Posted on 10/29/2013 5:13:16 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
A Newsmax/Zogby Poll shows that with one week to go before Virginians elect a new governor, Democrat Terry McAuliffe is leading Republican Ken Cuccinelli by a margin of 35.5 percent to 30.4 percent, with Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis gathering enough support to tip the balance.
Although McAuliffe's campaign spending advantage and the scandals surrounding outgoing Republican Gov. Robert McDonnell are the most oft-cited reasons for Cuccinelli's underdog status, Zogby's polling shows that Sarvis is hurting the state attorney general's chances.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Hold on, I thought the Clown’s and Hitlery’s stooge was 12 points up!
Sarvis could be taking almost as many voters from the Democrat as from the Republican
Cucinelli’s unshakeable problem is the (R) after his name, something which no government-teat sucking North Vigrinian can overlook.
Sarvis can hold the votes.. then quietly they will swing to Ken. Paul’s people understand game.
Or maybe he thinks he’d be a better governor than either Cuccinelli or McAuliffe. He’d certainly be less corrupt than either.
Like I’ve always said, 3rd parties elect Democrats.
I don’t think so, not too many libertarians care for big spending democrats. They’re small government, exactly like the very conservative Cuccinelli. I think KC’s problem is he’s afraid to talk about family/social issues and he’s being burned on the airways with McAwful’s lies. He needs to fight back.
Like I’ve always said, 3rd parties elect Democrats.
Case in point is Ross Perot, who gave America Bill Clinton not once, but twice.
He needs to wait till he last forty eight hours to throw his support behind him. Otherwise, they will have time to retaliate.
In northern va the cement heads keep helping the Dems reelect jerry Connolly...
For instance, if first round results were (D)40%, (R)35%, and (L)25%; the (L) candidate would be eliminated, and there would be a runoff between only the (D) and the (R). If at least 2/3 of (L) votes switched to the (R) candidate, he or she would win.
Conversely, knowing that there would be a runoff vote, voters might be more comfortable casting their first ballot for a 3rd party. The 3rd party candidate might actually get enough votes to bump either the (D) or the (R) candidate out of the running. That could open the door for a (T) candidate (i.e. Tea Party) to win the brass ring.
Ross Perot—what a nut job. I wonder what he’s doing these days.........
Maybe Republicans should stop pissing on/off Libertarians and court them instead...
..just a thought.
This guy wouldn’t be getting this much traction if the GOP had ever tried even once to live up to their “small government” rhetoric over the last 30 years.
3rd party candidates like this usually fade in the end as people consider it a wasted vote
Lucky if gets half or third of what is polling now
Don't know if that's actually true, but you can find it on the Internet.
Thanks, I didn’t know that. I will look it up.
I agree that the Libertarian leaving the race does not mean all of the votes go to the Republican.
A lot of Libertarians are pro legalized drugs, and anti military. That throws them into the Dem camp when choosing between the 2 parties.
Many are small government types, but many don’t care about that aspect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.