> two is that Libertarians are BORING.
This is definitely true. The Libertarian Party of today doesn’t try hard enough. Like at all. As corny and as out of touch as it may seem for politicians and political organizations to do this, the Libertarian Party could benefit greatly from actually gaining young voter’s attention and support by taking advantage of social media like the Democrats and Republicans too, instead of hiding away from the spotlight like they always do and running on classic/old school campaign strategies. Younger voters have been shown time and time again to be consistently more likely to be more socially liberal than the average person in America, but because of that Democrats have that stronghold over that demographic and therefore there are also more likely to be more fiscally liberal as well. If Libertarians could actually gain their attention through means that literally consume half their day-to-day livelihood (social media)- Boom. You now have a higher chance at converting young voters to your cause. Whether it will work is dependent on how well your candidates and their campaigns perform. Libertarians generally agree that immigration enforcement shouldn’t be extreme and aggressive and borders should be less restrictive (debatable among the party). Campaign on that, and you can reach out to a lot of Latinos and immigrants who’ve felt disparity because of the immigrant laws and enforcement. Actively denounce the War/Genocide in Gaza, and just don’t support attacking Iran. Don’t be afraid to do it. Maybe watch your words as a potential candidate, but nearly considering nearly 90% of Democrats and their voters are against the War in Gaza/Iran (Ironic considering half of them will still accept money from AIPAC), you will most likely not get much of an issue from the left if you denounce the war and Israel (so long as you don’t talk about it like some alt-right conspiracy theory podcaster), campaign on Anti-Gaza/Iran War (assuming the war and oppression of Palestine and possibly in Iran will still be occurring in 3 years) and you will at least have an anti-war and anti-interventionist stance established to a voter base that isn’t mainly controlled by Christian Zionists funded by AIPAC (Republicans). But the only true success you’ll truly have with Democrats is most likely the voters, probably not the party themselves. With the Socialist/Democratic Socialist direction the Democratic Party has been going since the rise of figures like Zohran Mamdani, Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Rashida Tlaib, and the mainstream Liberal establishment endorsing these figures and polices, trying to truly establish a bipartisan consensus between Democrats and an Libertarian running under the Republican Party is not likely. Socialism is the antithesis of Libertarianism.
As for Republicans, they already have been very fiscally conservative for the past 10 years since the rise of Trump and the spread of populism throughout the mainstream Republican Party members (I guess you could say), but then you’d need to convince the majority of rural blue-collar workers who don’t really care for being socially liberal and the Paleoconservatives, Neoconseratives, Christian Zionists, and Populists who absolutely don’t want to be socially liberal. Most rural blue-collar workers don’t care for the legalization of marijuana, equality for the LGBTQ and minorities (though that doesn’t necessarily need to be a main priority as there already is equality in a civil rights sense), ending the war on drugs, or cutting support to Israel and their war of aggression, and Paleoconservatives, Neoconseratives, Christian Zionists, and Populists most certainly don’t care for the legalization of marijuana, ending the war on drugs, or *definitely* cutting off money and aid to their precious zionist allies. If you want to pander socially liberal ideals within the GOP (considering that most of the party consists of geriatric septuagenarians), I’d say your best bet would be through aggressively campaigning and rallying sort of in the Trump/MAGA style (without the incessant insulting and empty political threats). Republicans seem to be attracted to candidates that make the most noise, whoever is the loudest, just literally whoever talks the most, regardless of whatever they even say. It worked for Donald Trump in 2016, it’s what got him the Republican nomination and eventually (nearly) all the party’s support. For a Libertarian however, considering all that I said, being socially liberal (not the most attractive to the average blue-collar worker, definitely not attractive to Paleoconservatives, Neoconservatives, Christian Zionists, or Populists) only gives you a bit under half to maybe even just a third of the Republican to really bother pander to without just wasting your time. The Libertarians, Moderates (which a few are also Libertarian-leaning), Ex-MAGA, and (potentially) the Problem Solvers Caucus (PSC). There are already 2 Libertarian/libertarian-leaning Republicans in Congress, Thomas Massie and Rand Paul. Moderates make up about 18-27% of the GOP, but it may be tricky trying to reach out them because many of them consist of the Pre-2016 Never Trump Establishment Republicans (Key word being “Establishment”, because these are the same reptiles