In early 2008, as it was becoming apparent that Ron Paul would not be the Republican nominee for president, I was pointing out to people that the hardcore Ron Paul supporters should go to the Libertarian Party.

If just 10 percent of the hardcore Ron Paul supporters moved to the Libertarian Party, then the radical libertarians (i.e., the principled libertarians) could basically run the show and put up a good nominee.

Unfortunately, most Ron Paul supporters did not do this. Some of them stayed in the Republican Party to try to move the party in a more liberty-oriented direction. Some Ron Paul people went back to hiding under a rock. A few even supported Obama because they were tired of the same old establishment candidates. It was obvious to me that the candidate of “hope and change” would bring more of the same, but I can understand the sentiment when you are comparing him to John McCain and Hillary Clinton at the time.

I was a member of the Libertarian Party (LP) in 2008. I had been registered Libertarian since 2002, and I had been active in my local chapter since 2003.

That was the year that we got Bob Barr as the nominee. That was the slide downward for the party. I am still a registered Libertarian, but I have not been active in the party for many years now.

In 2008, the LP could have nominated Mary Ruwart. She is a principled libertarian. She would have been a great messenger for the cause of liberty. I think Ron Paul would have passed the torch on to her.

Bob Barr was not a principled libertarian. I have not heard about him in a long time, but I assume this still stands true. I am not saying he is a bad guy. I just don’t think he was the right person to represent the party and the movement.

In 2008, there were probably a couple of million people who had supported Ron Paul, or at least were very sympathetic to his cause. These people had nowhere good to turn. Chuck Baldwin was the Constitution Party nominee that year. He was probably the closest option to Ron Paul in the general election.

I still wonder just how well Mary Ruwart would have done if she had been the nominee for the LP. I think Ron Paul would have endorsed her, and she would have picked up on his momentum at the time. Unfortunately, we will never know.

The last really good candidate the LP had was Harry Browne in 2000. He was unapologetically libertarian. He represented the party and the message well. He was a great spokesman, and he converted people to libertarianism for life. I should know, because he solidified my libertarian beliefs.

Michael Badnarik was the nominee in 2004. He was a constitutionalist. He was generally principled with his message, and he is a good guy. Unfortunately, I don’t think he was always the best salesman of libertarianism, but I do believe his heart was in the right place. I would take Badnarik over anyone the party has nominated since then (Bob Barr and Gary Johnson twice).

Unfortunately, the party has also gone down a bad road in other ways. There has always been infighting, so that isn’t so much the issue. I think Nick Sarwark, who has been chairman of the LP since 2014, is representative of where the party has gone. Sarwark seems to go out of his way to insult the good libertarians out there who are principled. Sarwark is not a consistent defender of liberty, and I believe he has done tremendous damage.

If the CIA wanted to plant someone in the LP executive committee to do heavy damage to the cause of liberty within the Libertarian Party, I don’t think they could have done a better job than putting Sarwark in there to infiltrate it. For the record, I don’t believe this is what happened, but it is sad that this is the case.

A Renewed Hope

In the last year, some well-known and more radical libertarians have joined the LP. Now they are encouraging others in their audience to do the same.

If that weren’t enough, now we have Operation Libertarian 2020. (That is the name I am giving it at this time.)

There are three influential libertarians in particular who are encouraging people to join the party and nominate someone principled in 2020. They are Tom Woods, Scott Horton, and Dave Smith.

I’m sure these same three would also be thrilled if someone can dethrone Nick Sarwark. Many other people should feel the same if they saw Nick Sarwark’s appearance on Dave Smith’s show after their debate.

These three heavyweights of the libertarian movement are throwing their support behind Jacob Hornberger, who has officially announced that he is seeking the LP nomination in 2020.

I believe there are fewer than 15,000 active LP members. There are far fewer who would become delegates and go to the national convention where the nominee is chosen.

These libertarian stars have more people in their audiences than there are LP members. If just a fifth of their audience were to join the party, they could overtake it easily. And really, the percentage is probably a lot smaller than that, because there are already radicals within the party. That is why there is a Mises Caucus.

This is what I wanted to have happen in 2008. Oh well, it’s only 12 years later. I’ll take what I can get.

I think Hornberger is a solid candidate that principled libertarians can get behind. He is not a self-described anarchist. He is a constitutionalist. I don’t know if he considers himself a minarchist, but he’s close enough. He is quite similar to Ron Paul.

I will go more in depth on Hornberger as the time gets closer to the LP convention.

He appeared on Tom Woods’ show not too long ago. I think he is making one mistake and that is to make open immigration one of his signature issues.

The problem is that the issue of immigration is an issue of contention even between hardcore libertarians. It is a hard issue because we are dealing with a massive state (the U.S. federal government). So while many libertarians believe in the concept of free movement (while respecting property rights), it is a tough issue when we have national borders and a massive welfare state.

It is one of the toughest issues for me personally. I believe the right answer for now is to allow immigration with the conditions of no welfare and not having the right to vote, or at least not having the right to vote any time soon. Many libertarians rightly fear having people come to the U.S. and helping to destroy the liberty that we have left. It has nothing to do with stealing jobs.

I think it is ok for Hornberger to take the position he’s taking, but it should not be a signature issue. This issue does not convert anyone to libertarianism. It just may confuse them more. He might as well make abortion a signature issue as well.

I hope Hornberger will reconsider his position on this. He is very good in his criticisms of the warfare state and the infringements on our civil liberties. I think he could also tie these things in with reducing government spending at home. Ron Paul did this effectively in his presidential campaigns.

Aside from this one point, I think Hornberger will represent the liberty message well. He will convert people. He will give people a choice. Gary Johnson and Bill Weld gave people a choice of not voting for Trump or Clinton, but that was about it. They did not create many hardcore libertarians. If they did, it was inadvertent.

I am excited to see what 2020 brings. Maybe we will actually have a libertarian representing the Libertarian Party. It’s long overdue, and it hasn’t happened since Ron Paul brought so many to the libertarian movement in 2007.