Can the Libertarian Party Get 1 Percent of the Vote?

L.P. nominee Gary Johnson fights to reach single digits.

(Page 2 of 2)

While hoping for a 5 percent breakthrough, most Libertarians I talked to see Ed Clark’s 1 percent mark as the more realistic goal for Gary Johnson. “Certainly if we pass any of our past presidential vote totals, that will be growth,” says Carla Howell, executive director of the Libertarian National Committee. “Anything above that is gravy.”

What it would mean to miss this target is heavily disputed. “If he gets under 1 percent, if he doesn’t beat Ed Clark, that would be disappointing,” says John Vaught Le­Beaume, an adviser to the Johnson campaign (who previously worked for the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit organization that publishes this magazine). 

Longtime Libertarian Party activist Bill Redpath, by contrast, sees a glass half full. “Getting more than 1.06 percent of the vote…if we set a record, that would be a serious accomplishment, particularly this year,” Redpath says. “It’s a difficult thing. It would certainly be an accomplishment for the Johnson campaign to top Clark’s vote percentage.”

Some party activists draw the over/under line of 2012 disappointment closer to Harry Browne’s 0.50 percent. “If we’re around half a percent, then I would probably consider taking a long, hard look at what we did,” David Blau, chair of the Massachusetts Libertarian Party, told me in September “If we get numbers that are that low, I would be kind of surprised given the campaign effort this cycle.”

Wes Benedict, former executive director of the Libertarian National Committee, says the goal in 2012 is looking “for improvement” over Bob Barr’s 523,000 votes. “I’d like to see us go significantly higher than that,” Benedict told me in late August “I think Johnson will get more than 523,000. I would love to see a million, but that’s going be tough.…Under 600,000 would be disappointing.”

Jillian Mack, finance director of the Ohio L.P., is optimistic that Johnson will clear that bar. “I think he’s going to do really well,” Mack told me in September. “If he doesn’t get among the top three presidential vote getters in the L.P.’s history, I would be shocked—not just disappointed, but shocked.…It wouldn’t change my affiliation. I am a Libertarian Party member; the other two parties are corrupt, and I don’t want anything to do with them. [But] it reinforces the idea that we need to try new tactics, new avenues, new methods of communication, new ideas, and nothing is off the table in terms of new concepts to reach out to people out there and let them know they have an alternative.”

The Long Game

The record-holding 1980 Libertarian Party campaign happened at a time when the L.P. was at or near the center of the freedom movement, a gathering place and rallying cause for libertarians of many stripes. That is no longer the case, says Cato Institute Executive Vice President David Boaz, who served as the Clark campaign’s research director. “Today think tanks are at the center of the libertarian movement, and I don’t think that’s ideal,” Boaz told me in September. “I want a movement that is bigger than think tanks.”

The Libertarian Party suffered a series of fractures after the 1980 campaign, with many of the earlier activists (including Boaz, Rothbard, and Koch) leaving the scrum of party building to concentrate on other pursuits. Boaz, who calls the 1980 election “the most exciting period I’ve ever experienced,” likes Gary Johnson, but he’s not hopeful that the L.P. will break through in this election, or ever. 

“It’s difficult to take an ideological party and move it beyond a certain level,” he says. “That’s what in 1980 we thought we were going to break out of. We were going to make an ideological party a major party, or at least a challenger, and it just turned out to be more difficult than we expected. When you get a reputation as a perennial minor party, it is difficult to attract enough people—talented people—and enough politically ambitious people to move beyond the minor-party world.”

Could Johnson be the one to break that cycle? “I don’t know,” Boaz says. “Certainly you would think it would be easier to run against Obama and Romney than it was to run against the non-offensive Carter and the libertarian-sounding Reagan. Maybe [Johnson] will get more votes than Ed Clark did, but I don’t feel confident about that.”

Johnson’s emphasis on staying the course through the next election cycle was a major selling point to activists and party officials who feel burned by the Barr/Root ticket. “When Gary first called the LNC [Libertarian National Committee] members in December, basically asking for our support if he was going to run for president, I was like, ‘Yeah, Gary, I already know who you are; I just got two questions for you,’ ” said LNC board member Brett Pojunis of Las Vegas. “  ‘If you don’t win in 2012 will you run again in 2016?’ He said ‘Yes, absolutely.’ I said ‘OK, great. If you don’t win in 2012, between 2012 and 2016, will you help me build the party?’ He said yes. So he’s got my undying support.”

