In last week’s column, I argued that while neither major party consistently fights to shrink government and protect civil liberties, the Republican Party is closer than the Democratic Party to practicing such ideals. Meanwhile the actual Libertarian Party, despite existing for over a half-century, has failed to break into the mainstream, rarely making a dent in federal and state elections. These two realities raise a question: should libertarians stop propping up an uninfluential third party and try instead to overtake the GOP? 

To recap from last week: not only are Republican positions closer to libertarian goals, but historically the results of Republican governance are more libertarian. Looking at state-level outcomes, where legislatures are often dominated by one party, red states score way higher on the Cato Institute’s Overall Freedom index than blue states. What’s more, libertarians already tend to vote Republican, with 45% of libertarians aligning this way (by contrast, 5% identify as Democrats). 

The Libertarian Party, by contrast, struggles to get vote share. The only time the party held a Congressional seat was when former Michigan Congressman Justin Amash switched his registration in 2020. There are no Libertarian Party governors, nor prominent mayors, and their presidential candidates struggle to perform better than low-single digits. In the last presidential race, Libertarian nominee Chase Oliver won a shockingly low 0.42%. And that, critics argue, means its main influence is running “spoilers” who take votes from candidates who can actually deliver better outcomes.

To be sure, this dismal performance isn’t entirely about voter preference. The Libertarian Party is the nation’s third-largest, but ballot access restrictions keep it and other........

© Eurasia Review