Murkowski As Libertarian Polls 34%

From PublicPolicyPolling’s blog:

In a three way contest with Murkowski running as the Libertarian candidate [Republican Joe] Miller leads but with only 38% to 34% for Murkowski and 22% for [Democrat Scott] McAdams. Democrats have been hopeful that Murkowski will run on the assumption she would split the Republican vote but her supporters actually go 47-23 for McAdams in a two way contest with Miller.

Murkowski’s support is pretty evenly distributed across the board- she gets 38% of independents, 32% of Republicans, and 28% of Democrats. Miller gets 59% of the Republican vote and McAdams gets 57% of the Democratic vote.

Miller leads McAdams 47-39 without Murkowski in the race.

This poll does not mean that Murkowski will run as a Libertarian. Wes Benedict, the national party’s Executive Director, has come out against such a move. However, Alaska LP State Chair Scott Kohlhaas is at least open to the idea for the press it could give the party. (This may not be surprising; Kohlhaas is running a serious campaign for the state legislature and is likely hoping for a down-ballot effect).

A Libertarian Murkowski campaign would require the current nominee, David Haase, to step aside. However, many commenters at IPR have noted that when Haase was the LP Senate candidate in 2008, he eventually dropped out to endorse incumbent Republican Ted Stevens. Further, he actually endorsed the McCain-Palin campaign for President. Thus, it appears the biggest roadblock would be gaining the approval of the state party’s Executive Committee.

Despite claims to the contrary, it appears that Murkowski has not yet approached the Libertarian Party about a run. However, with these strong poll numbers I would not be surprised if it does not happen soon. You can see the full poll results here.

27 thoughts on “Murkowski As Libertarian Polls 34%

  1. Eric Dondero

    The Libertarian Party of Alaska is holding an emergency meeting at this moment to decide the fate of this race.

    We are providing full coverage at There will be a major press conference tomorrow morning in downtown Anchorage to announce the results.

  2. Adamson

    So if this Haase guy dropped out in ’08 and endorsed a Republican, which dim bulbs in the Alaska LP thought it would be OK to nominate him again for another campaign?

  3. Richard Winger

    Libertarians in Alaska nominate by primary, and the party has no choice in that policy. I don’t know whether Alaska Libertarians were for or against nominating Haase for US Senate in 2010, but in any event if he wanted to run, no one could stop him from filing in the Libertarian primary, and the only way to stop him from getting the nomination would have been for someone else to file for the same nomination and defeat him in the primary. Anyway, I am glad he filed in 2010.

  4. paulie


    I’m not glad to have the party nominate again candidates who endorse their opposition and support dreadful candidates like McCain, Palin and Ted Stevens.

    At that point, we may as well be running a Murkowski. Oh wait…

  5. NewFederalist

    Golly Batman… if the Libertarians nominate a sitting U.S. Senator for re-election wouldn’t she become the front runner for the Libertarian presidential nomination in 2012? What would this mean for the political destiny of Wayne Allyn Root? *sigh* It was so much easier when Murray was alive…

  6. Andy

    The problem here is that Murkowski is NOT a libertarian. Rip off artist Scott Kohlhaas has sunk to a new low with this one. I wonder how much payola they are offering “Slick” Scotty to sell out Libertarian Party ballot access to this Republican slime. What’s the matter Scotty, not making enough money ripping off petitioners and defrauding Libertarian donors?

  7. paulie

    Golly Batman… if the Libertarians nominate a sitting U.S. Senator for re-election wouldn’t she become the front runner for the Libertarian presidential nomination in 2012? What would this mean for the political destiny of Wayne Allyn Root?

    Politicalhack-Libertarianrepublican Alliance Strategy?

  8. Thomas L. Knapp

    Prediction #1: The Alaska LP won’t offer Murkowski it’s ballot line.

    Prediction #2: Murkowski will be the GOP nominee for US Senate in November. The uncounted absentee ballots will at least get her into “automatic recount on request” range and probably make her the putative winner.

  9. Hugh Jass

    You also thought that Hillary Clinton was going to win the Democratic convention vote in August. I’d be a bit skeptical of your predictions when they involve miraculous comebacks for politicians.

