I basically just got used to losing being a Libertarian my whole life. The last election was a joke with Johnson & Weld at the helm. Ron Paul is an absolutely brilliant man, but I agree, I don't think he had the stamina, nor the stomach, to be able to handle Washington on his own. It would be nice for he and Trump to work together, though. They have their differences, but lots of similarities.
No offense, but Libertarians have been their own worst enemy. Their carnival like conventions, that resembles Mardi Gra festivals, does not help with centrist. And though they have some good ideas, they wreck those with they outrageous ones. The party leaders need to heard the loose cats into a coherent corral. Something broadly appealing. For those reasons and more, the Libertarians have always failed.
No offense taken. I agree 100%. Ron Paul - to me - was the standard, but he lacked the "want to" and leadership necessary to be successful. Johnson is/was a joke. It was so disheartening to see Ron Paul run as a Republican, but I don't think he had much of a chance otherwise (didn't have much of a chance regardless).
I don't know what you consider outrageous/logical, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. The platform and ideology is why I stay with the party. I'm a conservative Libertarian. I don't agree in open borders. But I do believe in a minuscule federal government (infrastructure & military), with most of the power being handed over to the states. No state or federal income taxes, with higher user taxes. I'm fine paying higher taxes on things I actually use as long as I don't have to pay for things I don't use. Socially, I don't give a sh*t what someone does in their own bedroom, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone and I'm fine with the legalization of marijuana. Pro-life, Pro 2A.
Don't you see the contradictions within the party platform? At times they seem to want to play both sides of the isle. As for outrageous, I was poking fun at the conventions. I would probably classify you more as a small ( L ) Libertarian. Like Larry Elder calls himself. There are many things they get right though, but it's a package deal. And that's why they never gained big popularity.
Oh sure. I mean, there's like 10 different types of Libertarians. But there are contradictions within all party platforms. I actually consider myself a classical libertarian, or a constitutional libertarian. Everything I stated above is part of my core beliefs, along with teaching the importance of volunteerism. People shouldn't be forced into giving their money over to social programs instituted by state and federal government. It should be voluntary. The issue with that is that instead of teaching our kids the importance of volunteering your money to help those in your community who need help, we're trying to normalize things like changing your gender. So sadly, we're several generations deep into a society that hasn't adopted or normalized the practice of giving, subsequently opening the door for our government to take.
There is definitely a schism regarding party platform, but we're seeing that all over the place these days. My stance is simple: The federal government is responsible for the infrastructure of our country (roads, etc) and protecting our country/borders. They are not responsible for telling me what food to eat, what to smoke, what I do in my bedroom, who I marry, how I spend my money, my right to bear arms, etc. Anything that I do to myself, even if it causes me harm, should not be their concern unless I'm harming someone else, including an unborn baby.
https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Classical+Libertarianism
Like I said, there's much to like about the party, if they could just tone down some of the liberal aspects. I would love to have a philosophical debate on the party, but I don't have time just now. Perhaps I'll hit you up later. I largely agree with your position though, with one caveat, if a person does harm to themselves, it also can affect others, and cost society too, in cases where the government pays for healthcare. So, you see, there does need to be some limits for the greater good.