Unless just about every polling outfit in the country is wrong, Terry McAuliffe should cruise to victory in Tuesday’s election. If he does, says Tarina Keene, “he will owe his victory to the women of Virginia — women who want to own their own bodies. Who want to be able to make their own reproductive health-care decisions.”
Keene directs NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia, so she has a vested interest in this argument: Making McAuliffe’s victory contingent on pro-choice support makes McAuliffe beholden to pro-choice activists. But the vested interest does not make the argument wrong. In fact, given the lopsided gender gap in the gubernatorial contest, it is hard to refute…
Mr Hinkle then notes:
Keene’s remark is interesting not only for its political implications, but also for its philosophical implications. Talk of owning your own body has strong libertarian overtones.
Many libertarians start by embracing the concept of individual autonomy or “self-ownership” — a notion that goes back at least to John Locke (“every man has a Property in his own Person. This nobody has a right to, but himself”).
Noting that Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has run into resistence because of his support for a government ban on abortion, and his opposition to the rights of homosexuals to live free of government interference, Mr Hinkle notes that some who might have voted Republican
have found refuge in Robert Sarvis, the Libertarian Party nominee. Sarvis has been polling well for a third-party candidate, scoring as much as 10 percent in some polls. If he clears that bar on Election Day, then the party will win automatic ballot access for state and local offices through 2021.
The column by A. Barton Hinkle, originally published in the Richmond Times-Dispatch can be read in full @ Reason http://reason.com/archives/2013/11/04/virginias-libertarian-moment
I would not say that the case is closed, because Sarvis was polling at 9-12% and ended up getting 6.6%. That’s still a good vote total by LP candidate for Governor standards, but it is less than what his polling numbers indicated that he would get.
The bottom line is that Robert Sarvis and the Libertarian Party had a great night. This campaign will go down in Libertarian Party history as one of our best showings ever. I am impressed.
I wonder what his future political plans are. I hope he seeks the nomination for President of the Libertarian Party. It would be interesting.
As for talk of one candidate “pulled more votes from” another candidate, of course there’s no telling how many would just not have voted if there had not been that one candidate on the ballot.
Thanks for the vote totals from different states. That should probably be a separate thread. I may get to it later, but would be good if someone else can post one in the meantime.
Report from Batavia:
City Council in the field of 9 for three seats
Jim took 17% of voters
Lisa took 11%
Genesee County Legislature race:
Bob took 12% of voters
I don’t think that there is any chance that it will be Jeb Bush or Sarah Palin or Dan Quale (sic)
I do. But that’s OK, we don’t have to agree.
Santorum is a decent possibility though.
There’s nothing decent about Santorum 🙂
http://spreadingsantorum.com/
However, I agree he has a good chance at the next NSGOP nomination given trends within that party, which would be good for the LP, even if he does have Rand Paul to “balance” him and Bloomberg to sop up the moderates.
Sorry about the lousy typing.
I’m having issues with my left eye and cannot wear my lenses today!
Jill–
Thanks for your highly optimistic question.
In NYC, the LP got about .25% of the vote for Mayor. There weree 15 candidates and over 1,000,000 votes cast. We also got about 1% for Public Advbocate and about .50% for Comptroller. Alex Merced, the PA candidate, is the only one to break 10,000 votes. Unfortunately, Leticia James (Democrat-Working Families) got over 800,000 votes for the same office.
We are a fusion state, so some local City Council members races were cross-endorsed. At the high end, David Garland (Republican-Conservative-Libertarian-Dump the Dump) got about 30% in his Manhattan district and others got from 15-25%.
Upstate, Robert Porter (Repuclican-Libertarian) got 19% in Albany.
I don’t have specifics on our three candidates in Batavia, but they are all happy with thier showings, albeit not enough to be victorious.
Paulie said: “NSGOP nominees in 2016 might be Jeb Bush, Sarah Palin or Dan Quayle newly rehabilitated, or Santorum. It seems unlikely they could rehabilitate Cheney, but given past trends that could happen.”
I don’t think that there is any chance that it will be Jeb Bush or Sarah Palin or Dan Quale or Dick Cheney.
