Ken Cuccinelli for Senate?

He could not win, and i would not support him because it would be a waste of time. Cooch is finished in Virginia. He had potential, but he screwed it up with the stupid sodomy nonsense and has no chance at any statewide office ever again. Focus your efforts on the next generation of Liberty Candidates in the Commonwealth, and try to stress to them the importance of not making the same mistakes Cooch did.

He came within 2% of becoming governor and had the momentum going into the election. If Sarvis the spoiler wasn't on the ballot, Cuccinelli would have probably won. There will be a recount in Virginia to decide who their next attorney general will be. If Obenshain holds his lead, he will be the GOP frontrunner for governor in 2017. If Herring is victorious, Cuccinelli could attempt another run.
 
He came within 2% of becoming governor and had the momentum going into the election. If Sarvis the spoiler wasn't on the ballot, Cuccinelli would have probably won. There will be a recount in Virginia to decide who their next attorney general will be. If Obenshain holds his lead, he will be the GOP frontrunner for governor in 2017. If Herring is victorious, Cuccinelli could attempt another run.
Exit polls showed the Libertarian helped the Republican keep the election close, not spoil anything for the Republican.
 
And those exit polls were all in the MOE. Essentially, the exit polling doesn't give a definitive answer one way or the other.

Then I suggest people quit calling the LP and Sarvis "the spoiler" if there is no "definitive answer one way or the other."
 
Then I suggest people quit calling the LP and Sarvis "the spoiler" if there is no "definitive answer one way or the other."
The Obama bundler money behind him sure led most to believe that he was a plant to sink the GOP candidate which is likely why Ron jumped in on this. My main issue isn't with the LP in general, it's when they run their peeps in races w/ non-establishment GOP nominees. This is exactly why this third party was created: because too many republicans were becoming establishment and not following the Constitution.
 
The Obama bundler money behind him sure led most to believe that he was a plant to sink the GOP candidate which is likely why Ron jumped in on this.

Oddly enough, I haven't seen any discussion from the left at how this backdoor funding almost cost their guy the election, and how they shouldn't do this in the future.
 
Oddly enough, I haven't seen any discussion from the left at how this backdoor funding almost cost their guy the election, and how they shouldn't do this in the future.

To answer the original question, I'd like to see Cuccinelli run and win the primary. The traditional GOP has sent a message, loud and clear. They would rather see a Democrat than the TEA Party win an election.

Nominating and running him again would send that same message right back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cjm
To answer the original question, I'd like to see Cuccinelli run and win the primary. The traditional GOP has sent a message, loud and clear. They would rather see a Democrat than the TEA Party win an election.

Nominating and running him again would send that same message right back.

Agreed. I'd happily support him again if he chose to run. I will add too, that not only has the traditional GOP sent a message, but the libertarian purists have as well. Evidenced here, there were some that were quite gleeful that "unpure" Cuccinelli lost the race.
 
Agreed. I'd happily support him again if he chose to run. I will add too, that not only has the traditional GOP sent a message, but the libertarian purists have as well. Evidenced here, there were some that were quite gleeful that "unpure" Cuccinelli lost the race.

I don't like them either, but they never claimed to be here for anybody but Ron though. The GOP, on the other hand, claims to exist in order to support Republicans.
 
To answer the original question, I'd like to see Cuccinelli run and win the primary. The traditional GOP has sent a message, loud and clear. They would rather see a Democrat than the TEA Party win an election.

Nominating and running him again would send that same message right back.

The only message it would send back is "we don't care how stupid or reckless our candidates behave, we will blindly support them again and again". Cuccinelli should have won this race by 10 points. The reason he lost has nothing to do with "the GOP Establishment". Yeah, they hate him, but they couldn't do anything to stop him from winning if he hadn't stopped himself. Cuccinelli chose sodomy over winning. He chose sodomy over us. And for that, he has no right to expect any future support from either the Tea Party or the Liberty Movement. We have to hold our candidates accountable. Supporting lousy candidates (and Cooch proved himself a lousy candidate) just to spite the establishment is the path to ruin.

I liked it when Cuccinelli won the nomination, and if he had won the election, he would have been one of the more pro-Liberty Governors in the nation. The idea that we all hate Cooch because he isn't "pure" is incorrect. I knew Cooch wasn't pure going in. What I didn't know was that he was a freaking idiot. Anybody who thinks they are going to have any chance of winning an election in this century while supporting laws that make sodomy a felony is too stupid to waste our time on. That Cooch will be remembered for the rest of his life as the guy who wants to ban sodomy is not the fault of the GOP Establishment. Cuccinelli chose to make that his issue, and he has nobody but himself to blame for the consequences of that choice.

