Where the Libertarians Are (Hint: the East, as Always, Sucks)

Montana and New Hampshire lead the pack, with West Virginia and Mississippi bringing up the rear


Photo by Black Bloke/PorcFest

Jason Sorens of Free State Project fame has once again crunched the numbers to figure out where libertarians are clustered around the United States. It's an effort he previously made in 2010 and he repeats the exercise using updated figures from the 2012 election. With minor adjustments, he once again finds that libertarians are largely concentrated in the West, with New Hampshire an isolated outpost of freedom lovers in a sea of eastern suckage. 

Sorens writes:

To see which states have the most libertarians, I use six measures: Libertarian Party presidential vote share in 2008 and 2012, Ron Paul contributions as a share of personal income in 2007-8, Ron Paul and Gary Johnson contributions as a share of income in 2011-12, and "adjusted" Ron Paul primary vote share in 2008 and 2012. Ron Paul vote shares are adjusted for primary vs. caucus, calendar, number of other candidates, and the like (for details see this post). Hawaii and Wyoming are excluded because they did not collect vote shares in the 2008 presidential primary. D.C. is included.

I'm not at all surprised to see states east of the Mississippi, whether blue or red, score so poorly. Frankly, it corresponds closely with the fever swamp of smug authoritarianism I note in conversations with and Facebook feeds from eastern friends and relations. Popular culture fears of the zombie apocalypse clearly reflect our implicit knowledge of what's going to happen when easterners one day shake their heads, look around, and simultaneously try to flee one another in a mad rush across the Mississippi River.

It's going to be ugly.

The states are ranked from most to least libertarian below (although omitted, Wyoming seemed to trend above average, Sorens notes in the comments). Montana and New Mexico are both overstated in the rankings, Sorens says, because Ron Paul was on the 2008 Montana general election ballot as the presidential candidate of the Constitution Party, while former governor Gary Johnson drew outsized support from his home state when he ran.

Note that these rankings are based on concentrations of libertarian supporters, not local laws and policies. And don't get hung up on the numbers, unless you're a statistician.

Montana 5.504036
New Hampshire 4.163368
Alaska 3.586032
New Mexico 3.319092
Idaho 2.842685
Nevada 2.477748
Texas 1.632528
Washington 1.568113
Oregon 1.180586
Arizona 1.0411
North Dakota 0.7316829
Indiana 0.6056806
California 0.5187439
Vermont 0.4731389
Utah 0.2056809
Colorado 0.1532149
Kansas 0.107657
South Dakota 0.0328709
Maine -0.0850015
Pennsylvania -0.2063729
Iowa -0.3226413
Georgia -0.3296589
Virginia -0.3893113
Maryland -0.4288172
Rhode Island -0.470931
Tennessee -0.4882021
Missouri -0.4912609
Arkansas -0.5384682
Louisiana -0.5897537
Nebraska -0.6350928
Minnesota -0.7662109
Michigan -0.7671053
North Carolina -0.811959
South Carolina -0.8196676
Illinois -0.9103957
Ohio -0.9599612
Delaware -1.057948
Florida -1.072601
District of Columbia -1.091851
New York -1.225912
Kentucky -1.330388
Massachusetts -1.342607
Wisconsin -1.410286
New Jersey -1.431843
Connecticut -1.606663
Alabama -1.863769
Oklahoma -1.93511
West Virginia -2.244921
Mississippi -2.519249

Read the whole thing here.

NEXT: Matt Mayer on Dismantling the Department of Homeland Security

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.

  1. I’m not counted by this study.

    1. At least you’re not adding to the Suckage, then.

  2. Woo! I’m part of New York’s -1.22 libertarians!

    1. The negative numbers are sending me into an existential spiral.

  3. Concentration of libertarians? So you’re telling me more populous states dilute a minority subset more than less populous states? Where did I put that shocked face?

    1. Why would the percentage of a minority be less in a populous state?

      1. Looking for Libertarians, a new feature film from Universal Pictures.

      2. 1 libertarian is a higher percentage of 10 people than in a group of 100 people. So if I move to Wyoming I would increase the concentration of libertarians more than if I moved to California.

  4. I think the superior method would be to track woodchipper purchases by zip code.

    1. I wonder if that joke is ever gonna get old!

      1. Never. We’re going to be making woodchipper jokes in the comments for years to come. Well, at least until President Hillary has us all arrested.