Santorum is a decent possibility though.
Agreed. Also a silver lining is that strong run in VA, especially on top of retaining party status in DC for the first time, is a sign to DC area based national political reporters and journalists that the LP is up and coming. I’m a couple of weeks behind on email and IPR, so I don’t know if any announcement has been made, but if the office move is announced soon (or already has been if I missed it) that will be another signal.
Also, many of the DC-area small l libertarians who have generally been a lot more anti-LP in recent decades were much more on board with this year’s Virginia races. That is a good sign as well.
I was hoping Sarvis would get to 10%. I wasn’t expecting it though and the final result isn’t disappointing. Who knows what would have happened if he had started sooner, been invited to one of the debates (or more), and had a competently managed & organized campaign team. Sometimes it seemed Robert Sarvis was the only one in the Sarvis campaign who wanted to win. For starters, they should have responded to the false GOP attacks with more than just twitter. Or to the “why aren’t you an Austrian” line with more than just emails and twitter. Or explain more thoroughly why Ron Paul should have endorsed Sarvis, and Cucc. was as authoritarian as McAuliffe. Plus numerous logistical blunders and missed opportunities I won’t get into right now. Organizing anything pro-Sarvis, and getting any support, was like pulling teeth from an alligator.
What is disappointing results-wise is how LP, IG, and Indy candidates fared in one-on-one House races. I didn’t expect any to win but I thought a few might get over 40% with how high the dissatisfaction with the major parties is. Instead the best got 20-30%, the worst 15%. Lone exception: Bill Grogan in the 68th got 37% of the vote. With Lacey Putney’s retirement, there are now no independents or 3rd party members in the Virginia legislature for the first time in over a decade.
I think the LP can win VA House races if they play their cards right. Of course the major disadvantages are that you don’t know if there will be other contenders until the last minute, so it’s hard to target races for 1-on-1 matchups unless you form some backroom deal with the local Dem./GOP heads (whichever isn’t running). Secondly, with having to get on the ballot by petition, you can’t really make a lot of headway until late June when you’re confirmed as being on the ballot. But the silver lining is that you only need 125 valid signatures to get on the ballot, which is very doable. I know House districts in Virginia are fairly large, about 52,000, but with enough volunteers and time, I think an active candidate should make it his or her goal to have their campaign knock on every single door in their House district. 25 people knocking on 2,000 doors each over the course of months isn’t impossible really. Doing this would give you a fighting chance.
NSGOP will not nominate Christie. Since WWII all NSGOP nominees have been
1) Former/sitting VP or VP nominees
2) Past runners up for P nomination
3) Members of the Bush klan
4) One victorious war general, and you have to go back to the 1950s for that
So, I’m pretty confident in predicting their next nominee will not deviate from those categories, IE will come from one of those categories, almost certainly 1-3.
Also, as an Obese-American (LOL) and a “pushy NYC area tristate” type I don’t believe that either of those will play well on the national stage.
NSGOP nominees in 2016 might be Jeb Bush, Sarah Palin or Dan Quayle newly rehabilitated, or Santorum. It seems unlikely they could rehabilitate Cheney, but given past trends that could happen. Don’t laugh – Reagan was considered a joke until well into the primaries by many. Jeb may be the most likely choice from those given the recent Republican trend of giving relative moderates the top spot, but I could also see a sharp lurch to the theocratic right with a Santorum or Palin. I don’t think there is any realistic chance Rand Paul can win, but he will do better than either of Ron Paul’s runs and could realistically get the VP spot, especially if he does well.
Bloomberg may well make his move in 2016 as well, or find a surrogate, but most likely do it himself this time, given his failure to find one this last time.
I’m compiling a list of Libertarian wins yesterday. I know of three so far from Pennsylvania, a re-election for Brett Bittner, and a good win by Joshua Katz in Connecticut. Can you please let me know when you find more, please?
Mark, were there any wins in New York yesterday?
Jill–
We hear this crap all the time, especially when a candidate does well.
And Sarvis used to be, God forbid!!, a registered Democrat.