Pojunis said “if we get less than 4.9 percent, 5 percent, that will be a bit disappointing, because I think we had every opportunity under the sun to achieve more.” Still, “If Gary keeps his promise—which I believe he will—he’s going to build this infrastructure up. We’re going to have the super PACs going, and a whole different Libertarian organization will be there to support him that we don’t have today.…We’re getting more organized, getting more professional people in the party. We’re working together. We’ve got all the cards stacked in our favor for 2016. If we can’t build the party in the next four years, that’s on us.” 

L.P. Executive Director Howell is also bullish, particularly about the ways politics can reach people that policy wonkery cannot. “I think there’s many ways to advance liberty,” she says. “Most of them are good, and there’s no reason we can’t do them all. The most important one in my book is campaigns, because that’s what expands the movement; that’s what brings awareness to more people, as opposed to some organizations that preach to the choir of people who are already convinced that we need a much smaller government.…I am really looking forward to the years going forward. It’s going to be awesome.”

But as the race drags on, Ed Clark’s outlook for the 2012 cycle has dimmed. By September he was pulling back from his cheerier May assessment. “Romney has taken the edge off the anti-government feeling with all his social conservatism and militaristic foreign policy,” Clark told me. “I am not as optimistic as I once was.” 

If the Libertarian Party can’t seize 1 percent of the vote at a time when dissatisfaction with big government is rampant, why are so many L.P. stalwarts acting so upbeat? Bill Redpath, who has been toiling for the L.P. since 1984, says he is looking at the long game. “The L.P. always has better access and runs more candidates than any other minor party in the United States,” Redpath said. “It’s just like clockwork, time and time again. That is an accomplishment in and of itself.…We are the top minor party in the USA. There’s nothing libertarian about the Democratic Party, and there’s very little libertarian about the Republican Party.” 

The Libertarian Party may be the party of principle, but the real question is whether it can break the stigma of being the party of less than 1 percent.  

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Belgian||


  • Graphite||

    I don't get the magazine, but if the December 2012 issue came out before the election, we could see quite a few "what if *this* happened on Nov. 6?" articles as they filter through to online publication.

    If not, this is a hilarious gaffe.

  • ||

    But those articles are usually marked as being from the particular issue, with a link to the full issue. It's probably been left out by accident.

  • NoVAHockey||

    I'm pretty sure this is a the cover story of the issue that came in before the election.

  • ||

    This is the cover story. It was retarded, putting it in an issue that arrived several days * AFTER * the election.

  • CE||

    Actually, pretty interesting to read, after knowing how it turned out (1.0% and 1 million votes.)

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||


  • AlmightyJB||

    We are the 1% after all.

  • ||

    I am the last one!

  • Almanian.||

    Then Arnold has to kill you now.

  • Pro Libertate||

    There's one reason to have voted for Johnson--we can now go around calling ourselves one percenters.

  • MSimon||

    I in fact did that on my blog after the election.

  • Julio Cesar Samper Uribe||

    Well, it seems OWS is right after all.

    They are the 99%.

  • Loki||

    Can the Libertarian Party Get 1 Percent of the Vote?


  • CE||

    Check the stats -- it just did.

  • ||

    Depends on whether you round up or not.

    Vote totals so far from Wikipedia:

    Gary Johnson 1,216,561 votes 0.98%

  • Almanian.||


  • CE||

    Okay, so here are the hard questions:

    If a qualified and sorta mainstream LP presidential candidate was polling at 6 percent in mid-September, why did he finish at 1.0 percent less than two months later?

    What happened to the Super-PAC money? Ron Paul was effectively out of the Republican race by April, so there was plenty of time to line up support.

    Was Johnson really not on the media's radar, or did they just shut it off because he wasn't someone they could mock easily, and might have hurt Obama?

  • ||

    If a qualified and sorta mainstream LP presidential candidate was polling at 6 percent in mid-September, why did he finish at 1.0 percent less than two months later?