        1. Maybe we could combine it with another meme…”stick her P**** right in the woodchipper”…get Johnny football to say it in a press conference next season and watch libertarianism flourish.

          Michael hinish is a political messaging expert…dude seriously would this might work?

      2. As soon as I finisih pouring you a Heinie

  5. It doesn’t surprise me that Florida has negative libertarians.

    Love the weather, hate living in the state.

    1. Yeah. The negative concentration in Florida should really show you this study is crap. FL is well represented in this forum.

      1. There are 3 of you, and 2 are just sugarfree socks.

          1. The black knee highs with holes in them. The ones he wears with his Chuck Taylors.

      2. Huh?

        0 is “average concentration”. According to this study, FL has a below average concentration of (self-identified) libertarians. Regardless, FL’s an enormous state so it likely has way more libertarians than, say, Montana or New Hampshire.

      3. In all the states I’ve lived in so far, Florida has the most libertarians. This is purely anecdotal, but the difference seems significant. I think maybe the influx of new blood from various places keeps any one political philosophy from completely dominating, which leaves room for more offbeat viewpoints.

        Florida probably is a little less statist than most states, partially because of the fiscal discipline demanded of old people. In a number of ways, state law here is less intrusive than in other states. Of course, this is all relative, and the state is still way too statist for my tastes.

        1. Now wait a minute. I thought FL was the retirement Mecca for all those former NY residents?

          You can’t get much less libertarian than any NYer’s I’ve ever known, despite what this poll indicates.

      4. I wouldn’t say well represented…

        1. Oh, posh. You have Episiarch, after all. Check and mate.

    2. Meh, strong gun culture and the highest number of CCW holders makes up for a lot.

      1. No income tax, constitutionally require to have a balanced budget. Plus now you can get gay married.

        *crosses fingers*

        Come on legal weed.

        1. You think old Grady Judd will ever allow that? He’s one of my people you foolish mammal. That’s why you never see him feeding.

          1. Hmm. He does seem to get 80 percent of his energy from the sun.

            1. We all get 100% of our energy from the sun actually.

        2. And guns. Bring your gun to work day is a real thing in Florida. Well, except if you work for the Mouse, anyway.

          1. I sadly work in the hospital. One of the few places you can’t carry. But you can carry in the state house so there is that.

            1. That can turn on a dime.


    3. They didn’t make it look like America’s wang for nothing.

      1. Johnson?

        1. What does America need that for, dude?

          1. Does it hand to the Right or the Left? I can’t tell from the map.

            1. Hang. Edit, pleeeeeze…. Although the hand thing kinda works too.

    4. If you think Florida is bad, try CA, my lifelong state of residence. ๐Ÿ™

  6. I have to say that I’m VERY disappointed in The South here. I think most southerners really are libertarian but they’re just culturally opposed. I’ve noticed a lot of southerners vote this-way-or-that ’cause my daddy and his daddy before him did,’ which is really a shame.

    1. Southerners are pretty religious, too. So they’re used to having a Lord tell them what to do.

      1. Yeah, I know. Sadly, I think it’s more of “candidate X” said “God” 15 times in his speech, therefore I’m voting for him, than anything actually biblical. I realize, for example, the whole gay marriage debate, but I think a lot of southerners would be fine with government just not being involved in marriage if they were ever exposed to the thought. But they never are and most people anywhere don’t care to think too much.

        1. Meh, I don’t know. Perhaps it’s because the same people that say “God” a lot in their speeches are also the same ones that say the government needs to stop pissing so much money away and stifling businesses.

          If an fiscally conservative atheist ran against a Christian progressive in Alabama on a platform of bringing a few more automotive plants to his district, I’d wager he would fare well.*

          *Unless it was a gerrymandered urban district then the opposite would apply.

          1. Gerrymandering is only a problem when it’s done to Republicans favor. I didn’t see Dems up in arms back when they swept through the state legislatures some years ago. But once Republicans did, it was time to end gerrymandering once and for all! *rabble rabble rabble*

      2. this is my brother and sister in law; they vote for the ‘God’ guy; but when I discuss issues with them, they are libertarians, but they don’t realize it

    2. You don’t know the South then. This is authoritarian country.

      I live in Dogdick, Ga and we still have dry areas near hear.

