Reuters: Republican Chris McDaniel Leads Incumbent for U.S. Senate in Mississippi

A race that close can be subject to vote fraud... and Mississippi is one of the most corrupt states in the union.
 
Is it just a joke that you have Tom Cotton as one of the candidates that you support?

If I were Michael I would revise my list. I often get lectured as not being pure enough but compared to Michael, Spoa, and some others, who I all really like by the way, I am pretty pure.

I would never put Cotton, Sullivan, Kingston (even though I will vote for him over Perdue), and probably not Shannon on my RPF signature. I wouldn't donate to them. Money and effort is better spent on actual liberty candidates.
 
If I were Michael I would revise my list. I often get lectured as not being pure enough but compared to Michael, Spoa, and some others, who I all really like by the way, I am pretty pure.

I would never put Cotton, Sullivan, Kingston (even though I will vote for him over Perdue), and probably not Shannon on my RPF signature. I wouldn't donate to them. Money and effort is better spent on actual liberty candidates.

Yeah, I could possibly see casting a vote for Cotton as the lesser of two evils, but "supporting" him is certainly an entirely different matter all together. He's really portrayed himself as being "the anti libertarian."
 
If I were Michael I would revise my list. I often get lectured as not being pure enough but compared to Michael, Spoa, and some others, who I all really like by the way, I am pretty pure.

I would never put Cotton, Sullivan, Kingston (even though I will vote for him over Perdue), and probably not Shannon on my RPF signature. I wouldn't donate to them. Money and effort is better spent on actual liberty candidates.

If I lived in Arkansas, I would vote for Cotton. He is much more pro-liberty than Pryor. If I lived in Alaska, I would vote for Sullivan. Although Miller is more libertarian, he is deeply unpopular and his nomination would lead to Begich's re-election. If I lived in Georgia, I would vote for Kingston. He is much more conservative than Perdue. If I lived in Oklahoma, I would vote for Shannon. Although Brogdon is more pro-liberty, he is running a horrible campaign. He is underfunded and getting crushed in the polls. Although Oklahoma has runoff elections, Brogdon could still spoil the election for Shannon. For example, if the primary results are 45% Lankford, 35% Shannon, 19% Brogdon, and 1% Others, Lankford still goes into the runoff with the most name recognition and support. If Brogdon receives little support now, all those resources can go to Shannon. From now on, I will put the best liberty candidate in my signature. If they are running a bad campaign, I will switch my support to the most pro-liberty candidate that can win.
 
Last edited:
If I lived in Arkansas, I would vote for Cotton. He is much more pro-liberty than Pryor. If I lived in Alaska, I would vote for Sullivan. Although Miller is more libertarian, he is deeply unpopular and his nomination would lead to Begich's re-election. If I lived in Georgia, I would vote for Kingston. He is much more conservative than Perdue. If I lived in Iowa, I would vote for Ernst. Although Whitaker is more libertarian, he is doing poorly and basically out of contention. If I lived in Oklahoma, I would vote for Shannon. Although Brogdon is more pro-liberty, he is running a horrible campaign. He is underfunded and getting crushed in the polls. Although Oklahoma has runoff elections, Brogdon could still spoil the election for Shannon. For example, if the primary results are 45% Lankford, 35% Shannon, 19% Brogdon, and 1% Others, Lankford still goes into the runoff with the most name recognition and support. If Brogdon receives little support now, all those resources can go to Shannon. From now on, I will put the best liberty candidate in my signature. If they are running a bad campaign, I will switch my support to the most pro-liberty candidate that can win.

Ok, I get why you would vote for them. But they aren't the only people having races, that is my point. There are liberty candidates with shots at winning.
 
Lee Bright, Tom McMillin, Igor Birman, Barry Loudermilk, Bob Johnson, Jody Hice, Steve Lonegan, Rod Blum, Paul LePage. These are off the top of my head.

Lee Bright has no chance and the rest are not running for U.S. Senate.
 
A race that close can be subject to vote fraud... and Mississippi is one of the most corrupt states in the union.

Rumor has it that Democrats will be called on to tip the scales in Cochran's favor. Haley Barbour will stop at nothing to keep power. Although his brother Jeppie has come out and endorsed MdDaniel.
 
Lee Bright has no chance and the rest are not running for U.S. Senate.

If Graham gets under 50%, Bright will probably face him in a runoff. It's close. I don't see why you would advertise non-liberty candidates over liberty candidates just because they are running for Senate.
 
If Graham gets under 50%, Bright will probably face him in a runoff. It's close. I don't see why you would advertise non-liberty candidates over liberty candidates just because they are running for Senate.

Advertising candidates that are already supported here is pointless (Birman, McMillin, etc). There are dozens of great house candidates, far more than I can fit in a signature. This is why I stick to the senate.

Can you cite a poll showing the SC race?

The last one I have found was February:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep..._carolina_senate_republican_primary-4090.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_South_Carolina,_2014#Polling
 
Looking better now. McDaniel actually ahead by 1%. McDaniel is just killing Cochran in Jones county.
 
Back
Top