I have been arguing that the Libertarian Party needs to dissolve, give up. For years. I’ve made my case many times. Why? Well, American are not libertarians, on the whole. And Americans still support the two-party system . . . with their votes, if not their full soulful effort or actual party membership. Further, Americans seem to grant only a short grace period for a new party to take form. If a new contender does not gain traction right away, it is dismissed as a Losing Cause. And the fact that the major parties have set up huge barriers to entry means that opposing them is an almost Sisyphean task.
Why try? Over and over? The rock up the hill, only to be defeated each time?
And yet, this outing, the Libertarian ticket didn’t do too badly.
This, in a sense, should be no wonder, given that the ticket sported the most prestigious candidates in this year’s presidential race — the most governing experience, the only experience cutting government programs — and what I think of as “not bad” ideas.
And yes: Much was indeed arrayed against them. The private/public-be-damned Commission on Presidential Debates balked at their inclusion. The VP candidate betrayed his commitment by focusing only on the Evil of Trump, witlessly missing the sheer horror posed by Trump’s main opponents, “old friend” Hillary. And then there were a few charming “gaffes” that the media played up as if Gary Johnson had spoken of grabbing a woman in the petticoat junction, or called half his opponents’ followers “deplorables.”
The following notice is off LP.org:
Yesterday Libertarian for president Gov. Gary Johnson won 4,013,780 votes, the highest vote total for an alternative party presidential candidate since Ross Perot in 1996.
Perot, whose net worth was over $3 billionaire [sic] in 1992 dollars, became a household name that year after he bought 30-minute prime time infomercials to boost his first presidential campaign. He was subsequently included in the presidential debates.
Perot received 8,085,402 votes in his 1996 bid.
The rationale for continuing to support the Libertarian Party thereby got a little stronger — despite the inanity of LP Chair Nicholas Sarwark’s comments on the night of the vote. We can forgive party hacks their hackdom. Besides, the man did better at running a political convention than any other I’ve witnessed in my lifetime . . .this other man’s antics on the floor of the 2016 Libertarian Party Convention notwithstanding:
Wirkman Comment 
To be successful, libertarians have to be able to show people in simple. easy to understand ways how they would be better off with libertarians in charge instead of statist Democrats or Republicans. If you can’t do that, then don’t expect people to vote for you…
An example here: How much should it cost to take care of your basic health needs? Lets say you have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, high blood sugar (treatable with pills, not insulin) simple arthritis. Under statist rule, you will require a doctor’s prescription and lab tests. Cost of this depends on insurance, but without insurance the cost will likely be in the $250 range. Medication costs (Walmart) $160 for one year. Include in this a second doctor visit and lab tests for another $250 for a total of $660.
Under libertarianism you get a simple blood test to determine what problems you have. You can test your own blood pressure. No doctor needed here. You buy the needed meds from a mail order provider like “Express Scripts”. Blood pressure and cholesterol meds would be about $17 total for a 90 supply. Blood sugar meds and arthritis meds about $5. So that’s $22 for 90 days, or $88 for a year. Compare this to the $660 that you would pay for medication under our present system. All because under libertarianism you are free to make medical decisions for yourself.