I've been disappointed in the Barr pseudo-campaign. He's great on some issues (free speech and RKBA -- unlike certain presumptive GOP nominees I could name), coming around on other issues (the drug war), but he's still too far off the reservation for my tastes on too many other issues (the so-called "Fair Tax", immigration, foreign interventionism) for me to be comfortable with him as the LP standard bearer. If he gets the nomination, I'd probably suck it up and support him. But I'm betting he'll drop out before he's ever officially "in", lest he suffer the indignity of losing the nomination.

Barr is no threat. In the off chance he wins the LP nod, most will not donate for him.

/prediction

shoulda added link to Serf City recent article:

http://serfcity.wordpress.com/2008/04/10/barrs-road-to-damascus-takes-a-detour/

Hey Jim... I hear that the upcoming Serf City actually makes the case that "real libertarians" should be supporting John McCain and not Bob Barr.

I can't wait to read it.

Also, I'd like to add to my prediction: if Barr somehow does get the LP nomination, Ron Paul will get way more votes than him. Even with Barr as the LP candidate and Ron Paul not even on the ballot. More people will write Paul in than vote Barr-L. Still not sure if the combined affect of Paul-write-ins and Barr votes will affect a damned thing in the general, though. I hope so, but probably not.

What name recognition?

Also, I doubt many people who find Barr's war stance at all acceptable would be voting for McCain anyway.

Hey Jim... I hear that the upcoming Serf City actually makes the case that "real libertarians" should be supporting John McCain and not Bob Barr.

Alas, the person who contributed that article had a change of heart and withdrew it. As outlandish as "Libertarians for McCain" sounds, it's really no worse than "Libertarians for Giuliani," which some members of the Republican Liberty Caucus were actually pushing earlier this year.