      1. I’ve noticed a pretty strong anti-government streak, though many are pro-church authoritarian.

        1. Yeah, I think the last thing I’d say of Southerners in general is that we are authoritarians.

          1. What do you know about the South? You live in Florida.

            1. Oh he got you good. There are no southern people in Florida. What a fresh and original joke.

              1. Tampa is not the South.

                Neither is Miami.

                1. Anything 50 miles inland and north of Ocala is deep south.

                2. Lynyrd Skynyrd is from Florida

                  (Drops Mic)

                  1. The Outlaws were from Tampa.

              2. It’s also a totally wrong viewpoint. Florida is chock-full of “Southerners.” There are certainly many thousands in the Bay area alone.

                For me personally, I’m from a traditional “Deep South” state originally, and my parents are both from Tennessee. So I’m Southern enough.

          2. I disagree…grew up in Alabama, lived in Mass for 15 years and now live in Houston….people here in Texas accept authoritarianism with open arms…the public schools look like prisons and you have to get written notes from dr to keep you5 year old home from school when you think she looks and feels sick…..or face courts/prison!!!…also can’t pick your kids up school or have them walk home based purely on what works for your family on a given day…have to fill out forms and beg bueracrats to change their plans….you think that shows a strong anti-government streak?

            1. That is no doubt all true. I however seriously doubt that the people responsible for such rules are typical conservative Texans. Public schools, even in deep red states, are run by Progressive fascists.

            2. Yeah, but Houston, much like Dallas and Austin, is run by fucktarded leftists.

            3. There is no substantial enclave of libertarians in the U.S. Statism and authoritarianism permeate our culture.

      2. There are dry areas in Texas too.

        It’s like the prohibition on pot in cities like NEW York or Chicago except the police here don’t use the “odor” as a pretext to stop and search anybody they feel like searching at any time.

    3. No you haven’t. But I’ve sure noticed a lot of libertarians vote the way they do because “I hate my dad.”

      1. Thanks for the clever rebuttal!

        1. There was nothing to rebut. First your point was wrong Southerners in generally are far less socially and historically atomized so libertarianism seems alien to them. Second of all no one talks about their daddy. Watching True Detective is not a good way to figure out the south.

          1. I’m unclear on how less “atomization” necessarily leads to statist thinking. My comment about that was anecdotal – and true. I moved down here a few years ago and have noticed that tendency. If that hasn’t been your experience, fine.

            Also, True Detective is an awesome show. I hope the new season is on-par with the first one.

            1. Libertarianism comes with a whole lot of secular and frankly urban baggage that is alien to the south. The small government-states rights orientation of Southern politics rarely overlaps with urban-cosmopolitanism. If the thought-leaders of libertarianism were based in Jacksoville or Charlotte maybe it’d be different. How often does the von Mises Institute get mentioned on here compared what’s showing on HBO this week.

              1. LvMI is at Auburn, though.

                This is the sort of thing that rankles me. What is a free market institution doing at a gubmint collitch? Is it a “take the gospel to the sinners” approach?

                Kevin R

      2. And you post here because you hate yourself.

        1. No I post here because it’s so easy to get you guys riled up.

          1. Of all the lame ass reasons to post here, that’s got to be the lamest.

    4. ” ’cause my daddy and his daddy before him did,’ which is really a shame.”

      More so when that tradition involves Confederate flags.

    5. “I think most southerners really are libertarian”

      For themselves, perhaps.

      For others?

      Not so much.

  7. I see they got all 14 of us in CA.

  8. Where the Libertarians Are

    Hint: NOT inside the Beltway.

    Ba rum-bum! Pshh!

  9. The West was were people went to get away from the officious big government nannies in the East.

    Plus having much of your state’s land owned by the feds does make you cranky.

    1. Not in California!

      The libertarian thinkers in our famous “outside the box thinking”, disruption creating, job generating Silicone Valley inhabitants, want to host fund raising parties for the beltway elites to ensure they continue their stranglehold on national policies.

  10. Texas 1.632528

    What? Below Nevada, or Idaho? Outrageous! Texas is already Libertarian, except for Austin, Dallas and parts of Houston.

