Yet Libertarians come here asserting how conservative they are and how we should follow. Rhetorical question. How is the conservative agenda advanced with Washington's Marie Cantwell (D)rather than Slade Gordon (R)?
I don't know anything about either of those people, but your question is indeed rhetorical since it has little or nothing to do with reality. With regard to furthering the conservative agenda there are two cases with Libertarian voters in that election. First, conservative LP voters obviously disagreed with you and felt the LP candidate better represented their conservative values. It is likely they found the tenets of limited government and self-responsibility to be more important than furthering the Bush Doctrine or "reforming" Socialist Security. Second, non-conservative LP voters weren't interested in furthering the conservative agenda. I either case, they wouldn't have voted for Slade Gordon anyway in enough numbers to change the outcome.
Voting is not a team sport. It is not up to voters to "take one for the team" and elect someone who doesn't represent their values and beliefs. That kind of foolishness is how we ended up with the corrupt and degenerate political system under which we suffer today.
Besides, if Slade Gordon is even worth considering as a candidate, especially a Republican candidate, he is not wasting time whining about LP voters who wouldn't have voted for him anyway. If he is worth his salt as a conservative, he is trying to find a way to get his message across to more voters in the next election.