Big Eddie, your take on the convention is all wet. There was no back room deal. Any analyst would have predicted the final result. Root was closer ideologically to Barr than to Ruwart, so that once Root was eliminated it was obvious that more of his supporters would gravitate to Barr than to Ruwart, regardless of Root's endorsement. And here is a little LP history for you. Back in 1984, Earl Ravenal, the "pragmatist" candidate, was beaten by David Bergland, the "pure" libertarian. The Ravenal supporters left the party. It took us until now to recover. I am a pure libertarian who does not intend to do similar damage to our cause. I may not be thrilled with Barr, but I am giving him the benefit of the doubt. He could lose my support, but I am hopeful that he will, instead, solidify my support by saying and doing the right things from here on.
I certainly do not regard this as the death of the LP. The so-called pragmatists won this round. The so-called purists may win the next. We must continue to work together.

Kevin, the key to the growth of the LP is not attracting more disaffected Republicans, but exciting disaffected Democrats and Independents. Frankly, nominating re-educated Republicans, middle aged white men, who project conservatism even when they speak libertarianism, is not the best way to do that.

I agree with you on both counts, Ken. I am just tired of hearing people who see negativity in even the slightest hint of success in this party. You have been around alot longer than I, and I have a feeling that such discourse is not new. My main point is that all of a sudden when I talk to people about who they will get their vote for President, and mention Bob Barr, some people have actually heard of him. They don't know what he stands for, but then again most of them have no idea what the people they usually vote for stand for either. Any media is good media when nobody knows who you are, right?