    1. You’ve never been to Texas, then.

        1. Then you don’t know the difference between “libertarian” and “authoritarian conservative.”

  11. I am not so sure Montana and New Hampshire have very libertarian governments to show for it. And whatever you think of Mississippi, it is overall a lot more Libertarian than somewhere like New York or Illinois. Of course to understand that, you have to think that Libertarianism involves economic rights too and not just gay sex and pot.

    1. Which is why percentage of Ron Paul voters/ donations is a terrible way to gauge the libertarianism of a state. I’d venture that half of Paul voters were single issue pro-pot or anti-“empire” voters with no interest in libertarianism.

      1. Those are two important and doable issues though.

        Taxes are never going down by any substantial amount. The two parties will quibble about a point or two forever.

      2. That is probably a pretty good guess. Also, most of them only participated in the process or even voted when they worked for Ron Paul. If they are not voting or pushing the major parties towards Libertarianism at the state level, their views won’t have any effect.

    2. Are you suggesting the Drug War isn’t a massive violation of economic rights?

      1. No. I am saying it isn’t the only massive violation of economic rights. Moreover, if you plan to end it is to turn it into some massively regulated and taxed industry, you really don’t believe in economic rights. You just want to do drugs.

        There are a lot of reasons to support the end of the drug war that don’t require you to believe in economic rights. In fact, a good number of people who support legalizing pot have utter contempt for economic rights in every other context. I don’t see how you can call those people “Libertarian” in any real sense.

        1. Moreover, if you plan to end it is to turn it into some massively regulated and taxed industry, you really don’t believe in economic rights. You just want to do drugs.

          A massively regulated and taxed industry is still preferable to putting people in prison. You don’t have to want to do drugs to support that.

          1. Sure it is. But if that is your goal, you don’t believe in economic rights. Would I take that over what we have? Probably. But it would be the best of a set of bad options. For a lot of people that is the good option. Those people don’t even really support ending the drug war. They just want to reframe the drug war and make it about enforcing a regulatory scheme. And to the extent they do support ending the drug war, they don’t really support economic rights.

            1. But if that is your goal, you don’t believe in economic rights.

              Very few people do due to so many economic myths and fallacies that are accepted as fact.

          2. I can’t breathe.

        2. Gary Johnson’s explicit platform was “legalize and regulate” marijuana, although he openly admitted he wanted to end the war on drugs in its entirety. He said it was simply more palatable to more people to do the regulation thing rather than just open the flood gates. It depends on whether or not you think incrementalism has any merit.

          1. sure. But that is not what I am talking about. Saying you will take regulation over what we have now doesn’t mean you support the regulation. It means you are willing to live with a less than ideal situation. Some people support the regulation and view that as an ideal. So even those people support ending the drug war in one sense, that doesn’t mean they mean they support or care about economic rights.

            Progs generally fall into this camp. They are all for legalizing pot, just so long as the various Top men get to tax it and control it and make sure none of us do anything the Progs wouldn’t want us to do like make a filthy profit or something.

            1. Some people support the regulation and view that as an ideal.

              Well, yeah. Government is The People, and we can’t allow businesses to operate without asking permission from The People before offering goods and services to unwitting customers who are so stupid that they don’t know what’s good for them.

            2. Yeah. The ‘vote Libertarian because Legal Weed’ thing pisses me off, too. When someone leads with that (instead of end the entire war on drugs or some other issue), it’s usually a bad sign.

            3. Besides, it’s not a crime if the government does it!

          2. He said it was simply more palatable to more people to do the regulation thing rather than just open the flood gates. It depends on whether or not you think incrementalism has any merit.

            I think it’s the ONLY way to get anything done. The goal should be to lead people towards liberty (I believe this is the Paul’s intention). Baby steps. You can’t change shit with government. You need to convince the people that their best interests lie with liberty and as that happens the politicians will follow out of necessity.

            ALSO, acal move has the potential to cause a backlash. If we made all drugs legal and unregulated tomorrow, there would likely be a spike in negative drug related activities that the “warriors” could point to as a reason for continued criminalization. Slow and steady wins.

            1. You are right that is the only way to get anything done. That is just saying that the only way to get anything done ending the drug war is to work with people who don’t believe in economic rights.

              1. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

          3. Incrementalism works for the progressives because they always want more government. Conversely, once something is a law or even regulation, it is almost impossible to do away with it.

            Once we have economic regulation of marijuana and the state is drawing in taxes, what I worry is you’ll see it treated a lot like cigarettes and other sin taxes. Over time, they’ll just keep using it as a revenue stream until they create new black markets again.

