Did the Libertarian candidate spoil it in AZ CD9?

[kylejack]

A candidate is only entitled to the votes he earned. His jobs plan endorses the military-industrial complex. I will not mourn his loss.

 

[UWDude]

You're assuming that everyone in Arizona who voted Libertarian was actually libertarian. I don't think that's the case. You bring up all the Ls on the ticket except one, the one at the top of the ticket who was actually an experienced, well-qualified candidate. In Arizona, Johnson got 1.4% of the vote statewide. The Libertarian in the US Senate race got 4.5%. Something doesn't add up.

My theory is that AZ, statewide, is about 2% Libertarian. The congressional races you cited were very competitive and were almost exclusively negative advertising. I think a significant number of NON-libertarians got pissed at the negativity in those races and voted Libertarian as a protest vote. I think that's why the L numbers swelled statewide, especially in the competitive races.

What do you think?

Arizona is very Libertarian. There are three other strong Libertarian states: Washington, New Hampshire, and Georgia. I think most of those votes were true Libertarians.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Arizona is very Libertarian. There are three other strong Libertarian states: Washington, New Hampshire, and Georgia. I think most of those votes were true Libertarians.

Care to explain why you think that? You really think statewide Libertarians in AZ would give GJ 1.4% of the vote, while giving their Senate candidate 4.5? How would you explain the difference?

 

[AJ Antimony]

we had an election, ron paul won.
romney got the votes at the convention insead of ron.
The GOP doesn't follow rules to elect their candidates. they just pick them when the votes don't go the way they want.

The LP follows the rules, even when it would benefit them to do otherwise.


One group is criminal, the other is not.

The LP has no control over who gets on the ballot as a libertarian, the GOP has full control.

what are you talking about?

LOL Everyone in this thread is talking about congressional elections/elected office, then you out of nowhere bring up conventions and delegates and whatnot. I see what you're trying to say, but in a way it's apples and oranges.

You're saying when the GOP picks delegates the GOP doesn't like, it replaces them willy nilly. Yes, we know. But this is irrelevant as far as this thread goes. When the GOP holds primary elections for public office, they can't replace the eventual nominee. Ever heard the name Todd Akin before?

 

[torchbearer]

LOL Everyone in this thread is talking about congressional elections/elected office, then you out of nowhere bring up conventions and delegates and whatnot. I see what you're trying to say, but in a way it's apples and oranges.

You're saying when the GOP picks delegates the GOP doesn't like, it replaces them willy nilly. Yes, we know. But this is irrelevant as far as this thread goes. When the GOP holds primary elections for public office, they can't replace the eventual nominee. Ever heard the name Todd Akin before?

I was talking about the difference between the GOP and LP.

 

[RonPaul101.com]

I know the immediate feeling is that it was a bad move or costly to help elect the Democrat, but long term this was a very good move and we need a lot more of them. Once the average GOP voter realizes they will never be able to elect any GOP candidates who aren't one of "our" candidates, that is when we've won.

To make an omelet, you've got to break some eggs.

 

[Smart3]

So we cost an Uncle Tom election. What's the problem?

 

[klamath]

It won't be the first time you question your vote after the fact. What you decide is the best person for your district is YOUR decision.
I actually regret voting for Gary Johnson as all it did was strengthen the proabortionist libertarians and their belief that their way is the way for the RP movement. I won't make that mistake ever again.

 

[Smart3]

It won't be the first time you question your vote after the fact. What you decide is the best person for your district is YOUR decision.
I actually regret voting for Gary Johnson as all it did was strengthen the proabortionist libertarians and their belief that their way is the way for the RP movement. I won't make that mistake ever again.

If you oppose abortion, then you shouldn't be voting LP. Period.

 

[klamath]

If you oppose abortion, then you shouldn't be voting LP. Period.

As I said, I won't make that mistake again unless the condidate respects ALL life.

 

[UWDude]

Care to explain why you think that? You really think statewide Libertarians in AZ would give GJ 1.4% of the vote, while giving their Senate candidate 4.5? How would you explain the difference?

Gary Johnson was distasteful to many libertarians for his stances on Iran.

Arizona is very Libertarian. (compared to most states) and 1.4% is better than most states. The Ron Paul R3VOLution sign and logo was originally designed by Arizonans.

 

[puppetmaster]

i would blame the loss of the (L) on the republicans

 

[erowe1]

Gary Johnson was distasteful to many libertarians for his stances on Iran.

Arizona is very Libertarian. (compared to most states) and 1.4% is better than most states. The Ron Paul R3VOLution sign and logo was originally designed by Arizonans.

1.4% is higher than the average, but not by much.

 

[AJ Antimony]

Gary Johnson was distasteful to many libertarians for his stances on Iran.

