I "Demand" You Think 2 When I Say 1+1

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/11/brian-holtz-responds-to-jim-davidson-multiple-freedom-parties-is-dumb

George, the current multiplicity was born over differences on issues -- either the Portland platform changes, or Barr's less-than-libertarian positions as of Denver.   Nevertheless, the BTP has indeed done utterly nothing to differentiate itself from the principles of the LP Platform, despite all the talk above about a "market of ideas".

Given that the BTP-US can't even accept contributions, your point about resources makes little sense in the current context.  LP donors don't need competing national freedom parties in order to target their donations. They can selectively donate to state affiliates, to party caucuses, to individual candidates, and to groups like your own organization.

Jim Davidson, you fantasize that I make "demands".   I can't make you stand and face my argument that a caucus is better for reforming a salvageable party than is inter-party competition.  I can't make you stop telling lies about whether I "demand" party "loyalty" when in fact I argue for tanspartisan endorsements and targeted non-campaigns.  All I can do is marshal evidence and arguments.  You can try (again) to ignore them, but that demand-y feeling in your head isn't me.  It's logic.  You may as well complain that I "demand" you think of 2 when I say "1 + 1".