Harry Browne was the Libertarian candidate for president in this election. But how come in Arizona did some guy with the last name of Smith end up being the Libertarian presidential candidate?

This link to ABC News Election Coverage of Arizona will show you what I mean Who the hilly-hey is Smith?

-- butt nugget (catsbutt@umailme.com), November 29, 2000

Answers

I propose to move this thread to the new answers.

-- mitzy (mitzyb@phony.baloney), November 29, 2000.

Looked it up for ya Butt, he's L. Neil Smith...

From his website "life-long freedom advocate widely published author; including 20 novels, some short stories, and many political essays (see his Webley Page) particularly notable in gun rights circles for his uncompromising defense of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the rest of the Bill of Rights considered a veritable GIANT of the modern libertarian movement, his writings have introduced many thousands to the freedom philosophy a bold, inspiring critic of those on the so-called Left and Right who have stolen our Liberty an unashamed and implacably zealous foe of Big Government a maverick, so thoroughly principled that he condemns even other Libertarians who don't live up to our principles "

How he ended up on the Arizona ballot though is beyond me...and the site doesn't seem to have an answer either.

Smith's Site

-- kritter (k@a.n), November 29, 2000.

BN,

A maverick group of libertarians from AZ simply opted out and fielded their guy,though officially Harry was the national candidate.I do think I remember reading at one time that there was some feathers ruffled over this.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), November 30, 2000.

What happened was Harry Browne was unable to get himself listed on the ballot in Arizona, so the group selected Smith as a surrogate candidate in that state. Had Browne won (virtually impossible of course) I'm sure Smith would have stepped aside for Browne.

-- brownesupporter (brownefor@president.com), November 30, 2000.

If you go back enough decades, there used to be a popular manuever called the Favorite Son (this term was coined before women could vote). This was usually done in the primaries, so a delegation could come to the convention, and cut a deal with the eventual winner of the nomination.

However, I recall reading where the Whigs ran 4 different candidates for President in one election - with no more than one Whig running in any one state. Their intention was to pool all the electoral votes won by the 4 and cast them all for one "consensus" Whig, who would become President. They failed, of course. But it was an interesting twist.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), November 30, 2000.

Hey there butt,

I'm sorry -- I'm not familiar with the mechanics of how Smith got on the ballot there.

But, just to make it up to ya, here's the most detailed program I've ever seen on how Libertarians might go about implementing a strategy of government reduction...

Toward the Establishment of Laissez Faire Capitalism

I put this up once before, but IMO it's a fantastic piece that I think everyone should see.

Any questions, gimme a buzz and I'll try to help.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), November 30, 2000.

Thanks for the answers everyone. I'll check out that link eve.

-- butt nugget (catsbutt@umailme.com), November 30, 2000.