states plus Washington DC in the last election)
@@quebeccityoliver4742 yes, I am dutch. I am a labour party member, so I really don’t mind that the LP (already getting tired of typing the whole thing out) will not get any seats. As long as RUTTE 4 doesn’t happen, and Wilders 1 doesnt either I’m relieved, but it looks like the VVD will grow still. Despite the scandals, they are expected to do very well.
Epic.
Wait the mascot for the libertarians is a porcupine/hedgehog?
Missed an opportunity to make it a snake
Take the L
Pretty funny; wish that I'd said all this.
Libertarians should have a bigger voice. I support you. But if you cannot get your libertarian vote then do the next best thing. Make a democra-terian party that bring some more level headed democrats to the libertarian side and a republi-tarian party to bring some republicans too. Once those parties exist you can bridge the gap with libertarian and BOOM from 2 parties we get 5 with a great % of people wanting less government.
Now do Debates!
he already has.
Hes just a damn good singer
#yanggang2020
Surprise ending.
If you're a libertarian in 2020, just run as a Republican. The Republican's domestic policy has been completely conquered by libertarians, and other than the President, you'll have so little influence over foreign policy it doesn't matter much anyway.
The Libertarian party is dying because the Republicans are a stronger vehicle for right leaning libertarians and a large contingent of left leaning libertarians would unironically ask if the child consents.
Republicans are socialists driving the speed limit.
*cries*
Oh
We need a new electoral system. ranked voting and proportional representation would give a third party the ability to compete and not be shut out.
Proportional representation at what level? Are you talking about making the House represent the country rather than constituencies?
@@owlblocksdavid4955
CGP Gray did some excellent videos where he substituted animals for parties to hand wave the partisan crap away.
You'd have proportional representation as in "you vote for the people in your district" as they'd be the ones that were supposedly there to specifically represent you. Having some rando from New York having sway over your reps in your district would be garbage.
ua-cam.com/video/QT0I-sdoSXU/v-deo.html
I was disappointed when I saw that I was the 4th view. The fact that mine was only the second like was a heart-wrenching defeat. But I'll be damned if I'm not the first to post a comment.
About that...
Congrats on 2nd comment
@@AtlasReburdened Well, I seem to have made a fool of myself. Imma head out.
@@trajectoryunown Don't sweat it man, it happens.
Idiot
The song is mostly about Andrew Cuomo raising ballot thresholds in NYS to kill third parties. If you want to support LPNY's legal challenge, I urge you to donate. lpny.org/donate/
Based
Stossel for president remy for vice president
No L in NH :'(
If an actual libertarian, like Dave Smith or someone from the Mises Caucus, was running, I'd be inclined to push for inclusion. But if it's _Libertarianism+_ , i.e. Reason's left libertarianism/the LP today with a smattering of Social Justice, no thanks. Seeking to minimize state intervention and protect freedom of assn means that libertarianism cannot, by definition, use govt to remedy racism, sexism, etc., nor can libertarianism necessarily take as a default that abortion must be a protected right (it's competing interests of mother & child).
@@biot7175 Fair enough.
@@biot7175 And if you truly believed in individual freedoms, you wouldn't believe that. At least the OP recognizes that there can be competing individual rights but rarely do society's rights override the individuals' rights. Certainly not for something as fundamental as choosing to reproduce* - I certainly do not trust others to tell me which "certain kinds of people" should be allowed or forbidden.
*Obviously the eugenics movement showed this was not the case in the past - though forced birthing in Romania was also an utter disaster.
Two party system doesn’t work
Since I bought my wife... Man hes really becoming anarcho capitalist! ...an exercise bike. Oh l see
🤣🤣🎅🎅👍
I think it would be awfu
Just sit back enjoy the false binary political structure. Will Stillspendit is the perfect GOP name, although I do vote for them depending on the guy I want to disappoint me. Even the L guys tend to turn around and disappoint too so what can you do. 🤷