And his wife is black, so he must be a Communist because de Blasio’s wife is black and everyone knows he is a Communist.
This is the usual shit put out by the losing side (usually Republicans) claiming that we stole votes from them.
The truth is that Sarvis, like most successful (by our standards) Libertarian candidates, drew support from both disgruntled Democrats and disgruntled Republicans. In fact, as the Washington Post reported this morning, his support was pretty evenly split across the board from both the left and the right.
What a surprise!
This is a good way to root people out of our ranks who aren’t really here for the philosophy or the greater cause. Those aligned with GOP thought, even if on the lite side, should remain with the GOP and not taint our party.
I agree with your comment above, Bondurant, but I was shocked at how many Libertarians bought into all the obvious hit pieces against Sarvis, especially Glenn Beck’s. It’s downright embarrassing and depressing.
The neocon conspiracy theories are fun to read. Who is Glenn Beck to challenge the Libertarian and/or libertarian credentials of anyone. That blowhard fascist has referred to himself, falsely, on multiple occasions as a libertarian.
According to this polling data, Rob Sarvis received twice as many votes from self identified liberals than he received from self identified conservatives.
http://libertycrier.com/washington-post-exit-polling-twice-many-self-identified-liberals-voted-sarvis-conservatives/?utm_source=The+Liberty+Crier&utm_campaign=327c554349-The_Liberty_Crier_Daily_News_11_6_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_600843dec4-327c554349-284774857
“Jose C November 6, 2013 at 1:59 am
To those when Sarvis’ campaign was first mentioned in IPR said of the polling which showed Sarvis doing well it could not and would not last the case as they say is closed.”
I would not say that the case is closed, because Sarvis was polling at 9-12% and ended up getting 6.6%. That’s still a good vote total by LP candidate for Governor standards, but it is less than what his polling numbers indicated that he would get.
The LP needs to choose its next Presidential candidate carefully. Because there’s an opportunity available for the party if the Dems nominate Hilary Clinton and the GOP nominates Chris Christie. Given Christie big re-election and the fact the primary calendar favors a candidate like himself (as it did Romney, McCain and others) over a Rand Paul, then the “control-the-GOP” operation will be proven a failure and in the wreckage the LP can stand tall. But it can only do so if it has the right candidate and campaign necessary to attract the voters put off by Clinton and Christie and giving them a viable alternative. The stress on the “viable” part.
Localized candidates often perform better than the presidential ticket. The top of the ticket raises awareness for other Libertarian candidates. Without it, we aren’t looked at seriously, but the ticket itself always under-performs.
Robert C. Sarvis received over 145,000 votes statewide — or 6.52%. This is 4.5x times more votes than Gary Johnson received in 2012’s presidential election in Virginia, and 8x more as a percentage of votes.
One similarity between the Johnson campaign & the Sarvis campaign: they both emphasized their support of gay marriage. This IS a libertarian issue, and it’s one that resonates with young people. Successful campaigns in the future must emphasize this, at least until it’s legal in most or all states.
Sarvis pulled more votes from McAuliffe, I agree
All election results can be found on the Virginia State Board of Elections website.
For the House of Delegates races involving Virginia Libertarians, select the “House of Delegates” link on the index page, then check the boxes next to 23, 33, 47, 53, 55, and 78 and then select the “My Tracked Contests” tab at the top of the page.
Some readers will have missed “http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/11/04/Ron-Paul-to-Virginians-Insane-to-Vote-for-Libertarian-Robert-Sarvis”
and observe, unsurprisingly, that the 12 and 13% numbers, like the PPP 4%, for Sarvis tended to evaporate.
Laura DelHomme was apparently in the 20s. I can’t find that link again, though.
To those when Sarvis’ campaign was first mentioned in IPR said of the polling which showed Sarvis doing well it could not and would not last the case as they say is closed.
Congratulations to Bob Sarvis! This is an Ed Clark moment. In 1978 Ed Clark received 5.6% of the vote in the California Governor’s election against Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Evel Younger. Ed Clark’s showing made him a top contender for the Libertarian Party nomination for President which he received on the first ballot at the convention in Los Angeles in 1979. And the rest as they say was history.