          4. How is it opening the flood gates?

            How many years of human history were there no “drug laws” and yet, we managed to survive. Social norms were the influence on socially acceptable drug use prior to the laws. That worked better than any drug war to keep drug use to a level that was not disruptive to an entire society.

        3. No. I am saying it isn’t the only massive violation of economic rights. Moreover, if you plan to end it is to turn it into some massively regulated and taxed industry, you really don’t believe in economic rights. You just want to do drugs.

          You can apply that to every single industry. There’s no industry today that isn’t massively regulated. The choice is either outlawed or regulated. Therefore by your logic there could be no economic freedom ever.

          .. which I actually partially agree with, since that exists only in the blackmarket in our environment.

        4. “if you plan to end it is to turn it into some massively regulated and taxed industry, you really don’t believe in economic rights. You just want to do drugs.”

          Or, want to increase tax collection.

          1. If you were given the choice of keeping the income tax, and the current drug laws, or repealing it, and having “sin taxes” – aka excise taxes – on tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other drugs, would that be “more libertarian” than what we have now?

            Excise taxes have an advantage over general income, sales or property taxes, in that the taxpayer can minimize his tax exposure by consuming less nor none of the taxed product. This puts a limit on government activity that the Founders knew quite well, and is one reason why they instituted boycotts of goods that had tariffs folded into their prices.

            You can minimize your income tax by earning less income, but that’s not an outcome helpful to anybody. Reducing your general consumption to limit sales (or VAT) tax paid might be a good thing, if you are a chronic over-spender. Buying a smaller home or renting might also make sense, if you are spending too much on housing.

            Tax avoidance by smuggling or under-reporting income would be a violation of various pieces of legislation, so please don’t draw the obvious conclusions. IANAL, etc.

            The modern problem, of course, is that these new revenue sources, like taxing pot, are not being contemplated as ways to reduce existing taxes. If they actually traded off like that, I’d easily put it in the “more libertarian” column.

            Kevin R

    3. you have to think that Libertarianism involves economic rights too and not just gay sex and pot.

      To be sure, there are not a whole lot of Mexicans up here in New England either. But we do have cocktails.

      1. You can smoke pot in Vermont but you now can’t buy a fucking twinkie because it has the evil GMO ingredients. I fail to see how you are overall anymore free there than in a state where you can’t legally smoke pot but can buy a fucking twinkie.

        If you are only free to do things that ruling party thinks are cool, you are not free no matter how much you love those cool things and hate the uncool things.

        1. There are closer substitutes for Twinkies than there is for pot.

        2. Well, you won’t get arrested for bringing a twinkie across state lines.

          On a side note Vermont has some of the best gun laws in the country, surpassing both Texas and the so-called live free or die New Hampshire.

    4. Can’t speak for New Hampshire, but Montana’s problem is the few populated areas determine the government for the entire state.

      1. Can’t speak for New Hampshire, but Montana’s America’s problem is the few populated areas determine the government for the entire State.


      2. I have friends in populated Montana and, that’s their contention as well.

  12. Frankly, it corresponds closely with the fever swamp of smug authoritarianism I note in conversations with and Facebook feeds from eastern friends and relations.

    What about the smug belief that you should force people to make their own decisions? Where do you get off making that decision for everyone? That kind of arrogance is concentrated right here, in the pages of Reason magazine.

  13. not local laws and policies.

    No kidding.
    Montana is a weird place. I freely admit the likelihood of a huge sampling error, but I have never heard the sort of explicitly anti-business, anti-capitalist, anti-private-ownership rhetoric I have heard here, anywhere else.
    There are a lot of people who think they are still fighting the Good Fight against the depredations of the Copper Kings and their Pinkerton goons. I said something abut this to somebody one time, and she replied, “Oh, they’re out there. They’re called the Koch Brothers.” I was too dumbfounded to reply. I gazed at her in stunned disbelief, and staggered away.

    1. Sounds like you’re too close to Butte. I tried it there for a while. Didn’t take long to realize it was a dead end. Come farther west. Just be sure to steer clear of prog-holes like Misery-oula and Cali-spell.

    2. Where are you in Montana? I know one problem there and in Wyoming is the influx of people from places like California, fucking up your peace. I really liked it out there when I went on vacation.

