Those of us who aren't particularly fond of either Republicans or Democrats will sometimes refer to both of them, as a group, as "Republicrats". Suggesting that, though their adherants will claim differently, the two are equally bad.
Tonight, I heard a similar term, in a much different sense. The word is "Repubocrat". That's re-pub-O-crat, rather than re-pub-LI-crat, above. The difference is, the person doesn't mean anything by it except that she agrees with neither and both. This was her way of saying that she was fiscally conservative and socially liberal, a line libertarian folks have been pulling a long time to explain their position to "outsiders", with limited success.
Unfortunately for libertarians, for many reasons, the little contact the public has with libertarians in a political context is sometimes not very good, and is almost never compelling. There are plenty of explanations for this, but the important issue here is that important ideas and positions are not being considered in part for communication problems.
Looking back at the history of how political ideas gain traction, one that has appeared several times over the past hundered years, is to change the dynamics of the conversation by changing the language.
An example is the word "Liberal" in America. In most of the world, "Liberals" are those arguing against greater state power and for greater freedom, whereas here the name is used by those who elsewhere would be called "Socialists" or, since that name has been sullied, "Social Democrats". In fact the name Liberal here used to have the same popular meaning, before it was coopted by people sympathetic to socialist movements abroad and in the U.S. So Enlightenment thinkers, or "Classical Liberals" as they are sometimes now called, coopted the word "Libertarian" from the Anarchists!
So I suggest that sensible libertarians start looking for a new banner to march under, and I think Repubocrat is a reasonable first consideration. The appeal is that it carries the essential meaning that we hold some views in common with each party, that we agree with both and neither. Also, the name will seem familiar and friendly to those who have settled into our supposed "two-party" system. One, hidden bonus, I think, is that extreme libertarians will be loathe to call themselves Repubocrats, because the close association it draws to the existing parties. Some would say that's the most important bonus. Perhaps if we could only shake them, we'd be just fine.