Bob Sarvis has to be considered one of the top contenders for the Libertarian Party nomination for President. This of course depends on what his political plans are. My advice to Bob Sarvis is to attend next years national Party convention and meet and greet the delegates. He should use the convention to get to know the delegates, to communicate with the delegates, to meet and greet the movers and shakers in the Party. The convention will be a great time for Bob Sarvis to talk about his vision as it relates to the future of the Libertarian Party and the future as it relates to any plans he has to seek the office of President.
If he plans to seek the office of President as a Libertarian what will his campaign do differently then other Libertarian Party candidates that did not do well? Will he campaign on a Libertarian vision and the Libertarian Party as the alternative to the failed policies of the Democratic and Republican parties or will he play it safe and mirror other campaigns that campaigned on a “socially liberal Republican light” vision? Will his campaign find it unacceptable if the Libertarian Party is not on the ballot on all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Guam or will he be satisfied with less? Will his campaign challenge the myth of the need for a “two party system”?
Again, congratulations to Bob Sarvis. Well, done.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/05/cnn-exit-polls-virginia-governors-race/
Don’t blame McDonnell
If Cuccinelli loses, he can’t blame his defeat on scandal-plagued outgoing GOP Gov. Bob McDonnell or third-party Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis. Virginia voters actually approve of McDonnell’s job performance by 12 points (53%-41%). And if Sarvis had not been in the race, exit polls indicate McAuliffe would have beaten Cuccinelli by 7 points (50%-43%).
I would NOT support Sarvis for President or VP. I like Rob, he did a fine job in this race, but the Presidential ticket needs to be fairly reliable libertarians, and he isn’t that.
Andy, you are incorrect. It’s 10%.
Hi Andy, I think the requirement is 10% of the vote. Nevertheless Robert Sarvis campaigning aroused interest in the LP in many people who had really never considered it before. If I recall correctly, his 6.6% is the best showing by a Libertarian candidate for Governor an any state since Dick Randolph got 14% in Alaska in 1982. I wonder if Sarvis will be interested in an LP nomination for President or VP? His showing makes him a contender if he wants to be.
I just saw Sarvis as being listed at 6.6% of the vote with 99% of the polling places reporting. This is still good by LP for Governor standards, and it is still more than the 5% of the vote need to get the LP ballot access for 2014 (assuming I’m correct about the 5% vote test).
“CNN exit polls have it :
McAuliffe 50
Cuccinelli 43
Sarvis 7”
If Sarvis does end up with 7% of the vote that is good by Libertarian Party standards for Governor. It is not the best that the party has ever done for that office, but it definitely puts Sarvis in the top tier of Libertarian Party candidates for Governor. I’m also pretty sure that by getting over 5% of the vote, that the Libertarian Party of Virginia will have major party status for the next election, and when you get major party status in Virginia you can chose whether or not you want to nominate candidates by primary or by convention, and if you chose to nominate by convention you do not have to gather petition signatures to place candidates on the ballot (except for I think that petitions for President are mandatory in Virginia), so Sarvis could have just gotten the LP ballot access for 2014.
I am quite happy with these results.
No, Bruce, Cuccinelli lost because he was a crappy cadidate.
7% in a three-party race is quite good.
“One need not be an oddball to be a member of the Libertarian Party. ”
My apologies. I should not have written this stupid sentence and I’m sorry if it offended anyone. My point being is the LP has opportunity now to be perceived and viewed as a major party by the voters.
Mother Jones has a good expose of Terry McAuliffe as a wheeler/dealer crony capitalist @ http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/terry-mcauliffe-governor-virginia
“The Johnson/Sarvis approach seems to have potential….”
