Please Weigh in on Today's Speaker

Hi All! Thanks to those who attended today's meeting and met Joel Engardio, the District 7 Supervisor candidate. We had some discussion about him at dinner, but not everyone was there, so I would be curious about other attendees' impressions/opinions at today's meeting. Everyone, please weigh in on Joel and if you think the LPSF should recommend him for Supervisor in District 7. Consider that even though he is mixed bag, this is also San Francisco, and we will probably never get a full-blooded Libertarian on the Board of Supervisors, so is he someone we could live with (and support) even though he's not perfect?



Thanks for asking.

You and I have a difference how we view the purpose of LP politics.

David Nolan was inspired by a particular vision in founding the LP. It
involved creating a vehicle for educating people and changing hearts and
minds. He viewed running candidates as a means to get a bully pulpit in
order to spread the freedom philosophy. Watering down our message, or
supporting the least worst candidate, was not in his mission statement.

In this regard, Starchild wrote:
"I join Dr. Edelstein in heartily
agreeing with David Nolan's thesis. It is my belief that we should
continue to run candidates and seek votes, but not at the expense of
watering down our ideas or trying to appear non-radical. To the extent
we have a primary focus, it should be spreading libertarian ideas and
gaining more converts to the philosophy of non-aggression. I say this
as a four-time candidate who has gotten respectable vote totals by the
standards of most LP office-seekers."

Love & liberty,
<<< starchild >>>

If supporting the least worst candidate was consonant with Nolan's mission,
I would support Joel. However, it is not. It's destructive of our mission by
giving the impression the LP is a pale carbon copy of the Republocrats, and
stands for "improving" the state, rather than for freedom from a
metastasizing cancerous growth in the body politic.

Warm regards, Michael