http://www.theblaze.com/stories/100-mill...s-in-2012/

Quote:David Boaz has his doubts about Ron Paul supporters voting for Romney in November, telling TheBlaze that it’s likely you’ll see the same pattern from Ron Paul people this year as you did in 2008; when only 38 percent of those who voted for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary voted for John McCain in general.

That percentage, if it held this time, is a loss of 1,299,393 voters for Mittens at a MINIMUM.

Quote:As mentioned earlier, Boaz and Kirby wrote in 2010 that according to 2008-2009 American National Election Studies (ANES) data, only 38 percent of respondents who voted for libertarian-leaning candidate Rep. Ron Paul in the 2008 Republican primary voted for John McCain that following November. Twenty-four percent supported Obama, 33 percent responded “other.“

Following Ron Paul’s retirement announcement earlier this year, Matt Welch said he believes Paul “has been the biggest gateway drug for a lot of people into libertarianism over the last five years,” noting his popularity at college campuses.

“Younger libertarian voters are more likely to sit on their hands or vote Gary Johnson,” Welch told TheBlaze last week. “Older voters for Gary Johnson or the guy who will fire Obama (Romney). ”

Many Romney surrogates and worried Republicans may see some tragic truth in Welch’s frank description of the options for older libertarians; a vote for Johnson, another third party candidate, or no vote at all is another vote not cast for “the guy who will fire Obama.”

Back in 1980, a lot of secular-white-liberals became infatuated with the third-party presidential candidacy of John Anderson, a RINO Congressman from Illinois. (Young liberals would be shocked to know what their elders had to say about Jimmy Carter back when his name was actually on the ballot). Anyway, the slogan for some of those liberals was "Anderson where you can, Carter where you must." What they meant by this was, they preferred to vote for John Anderson, but in states where such a vote might plausibly tip the scales from Carter to Reagan, they would hold their noses and vote for the peanut farmer. Anderson wound up getting about 6-7% of the national vote, mostly in New England, the Pacific Northwest, and leftish college towns like Madison and Boulder.

For voters who feel an affinity for libertarianism, yet also recognize the defeat of Barack Obama as the dominant, proximate goal of this election, a similar dynamic holds as it did for the Anderson voters of a generation ago. In states where the outcome is in some reasonable doubt (generally, a state where both Ds and Rs are paying for presidential-TV ads and/or states where Romney-Obama-Biden-Ryan appear in person), I urge people who care about the solvency, security, and liberty of the American people to vote for Mitt Romney. But in states where those conditions are absent, vote for Gary Johnson.

Johnson where you can, Romney where you must.

(09-20-2012 07:50 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  Back in 1980, a lot of secular-white-liberals became infatuated with the third-party presidential candidacy of John Anderson, a RINO Congressman from Illinois. (Young liberals would be shocked to know what their elders had to say about Jimmy Carter back when his name was actually on the ballot). Anyway, the slogan for some of those liberals was "Anderson where you can, Carter where you must." What they meant by this was, they preferred to vote for John Anderson, but in states where such a vote might plausibly tip the scales from Carter to Reagan, they would hold their noses and vote for the peanut farmer. Anderson wound up getting about 6-7% of the national vote, mostly in New England, the Pacific Northwest, and leftish college towns like Madison and Boulder.

For voters who feel an affinity for libertarianism, yet also recognize the defeat of Barack Obama as the dominant, proximate goal of this election, a similar dynamic holds as it did for the Anderson voters of a generation ago. In states where the outcome is in some reasonable doubt (generally, a state where both Ds and Rs are paying for presidential-TV ads and/or states where Romney-Obama-Biden-Ryan appear in person), I urge people who care about the solvency, security, and liberty of the American people to vote for Mitt Romney. But in states where those conditions are absent, vote for Gary Johnson.

Johnson where you can, Romney where you must.

I can.

States where Romney definitely needs -- and, IMHO, deserves -- votes from Liberty-minded citizens:
Colorado
Florida
Iowa
Nevada
New Hampshire
Ohio
Virginia
Wisconsin

Not "definitely" but arguably:
the 2nd [more rural] congressional district of Maine
Michigan
North Carolina
Pennsylvania

Anywhere else, go with Gary Johnson.