that boomers elected in for the past 30-40 years and supported shit like the War on Drugs and Terror and, of course, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001). The Ex-MAGA, could be tricky to sway, because if you find some that are the type to return to moderate conservative politics, you could at least hook them with your fiscally conservative policies and then reel them in later on with socially liberal policies (Very tricky, a moderate conservative is still conservative on all fronts. Just more likely to be open-minded possibly). But then there’s the Ex-MAGA that either: (A. Were abandoned/kicked out by Trump himself, but still hold their hard-right populist views. (B. Left MAGA themselves, but still hold their hard-right populist views. (C. Left MAGA and the GOP to join the Democrats after COVID, Jan. 6, etc. All three of these options of objectively not intelligent considering you’re running on a campaign of social liberal/fiscal conservative policies. Pandering to hard-right populists for support just because they stopped liking Trump isn’t going to get your agenda anywhere. Pandering to potentially moderate/conservative-leaning Democrats might be beneficial. As I said in the Democrat section in the beginning of this very long comment, trying to pander to them might be a futile endeavor due to the rising socialist environment of the party, and the Liberal Establishment has been increasingly endorsing and promoting this environment and shunning those who don’t. So I couldn’t imagine said Establishment would take too kindly to an outsider Libertarian trying to sway their Ex-MAGA insiders members back to the right just on a more liberal note. So that leaves me with finally the Problem Solver Caucus. They are a small faction within the GOP of Moderates that focuses on bipartisanship with the Democrats to make compromises on legislation. Pandering to these Republicans isn’t about them being Moderates, it’s about them being bipartisan and making compromises, which implies that they would (potentially) most likely be a mix of liberal and conservative both socially and fiscally. They’d be the perfect target to hook line and sinker. But really their support depends on if they aren’t consistent of Establishment/RINOs that are only working with the Democrats for some agenda or gain.
Don’t forget there’s always independent voters. Never forget about them. They the most overlooked voters in elections, though they tend to just lean towards one party or another.

>two is that Libertarians are BORING.
This is definitely true. The Libertarian Party of today doesn’t try hard enough. Like at all. As corny and as out of touch as it may seem for politicians and political organizations to do this, the Libertarian Party could benefit greatly from actually gaining young voter’s attention and support by taking advantage of social media like the Democrats and Republicans too, instead of hiding away from the spotlight like they always do and running on classic/old school campaign strategies. Younger voters have been shown time and time again to be consistently more likely to be more socially liberal than the average person in America, but because of that Democrats have that stronghold over that demographic and therefore there are also more likely to be more fiscally liberal as well. If Libertarians could actually gain their attention through means that literally consume half their day-to-day livelihood (social media)- Boom. You now have a higher chance at converting young voters to your cause. Whether it will work is dependent on how well your candidates and their campaigns perform. Libertarians generally agree that immigration enforcement shouldn’t be extreme and aggressive and borders should be less restrictive (debatable among the party). Campaign on that, and you can reach out to a lot of Latinos and immigrants who’ve felt disparity because of the immigrant laws and enforcement. Actively denounce the War/Genocide in Gaza, and just don’t support attacking Iran. Don’t be afraid to do it. Maybe watch your words as a potential candidate, but nearly considering nearly 90% of Democrats and their voters are against the War in Gaza/Iran (Ironic considering half of them will still accept money from AIPAC), you will most likely not get much of an issue from the left if you denounce the war and Israel (so long as you don’t talk about it like some alt-right conspiracy theory podcaster), campaign on Anti-Gaza/Iran War (assuming the war and oppression of Palestine and possibly in Iran will still be occurring in 3 years) and you will at least have an anti-war and anti-interventionist stance established to a voter base that isn’t mainly controlled by Christian Zionists funded by AIPAC (Republicans). But the only true success you’ll truly have with Democrats is most likely the voters, probably not the party themselves. With the Socialist/Democratic Socialist direction the Democratic Party has been going since the rise of figures like Zohran Mamdani, Bernie Sanders, AOC, and Rashida Tlaib, and the mainstream Liberal establishment endorsing these figures and polices, trying to truly establish a bipartisan consensus between Democrats and an Libertarian running under the Republican Party is not likely. Socialism is the antithesis of Libertarianism.