    1) Polling is stated preference -- voting is revealed preference.

    2) "Don't want to waste my vote" syndrome, even in the vast majority of states not remotely in play.

  • Randian||

    People will mouth that they hate the two-party system, so saying 'Johnson' as a poll response may just be code for 'I'm indie and I hate them both'.

    Then those people go out and swear fealty to their TEAM yet again.

  • JeremyR||

    Or maybe they are pragmatic, and think voting for a team that has a chance to win, is better than voting for a team that doesn't.

    It's ludicrous to think that the LIbertarian party isn't just as much a team as the Republican or Democrat, just not on the same scale.

    Otherwise, libertarian Republicans (like Mia Love) wouldn't have lost because Libertarians wouldn't vote for her.

  • XM||

    Nobody outside of the active circle who are emotionally invested in fiscal matters and limited government knows who GJ or his libertarian party. He's invisible to much of the country.

    GJ didn't strike me as terribly exciting candidate, his good policies notwithstanding. He's like a less interesting, white version of Luis Fortuno. And Fortuno got his ass kicked for firing all those government workers.

  • ||

    The election results got me down bad enough that I have been mostly lurking and not commenting around these parts since the election. It is bad enough that captain zero won, but to see the libertarian party barely get 1% of the vote is even more disheartening.

    If only 1% of the population is enthusiastic enough about personal liberty to pull the lever for it, we are truly doomed.

    The lefties I have talked to since the election are motivated purely by envy, emotional hysteria, and a cult like fanaticism. There is no getting through to them. They will agree to most any point I make and agree that some of the more egregious acts of this administration are bad, but a day or two later it is all forgotten and the fanaticism returns.

    Fuck it. I am going to the gun shop and drink coffee. He has a beautiful M-1 Garand on the rack, I might just console myself with a gun purchase.

  • Rights-Minimalist Autocrat||

    The election results got me down bad enough that I have been mostly lurking and not commenting around these parts since the election.

    You should try alcoholism. It still sucks, but you care less.

  • ||

    Heh. You must be new here. I am an expert at that already.

    Working on some crown now that I was recently gifted with.

  • Libertopian||

    A lot of libertarians had super smart reasons why they weren't going to vote for Johnson and how they were purer libertarians for not doing so. A lot of people either 'wrote in' Ron Paul or didn't vote.

  • Brandybuck||

    What Rothbard did not understand, what many libertarians still do not understand, is that the great vast majority of voters do not vote based on ideology. Most small-L (and many Big L) libertarians still voted for Obamney. The LP is a strictly ideological party. The Democrat and Republican parties are both coalition parties.

    An ideological party will never win a major election. That's just the facts. If the LP remains it needs to be content with winning minor local races. If we ever get an LP member in congress it will be because some Republican switched their registration after winning.

    The two realistic strategies for libertarians to take, are to transform the LP into an issues party, or working within one of the two major parties. The LP could become a new coalition party of issues of interest to libertarians. It would cease to be a purity party though, and would have to become the Libertarian Lite Party. If that is anathema to you, then you need to be content with never winning an election.

  • Brandybuck||

    Or you could work within one of the two major parties. You will never turn them into libertarians. The tea parties and occupiers will always get co-opted by the statist thugs. But perhaps, just perhaps, you might just get an occasional reach around as they adopt one of your issues (see, that pesky issues-vs-ideology thing again). Perhaps you can get Democrats to actually believe in marijuana legalization. Perhaps you can get Republicans to actually believe in spending cuts. Perhaps, perhaps. It might be just pollyanna thinking, but I suspect it's a bit more attainable than an LP purist winning the white house.

  • Libertopian||

    It would have helped a lot if Ron Paul would have endorsed Gary Johnson like he should have. It would help if libertarians didn't love infighting and were willing to make trivial concessions for strategic gain. A lot of people refused to vote for Gary because he wasn't Ron Paul. And so we have Obama instead.

  • Kroneborge||

    I voted for Gary Johnson, but honestly I think the freedom movement will have more of an effect through the republican party and people like Rand Paul. I also would have much preferred Gary Johnson actually win a senate seat, I think he will have more effect there.