      1. Mostly Californians, Oregonians and Washingtonians around here who are fleeing the hells they created back home. Of course the first thing they do here is get to work making OUR home more like THEIR old homes.

    3. Montana is a weird place. I freely admit the likelihood of a huge sampling error, but I have never heard the sort of explicitly anti-business, anti-capitalist, anti-private-ownership rhetoric I have heard here, anywhere else.

      An analysis like the one discussed here has that problem. It’s mostly a measure of radicalism, regardless of kind. In NYC, the borough with consistently the highest LP vote is Manhattan, although it’s also the most authoritarian, because Manhattan’s where the radicals & intellectuals reside.


    1. your just jealous because your region is indefensible.

      1. That doesn’t stop him from liking the Browns.

        1. I hate the Browns more than you can imagine, thank you very much.

      2. Fuck you. Ohio is very nice. For instance, there are hayrides.

        1. I hate to break this to you, but we have hayrides down here. Where is your god now, Warty?

          1. Ohio is no place for gods. The lack of sun and the sulfur dioxide kill them or something.

            Also, here’s a hot chick with a banjo.

            1. Ohio puts the godless wasteland in godless wasteland.

              1. Speaking of…Orlando. The place smells of sulfur.

                1. Well, sure, every state has Ohio analogues. We have Orlando. Fortunately, I don’t live there.

                  1. There are zero ways in which Orlando is an analogue of anything in Ohio…except maybe down in the southeast of the state, where West Virginians live and it also smells of sulfur.

                    1. No, that’s true, Orlando has some fun things to do.

                    2. Listen to bitter housewives brag about how much dick they’re getting from their husband’s co-workers? Eat at Red Lobster? Sit in traffic on Alafaya? Park on Colonial?

                      Go to UCF?

                    3. Yeah, I don’t think we want to talk about the number of Ohioans who move down here, let alone visit nonstop. There’s a reason many astronauts come from Ohio, after all.

                      Of course, I don’t like Orlando. It’s like a blood enemy of Tampa.

        2. What has a hole on both ends and is mounded up in the middle?

          1. I’ve got a rhyme that comes in a riddle
            What’s round on the ends and high in the middle?

            1. That’s what I was trying to write. Just couldn’t find the misplaced brain cells where the information used to be.

      3. Who in their right mind would want to invade Ohio?

        I thought that we were forced to let them into the Union after losing to the Canucks in 1812.

        1. Ohio will hopefully be removed in some future galactic biopsy

    2. *staps on alligator hide armor*

      LET’S DO THIS!!!

      1. *buckles on frozen beaver pelts and picks up hockey stick*

        BRING IT!

        1. (Eats bagel)

          Knock yourselves out

        2. *dons buck skin and grabs ho(e)
          Us Illinis can wrassle too!

  15. Oh Virginia forever in the middle of the pack.

  16. West Virginia…bringing up the rear


  17. Considering how sparsely populated this state of Montana is there’s no problem finding either libertarians or non-political liberty lovers here.

    I do however wish more libertarians and non-political liberty lovers would choose this as their new home before the in flooding of assorted liberty hating prog-maggots from around the nation completely destroys the really great thing we had going here. Once it’s gone the chances of ever getting it back are extremely slim.

    1. The Progs have taken over and completely ruined so many nice places in this country. It would be nice if there were one place they were not allowed to fuck up.

      1. They move into an area, get a bunch of idiotic policies put into place that raise the cost of living beyond what they want to pay, move on to the next area, and immediately start pushing for the same policies. They’re a disease.

        1. It was just bad luck our old place had a high cost of living and was impossible to live in. This place will have better luck. So why not make it nicer by putting in some nice policies and helping out the dumb hillbillies who currently run it?

          This is how your typical Prog economic refugee actually thinks.

          1. Paving the road to hell with good intentions.

            1. I’m not so sure about the good intentions.

        2. Let’s play a game of “Is It Prog or Virus?”

          [Thing] can’t survive without moving to a place, adapting the new environment to suit [thing’s] needs and sucking the life out of it while making more of [thing’s] own kind. Then when the host — I mean place — is ruined, [things] go do it again, elsewhere.

