Stop the Smearing and Get the Vote Out

by Jonathan Cymberknopf

This 2008 election cycle I have been doing a lot of browsing through the internet looking at various Third Party web sites or so called Independent sites searching for news you normally don’t hear in the mainstream media since I decided to vote for someone other than Obama and McCain.

The crazy thing I noticed which may be a normal occurrence at these web sites, but regardless, found it equally disturbing was that the bloggers who I presume by their comments will all be voting Third Party go to such large extents in smearing each others candidates. I have seen everything from people posting gossip, rumors, and lies to simply denigrating each other for believing in something or someone different or an all together different platform than that of the other. The blogs are filled with conspiracy theories, wild interpretations, and everything is taken personal and everything is highly exaggerated.

I compare it to watching an Obama or McCain attack ad on TV but it is actually much worse as they contain the same elements of distortion and statements or words taken out of content and date.

It really is a turn off and I decided not to visit these sites too often as it almost makes me sick enough to go back and vote for the lesser of two evils. The back and forth between bloggers who may be just kids for all one knows since they behave that way is a clear attempt to convince each other to leave one Third Party candidate for their own Third Party Candidate.

Worse than that, there are people who have nothing constructive or positive to say and their whole purpose is to create chaos or simply be vindictive. What I mean by that is there seems to be disgruntled members of Third Parties who did not get their wish in having their candidate win the nomination of their Party and all they do is spend their time and efforts in doing whatever they can to tear down the actual winner and attempt to create dissention among the supporters. I have even caught a few posts under different names as to create the illusion of masses.

Recently the rhetoric hit an all time high when apparently Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin for President. The opportunists I am describing above came out in full force and the words being tossed around were disappointing. I bring this example up because as I mentioned in the beginning, I decided to vote for someone other than Obama and McCain and chose Bob Barr, The Libertarian Party candidate, as my choice for President.

So it was really interesting for me to study human nature and the dynamics of these posts. To be perfectly clear, the smearing and name calling came from both sides.

My feeling on the issue is good for Chuck Baldwin who is a Pastor and the Presidential Candidate for the Constitution Party. As a Bob Barr supporter, there is nothing wrong in admitting it would have been very nice to receive Ron Paul’s endorsement. This would have generated additional publicity and as we all know access to the news media and publicity is hard to come by for any Third Party candidate as both Senator Obama and McCain go to great lengths to block and monopolize coverage.

However, at the same token, I am not going to change my vote due to one endorsement made by one Republican congressman.

In one of my many past endeavors, I was a Branch Manager for a credit union. Now for those who don’t know, Credit Unions are not-for-profit organizations as opposed to Banks, but they offer the same financial products and services. We would never solicit or go after members of another credit union and ask or pitch them to leave their credit union to join ours and plenty of chances there were; as most credit unions serve as shared facilities which meant you can come to X-credit union and make a deposit for Y-credit union. Our targets for growth were customers from banks who after all represented more than 90% of the market share.

Do you see where I am going with this? Third Party supporters should not go after each other and smear each other at that, but go out and convince the average American who is naive since all they know is what the media tells them and open their minds and bring back the spirit of Individualism that America was founded on, so they can start begin to think for themselves again. It is like the movie “The Matrix” they have to get unplugged from the matrix and realize they are being used and controlled by this Duopoly.

Third Party supporters have more in common than they realize regardless of ideology or philosophy and should band together even if it is in spirit. We should do what we can to write editorials, write to the media, write to our congressmen, our senators, the debate commission, news outlets, and be active in exposing the pervasive corruption and challenging the establishment and showing fellow Americans how Obama and McCain are the ones lacking real solutions to our nation’s problems.

The 700 billion dollar bailout could not serve as better proof. We should be focusing and working fast and furious in placing pressure on opposing this bailout from hell. We have to educate our fellow citizens.

In the words of Ralph Nader “There can be no daily democracy without daily citizenship.” Please join me these final days left until Election Day in doing what we can to open the eyes of our fellow Americans and show them they do in fact have a choice come November 4th. Vote Third Party!

26 Responses to “Stop the Smearing and Get the Vote Out”

  1. Cody Quirk Says:

    This article does need to be published here I do agree.

    Now I wait to see if Libertarians and Barr supporters will adhere to it.

  2. Bill Lussenheide Says:

    I believe that those of us in the third party movement realize that we are a fairly scarce group, even when viewed “en toto”, with perhaps no more than 1% of the electorate being any sort of consistent third party supporter for all the parties combined.

    Thus, an economic and sociological axiom, known as “Scarcity Principle” comes into play.

    Like what is written above, rather than focusing on the 99% of the non-third party electorate, we over focus on the 1% who are, and try to slice and dice this tiny sliver. We believe that only other third party followers are the “entire voting universe” that could possibly swing to our particular third party flavor.