  • MWD78||

    the real problem in the GOP that no one wants to address is that it was hijacked in the mid-90's by the Religious Right (a small, highly vocal minority within the party at the time) that painted the rest of the party into an absurdist ideological corner that did not reflect their constituency. over the course of the past 25 or so years, that cancer has ruined the party to the point where the Libertarians (the only true Republicans) have had to try and start their own party. personally, i'd think their efforts would be better served in taking the GOP back from the dinosaurs that seem to think the 1950's was the golden age of american culture.

    unfortunately, the Libertarians have (as always after the election) just faded back into the grain silently to be marginalized for another 4 years. then come election time, they wonder why no one takes them seriously, and the GOP is left to run such laughable candidates as McCain or Romney only to get their asses handed to them.

  • MWD78||

    the GOP needs to start representing their constituency, not the misguided agendas of a few loud reactionaries within the party trying to revive an era long-gone. well, at least if they want to remain relevant and have some input beyond pure thorn in the side legislative spite maneuvering. the GOP really needs to remember that as long as they keep their heads in the sand, their asses are right up in the air, and that sends a very mixed message to say the least. it would explain a lot about Bohemian Grove though...but that's beside the point for now.

    its time for the Libertarians to actually show some spine and take the GOP back from the Luddites that took it away from us and cost it all credibility to an entire generation of voters.

  • Wholly Holy Cow||

    Gosh, if only Gary Johnson put down his ego and campaigned with the Republicans to help Romney win in order to defeat Obamacare. But why do any hard meaningful work that will advance liberty?

    So other than assuring that this huge massive entitlement program continues to bankrupt the country, both financially and liberty-wise, yeah, sure, Gary Johnson is a libertarian hero. You people are fucking idiots. And by 'you people,' I mean each and every Johnson voter.

    And to the brain surgeon who wrote that the GOP needs to jettison SoCons. You mean like Ron Paul? Because nothing says tolerance more than a piece of paper from the government announcing the union of Bob and Joe.

  • π-e||

    what the hell are you talking about?

  • dinkster||

    QQ'ing over Romney loss? "Repeal and replace" just didn't do it for me.

  • gaoxiaen||

    How would helping Romney advance liberty? I was never pro-Obama but was always anti-Romney. Team Red needs to re-think its strategy and its future. Obamacare is important to a one-issue voter, but not everyone gets to suck the government teat like medical doctors. I would definitely like to see a free market in medical care and (all) drugs. How many doctors are willing to give up the financial protection of the guys with the guns?

  • JeremyR||

    EPA? We're going to go "green" now. No pipelines, no more coal, they'll likely find a way to kill fracking.

    Guns? Obama was even brazen enough to bring up gun control at the debate.

    Getting the media to notice the drone strikes, indefinite detentions, secret trials, etc? Democrats can do whatever they want in terms of foreign policy, Republicans get called out for it.

  • Kennon||

    Rothbard was quite mistaken on the LP Goals.

    1% was generally expected. The party was not divided in 2006 but taken over by GOP moles. Many state LP's, run by effectively the GOP, continued to sabotage the Johnson campaign though less so in past years after a purge at the last Convention. Johnson's manager clearly had no understanding of the LP and many people felt it showed.

    Based on public surveys, response will top out at over 5% if the LP does everything right and has far more people in office then it has now.

  • mtrueman||

    Want votes? Go out into the market place and buy them. How do you think the Democrats managed to win? The Democrats spent about a billion dollars and received just over 62 million votes. Libertarians spent about 2 million on the campaign and received around 1 million votes.

    If Libertarians want votes, or even to be taken seriously enough to share a podium with the big spenders on debate nights, the path is obvious. Like everything else, it's a matter of money.

  • FucktheNannyState||

    Too bad there are so many idiots in this Country

  • Libertopian||

    A lot of libertarians aren't even willing to vote at all so we're kind of fucked. There are lots of libertarians who actually think that once the welfare moms and military families out there read a little Rothbard they'll all turn anarcho-capitalist and happily reject the state completely. And so there's not even a need to engage in politics and be strategic because stateless utopia is right around the corner.


Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties