A reader channels some of my own thoughts on the general election:

In similar fashion to you, I'm a moderate, libertarian-wing conservative. And while I like to think of myself as practical, I also consider my politics to be informed by political theory and philosophy. Like you, I am attracted to Obama's temperament, but somewhat uncomfortable with his liberalism. Like you, I don't see enough of my own conservatism in McCain to get super-excited, although I am happy to have him as the head of the GOP, given the alternatives that looked possible six months ago. But mostly, I firmly believe that the GOP needs to be punished for the last eight years. It seems to me that the most satisfactory meta-outcome for me in this election would be a strong rebuke to the GOP coupled with an endorsement of Obama's style, but not necessarily his substance.
 
Enter Barr as third-party spoiler. Isn't he perfect for the above-stated purpose?

If Obama were to win the Presidency, but under conditions in which McCain would have won without Barr drawing off conservative votes, isn't that the best of both worlds? It's a rejection of the collectivist strands of Obama liberalism, it's a rebuke of the current GOP, a tacit endorsement of Obama's approach to politics and it's a signal that the balance of power for both parties is held by a small but sizable libertarian impulse in American politics.

 
I cannot think of anything I'd rather see happen in November. I seriously hope you consider giving this sort of reasoning more airtime.

Will do. I'm still adjusting to post-Clinton life.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.