    The scarcity principle states that our demand for a resource increases when it is scarce and even more so when we are in competition for the resource. Whenever you have the chance in persuading people, communicate that there is competition for the opportunity at hand or how other people are desperate in this circumstance to take action. What you are doing is communicating that there is competition and scarcity in the situation. In our case, followers and voters for our third party brand.

    What makes scarcity very interesting to me is that we actually don’t enjoy having the scarce resource more than if it was an abundant resource. The pleasure isn’t gained from getting followers. It is gained from merely just having the resource, again, in this case voters and followers that were once in the fold of the other third parties. Knowing we have it provides a sense of pride and security. It is not really a reality , but merely an illusion.

    It is based on envy, and the old “Ha Ha, I got something that you wanted, and you cant have it”.

    I believe that the situation in the California AIP, (pulling the ballot line from the CP) was motivated by these very principles. Again, the life forces at work are Competition, Pride, Envy and Control based on the illusion that your resource is scarce, valuable, unique and desirable.

    Unplugging from the third party matrix makes one realize the thought found in the Good Book,—”The fields are ripe for harvest, but the workers are few”. There is really no good reason for third parties to feel that they are in some kind of competition with each other over the same little piece of bread.

  3. Observer Says:


    Thanks for your article. It expresses my sentiments exactly and has been one of the very few worthwhile articles placed on this web site in some time.


  4. George Whitfield Says:

    Excellent point, John, and very well-written.

  5. Shawn Levasseur Says:

    I agree that sniping between 3rd parties is unproductive, mostly because it’s such a small pool to begin with. You get far more mileage out of focusing on problems with the major parties. It’s all about return on the investment of your time and effort. It’s also why I find excessive squabbling within parties so wasteful.

    However, there are significant ideological differences between the minor parties, that won’t be easily swept aside. People in these parties are by definition less likely to compromise on their beliefs, otherwise they’d be working within the major parties. Expecting them to work together in the same manner as credit unions, who each have the same mission, is not reasonable, as the goals of each party differ.

    Getting minor parties to work together on issues where they are aligned would be a good thing, but there are limits on what can be done.

  6. One big third party Says:

    WHAT should have been done with all third party with the same ideas in mind such as the constitution party, libertarian party and the new Modern Whigs party should have been combined to make one big 3rd party.

  7. William Says:

    “This article does need to be published here I do agree.

    Now I wait to see if Libertarians and Barr supporters will adhere to it.”

    Come on, Cody. I agree that everyone ought to be civil and vote for who they want to vote for, but your post implies that you have not engaged in the partisan mudslinging yourself, and pin the blame entirely on one group of people. I find your comment especially hypocritical given the article YOU yourself penned last week on here which openly questioned Barr’s character.

    This is not intended to start a war, this is me pointing out my honest observation. ALL of us, myself included, who have engaged in this behavior ought to admit it and move on. I’m guilty. Anyone else man/woman enough to admit it?

  8. disinter Says:

    This nonsense that Barf shouldn’t be criticized simply because a bunch of idiots nominated him is a bit creepy.

    If the LP had nominated Karl Rove, are we supposed to bow down and kiss his feet?

    Screw your group-think mentality.

  9. disinter Says:

    I agree that sniping between 3rd parties is unproductive

    Then why are you, and the Barfers, here doing it?

  10. disinter Says:

    In other news Turd Party Watch is afraid to cover:

    The buzz among reporters afterward, though, was about the third
    participant, Libertarian Yvonne Schick, a Spicewood real estate
    investor. She adroitly appealed to Ron Paul supporters: She chided her
    own party’s presidential nominee, Bob Barr, for not showing Paul
    sufficient respect. And she was unruffled by Houston Chronicle reporter
    R.G. Ratcliffe’s effort to “out” her as a Scientologist. Her most
    memorable line? Terrorists are like fireants, baby.

  11. disinter Says:

    Where did all the Barfers go? This shit hole used to be heavily infested with them saying retarded shit like: “Barr is going to get in the debates, raise tens of millions of dollars, be on the ballot in every state and kick some fellow neocon ass bizatches!”.

    Have most Barfers realized that Barf is nothing but a con artist as well?

  12. Richgriffin Says:

    My ideological differences with the Libertarian party are larger than my differences with Republicans and Democrats. It isn’t a good idea for other parties to combine together, because we disagree too much. I regard libertarianism to be incredibly harmful and dangerous, especially on domestic issues. I do agree that other parties that are progressive ought to combine and work together more effectively. So my problems with the right-leaning candidates is ideological, with no need for name calling. Baldwin, for example, was once the President of the “moral (sic) majority”, which is all I ever need to know about him and reject him completely.

    I believe that Libertarians ARE delusional in their thinking and it is dangerous to others well being and safety.