As for Republicans, they already have been very fiscally conservative for the past 10 years since the rise of Trump and the spread of populism throughout the mainstream Republican Party members (I guess you could say), but then you’d need to convince the majority of rural blue-collar workers who don’t really care for being socially liberal and the Paleoconservatives, Neoconseratives, Christian Zionists, and Populists who absolutely don’t want to be socially liberal. Most rural blue-collar workers don’t care for the legalization of marijuana, equality for the LGBTQ and minorities (though that doesn’t necessarily need to be a main priority as there already is equality in a civil rights sense), ending the war on drugs, or cutting support to Israel and their war of aggression, and Paleoconservatives, Neoconseratives, Christian Zionists, and Populists most certainly don’t care for the legalization of marijuana, ending the war on drugs, or *definitely* cutting off money and aid to their precious zionist allies. If you want to pander socially liberal ideals within the GOP (considering that most of the party consists of geriatric septuagenarians), I’d say your best bet would be through aggressively campaigning and rallying sort of in the Trump/MAGA style (without the incessant insulting and empty political threats). Republicans seem to be attracted to candidates that make the most noise, whoever is the loudest, just literally whoever talks the most, regardless of whatever they even say. It worked for Donald Trump in 2016, it’s what got him the Republican nomination and eventually (nearly) all the party’s support. For a Libertarian however, considering all that I said, being socially liberal (not the most attractive to the average blue-collar worker, definitely not attractive to Paleoconservatives, Neoconservatives, Christian Zionists, or Populists) only gives you a bit under half to maybe even just a third of the Republican to really bother pander to without just wasting your time. The Libertarians, Moderates (which a few are also Libertarian-leaning), Ex-MAGA, and (potentially) the Problem Solvers Caucus (PSC). There are already 2 Libertarian/libertarian-leaning Republicans in Congress, Thomas Massie and Rand Paul. Moderates make up about 18-27% of the GOP, but it may be tricky trying to reach out them because many of them consist of the Pre-2016 Never Trump Establishment Republicans (Key word being “Establishment”, because these are the same reptiles that boomers elected in for the past 30-40 years and supported shit like the War on Drugs and Terror and, of course, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001). The Ex-MAGA, could be tricky to sway, because if you find some that are the type to return to moderate conservative politics, you could at least hook them with your fiscally conservative policies and then reel them in later on with socially liberal policies (Very tricky, a moderate conservative is still conservative on all fronts. Just more likely to be open-minded possibly). But then there’s the Ex-MAGA that either: (A. Were abandoned/kicked out by Trump himself, but still hold their hard-right populist views. (B. Left MAGA themselves, but still hold their hard-right populist views. (C. Left MAGA and the GOP to join the Democrats after COVID, Jan. 6, etc. All three of these options of objectively not intelligent considering you’re running on a campaign of social liberal/fiscal conservative policies. Pandering to hard-right populists for support just because they stopped liking Trump isn’t going to get your agenda anywhere. Pandering to potentially moderate/conservative-leaning Democrats might be beneficial. As I said in the Democrat section in the beginning of this very long comment, trying to pander to them might be a futile endeavor due to the rising socialist environment of the party, and the Liberal Establishment has been increasingly endorsing and promoting this environment and shunning those who don’t. So I couldn’t imagine said Establishment would take too kindly to an outsider Libertarian trying to sway their Ex-MAGA insiders members back to the right just on a more liberal note. So that leaves me with finally the Problem Solver Caucus. They are a small faction within the GOP of Moderates that focuses on bipartisanship with the Democrats to make compromises on legislation. Pandering to these Republicans isn’t about them being Moderates, it’s about them being bipartisan and making compromises, which implies that they would (potentially) most likely be a mix of liberal and conservative both socially and fiscally. They’d be the perfect target to hook line and sinker. But really their support depends on if they aren’t consistent of Establishment/RINOs that are only working with the Democrats for some agenda or gain.

Don’t forget there’s always independent voters. Never forget about them. They the most overlooked voters in elections, though they tend to just lean towards one party or another.