Originally Posted by Smidgey

With 12.5% of the population of the USA, one of the lowest voter turnouts of any demographic and most of them residing in the Southern States, which return Republicans to the Congress and the Senate as well as giving electoral votes to the Republicans, it is hard to see what impact they really have on such issues. Consider that whites account for around 75% of US population and are one of (if not the) highest voting demographics, it makes one wonder whom really is responsible for creating affirmative action.

Take for example its first instance - J.F.K. A white president.



Why would a muslim never vote libertarian? I'm sure there must be some Muslim somewhere that would.



This relies on one of the biggest misconceptions in socialist and left wing economics. You make the assumption (and a wrong one at that) that trade is about competition and competing with other nations. In fact, it is largely the exact opposite. You want other nations to do well so that they purchase your products at higher prices, thus making you richer.

Further, what incentive would France have to switch off the electricity to the UK? As for Russia and gas, that is a luck of the draw concerning natural resources and nothing to do with libertarian economics. Not to mention that you are making two assumptions:

1) That UK companies would stay the same or suffer under libertarianism and thus be bought out by other national companies (I believe that the opposite would be the case).
2) That the UK economy would not grow under libertarianism and thus would not have the economic power to make pushing it around a huge error. Consider again France, one of the UK's largest trading partners. I would most certainly not be in France's interest to damage the UK economy, and in turn damage its own (in fact, I don't believe that the French economy could take that much more damage in its current state).