[jwalsh07]

If anybody is interested in whether or not Sarvis hurt Cuccinelli take a look at Montgomery COunty. Romney tied Obama in Montgomery. Cooch lost to McAuliffe. by 3% with Sarvis getting 10.5% of the vote. So yeah, Sarvis hurt Cuccinelli more than McAuliffe. In fact Sarvis gets his highest percentage of vote totals in counties that Cooch won handily with percentages running a few points higher than his total.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks jwalsh07. That’s what Sarvis was there to do.

REVEALED: OBAMA CAMPAIGN BUNDLER HELPING FUND LIBERTARIAN IN TIGHT VA. GUBERNATORIAL RACE
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3087695/posts

[88keys]

Personally, I have been very interested to see how the Sarvis factor would play out...and you've confirmed what I suspected. 10% is a huge factor in a 2% victory by the "opposition", and no doubt Sarvis's place on the ballot affected all the counties across the state to some degree. It also seems that those votes came from the conservative-leaning side, all parties.

Is there any kind of a lesson to learn here? Or am I thinking unfairly that some conservatives and genuine libertarians actually voted for the LINO Sarvis, mistakenly thinking that that would result in anything other than McAuliffe being elected?

Or was that the point? In which case, why not just be honest and vote for McAuliffe in the first place?

/ rant...this whole business makes my head hurt!!