The LP candidate didn't so many votes because "purists" were pissed off with Cooch. If it was just the purists, the LP would have gotten the same amount of votes they always get. Their votes swelled this time because independents and moderate Republicans pulled the lever as a protest against a guy they perceived as a religious nut. If the Dem candidate was somebody likeable like Warner, rather than a corrupt slime ball like McAuliffe, he would have been the beneficiary of all those LP votes. The idea that Cooch would somehow win a race against a likeable politician after just losing a race to a guy who perhaps the most unlikeable man in all of politics is simply delusional.
 
Last edited:
The only message it would send back is "we don't care how stupid or reckless our candidates behave, we will blindly support them again and again". Cuccinelli should have won this race by 10 points. The reason he lost has nothing to do with "the GOP Establishment". Yeah, they hate him, but they couldn't do anything to stop him from winning if he hadn't stopped himself. Cuccinelli chose sodomy over winning. He chose sodomy over us. And for that, he has no right to expect any future support from either the Tea Party or the Liberty Movement. We have to hold our candidates accountable. Supporting lousy candidates (and Cooch proved himself a lousy candidate) just to spite the establishment is the path to ruin.

I liked it when Cuccinelli won the nomination, and if he had won the election, he would have been one of the more pro-Liberty Governors in the nation. The idea that we all hate Cooch because he isn't "pure" is incorrect. I knew Cooch wasn't pure going in. What I didn't know was that he was a freaking idiot. Anybody who thinks they are going to have any chance of winning an election in this century while supporting laws that make sodomy a felony is too stupid to waste our time on. That Cooch will be remembered for the rest of his life as the guy who wants to ban sodomy is not the fault of the GOP Establishment. Cuccinelli chose to make that his issue, and he has nobody but himself to blame for the consequences of that choice.

The LP candidate didn't so many votes because "purists" were pissed off with Cooch. If it was just the purists, the LP would have gotten the same amount of votes they always get. Their votes swelled this time because independents and moderate Republicans pulled the lever as a protest against a guy they perceived as a religious nut. If the Dem candidate was somebody likeable like Warner, rather than a corrupt slime ball like McAuliffe, he would have been the beneficiary of all those LP votes. The idea that Cooch would somehow win a race against a likeable politician after just losing a race to a guy who perhaps the most unlikeable man in all of politics is simply delusional.

I wonder what the reaction would have been had he said, "As AG, I have a constitutional obligation to defend the laws of the commonwealth" and left it at that.

I agree that Sarvis was a non-factor in the Cuccinelli loss. It was his campaign. The lack of support from RPV and RNC were less of an issue than the campaign abandoning its base trying to court the "center." [@MattC: I've seen the video, it doesn't apply here. KC lost more votes going to the center than he picked up].
 
I wonder what the reaction would have been had he said, "As AG, I have a constitutional obligation to defend the laws of the commonwealth" and left it at that.

But that really isn't the job of the AG. I actually agree that there is no Constitutional basis for the Federal Government to overturn a state law that makes sodomy a felony. But that was the holding of the Supreme Court in Lawrence v Texas. This was settled law. There was no hope for a successful appeal. A good lawyer would have known that and saved the taxpayers the bill. And of course even if the Supreme Court hadn't settled this issue already, you still can't make the Federalist argument and "leave it at that", at least not from a political standpoint. Remember, this is a law that criminalizes oral sex, even between husband and wife. As a politician, when you are defending an insane law on purely technical grounds, you need to go to great pains to emphasize that you do indeed recognize that the law itself is insane, and you are only defending some broader constitutional principle rather than the law itself. Even the dissenting judges on the Lawrence case did that. Scalia wrote in his opinion he had nothing against homosexuals and Thomas made it a point to call the law in question "uncommonly silly" and wrote that if he were a member of the Texas Legislature he'd vote to repeal it.

But this entire discussion is moot. This wasn't a simple issue of tactless framing. Cooch wasn't just defending the law on Constitutional grounds. This was a law he used himself in real life cases and was defending on the merits. Cooch believed the itself should stay on the books so prosecutors could use it as some kind of additional "tool" in sexual assault cases.
 
With respect to Cooch fans, Virginia is already now a blue state and Warner will win re-election. All our attention should be on getting Karen elected, as it was in 2012.

I have spoken with Karen and unfortunately she has declined to run again. I am currently in the process of attempting to recruit a candidate.
 
In regards to the actual topic of the thread, Ken Cuccinelli would not be the worst nominee we could get for Senate, but the jury is still out on whether he'd be the best.

