My candidate lost. That I expected and accept. What upsets me is the drop in percentage compared to previous presidential election. Going from 3.3% to 1.1% is both disappointing and disheartening. Some like arguing the Libertarian Party did better this year by leading among all third party candidates and the slow, incremental rise into the populace conscious reflected in the whole count of votes cast.
I say, bollocks. Small conciliation in the grand scheme of things.

     But what worries me more is the slow realization that being a Libertarian is as rare as, or even more than, being a Black Republican. I do not know if there is sufficient number of Libertarians in the United States to ever hope at winning, if not just compete on equal footing in the national elections. In other words, how do I know the number of Libertarians both actual and potential can rival those who count themselves either Democrat or Republican? If one of the two dominate political parties were to disappear wholesale, are there enough Libertarians that can challenge the other party to the degree as to mimic the tug-of-war of gaining Electoral College votes? I shall like to review the data if such exists. Until such proof, I must face the unpleasant reality that voting Libertarian is a losing proposition.
 

    So there are two obvious responses to insufficient numbers: (i) infiltrate an established political party and assume control and (ii) campaign harder at spreading the gospel of Libertarianism and work at restructuring or dismantling, as far Left is wanting to do, the duopoly that impedes third party's ascension to national prominence. My own strategy, (iii), was growing the party to the point of being able to saturate the political arena making certain there was a Libertarian candidate on every ballot from city council to challenging every open senate seat; the theory is that over time, the L letter label will become as commonplace as the 'D' and 'R' are today.
 

    I think there may be something to (i) approach because has proven successful for the radical Left. Back in the late 1980s and early '90s, Political Correctness and (Democratic) Socialism, then Communism until November 1989, was a novel intellectual exercise confined to leading colleges and universities campuses. Today, such radical, progressive notions have escaped the petri dish of ideas incubation labs that are universities out into the real world, infecting all institutions and American culture in the form of Woke and Cancel culture and manifest in physical harmful forms of AntiFa and the no longer shameful about being Marxist Black Lives Matter Movement. Personalities such as AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez), Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, and Bernie Sanders have gained shareholder control, dragging the Democrats further left resembling nothing like the Democrat party of Kennedy's era. In similar ways, the better course for Libertarians is doing the same with the Republican Party. Infect the GOP with libertarianism.
 

    A way of doing this is for every Republican candidate vying for a seat, there should be at least two libertarian candidates under the label of being Republican competing along side and just espouse libertarian values and ideas. Quite honestly, this strategy should include the 'kooks' and 'misfits' that mainstream media mock Libertarians as being.
 

    I imagine a possible rebuttal along the lines would not Conservatives pushback? Sure, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer may capitulate to some degree to the AOCs but they remain in charge of the Democrat party which is why Biden is the Democrat's candidate rather than Bernie Sanders. Likewise, the Republicans may agree with faux Republicans libertarians but the Conservatives will retain controlling interest of the GOP and temper any potential libertarian infection.
     While the Republican Party remains today the only group sympathetic at listening to Conservatives and, for want of a better label but the more vulgate appellation will suffice, Christian Fundamentalists thus given Conservatives the illusion their entreatment of the Republican Party is allowing them to steer the party, on occasion, implementing conservative polices, economic or otherwise, Conservatives are content imagining themselves as the intellectual backbone of the Republican Party. Thus they are less inclined being proactive in political engagement. As yet, there does not exist a Tory equivalent in the United States party system. Coupled with the contingent reality there is a great deal of overlap between Conservatism and Libertarianism, except for the more atheistic components of Libertarians, Conservatives are not likely to resist a more libertarian leaning Republican Party.

     So why not (ii)? Imagine a group of evangelist Libertarians going around proselytizing disenfranchised, disaffected, and dismayed voters. A scene at a bus stop, one person addresses another, "Have your heard of Libertarianism? Here, have some literature and read about what Mills, Hayek, and Nozick say. There is a better path." A certain subset of Libertarians will oppose the idea of employing methodologies of organized religions in recruiting efforts.
     Libertarians have jump-started a political active party by moving beyond their training wheels origins of think tanks which did serve the purpose of educating the masses about Libertarianism. There were the temples but no one went out and spread the gospel. Now, with campaigning candidates, Libertarians are preaching to anyone who will listen, like the vagabond in the public park, mostly to the already converted because the mainstream media will not share the platform away from the Established duopoly.

     The go to model of success for a third party is Perot's election campaign. Whether Perot took over an already existing, marginalize political party, called the Reform party or created another with the same name, he managed in a single election cycle getting on the same stage as the two big parties. Upon reviewing is his success, Perot did not sell any ideas, such that the Reform party had any grounding philosophy, so much as buy broadcast time and sell himself as the panacea for the nation's ills — repairman that will get under the hood and fix the nation.

     My old suggested strategy of establishing credibility and ubiquitous presence maybe slow going but has the promise of eventually working. In a way, that is the current tact the Libertarian party is doing. In this past election season, the Libertarian Party Facebook page has streamed live interviews with Libertarian candidates running for various offices across the nation. Nothing to the saturation point I envision but enough of a start. The Libertarian Party two prong attack, starting from the top running a presidential candidate, while working to fill a foundation at the local level winning local elections seems ideal but not the rate to domination is too slow by half. Again, with the drop in percentage win in the presidential bid, has set the party back decades; but htey carry on with glee having won a House seat and a handful of city council spots in unknown places of America. Big Whoop. At this rate, the Libertarian party may get on the national stage in . . . say, 80 years, give or take an election.

     On the personal level, the quandary making up my existential political angst is not knowing to where to turn and for whom/what to vote. Of the two center stage parties, only one has on occasion tolerated listening to suggestions rooted in Conservative ideology. The only third party ideological favourable alternative is too ineffectual to matter in not just one but not even two or three of my lifetimes. Why bother voting if I my candaidate, of whatever party, will never win?