          1. You forgot the ‘replicate like rabbits’ step……

        3. This happens to small towns in prog centric places like CA too!

          I have older friends that are third generation residents of a Gold Rush era town. Starting in the 1980s and ’90s, SF Bay Area residents “discovered” the “quaint” little town and began buying up and building “cabins”. Soon, many retired there. The downtown became a tourist trap, including a now famous winery. The newcomers said they were fleeing the rat race that is the Bay Area. Only, they soon started demanding all of the same government provided services they had back home and started voting for more taxes and more services and more government.

          They overran the place and the old timers are quietly dieing off, watching in horror as these proglodytes destroy all of the quaint ambiance that attracted them to the area in the first place.

      2. A lot of people live here because they like being left alone; free to make their own decisions. I’m one of those people. Now, I have two new neighbors from out of state. One living on each side of my property. They’ve reached a “consensus” that this place is “seriously under regulated.”

        1. You have a lot of self control to keep from going and burning their homes down. What a bunch of fucking assholes.

        2. I live in a town that has no police force. We contract out to the State Troopers and Sheriff to answer calls. As a result the town has no petty ordinances, since the troopers and sheriffs will only enforce state law. Thankfully, most of the residents like it that way. Occasionally ones that don’t will make a fuss at a town meeting before being resoundingly mocked and ridiculed by residents and selectmen alike.

          1. But, but, but! What do you do about that old car your neighbor is keeping in his driveway? What about the trash bins that aren’t placed out of sight behind fences?

            Oh the horror!

            (And you think I’m exaggerating, don’t you? These are real, enforced ordinances where I live.)

        3. It’s miraculous they haven’t died yet from the lack of regulations. It could happen any minute now! Their incandescent bulbs may burst and cause the house to go up in flames, or they might drown in their non-low-flow toilet.

    2. Schweitzer had a libertarian streak in him.

      Not saying he could pass the LP Purity Test by any means though. It’s a bitch.

      1. NO, he doesn’t. He is simply a Montana Democrat, which are more conservative than most Republicans in blue states.

        1. I would take him over Fatso or Peter King for sure.

      2. Well, he might get 8%.

  18. “Let the wild rumpus start!”

  19. Where my bitches libertarian womenz at?

  20. Hah! Why would I spend my money on libertarian presidential candidates instead of the one’s that win?

    Even in a dicey election, better to put money back into monocles, salt mines, and orphans.

  21. I only came here to find out exactly where Tundra’s house is in regards to me.

    Shouldn’t we get some sort of special award in Minnesoda for having two of us with a mile or two of each other? That has to be some sort of libertarian critical mass.

    1. I only came here to find out exactly where Tundra’s house is in regards to me.

      Only federal prosecutors get to know that, Jimbo.

      1. Huh. Good thing we live in a quiet suburb. I can just follow the sounds of a wood chipper to his house.

    2. I live in a town with about 6K people in it, and when the last election results came out, two people voted for Gary’s johnson! Two! There’s another one in town!

  22. Counting team members on a team of non-team players.

    1. Counting smaller-government-and-freer-markets proponents by political donations as a proportion of income.

      Not that I have a better metric but I would be interested in seeing the numbers detailing the popularity of deep dish pizza by asking New Yorkers how many they’ve bought in the past few years.

  23. Every lover of liberty needs to immediately move to Montana. Large land area coupled with low population density make Montana one of the last places left where tipping the scales in favor of liberty is realistically possible. Come on, just do it!

    1. Every lover of liberty needs to immediately move to Montana. Large land area coupled with low population density

      I like liberty & crowds. So basically I’m screwed.

    2. We’re on our way back! Leaving Massholistan for good. Never shoulda left.

  24. So KY, having put the most libertarian senator since Goldwater, and a very libertarian leaning congressman (Massie) is somewhere in the bottom 10 of libertarian states?

    I’ll be the first to admit that there are definitely some authoritarians here, but when your state puts in to federal office about half of the people we can even call libertarianish, it seems like you ought to be given a bit more libertarian street cred.

    1. Because they don’t love gay marriage and open borders that is why. The fact that they elected Paul and embrace all kinds of other Libertarian things doesn’t matter. They don’t embrace open borders and gay marriage, so they are worse than California.

      And you guys wonder why I say for some Libertarianism means Mexicans, Pot and ass sex. The joke only works because it is true.

      1. Yes, to truly embrace libertariasm you should support at least pot and ass sex. Mexicans are debatable. But to support none of those things probably means you’re a social conservative, not a libertarian.