Arizona is very Libertarian. (compared to most states) and 1.4% is better than most states. The Ron Paul R3VOLution sign and logo was originally designed by Arizonans.

Riiiight. So if GJ made a single different statement on Iran, he would have polled 4.5% in AZ instead of 1.4%. Oh, and he would have polled at 5% nationally instead of 1%, just like he said he would.

Time for some actual numbers.

As of June 2010, 24,328 out of 3,093,647 registered voters in Arizona were registered Libertarian. That's a whopping 0.8%!

As of October 2012, 22,086 out of 3,124,712 registered voters in Arizona were registered Libertarian. That's 0.7%!

Maybe Arizona is libertarian, but it's certainly not Libertarian.

 

[Lucille]

You're assuming that everyone in Arizona who voted Libertarian was actually libertarian. I don't think that's the case. You bring up all the Ls on the ticket except one, the one at the top of the ticket who was actually an experienced, well-qualified candidate. In Arizona, Johnson got 1.4% of the vote statewide. The Libertarian in the US Senate race got 4.5%. Something doesn't add up.

My theory is that AZ, statewide, is about 2% Libertarian. The congressional races you cited were very competitive and were almost exclusively negative advertising. I think a significant number of NON-libertarians got pissed at the negativity in those races and voted Libertarian as a protest vote. I think that's why the L numbers swelled statewide, especially in the competitive races.

What do you think?

That piece I quoted did include GJ in the paragraph, but not in its list.

I really couldn't say. Maybe they were more afraid of Romney or Obama than the down-ticket candidates, so they voted for or against Obamney rather than Johnson.

I only know why I voted the way I did. AFAIC, there weren't enough attack ads. I believe Paton could have taken down Kirkpatrick had he exposed her as the corporatist she is, voting YAY! on Barry's Big Fascist Medical System (which she called "uniquely American") which BigIns and BigPharma wrote, and BigAg's Food "Safety" Bill, which both left and right opposed, and Barry's stimulus which also doled out billions in corporate welfare. His EPA is also shutting down and preventing new coal plants all across the rez.

Paton also agreed on every one of C4L's candidate questions, and he could have also attacked her for being a warmonger, a supporter of a dictatorial executive branch which goes to war without the consent of Congress, and assassinates and indefinitely detains American citizens without due process. But they stuck with the ad criticizing her for the few hundred thou in taxpayer money she doled out to her staff after she lost in '10. Woulda, shoulda, coulda!

 

[Brian4Liberty]

A little research shows that Vernon Parker is a neocon war hawk (but I repeat myself), backed by both Bush Sr. and John McCain. Those LP voters would never have cast a ballot for Parker, whether or not an LP candidate was on the ballot.

In California, the two Parties have fixed it so that there are only two names on the Ballot in the General Election. In some contests, it's two Democrats in the General (which worked out well by eliminating Pete Stark).

I chose to leave some contests blank, instead of voting for the lesser of the two evils, but most people probably felt obliged to vote for one when there were only two choices.

 

[Lucille]

In California, the two Parties have fixed it so that there are only two names on the Ballot in the General Election. In some contests, it's two Democrats in the General (which worked out well by eliminating Pete Stark).

I chose to leave some contests blank, instead of voting for the lesser of the two evils, but most people probably felt obliged to vote for one when there were only two choices.

Thank God AZ rejected the awful Top Two Primary! I was so afraid that would pass.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Thank God AZ rejected the awful Top Two Primary! I was so afraid that would pass.

Lucky for AZ, they had California to tell them how that worked out! There are certainly better options than the top-two Primary.

 

[UWDude]

Riiiight.

Jesus Christ. Even on the puniest of issues, some of you people don't know how to stop being dicks.

 

[Lucille]

Lucky for AZ, they had California to tell them how that worked out! There are certainly better options than the top-two Primary.

Is there any hope that that can be over-turned? I read that 3rd parties are trying in WA, but they're not having much success. The state supreme court refused to hear their latest case.

9 8 Libertarian 'Spoilers' in One Handy Chart! [UPDATED]
http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/16/9-libertarian-spoilers-in-one-handy-char

If we apportion the LP votes in the chart along the lines of that 53%-38%-10% split, then–as best as I can calculate–there are no spoilers in the chart above. Obviously, there are reasons to believe that the 53-38-10 formula is flawed, but (unlike the implied 100-0-0 number people sometimes use to divvy up third-party votes), at least it's based on real polling data.
[...]
UPDATE: Scratch Kerry Bentivolito off that Kos list of losing Republicans. As FoxNews.com explains, "On the same day Bentivolio won a two-year seat in the 113th Congress which starts next year, [Democrat David] Curson simultaneously won a special election to finish [outgoing Rep. Thad] McCotter's term during the lame duck session."