Scenes from the Barr-McCain Debate

Okay, it wasn’t really Barr and McCain debating; it was a debate about Barr vs. McCain. But Bob Barr did show up.

It was the monthly debate at Lolita bar, hosted by Todd Seavey. The question was “Should conservatives and libertarians vote for Barr over McCain?” The final verdict by those in attendance (not counting Bob Barr, who was prohibited from voting): 2-to-1 in favor of voting for Barr.

Here are some photos. Keep in mind that photography really isn’t my strong suit, and the basement of Lolita is really small and dark. I was sitting too far in the back of the room to get any usable photos of the debate itself.

 

Prospective Libertarian congressional candidate Francis M. Powers (see post below)

Powers’ opponent for the Libertarian nomination Susan Overeem

The winner of the debate, Dr. Avery Knapp

16 comments for “Scenes from the Barr-McCain Debate

  1. Cathy Buckwalter
    June 10, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    Finally, someone I can vote for! Great!

  2. EEE555
    June 9, 2008 at 9:40 am

    “Note the “False Choice” BOB BARR or JOHN MCCAIN”

    If you are familiar with Todd and Michael’s debates, the topics, even the non-political ones, are always vague. And when pressed for further clarification by either the debaters or potential voters, they always defer to saying that we should interpret the question as we see fit and vote accordingly. This is not so much a political tactic (usually the questions that are harder to interpret are the non political ones eg: “are ivy leagues better” is meaningless if you allow each voter a subjective definition of better) as it is a social one. It (usually) keeps the debates more focused on a friendly debate among people who are all friends or friends-of-friends and less focused on nit picking. After all, most of us realize the scope of the debate to be completely informal and unscientific.

    Regarding your concern about a straw man: I am was not the biggest Barr fan going into the debate and was actually discussing with Todd how someone like that should vote:

    either “no” meaning that no, a libertarian shouldn’t vote Barr instead of McCain, because a pure libertarian should write in Paul instead of Mccain.

    or “yes” meaning that a libertarian should prefer Barr to McCain, as the question asks… but not vote for him, just that there is a marginal preference for Barr over McCain (leaving unasked if there is an additional marginal preference for Paul over Barr).

    For you to take show up to an informal gathering among friends and accuse them of presenting a straw man argument pro Barr (when in fact it was never presented as anything other than a social gathering) is actually a straw man argument against Barr. I feel like people like you need South Park-esque caveats before practically anything they do:

    This debate is not really a debate. It is a bunch of people who are probably drunk and are going to discuss a topic (rather poorly). The debaters are all drunk and biased, the voters are all drunk and biased and the results of the debate should not be relied on for any purpose in any way shape or form. Therefore it is recommended it not be attended by anyone.

  3. Austin Wilkes
    June 6, 2008 at 3:17 am

    Stephen Gordon is a LOSER!

    haha – jk – You Gordon bashers are a bit overzealous. Taking shots at him on his websites he posts at is one thing – doing so at random blogs that have no connection to him is taking it to a whole different level. “Raising the Barr” shall we say. :)

  4. Andy
    June 6, 2008 at 1:07 am

    If I wanted to play devil’s advocate, I’d point out that that it’s 80% libertarian because there’s roughly 80% more of import going on in the Libertarian Party nowadays.

    But seriously, Steve Gordon works for Bob Barr’s campaign. He’s admitted as much. Everybody knows it. And I don’t think anyone is seriously going to touting this as a “victory” just because the group of random people who happened to be there chose Barr. It might, however, be interesting to watch a serious debate and the subject and show the debate itself to people asking themselves the same question.

  5. stevec
    June 6, 2008 at 12:18 am

    I got “here” through a link posted by STEPHEN GORDON at a site called Third Party Watch which covers all Third Parties but is about 80% Libertaian.

  6. June 6, 2008 at 12:13 am

    To STEPHEN GORDON………….

    If Barr LOST this debate….would you have POSTED IT?

    If NOT, isn’t is disengenuous to post that he “won.”

    Hey genius, Steve Gordon didn’t post anything on this blog… ever.

  7. stevec
    June 6, 2008 at 12:03 am

    This debate format was as phony as a $3 bill……

    They probably borrowed the audience from one of those late night infomercials…..

    What Conservative/Libertarian would support Mr. Welfare – Warfare McCain… Also, we were told in advance that Barr would appear… How ludicrous would it be if he showed up and was advised the Libertarians / Conservatives decided vto go w/ McCain?

    I don’t mind you guys touting a “victory” – just make it an HONEST one – not w/ a straw man….

  8. Andy
    June 5, 2008 at 11:41 pm

    Yeah, it’s disingenuous for an openly pro-third-party blog to generally only post good things about third parties. TAR AND FEATHER THE BASTARD!

  9. stevec
    June 5, 2008 at 11:06 pm

    To STEPHEN GORDON………….

    If Barr LOST this debate….would you have POSTED IT?

    If NOT, isn’t is disengenuous to post that he “won.”

  10. stevec
    June 5, 2008 at 11:00 pm

    Note the “False Choice” BOB BARR or JOHN MCCAIN….

    Why not “who should libertarians – conservatives support for POTUS” which includes Chuck Baldwin, McKinney (or other Green), Obama, NOTA, or stay home…..

    This is a classic “Straw Man”….. Barr or McCain – as though though these are the only options available to us…..

    Hell, even Ron Paul won’t back this POS…..

    He’s sitting it out… saying a nice thing here about Barr…a nice thing there about Baldwin… saying he might even back McCain (if he does a 180 on his foreign policy – which he knows aint gonna happen)…

  11. Andy
    June 5, 2008 at 10:07 pm

    Can we hopefully expect a video? Sounds like a great debate.

  12. LPiberty
    June 5, 2008 at 11:26 am

    Any highlights from the q&a?

    I hope the discussions included prioritizing the military towards national security defense and favoring free market healthcare.

    A friend works at a private hospital and was shocked how much money is saved by not accepting medical insurance. But then employees need to go elsewhere to have their own medical insurance accepted. Aye carumba.

  13. hengels
    June 5, 2008 at 2:43 am

    Sorry I missed it. Got caught up preparing for a meeting…

Comments are closed.