Skip to comments.
Despite Vote, Libertarians Haven’t Ruled Out Murkowski
CQPolitics ^
| 9/6/2010
| CQ-Roll Call Staff
Posted on 09/06/2010 3:54:25 PM PDT by Mojave
Although Alaskas Libertarian Party has already voted against allowing GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski to run for another Senate term as the Libertarian candidate, discussions have occurred since then, the Anchorage Daily News reported Saturday...
Alaska Libertarian Party Chairman Scott Kohlhaas told the Anchorage Daily News that talks about a Murkowski bid are ongoing, despite the executive committees vote last month.
(Excerpt) Read more at cqpolitics.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Alaska
KEYWORDS: joemiller; liberals; murkowski
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
To: Brilliant
Why would the Libertarian Party want a RINO? They are completely opposed to every thing they believe.They see a chance to win with a flawed candidate, purely out of name recognition.
Which makes them political prostitutes.
21
posted on
09/06/2010 4:10:55 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
To: Mojave
Thanks Sarah,
Maybe we can add this state to Colo and NV of sure wins we can now loose. But at least there will be no RINO, and that, after all, is what’s important. Harry Reid thanks you.
22
posted on
09/06/2010 4:21:57 PM PDT
by
uscabjd
To: Mojave
Losertarian party is nothing more than democrat light.Abortion and open borders with a splash of isolationism. What is conservative about that?
23
posted on
09/06/2010 4:23:18 PM PDT
by
HANG THE EXPENSE
(Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
To: Clyde5445; Brices Crossroads; Al B.; onyx; Lakeshark; rintense; sarah fan UK; Josh Painter
To: uscabjd
“Thanks Sarah”
So, you would rather have the biggest rino in alaska as long as she could win? Is that what you’re saying? Because if it is, YOU are a RINO and are part of the RINO PROBLEM... Not part of the conservative solution.
And yes THANK YOU SARAH for giving us a CHANCE to pick up a conservative over a RINO.
25
posted on
09/06/2010 4:37:53 PM PDT
by
Robbin
(If Sarah isnÂ’t welcome, IÂ’m not welcome, itÂ’s just that simpleÂ…)
To: uscabjd
I dont’ know about NV and AK, but Sarah Palin had nothing to do with the collapse of the GOP and with the TP endorsed candidate. Our state was dumb enough to do it without any outside help,
Which candidate in CO did you believe to be a sure win? I didn’t hear of one. The state of CO is not red it is BLUE. The state of CO has two democratic senators, a democratic Governor, state legislature and state senate which are both controlled by democrats
26
posted on
09/06/2010 4:44:09 PM PDT
by
ebersole
To: dirtboy
They see a chance to win with a flawed candidate, purely out of name recognition.
Which makes them political prostitutes.
I don't see what the choice of Carly Fiorina as Republican candidate for Senator in California has to do with this thread...
Oh, sorry, you were talking about the Libertarians taking Murkowski, not mainstream Republicans (including Sarah Palin) endorsing Fiorina, just like they did Arnold before her. Yeah, I do agree that the Libertarians picking Murkowski would be really dumb.
To: Howie66
Let’s wait and see. If the Libertarians do give Murk the nom, you have a point. Until then, you really don’t.
And have you been paying attention to the horrible behavior toward the conservative Christine O’Donnell by the Delaware GOP?
To: LonghornFreeper
And where the flock did that come from? You must have pulled a muscle to make that pointless point.
29
posted on
09/06/2010 5:00:03 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
To: Raider Sam
She isn’t a libertarian. Miller is much closer to a libertarian.
To: Mojave
I don’t care what liberals think and do. < /sarcasm... sort of >
31
posted on
09/06/2010 5:07:39 PM PDT
by
FreeAtlanta
(Hey, Barack "Hubris" Obama, $10 is all it would take, why spend millions to cover it up?)
To: Menehune56
To: truthfreedom
Good point and yes I have.
The “establishment” GOP is as bad as anything as far as I am concerned.
Can’t wait until we clean them out, too.
33
posted on
09/06/2010 5:10:00 PM PDT
by
Howie66
(I can see November from my house.)
To: dirtboy
The point was very simple. Republicans, especially those of the "go with the candidate who can win" mindset, should look in the mirror before calling Libertarians "political prostitutes". If you want an example, another poster on this thread was actually blaming Palin for taking away an "easy win", i.e. Murkowski.
If you are not one of the Republicans who advocates taking any candidate who "can win", then the comment wasn't addressed to you specifically, I just picked your particular post from the half-dozen or more on the thread accusing Libertarians of being "political whores", "losertarians", etc.
Just like being pregnant or not, you can't be "a little bit of a political whore". You endorse one obvious RINO, then you are a political whore, at least until you publicly change course. Sarah Palin has done enough for conservatism that, at this point, I'm willing to give her a pass for Fiorina and McCain, but most Republicans haven't even come close to earning that.
I would note, in fact, that if the Libertarians do in fact allow Murkowski to run on their ticket, than all of those negative comments about them will be true. Nonetheless, almost all of them apply equally well to most Republicans. Remember, for example, that George W. Bush actually campaigned FOR Arlen Specter against conservative opposition in the primary at one point.
To: Virginia Ridgerunner
RINO losers like Murkowski would rather make war on conservatives than on the Marxists. The Dems are looking for an alternative to their loser candidate. Murkowski should just run on the Dem line. It would simplify things.
35
posted on
09/06/2010 5:18:32 PM PDT
by
Al B.
To: devere
36
posted on
09/06/2010 5:29:27 PM PDT
by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: LonghornFreeper
You endorse one obvious RINO, then you are a political whore,Bullcrap.
Libertarians hold themselves out as political purists. Yet they are now tempted to endorse a candidate who is the ultimate expression in political nepotism.
Someone the GOP just rejected, to the party's credit.
So you can stuff your moral equivalence argument where it don't shine.
37
posted on
09/06/2010 5:41:10 PM PDT
by
dirtboy
To: Virginia Ridgerunner; Al B.; Clyde5445; Brices Crossroads
Sore loser has not endorsed Joe Miller and I suspect she will have to be coerced by Cornyn and her Senate colleagues, if she is to finally endorse him at all.
The Libertarian party needs money and the amount of $1 million dollars from Murkowski to the Alaska Libertarian party was floated before the absentee count. I don’t know the legality of such dealings.
She’s a sore loser, but is she completely vindictive and stupid?
Remember, the source of this “news” comes via the ADN.
38
posted on
09/06/2010 6:02:52 PM PDT
by
onyx
(If you support Sarah and want on her Ping List, let me know!)
To: uscabjd
I agree, thanks Sarah, Joe Miller will win this race.
39
posted on
09/06/2010 6:05:15 PM PDT
by
ansel12
To: LonghornFreeper
In a race between Tom Campbell and Barbara Boxer, endorsing Fiorina was the right thing to do, and it worked, Campbell lost.
40
posted on
09/06/2010 6:09:16 PM PDT
by
ansel12
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-57 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson