I don't think getting involved necessitates any such thing. Did Ron Paul stop being libertarian? Did Susan Collins stop being liberal? My goodness, what is the identity of the GOP at this point? It is really big tent. In my estimation, the Democrats require a much higher level of doctrinal purity especially on hot button issues like RKBA (anti). But maybe that is my partisan side not seeing the full truth there.
Um, yes. IF Paul were a libertarian he wouldn't be voting Republican, or running Republican.
I don't think one "stoops" to join a party. Rather, I think one has to rise up to the level of being willing to work with others who share some general views, but who do not agree with you much of the time. The payoff is being able to actually accomplish some really good things because we are working with others, we have the numbers to effect elections.
That's not what I think. But we have different brains, so that's not surprising. I'm not willing to sell my soul for the "payoff" if it means things I don't believe. But if you don't vote (and speak) in lockstep, you don't get the Party money.
And I'm not so sure the system is "rigged" nearly so much as it is natural for great questions to devolve into two camps. Yes, the national debates for presidency are rigged. But my ability to effect national races, even as a party member, is rather minimal. I can have a lot more effect on local and legislative races. Notably, that is where most of the progress on RKBA has come the last 25 years: At the State level.
Disagree again. System is rigged against 3rd parties. Questions can devolve, but if it were natural to groups of people to devolve into two camps, I'd agree, but what we have now are two Parties and (according to some polls) a majority of citizens -- according to other polls, only a plurality of 40-50% -- who do not identify with either of those two.