Yes it does have potential because the facts clearly show on the ground the LP is the nation’s third party, period. Sarvis finished third in Virginia and Johnson finished third for President. It’s have become obvious that even those on the far Left and the far Right are not going to abandon the Democrats or the Republicans, which means there’s really no room for the Greens or the Constitutionalists to grow. But there is room for the LP to grow, especially among the young who espouse more libertarian-like views. The fact that marijuana legalization and same-sex marriage has mainstream support means the LP, instead of being a lone on an island, can have mainstream support too just as the major parties do. One need not be an oddball to be a member of the Libertarian Party. For the LP continue to grow, it needs to continue to nominate candidates like Sarvis and like Gary Johnson who can appeal to this mainstream
I probably should be happy with 6 1/2% – 7%, but I was really hoping for more.
Congratulations to Mr Sarvis for getting 7%. Every time I here a network report on the race, I here LIBERTARIAN Robert Sarvis. It is fine publicity.
18-29 at 20%ish is HUGE!
Of course, both R and D were quite flawed, and Sarvis is a non-fringe L, but he is also pretty much a no-name.
The Johnson/Sarvis approach seems to have potential….
Sarvis Watch – the issue in Virginia this year is personal freedom – which includes a woman’s right to control her own body, and the right of individuals to engage in recreational sex.
The Virginia Sodomy Law that Mr Cuccinelli defends actually prohibited heterosexual contact between people who were not married, along with other consensual activities. If you don’t own your own body, how can any other property rights be safe?
As for Attorney-General Cuccinelli challenging the Constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act – he managed to lose that case, despite the government having no explicit constitutional authority to mandate the purchase of medical insurance. So he is incompetent, and his incompetence has strengthened the argument of the Obamacare supporters.
This is what John Jay Myers posted to his FB page:
“Interesting exit poll results to the Virginia Governor’s race.
6% self described as liberal voted for the Libertarian
3% self described as conservative voted for the Libertarian.
20% of people from 18 to 29 voted for the Libertarian.
It looks like if the Republican loses, he will not be able to blame it on the Libertarian.
No matter the end count, these kind of numbers should tell either the R or the D that they may want to start espousing more libertarian ideals.”
@Gene: How do you figure the governor of Virginia is going to start a war?
& Has Sarvis pledged to recall the Virginia National Guard from Iraq & Afghanistan?
CNN exit polls have it :
McAuliffe 50
Cuccinelli 43
Sarvis 7
A software billionaire in Texas contributes to political candidates, and a loser like Glenn Beck thinks it’s a conspiracy. I lived in Austin, and Libertarians have always been prominent there.
And many software entrepreneurs are pro-Libertarian.
Given the Republican Party’s commitment to war and statism, especially to attacking a woman’s right to control her own body, it stands to reason that some opponents of Republican statism would contribute to both Libertarians and Democrats, just as some free market oriented business owners contribute to the better free market Republicans and also to Libertarians.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/07/cathy-reisenwitz-why-ken-cuccinellis-oral-sex-law-means-no-libertarian-should-ever-vote-for-him/
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/11/05/revealed-obama-campaign-bundler-helping-fund-libertarian-in-tight-va-gubernatorial-race/
“A major Democratic Party benefactor and Obama campaign bundler helped pay for professional petition circulators responsible for getting Virginia Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Robert C. Sarvis on the ballot — a move that could split conservative votes in a tight race.
“Campaign finance records show the Libertarian Booster PAC has made the largest independent contribution to Sarvis’ campaign, helping to pay for professional petition circulators who collected signatures necessary to get Sarvis’ name on Tuesday’s statewide ballot.
“Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama.”
Actually Sarvis has been scoring as much as 13%.
http://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2013/governor/va/virginia_governor_cuccinelli_vs_mcauliffe_vs_sarvis-4111.html
I was tickled that Robert accepted my friend request on FB today, but was surprised that we only have 29 friends in common.
And shame on the New York Times, which hasn’t mentioned the name “Robert Sarvis” once in any of its coverage of the Virginia gubernatorial election.
I wish reporters would get it straight that if Sarvis gets 10%, the LP is ballot-qualified for 2014, 2015, and 2016. The LP would get three years of ballot status. The article above says it extends thru 2021. That is erroneous.
Cheers to both A. Barton Hinkle and the Richmond Times Dispatch for their coverage of all candidates this election cycle.