  13. Clark Says:

    BITCHGRIFFIN LOPES HIS TINY MULE: “I believe that Libertarians ARE delusional in their thinking and it is dangerous to others well being and safety.”

    ....we know you dislike ‘Libertarianism’...please explain WHY sometime, you ‘don’t-know-what-a-dollar-is-dumbass-republicrat!..

    ..disinter is right richardheads like jonathong are an embarrassment to the LP!..

    ..but have a good day!..

  14. DeeDeeT Says:

    RichGriffin advocates State Collectivism—-Socialism. Socialism, no matter what form it is practiced in [Marxism, Leninism, Stalism, Nazism, Fascism, Progressivism] ALWAYS requires the sacrifice of the creative and productive individuals of a society in the name of the Roussean ‘greater good’. No matter what intentions may be regarded as ‘good’ by the simple-mindedness of Socialists, they are all ignorant of the long-term consequences of compulsory labor—- SLAVERY !

    There can be no compromise between the RichGriffins of the world and libertarians/classic American liberals. Socialists are the mortal enemy of freedom.

  15. DIAMOND DAVE Says:

    wow Disinter came out in full force and this time under his name not under a different name like eh usually does. I guess he wants to make sure the smearing does not stop.

  16. disinter Says:

    I’m a faggot.

  17. Cody Quirk Says:

    Me too, disinter. Want to have some gay sex with me? I promise not to tell the gay bashing Constitution Party ;)

  18. Cody Quirk Says:

    That’s not me above.

    Looks like I’ll have to do another Barr article, sorry Johnathan.

  19. Cody Quirk Says:

    Come on, Cody. I agree that everyone ought to be civil and vote for who they want to vote for, but your post implies that you have not engaged in the partisan mudslinging yourself, and pin the blame entirely on one group of people. I find your comment especially hypocritical given the article YOU yourself penned last week on here which openly questioned Barr’s character.

    = I didn’t start this mess, I only fought back on the same scale and used the same language. I’m not being hypocrtical, I’m fighting fire with fire.

  20. DonaldRaymondLake Says:

    Now let’s see if Cody Quirk [the real one] adhers to it!

    Talk bout the kettle calling the other pots black!

    Has the smear master him self turned a new leaf?

    You are the biggest hypocrite in Nevada…...

  21. Joseph Marzullo Says:

    Cody, you’re a crybaby. hahaha

  22. ~enemyartistkristofeR! Says:

    I would have to say that I disagree with this article. I for one know that I do NOT smear other third parties, if anything, on my blog or where ever I do my form of 3rd party promoting I seem to include all or most of the third party ticket candidates. You can even check it out for yourself on my blog @ I have donated, during the primaries to Ron Paul and post then to The Libertarian Party, Bob Barr and to Ralph Nader! I had attended a concert where Green Party Cynthis McKinney was to speak, but I got there late and missed her. And even amongst my friends who are third party people we are generally like each 3rd party candidate save a few minor differences. I mean look at what Ron Paul did getting together all the third party candidates (except for Bob Barr who decided NOT to show up - which might have alienated some people towards him) Because at the core of all their candidacies they want to save the basics of the constitution and the rights of We The People. Of course there are some differences between the third party candidates, but I do feel that supporters of and the 3rd party candidates themselves have been doing quite a good job including other third party choices in speeches about opening the debates and dealing out the issues that the BIG parties forget to discuss. So again I say Third Part Candidates and Supporters alike regardless of slight differences should continue to do so and if they don’t already should be Pro Third Party regardless whether they are your candidate or Not. This is a bigger picture than just who we plan to vote for this year, this is also for the next 4 years and 8 and 12 and 16 and you get the idea!
    Help Spread the Word - Vote 3rd! Visit my blog for info an various third parties links and more @ thanks!

  23. Kenny Says:

    Will Johnathan apologise for the Barr supporters’ smearing of Mary Ruwart? Until they do, I will take such “appeals” as desperate and hypocritical drivel.

    Barr’s public statements (especially on drugs and immigration) show that he is no libertarian. I look forward to November when the real libertarians can start the fight to get their party back from the Republican lackeys who hijacked it.

  24. disinter Says:

    Will Johnathan apologise for the Barr supporters’ smearing of Mary Ruwart? Until they do, I will take such “appeals” as desperate and hypocritical drivel.

    Well said.

  25. Glaivester Says:

    Well, I am supporting Baldwin, but I have contacted the head of the Libertarian Party of Maine and am giving advice on how to get Barr qualified as a write-in in case the lawsuit for ballot access fails. So I’d like to think that I am doing my part to help spread cooperation between the various third parties.

  26. Old Whig Says:

    The CP and LP in Kentucky have agreed to not run candidates for the same office. Except for President of course.


Leave a Reply