        1. Sure you are. But if you don’t embrace economic freedom, you are a Progressive not a Libertarian. Yet, states that embrace pot and open borders and are appalling in every other way are called more Libertarian than states that don’t but are much for free economically. Why is that?

          The reason is that for a lot of people Libertarianism means pot, ass sex and the culture war over all else. Economic issues are nice and all but really are negotiable.

        2. Mexicans are debatable.””

          Chinga tu madre, carbon!!

    2. I think they let you know that they’re using a definition of ‘libertarian’ that would curl your bones if you saw it when Vermont, bastion of American Communism, is higher on the list than the state that actually put libertarians in positions where the can do more than be subpoenaed for internet ranting.

  25. Now, I have two new neighbors from out of state. One living on each side of my property. They’ve reached a “consensus” that this place is “seriously under regulated.”

    This sounds strangely familiar. I’m a monster, because I have no sympathy for people who never bothered to read the covenants or take the time to consider the implications of living on a private unpaved road. Those people, suffering from a massive case of buyers’ remorse, are now scheming to get the county to take over the roads.
    Fucking dummies. MOVE TO NEW JERSEY.

    1. How fucking hard it that? Every so often you pool together to have a load of gravel dumped down the road and someone pulls their tractor out to grade it. In the winter, you plow your driveway, a section of the common road, and your neighbor’s driveway whose out of town on a business trip. Sheesh..

  26. Oh great, another regionalism post. I can’t wait to dive in to the hate.

    1. Oh thank god SOMEONE finally pointed this out. I was disappointed no one screamed it yet.

  27. So a lack of diversity corresponds to more libertarians.

    1. Ah, diversity.

      The government, at all levels embraced diversity for diversity’s sake back in the 1970’s with “affirmative action”.

      How’s that working out for us all?

      Have you been to any governmental offices lately? Say, the DMV. Or even the state capitol.

      I think I’m going to my favorite, local Chinese restaurant tonight and demanding that they embrace diversity as measured by race/ethnic stats from the local community and immediately rearrange their workforce and amend their hiring policies to reflect the makeup of the local community.

      Yeah, that ought to go over well. And my pot stickers will no longer be the delicacies I so enjoy. ๐Ÿ™‚

      But hey, they’ll be “diverse”.

  28. This will be the down fall to the greatest country on the planet. too many leaches think they are entitled to other peoples earnings. ?????

    1. Ants and grasshoppers I tell you. I’ve been saying this for years.

      The grasshoppers are winning!

  29. I think New Mexico is skewed due to GJ. and Colorado at 16? WTF? I think using Presidential vote is misleading as many small Ls vote team in the least important election.

  30. I live in Illinois…*hangs head in shame while the slave driver whips me
    slave driver: “get back to work! you have people dependent on your work ethic slave!”

  31. Can we explore libertarians in major cities? Why do I have to move to a ranch in Montana to be free? I like all the cool things that happen when tens of thousands of people decide to live in the same square mile – interesting food, booze, arts, mingling of different cultures and languages, all my gay friends, practical bike transportation. I just need to get the city government out of my wallet.

    1. “Why do I have to move to a ranch in Montana to be free?”

      Well, if you don’t understand this, you need to get out more.

      Libertarianism was pretty much encompassed by “rugged individualism” which is closely related to the American west.

      “Grasshopper, when you can snatch the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.” – Master Po.

      1. Buddy, I’ve been all over. I don’t see an inherent contradiction between libertarian principles and urban society, I just see lots of urbanites crapping on them.

        1. I agree with you. I would love to see a focus on which cities are the most libertarian. I imagine we’d still see a similar correlation between libertarianism and the western states, but we might see a greater southern presence as well. I like Montana, but I also like being able to go to a more metropolitan area with lots of businesses and entertainment. I’ve lived in New York and New Hampshire. Eager to find a place has the best of both and little of the worst. So I’m probably moving to Colorado.

  32. Interesting (although apparent for decades), but Soren’s measures are only of self-conscious & radical/extreme libertarians. What about people who are just moderately, but significantly, more libertarian than the avg.? What about “libertarian” as an adj. rather than a noun?

  33. NM is only in 4th place. Not a bad move for me, leaving the over taxed, tyrannical state of misery called CT.

    1. yeah whats up with CT?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.