143 Libertarians!


The Libertarian Party has 143 candidates holding public office right now, and the national LP now has what's supposed to be a full list of them on its web site; 112 of them are holding non-partisan offices, 31 partisan ones.

From Madison, Alabama's City Council District 4 to Wisconsin's Eau Claire County Board of Supervisors District 2, let freedom ring!

I've written about the Libertarian Party a fair amount here at Reason Online; see here for a representative bunch of links.

[Hat tip: Scott Lieberman]

NEXT: TSA Withdraws Subpoenas to Journalists

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Maybe one of those blind squirrels will find a nut.

    There’s 143 of them! Someone has to win!

  2. oops, I thought this was talking about 143 winning . . .

    I guess the LP has some credibility because Bob Barr certainly didn’t bring any.

  3. a former girlfriend used to send me pages throughout the day that simply read ‘143’. It’s shorthand for ‘I love you’. Seems fitting.

  4. 112 of them are holding non-partisan offices

    Um doesn’t non-partisan mean no party affiliation? They can be members of a party, they can be endorsed by a party, but they don’t run on the party ticket. There’s no party designation on the ballot for voters to identify. I don’t think they should be counted as Libertarian Party candidates. Or does non-partisan means something else?

    1. If they’re LP members, they still count.

    2. Party affiliation still counts in non-partisan races, because many people still won’t vote for a [fill-in-blank] no matter the position. I know one city councilman who specifically registered independent while filing papers, then re-registered back as Republican the next week. An independent in a neighboring city says he’s really a Republican, but would be impossible to get elected if he were registered as such.

      Running as an L can actually keep you out of the D and R radars.

  5. I’ve written about the Libertarian Party a fair amount here at Reason Online…

    And a book, right? I could have sworn I once saw a link here to a book you wrote about libertarians.

  6. Also, the post finally proves that there are more than 143 libertarians in the United States.

    1. Still, it can’t be many more than 175 total.

    2. A gross of libertarians.

      Yep, that’s about right.

  7. Has the FL LP has made a concerted effort to take over county soil and water boards?

    1. I voted for a few here in Orange County. Obviously, it didn’t help.

  8. That’s nice. But are they libertarians? Given the Barr and Root types lurking around the party, it doesn’t appear that one need be a libertarian to be a Libertarian. After putting both Barr and Root on the LP together they lost me completely. I wouldn’t vote for the LP even if they paid me. Not anymore.

    1. So you’re saying you’re either too lazy or too stupid to look at individual candidates and judge them on their own merits?

    2. Perfect is the enemy of the good.

  9. “The Libertarian Party has 143 candidates holding public office right now. . . .”

    How are they holding offices if they are still only candidates?

    1. You never stop running for office, even after you win.

  10. More importantly, how many of those jobs are the non-essential beureaucratic type Libs speak out against?
    Having a small-gov radical holding down the second-tier municipal re-zoning initiative comptroller sort of misses the point.

    1. Being on the second tier gets you a little closer to the first tier. You get to say you have government experience.

  11. Is government at any level, invented, designed or fashioned for the purpose of providing justice or preventing injustice? For those who look to government as our nation’s highest authority, the dispensing of justice is its highest duty, instead of a nation based on freedom principles, where the people are the highest authority and government’s highest duty is to prevent injustice, usually closest to the people served. There is a major difference between justice given and injustice prevented, just like equality and inequality. Justice and equality inspire admiration, but preventing injustice and encouraging inequality made America the great nation it became. It is easy to decide which is best when comparing America’s prosperity to almost 200 other nations in the world where most starve, are whipped, beaten and murdered by their prosperous elite rulers. Claysamerica.com

  12. I was once offered the chance to be Connecticut’s libertarian candidate for either a senator or congressindividualofeithergender, but turned it down. If anybody here wants to take advantage of the opportunity I squandered, here’s how you do it: attend a political forum where the state LP has a table, walk up to said table and say “I was gonna vote for you guys in the last election, but you didn’t have any candidates on the ballot!” And then the guy will say, as he said to me, “You wanna run?” And when you say “I wouldn’t last five seconds into the vetting process” he’ll say “That’s okay,” and when you point out “You don’t even know my NAME” he’ll respond “that doesn’t matter.”

    1. Jennifer, I think you’ll agree with me when I say many, many men have wanted you to do things and your name didn’t matter to them in the slightest.

      1. Well, sure, but if all you want to do is have sex with somebody, you don’t strictly need to know their name first. But putting somebody at the forefront of a political campaign guaranteed to get at least .000005 percent of the popular vote is quite another matter.

        1. More seriously, think of it from the party’s perspective. You’ve already expressed an interest in the party. You’re an attractive female. You appeal to the average libertarian voter already. What more do they need?

          Besides, look at who runs under the LP banner. “Vetting” is apparently not a word the Party is familiar with.

          1. Also, you’re not blue.

          2. I’ve experienced that as well.

            “Vetting” in the LP is similar to Karen Black breathlessly running back into coach and frantically yelling “Is there anyone here who can fly a plane?”

          3. Well, they do look for members of species that typically do not go to a vet for health care. But that seems to be the extent of the “vetting”.

        2. Well, sure, but if all you want to do is have sex with somebody, you don’t strictly need to know their name first.

          Well, sure, if you’re female. If you’re male, though, and not incredibly good-looking, at least feigning interest in your potential partner’s name seems to be an unwritten yet nonetheless strictly enforced requirement.

  13. Interesting debate at

    including why they’re undercounting if anything.

  14. what do you want to express FETUYUBDG???

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.