Posted on 10/27/2013 8:22:02 PM PDT by Maelstorm
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., on Thursday urged Virginia Republicans supporting Robert C. Sarvis, the Libertarian candidate for governor, to come home to the GOP and vote for Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, the party’s nominee.
“I consider myself to be a libertarian conservative, a libertarian Republican,” Paul said in a phone interview Thursday. “A lot of things (Cuccinelli) talks about are free-market, limited-government, leave-me-alone government. I think there is a lot to like there.
“What I’m excited about in Ken Cuccinelli is that he is smart, he is articulate, and he has a keen sense of justice,” Paul said. Cuccinelli’s attempt to challenge the Affordable Care Act in court was “one of the things that catapulted a nationwide debate over the constitutionality of the health care law,” he said.
Paul, a potential Republican presidential contender for 2016, will campaign with Cuccinelli in Fairfax County and Virginia Beach next week. His visit to the state comes as the attorney general faces headwinds from members of his own party who have defected to Sarvis
(Excerpt) Read more at timesdispatch.com ...
No, the reason that libertarians are at war with conservatism and are fighting to drive it from the GOP is over the social issues.
Sarvis is a good libertarian on the social issues.
“WOW”
Wow is an understatement. To think that Ken Cuccinelli has run such a crappy campaign that I’m seriously considering not voting for that race is stunning. Stuned beeber stunning.
All that I ask a conservative candidate do is to talk like a conservative and when elected, act like one. KC has actually got the second part down pretty well. Its the first part that he seems unwilling to do. KC has spent the campaign alternating between apologizing for his excellent record and trying to down play his conservative credentials. That leads me to wonder if he really is going to continue to lead as a conservative if elected.
Sorry folks. I’m done with wink and nudge conservatives. Cuccinelli’s fine record is the only reason I’m even undecided at this point.
Libertarians in SD in 2002 postponed the election of John Thune, who didn’t make it until 2004 as a result. But Thune like so many has been a disappointment.
“The principled vote must also account for likely consequences.”
Absolutely. And that includes making a decision to vote in the first place. If I vote for someone, that means that I, no one else, *I* am taking responsibility for that political candidate and what they do once elected. You vote for someone and they turn out to be a squish or a crook, then you have no one to blame but yourself for failing to adequately vet the candidate or taking the moral high road and refusing to vote at all.
I take my share of blame for the current governor of VA who has turned out to be not only a tax hiking RINWAD, but ethically challenged as well. I’m ashamed to say that I voted for him. I’m NOT willing to do a replay. I think it far more morally defensible to refrain from voting than to vote for a candidate because they’re somewhat less repugnant than the other candidate.
The notion that all libertarians are socially liberal is bogus. It’s also bogus to say many conservatives aren’t statist.
The libertarian opposes the statist — not that I haven’t mentioned this already.
Sarvis is a libtard.
Well, many opted not to vote for Romney for similar reasons. But I’d wager Romney is no Cuccinelli.
I never said all libertarians are 100% anything, but libertarianism is social liberalism, and Sarvis is a good libertarian on those issues.
Sarvis not being 100% pure seems to be your point.
My points and your understandings are of different dimensions.
That is because you are striving to sell a political ideology by avoiding the truth, and misleading people in an effort to get them to abandon their conservatism.
I do believe Sarvis is going to take some liberals especially young idealists that think gay marriage is a civil right and that abortion is sacrosanct. The problem we have in this race is Sarvis is picking up some GOP who have been sored with all the negative ads and the McDonnel BS with Star Scientific.
I’m a registered Republican that votes for the Conservative candidate. I insist any libertarian do the same.
I’m not interested in hearing any more of your idiotic judgements about my “efforts”. If you cannot speak to the issue without backbiting, FO.
To: Gene Eric
There are good reasons to deride the Libertarian Platform and the liberal degenerates that wear the veil of libertarianism, but the stock complaint against libertarians here is often baseless drivel bearing traits of the fifth column.
That is completely false, we all rightfully know that libertarianism includes the anti-conservative positions on social issues, if it didn't then there wouldn't be any need for libertarianism, it would merely be conservatism.
42 posted on 10/27/2013 9:43:42 PM by ansel12
With those libertarian politics and values, many are worried that he will win enough libertarians over that might have settled for the GOP candidate if he weren't in the race.
Yes that is what the worry is. This is going to be low turnout and we can’t afford to lose the 11% of GOP that appear to be going for him. It appears in some polls he’s actually taking just a bit more from McAuliffe.
Usually, I’d call RP a sellout. But Cuccinelli is the first intelligent VA GOP politician since Jim Miller and Sarvis is the dumbest sounding Libertarian I can think of.
In the new WaPo poll, Sarvis supporters chose McAuliffe 53-42 as their choice if Sarvis wasn’t running. So I don’t know how much Sarvis is hurting/helping but I dont believe he will get 8%.
I wouldn’t worry much about that poll. It was most likely a weekend poll. I couldn’t find the internals either. This race is highly polarized which I think explains the swings in some of the single day sampling. I believe this race is closer to a tie. I just don’t see the Democrat strongholds turning out and this poll shows McAuliffe voters more energized which I don’t believe given the mess with Obamacare. There are several dynamics going on here. We need to fight this to the end and see where the cards fall.
I wouldn’t worry much about that poll. It was most likely a weekend poll. I couldn’t find the internals either. This race is highly polarized which I think explains the swings in some of the single day sampling. I believe this race is closer to a tie. I just don’t see the Democrat strongholds turning out and this poll shows McAuliffe voters more energized which I don’t believe given the mess with Obamacare. There are several dynamics going on here. We need to fight this to the end and see where the cards fall.
Yes this poll was taken Oct. 24-27. D32/R24/I31, Likely voters D33/R28/I33. I think its alot closer then this poll shows but still some rough numbers in there. Hopefully alot of dims stay home.
Favorability: McAuliffe +9, Cuccinelli -17, Tea Party +17 Oppose,
McAuliffe supporters: For McAuliffe 34, Against Cuccinelli 64
Cuccinelli supporters: For Cuccinelli 50, Against McAuliffe 44
First of all, that dogcatcher job in Duluth does not make libertarians a national political power.
but irrespective of what mayhem their existence may unintentionally cause from time to time, I don’t consider them anything but a target of moderate ridicule.
(And if you really are “libertarian”, whatever the hell that may mean today, then it really isn’t up to you to declare who is or is not a “rino”. Not only is it beyond your scope, it’s just not your business)
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.