On November 15, the Wyoming Secretary of State released the official election returns. See them here. Libertarian State House nominee Bethany Baldes, in the 55th district, polled 49.2% of the vote in a two-person race. The Republican incumbent, David Miller, won with 50.8%.
Wyoming has not elected any third party nominee to the legislature since 1900, when a Populist won a State Senate seat.
Wyoming did elect an independent to the State House, in the 22nd district. This is the first time an independent had been elected to the Wyoming state house since 1976. Here is a story about Jim Roscoe, who is a former Democrat.
That doesn’t explain why she made that choice. I’m not suggesting they should have ignored her wishes.
Seebeck “In 2016 I earned 31% of the vote against an R with no D in my legislative district race. I did it on $0 in a highly conservative district with a military base….. Explain that one.”
When Lois Landgraf won that district in 2012 there was no Democrat on the ballot and she was opposed by the Libertarian and Constitution party candidates. She got 55% of all ballots cast. The L and C candidates combined got 29%. The remaining 17% were blank.
In 2014 she had no opponents at all and got 69% of all votes cast. The rest were blank. Democrats typically have lower turnout in mid-terms, so there were fewer voters in opposition that year.
In 2016, when Democratic turnout went back up and you were her only opponent, she got 60% of all votes cast. She got 60%, you got 27%, and the remaining 12% were blank. Those numbers aren’t all that far off from 2012.
There is a minority of voters – probably somewhere around 30% in mid term years and 40% or more in Presidential years – that won’t vote Republican. Most of them are Democrats. In your area the Democrats are much more willing to cast a “not the Republican” vote for a Libertarian or Constitution Party candidate than they are in many other places. Also, it’s likely that some of the people who would normally vote for Landgraf when she is opposed by a Democrat will vote Libertarian when there is no Democrat on the ballot.
The last time there was an R v D v L election in that district was 2002. The Republican got 64%. The Democrat got 29%. The Libertarian got 3%. And the remaining 4% were blank. That’s still a pretty consistent ratio of “Republican” and “Not the Republican” votes.
Actually, she did win, but got jacked at the end with a box of exactly 500 absentee ballots that did not even come close to fitting the pattern. For some odd reason the campaign and party decided against pursuing a case, but they know they got robbed.
The “odd reason” is that Ms. Baldes herself chose not to pursue it, and the party respected her wishes.
Yes, she got robbed.
But, figure, for a state legislature race, the typical libertarian when facing an R and a D is going to get 4% – 5%. Now take away one major party opponent and the typical L gets 15%. Have the Libertarian’s major party opponent be from the opposite party as the party that is having a surge year and you’re at 19%. Then add a geography bonus. I don’t know the numbers offhand, but the baseline in rural, Mountain West states like Wyoming is going to be higher than it is in high population density areas like NY or NJ.
In 2016 I earned 31% of the vote against an R with no D in my legislative district race. I did it on $0 in a highly conservative district with a military base. Led the state in percentages, and 6th-highest in the nation.
Explain that one.
Kudos!
Actually, she did win, but got jacked at the end with a box of exactly 500 absentee ballots that did not even come close to fitting the pattern. For some odd reason the campaign and party decided against pursuing a case, but they know they got robbed.
Almost only counts in horseshoes and grenades
Oh, sure. The candidate matters a lot when you hit 49%.
But, figure, for a state legislature race, the typical libertarian when facing an R and a D is going to get 4% – 5%. Now take away one major party opponent and the typical L gets 15%. Have the Libertarian’s major party opponent be from the opposite party as the party that is having a surge year and you’re at 19%. Then add a geography bonus. I don’t know the numbers offhand, but the baseline in rural, Mountain West states like Wyoming is going to be higher than it is in high population density areas like NY or NJ.
It was a great setup to run an active campaign and she almost pulled it off. A paper candidate probably would have gotten around 23%. It was that other 26% or so that she worked for.
I’d like to know what her sales pitch was. Like, was she running on her issues or attacking the other guy? Maybe I’ll try to look that up tomorrow.
She also went door to door extensively with a team, is 5th generation Wyoming, active in her community, etc.
It isn’t just small districts that juices returns. What puts candidates closer is running against one party when the opposite party has a surge year. So Baldes ran against a Republican in a year when Democrats had better than normal turnout. The Democrats all came out and voted “not the Republican.”
In late January or early February I’ll put out a chart going back 20 years that shows that effect. I did it for both US House and state legislatures. It’s more difficult to see for US House because there aren’t that many Libertarian candidates that have only one opponent, but it’s very clear for state legislature, where 30% of Libertarian candidates have only one opponent.
We have always run candidates in small population districts. I’m not aware of it being a liberaltarian vs conservatarian issue.
For years the LP had this strategy on paper of running more candidates in small-population districts. The anti-purist ‘conservatarians’ always torpedoed it…
Now it seems to be happening.