  10. Robert Capozzi

    tk, don’t be so hard on yourself! It’s a comment on a blog, dude, not your manifesto!

    If Murkowski is ruled the nominee, it renders this whole issue moot, I’d think, just a little fire drill.

  11. NewFederalist

    “Can’t believe I blew that apostrophe, dammit.”

    Perhaps you were vulnerable? 😉

  12. Thomas L. Knapp


    You write:

    “You also thought that Hillary Clinton was going to win the Democratic convention vote in August.”

    Interesting assertion. I’m sure you can document it. Please do so.

    My guess is that you’re thinking of this blog post, which says no such thing.

    If we’re going to drag out my record, let’s not forget that I predicted in late May, 2007 — at a time when everyone else was asking when he’d be shutting down his campaign and endorse obvious winner Rudy Giuliani — that John McCain would be the GOP’s nominee.

    Or that I won first prize (a nice Amazon gift certificate) in a competition for most accurately predicting the outcome of the 2006 congressional elections.

    If you care to come out from behind your pseudonym and show us YOUR predictive record, let’s see who’s done better.

  13. NewFederalist

    Tommy, Tommy, Tommy… jeez, man… chill. Hugh didn’t mean nothin’. He is just another asshole hiding behind a pseudonym. 🙂

  14. Hugh Jass

    Sorry to cause offense. I can’t find it offhand, but I seem to recall that you predicted after Hillary Clinton demanded a roll-call vote at the convention that she was going to pull off a coup at the convention with the superdelegates.

  15. Hugh Jass

    To be fair, I don’t have the best prediction record either (although I’ve done fairly well this election cycle)

  16. Robert Capozzi

    Personally, my practice is to refrain from predicting the future. My plate’s full enough determining what is virtuous, what is workable, what is peaceful, and whether what is indicated is likely, possible, or helpful.

    Predicting outcomes I leave to the stars!

  17. Thomas L. Knapp


    You didn’t “cause offense.” Actually, you had me looking back over what I’d written during that period to see if I’d said anything like that.

    Early on, I expected Hillary to romp for the Democratic nomination. I didn’t think Obama would even jump in, and if he did I figured he was too inexperienced to beat her.

    Iowa surprised me, but by New Hampshire I knew I had been wrong. What I did expect on into the spring — and it didn’t happen, I was wrong again — was that Hillary would tear the Democratic Party’s 2008 campaign apart in the process of trying to get the nomination at any cost.


    My political predictions are generally in the same vein as sports handicapping.

    I personally couldn’t care less whether Murkowski or Miller gets the GOP nod.

    My departure from the LP is recent enough that I’d probably be embarrassed to see the Alaska LP hand over its nomination to a losing Republican, but I’d at least be trying not to give a damn about that either.

  18. Buckeye1776

    Lisa Murkowski as the LP nominee for U.S. Senate has to be one of the worst ideas I have ever heard. Can someone provide the contact information for the Alaska LP so we can talk them out of this nonsense? Nominating a big-government incumbent Senator who was defeated by the (sometimes) libertarian leaning Tea Party? Great move.

  19. Thomas L. Knapp

    Murkowski isn’t particularly libertarian.

    Neither is Miller.

    In point of fact, Miller went after Murkowski on one issue where she’s clearly “more libertarian” — although certainly not libertarian enough to throw a party for or anything — than he is, that issue being immigration.

    Miller and Murkowski both support enshrining marriage apartheid in the US Constitution.

    Murkowski also supports a constitutional amendment to take away the property rights of people who own pieces of red, white and blue cloth and don’t treat that cloth the way she wants it to be treated.

    Miller claims that Murkowski is a big spender and that he wouldn’t be, but they all say that until they actually get to DC, and his issues group survey responses indicate that he wants to “maintain” or “slightly increase” all aspects of the single biggest US budget item (“defense”).

    It looks pretty much like a wash to me — neither of these candidates is anything to write to LPHQ about.

  20. paulie

    Can someone provide the contact information for the Alaska LP so we can talk them out of this nonsense?


  21. Just Say NO!

    Alaska LP,

    Just say no to this murky possibility of nominating Murkowski.

    And if TK is correct in his prediction, don’t give the line to Miller either.

    We are the Party of Principle!

    … not Kohlhaas’s party of whores.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *