Posted on 10/14/2014 4:35:31 AM PDT by Kaslin
One question I'm asked in every electoral cycle is, "What are the surprise races in this election?" My answer in recent years has been, "There are no surprises, because any unexpected development becomes universally known in seconds."
There have been two such developments in this cycle. One in Kansas: the emergence about five weeks ago of independent Greg Orman (and the withdrawal from the ballot of the Democratic nominee) as a strong competitor against 34-year Capitol Hill veteran Republican Sen. Pat Roberts.
The other was in South Dakota: a poll showing Larry Pressler, a former Republican senator running as an independent, within the statistical margin of error of Republican nominee Mike Rounds and ahead of Democrat Rick Weiland.
Before these developments, everyone figured these were safe Republican seats. Now they look to be in jeopardy. Republicans' chances for the net gain of six seats they need for a Senate majority seem reduced.
Unless these polls are dreadfully wrong, there's no question that many Kansas and South Dakota voters have been changing their minds. That's in contrast to the relatively static preferences of voters in other states with serious Senate contests, where only a few percent seem to have been moving around.
Both these states' contests feature purportedly independent candidates. In September, Gallup reported, 58 percent of Americans said that a third political party was needed. So maybe it's not surprising that, when presented with a well-known independent candidate, many voters consider voting for him.
But will they still feel that way on Election Day? Recent elections in Brazil on Oct. 5 and in Britain in 2010 suggest that they may not.
In Brazil, Eduardo Campos, who had been running third with between 7 and 13 percent in the polls, died in a plane crash August 13. His vice presidential candidate Marina Silva, who had run for president herself in 2010, took his place and within days zoomed up to parity, at 34 percent, with incumbent Dilma Rousseff. Languishing in third place in every September poll was PSDB nominee Aecio Neves.
But on Election Day, Rousseff led with 42 percent. Neves was second with 34 percent and Silva a distant third with 21 percent. Those numbers were very similar to the first round results in 2010, when Rousseff had 47 percent, the PSDB nominee 33 percent and Silva 19 percent.
So election returns from four years before seemed a better predictor than the late August and September polls. And now Neves, who was running third just weeks ago, is leading Rousseff in polls for the Oct. 26 runoff.
Something similar happened in the 2010 British election. After the initial debate between prime ministerial candidates -- the first in British history -- support for Nick Clegg and his Liberal Democratic party ballooned. Incumbent Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Conservative challenger David Cameron trailed behind.
But on Election Day most Britons voted either Conservative or Labour, as they have since 1922, with Conservatives gaining seats, as widely expected. Clegg's Lib Dems actually won fewer parliamentary seats than in 2005.
What this suggests is that voters may flirt with third-party candidates during a campaign but, when it comes down to voting, tend to choose between two major parties in pretty much the same proportions as they have before.
The American political system, more than Brazil's or Britain's, tends to strengthen this tendency. The Electoral College at the presidential level and single-member seats in Senate and House elections are formidable barriers to third parties and independent candidacies.
An independent presidential candidate who achieves critical mass can be competitive, as Ross Perot seemed to be until he withdrew suddenly in July 1992 or as polls in 1995 suggested Colin Powell would have been as an independent candidate. But usually support for third candidates dissipates by Election Day.
Will it this year? Perhaps Pressler, who voted twice for Obama, will displace Weiland as the chief alternative to Rounds in South Dakota. But he faces an uphill climb in a state that voted 58 percent for Mitt Romney.
In Kansas (60 percent Romney), Roberts has banked on that with a simple message -- I'm the real Republican; he's a Democrat. He's running even if you average the three polls conducted this month.
My guess is that oscillating polls will give way to familiar results in South Dakota and Kansas, as they did in Brazil and Britain. But maybe not. We'll see.
...and then there’s the libertardian in NC......who is a real joke.
Brilliant: maybe...maybe not.
“....safe Republican seats”
There are no safe GOP seats when they’re strongest tactic is viciously attacking their base. Roberts’ loss will be a good thing, ultimately, for conservatives.
“So maybe it’s not surprising that, when presented with a well-known independent candidate, many voters consider voting for him.”
True. Since a choice between career politicians, Democrat or Republican is damn near no choice. Democrat wins, we the people lose. Republican wins, we the people lose just a little less. So many of us have for years, voted for the Republican as ‘lesser of two evils’.
That said, I will always vote for the most conservative on the ballot whether Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitution Party-er.
This is pure nonsense. The person who says I vote for the man, not the party. Truly a canard. Now time for the facts. I have been voting since 1982. I have never missed an election. I have always, without exception, voted the straight GOP ticket in the general election and have never regretted a single vote I have ever cast. I live in CA. All Democrats out here are Marxists. Maybe there are some conservative Democrats still around in the Deep South and some other regions in the country, but here in CA, there ain’t no such varmint. They are ALL Marxists here. No exceptions. Also here in CA, third party candidates rarely make any difference at all and only serve to siphon off votes from the major party candidates. Does that mean every Republican candidate I have ever voted for was perfect? No. Of course not. Far from it. But without exception, every GOP candidate I have voted for the past 32 years was VASTLY superior to the Dem candidate. No question about it. My only realistic chance for advancing the conservative cause is within the GOP primary and I never miss an opportunity to do just that. But the only way I can impact the general election to my way of thinking is to vote the straight party GOP ticket in the general election. There is nothing to think about. Nothing to ponder. Nothing to debate. It’s just the facts and they way politics works in this country. Nothing in life is perfect, least of all politics. We have to work with what we have in order to make a difference.
One can always depend on Progressives enfranchising those in the cemeteries, Mickey and Minnie Mouse, John and Jane Doe, and finding boxes full of “uncounted” votes conveniently placed and “forgotten” in the trunks of poll workers.
One should also never forget the brilliant, intellectual, genius “independents” who have placed themselves above petty politics and camouflaged their support of Progressive candidates with the label of “Independent”.
By hook or by crook, the Progressives will win the day.
IMHO
Only 1 poll has Pressler ahead of Weiland in SD. Pressler is a clown, Rounds needs to be worried about Weiland.
In other words, GOP tyranny trumps Democrat tyranny.
Way to go. YOU and your ilk got us to where we are.
Thanks a lot.
Voting since 82 huh? Am I supposed to bow down or something?
No just stating the facts. I voted the first time in 1982 in a midterm election. I first voted for president in 1984.
In 1984 I voted for RR over Mondale. No regrets.
In 1988 I voted for George H. W. Bush over Dukakis. No regrets.
In 1992 I voted for George H. W. Bush over Clinton. No regrets.
In 1996 I voted for Dole over Clinton. No regrets.
In 2000 I voted for GWB over Algore. No regrets.
In 2004 I voted for GWB over Kerry. No regrets.
In 2008 I voted for McCain over BHO. No regrets.
In 2012 I voted for MR over BHO. No regrets.
In each case, without exception, the GOP candidate (though not perfect) was vastly superior to his Dem opponent.
Now, would like me to repeat this very same exercise with respects to US Senate candidate, gubernatorial, and congressional candidates?
As I stated. Thanks a lot. You got what you deserved.
I didn’t always get what I wanted, but I did always vote for best candidate available. If you disagree with any of the choices I made, kindly point them out.
JOHN McCAIN??? !!!!!
Obama and McCain were the two worst party choices in my lifetime. But that is the choices the all mighty parties gave us. I for damn sure voted third party in 08. If more had done the same we could have avoided this train wreck the establisment gave us.
Yes I voted for John McCain (not in the primary though) and would do so again over any Democrat I can think of including the current clusterfoxtrot who now occupies 1600 Pennyslvania Ave.
McCain??????!!!!!! I rest my case.
Yes....I voted for McCain in November 2008...did not vote for him in the Republican primary that year.
Who was I supposed to vote for in November 2008?????? BHO?????
Yes I would do it all over again if my choice were between those two again. No regrets.
I rest my case.
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.