So, I kind of realized that after doing the democrats, the republicans, and the independents, I forgot one candidate: the libertarian party candidate. The libertarian party is typically the biggest party that fields a candidate, but i just didn't cover them since I dont like right libertarians. I mean they're generally preferable to the GOP, but that's not saying much. But I figured, in the sense of fairness, why don't I measure him by my metrics?
The presumptive libertarian candidate is a dude by the name of Chase Oliver. He's from georgia, and he's actually pretty young for a presidential candidate, being almost my age. He seems to be a rising star in the libertarian party
Anyway, I'll only do metric 1 and a warmness rating here because lol no way this guy will support anything I'm for on metric 2, so let's get started. First, the metric again:
Basic income support - 10
Medicare for all support - 10
Economic policies (other than UBI/M4A) - 10
Social policies - 10
Foreign policy - 10
Worldview/ideology- 20
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 10
Experience/competence- 10
Doesn't act as a spoiler- 10
Total- 100
----
Basic income support- 0/10
He doesn't support a basic income
Medicare for all- 0/10
He supports shifting medicine to a direct primary care model, which....probably won't fix the problem.
Economic issues- 0/10
To be fair he supports making student loans interest free, but he also wants to end the program. Other than that he's your typical free market libertarian who thinks the government needs to get out of everything and stop printing money and blah blah blah. He's not really gonna do anything to help people.
Social issues- 9/10
I mean, this is where he stands out to me, but I think he's based on social policy, pro abortion, pro gay marriage, end the war on drugs, somewhat liberal on immigration, pro gun, pro civil liberties. i took a point off since he wants to end qualified immunity for police officers. i think this is a bad idea because no one is gonna want to be a police officer if they can go to jail for making a good faith mistake. I understand police violence is a problem with society, but police officers are still workers, and I believe they need adequate protection from legal consequences unless they make a very serious mess up that can't be justified or explained away. I believe if we want to try a police officer for misconduct, we need to prove guilt, and also malice or intent to act in a way not befitting of their position. I dont wanna try and throw cops in jail for every unjustified shooting they commit, because those critical of police have a habit of going overboard. I've seen it happen. I've seen the left ripping police for shooting people running at them with a knife and crap. It's nonsense. If you're committing obviously bad crimes as a cop, yeah, you should go to jail, but that should be reserved for actual malfeasance, not a cop doing their job in good faith.
Beyond that, this guy is based though.
Foreign policy- 2/10
He's another anti war guy. He frames it in a perspective I find more appealing as someone with a libertarian streak myself, but yeah no, we need military in active roles around the world to protect us and our allies. The way to be safe and free at home is to be prepared at all times for war abroad.
Ideology/worldview- 6/20
I mean, compared to a republican, I like him a bit more. He gets through to me mostly on social issues, and I KINDA understand where his foreign policy is coming from, but idk, I just feel like he kinda lacks that maturity that comes from a more nuanced perspective that I have on those things. On economics he doesnt seem as bonkers as a lot of libertarians these days, he actually seems like a pretty reasonable and presentable candidate by their standards, but yeah, no, I diverge from right libertarians in pretty significant ways, specifically on economics, and also on foreign policy.
Consistency/dedication to progressive values- 2/10
I believe he means every word he says on social issues, otherwise not a progressive.
Experience/competence- 3/10
Doing a summary look at this guy he doesn't seem like a crackpot. However, he also doesn't seem like someone who has any political experience, and a few of his positions speak to his naivete in my opinion. Not the worst candidate out there but not amazing.
Doesn't act as a spoiler- 0/10
He's a third party candidate and while he probably takes from both sides, I'm just going to assume that he's a spoiler. If you arent actively contributing to keeping trump out of office, no points for you.
Total- 22/100
All in all, he did better than Trump, but worse than Haley. Now, to be fair, Haley got a 28 because she was more experienced and polished, and because she was running directly against Trump, and barring that, I probably like this guy a bit better. He seems relatively sane by libertarian standards, and seeing a libertarian running feels like a breath of fresh air on social issues after dealing with all of the wokeism in the democratic party. In terms of social stuff, I really am a libertarian, and that's what influenced my framework. Not "social justice" and any of that nonsense. Just a live and let live philosophy of leaving people alone. Of course, I'm a straight up liberal on foreign policy, and closer to a social democrat or social liberal on economics. If anything, I just take a more libertarian approach to those economics, hence my focus on UBI, Medicare for all, etc. But the free market stuff is kinda to me and given my top issues are typically economic, yeah he doesn't do well.
As for a warmness rating- 35. he scores up there with RFK. Mildly negative since I tend to have a policy of not liking right libertarians as candidates, but I don't think he's that bad. All in all I would prefer him over haley ignoring the whole trump factor. The fact is, that aspect of my rating system was added simply to remove trump, and to provide an advantage for democrats over third party candidates who split the vote. I normally vote for LEFT WING third party candidates, so it makes sense there, but when applied to this guy, it kinda doesn't.
But yeah, he's okay. Not amazing, not great, more negative than positive, but he is what he is.
No comments:
Post a Comment