He could win if he didn't have recycled Karl Rove-esque RPV idiot consultants running his campaign and trying to make him look like a moderate, like he did this year. Warner is beatable, especially in light of Obamacare backlash.
 
In regards to the actual topic of the thread, Ken Cuccinelli would not be the worst nominee we could get for Senate, but the jury is still out on whether he'd be the best.

He could win if he didn't have recycled Karl Rove-esque RPV idiot consultants running his campaign and trying to make him look like a moderate, like he did this year. Warner is beatable, especially in light of Obamacare backlash.
If you think Cuccinelli lost because he was seen as too moderate, I want some of what you're smoking ;)
 
If you think Cuccinelli lost because he was seen as too moderate, I want some of what you're smoking ;)

It's pretty good stuff :cool:

What I mean is that the very first thing his campaign did was ditch its base, the base that got Ken the nomination - including a broad coalition of libertarians, tea partiers, and social conservatives. The Ken we nominated was a small-government firebrand, the Ken we got in the general election was a squishy Romney-esque "I'm not the other guy" candidate, whose campaign messaging was rarely issues/policy-oriented. Between that and the heavy-handed micromanaging/mismanaging of the grassroots by the campaign, grassroots energy went down the crapper and nobody cared.
 
If he hadn't run a Romney-esque campaign, he would've lost by more.

There was tons of conservative energy behind him regardless, and in off years like this, turnout is key. Democrats were using his social conservative crap to make him seem like an extremist to get their turnout levels up, and Cooch needed much higher turnout than the Dem if he was to have a shot.
 
http://www.roanokefreepress.com/cuccinelli-challenges-irs-employer-mandate-penalty/

Cuccinelli challenges IRS employer mandate penalty

RICHMOND (November 26, 2013) – Today, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli filed a brief in federal court challenging the IRS’s enforcement of Obamacare’s employer mandate penalty against Virginia businesses, alleging the penalty cannot be enforced in the commonwealth under the president’s health care law, also known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).

Cuccinelli filed a friend-of-the-court brief – or amicus brief – in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Richmond in the case of King v. Sebelius, asserting that because Virginia elected not to establish a health insurance exchange, opting instead to let the federal government establish one, PPACA does not allow the federal government to enforce the penalty against employers who hire Virginians. The penalty is a $2,000 or $3,000 per employee annual tax on employers that do not offer government-approved “affordable” health insurance at the workplace.

“If the courts ultimately rule in our favor and determine that the federal government has to follow the law as it was actually written, Virginia’s job creators can avoid a huge new $2000 or $3000 per employee annual tax, and our companies can instead invest that money to grow their businesses, hire new employees, and create needed jobs. This is precisely why we pushed for a federally run exchange in Virginia instead of having the commonwealth run its own. We knew how the law was written, and no matter how hard the IRS tries to circumvent the law, only Congress can change it,” said Cuccinelli.

PPACA called on each state to create its own government-run insurance exchange where people without employer-based health insurance could shop for private insurance coverage. For those states like Virginia that chose not to create their own exchanges, the federal government stepped in and set up federal exchanges.

However, the way the law was debated and ultimately written by Congress, PPACA only triggers the employer penalty in states with state-created exchanges, not federally created ones.

The IRS has tried to counter the law by passing a regulation to allow it to assess the penalty in states with federally run exchanges. However, because laws passed by Congress trump regulations passed by government agencies, and because the IRS regulation directly contradicts, rather than implements, the law Congress passed, the IRS lacks the authority to penalize Virginia’s employers under Obamacare.

By Valerie Garner
 
He came within 2% of becoming governor and had the momentum going into the election. If Sarvis the spoiler wasn't on the ballot, Cuccinelli would have probably won. There will be a recount in Virginia to decide who their next attorney general will be. If Obenshain holds his lead, he will be the GOP frontrunner for governor in 2017. If Herring is victorious, Cuccinelli could attempt another run.

He came within 2% against one of the most openly corrupt and personally off putting men to ever run for public office. McAuliffe pulled all his favors from a lifetime of political dealing to get himself the nomination so he could pursue this vanity run for public office. It was fluke situation. The Dems are never going to run a candidate as horrible as McAuliffe again. Cuccinelli should have won this election by at least 15 points. The next Dem candidate will be another Warner or Webb type and such a candidate would destroy somebody who openly advocates the criminalization of oral sex. Forget about Cuccinelli. We gave him our support at the convention and he turned around and stabbed us in the back with the moronic campaign her ran. There are too many good candidates out there to waste our time on idiots.
 
Back
Top