BREAKING: Alaska Libertarian Party Calls Emergency Meeting About Murkowski

[parocks]

BREAKING: Alaska Libertarian Party Calls Emergency Meeting About Murkowski
http://theothermccain.com/2010/08/29/breaking-alaska-libertarian-party-calls-emergency-meeting-about-murkowski/

"the five-member executive board of the Alaska Libertarian Party will convene in an emergency meeting today to discuss efforts by Lisa Murkowski’s supporters to secure the LP nomination for the Republican senator should she fail to overturn Joe Miller’s 1,668-vote margin in the GOP primary."

What should the Alaska Libertarian Party do?

[WorldonaString]

hmm I haven't been following this very carefully. But I'll bump for discussion. Whats going on up there?

[angelatc]

hmm I haven't been following this very carefully. But I'll bump for discussion. Whats going on up there?

The rumor is that if Murkowski doesn't win the recount and thus the primary, there will be pressure for the LP candidate to step aside and let her run on their ticket. She's got a huge war chest to bring with her.

The Alaska LP has a news conference scheduled for Monday, I think. I predict they'll use it to make a big fuss about the LP seat not being for sale and as a way to introduce their candidate to the public.

[Imperial]

Here is some discussion on the subject (full disclosure: I wrote this article)

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/08/murkowski-as-libertarian-polls-34/

Murkowski is very unlikely to make up the margin in the close race between her and Tea Partier Joe Miller in absentee ballots. Since the deadline passed for running Independent, and the only party running a candidate in the race are the Libertarians, the only hope for Murkowski remaining in the race is to pull a Tancredo and use another party's line.

PPP puts Murkowski at 34%, 4 points under Miller, in the general, with the Democrat another 10 points back behind Murkowski. The decision is now in the hands of the Ex-Com of the party as the OP points out.

[parocks]

What do you think they should do?


Here is some discussion on the subject (full disclosure: I wrote this article)

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/08/murkowski-as-libertarian-polls-34/

Murkowski is very unlikely to make up the margin in the close race between her and Tea Partier Joe Miller in absentee ballots. Since the deadline passed for running Independent, and the only party running a candidate in the race are the Libertarians, the only hope for Murkowski remaining in the race is to pull a Tancredo and use another party's line.

PPP puts Murkowski at 34%, 4 points under Miller, in the general, with the Democrat another 10 points back behind Murkowski. The decision is now in the hands of the Ex-Com of the party as the OP points out.

[parocks]

Do you know if in Alaska the same person can be on the ballot as a Libertarian and as a Republican?


The rumor is that if Murkowski doesn't win the recount and thus the primary, there will be pressure for the LP candidate to step aside and let her run on their ticket. She's got a huge war chest to bring with her.

The Alaska LP has a news conference scheduled for Monday, I think. I predict they'll use it to make a big fuss about the LP seat not being for sale and as a way to introduce their candidate to the public.

[Imperial]

Do you know if in Alaska the same person can be on the ballot as a Libertarian and as a Republican?

Alaska does not have fusion, so no.


What do you think they should do?

I don't think they can afford to. Despite the fact that they would get lots of attention and maybe a short-term bump at the polls, there are two major side-effects:

1) Those longtime party activists who are the reason the party has survived for three decades will not like a Murkowski run. The only issues one could maybe claim she was a libertarian on with any consistency are pro-amnesty and pro-choice, both of which are hot button issues within the party that should not really be the focus of a Libertarian campaign.

2) Turns off conservatives. As far as the tea-partying, far-right conservatives are concerned, this would just be another reason to right off the LP for them. They would say that the LP wants candidates who want to give away our jobs and kill our babies.

It would be fun to see an LP candidate to win this big of a race, but in the long-run it just isn't worth it.

[parocks]

I agree that the Libertarians should not have Murkowski as their candidate.

So, if Murkowski was the Libertarian nominee, what, Miller gets the Republican nod by default? Or vice versa? What if Murkowski gets the Republican nomination? Should the Libertarians give Miller the nomination?

Miller really is great on the issues. He answered 19/20 of the Campaign for Libertys questions right.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/candidatesurvey.php?state=AK


Alaska does not have fusion, so no.



I don't think they can afford to. Despite the fact that they would get lots of attention and maybe a short-term bump at the polls, there are two major side-effects:

1) Those longtime party activists who are the reason the party has survived for three decades will not like a Murkowski run. The only issues one could maybe claim she was a libertarian on with any consistency are pro-amnesty and pro-choice, both of which are hot button issues within the party that should not really be the focus of a Libertarian campaign.

2) Turns off conservatives. As far as the tea-partying, far-right conservatives are concerned, this would just be another reason to right off the LP for them. They would say that the LP wants candidates who want to give away our jobs and kill our babies.

It would be fun to see an LP candidate to win this big of a race, but in the long-run it just isn't worth it.

[Imperial]

I agree that the Libertarians should not have Murkowski as their candidate.

So, if Murkowski was the Libertarian nominee, what, Miller gets the Republican nod by default? Or vice versa? What if Murkowski gets the Republican nomination? Should the Libertarians give Miller the nomination?

Miller really is great on the issues. He answered 19/20 of the Campaign for Libertys questions right.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/candidatesurvey.php?state=AK

It bears noting that the odds of Murkowski being floated to victory on absentee ballots is slim. See this analysis: http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/7466/aksen-absentees-bad-for-murk-and-provisionals-can-too

The only route I see for her to win the Republican nod is if she gets enough absentees to get a recount declared. At that point, if she has a better legal team she might get enough ballots to win. When you get into recount stage, the legal team is sometimes more important than the votes - it becomes "whose votes are legit" type situation.

If Murkowski chose to go Libertarian before all of that, then I would assume Miller would be the Republican by default. I think she has until September 17th to do that, assuming the Libertarians let her do it.

I think there is a better case for giving Miller the Libertarian nomination than Murkowski as far as issues are concerned. However, expect Miller to be fighting with McAdams for second in that situation, since Murkowski, obviously the most popular of the three in Alaska, is polling BEHIND Miller in the general as a Libertarian. As a Republican, she would simply dominate.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

PPP puts Murkowski at 34%, 4 points under Miller, in the general, with the Democrat another 10 points back behind Murkowski. The decision is now in the hands of the Ex-Com of the party as the OP points out.

A chance to actually win something (major) for once? The Libertarian party would be f***ing retarded to turn down that opportunity if it presented itself. But, since the Libertarian party is, in fact, kind of retarded; I could see them turning that down and getting another 0.78% this November like they did in the Alaska Senate election in 2008.

[parocks]

Well, you know what's going on up there much more than I do.

Miller did beat Murkowski (sorta). I'm not sure that makes her more popular than Miller.

So I don't know why exactly Miller would do so much worse than Murkowski if the roles were reversed. If Miller was the R, he'd get 38, Murkowski as L 34.
Why wouldn't polls indicate Miller L 38 Murkowski R 34?

The National GOP knows that this is just getting to be a worse and worse mess for them, and they really should call her and tell her to concede. Today preferably.

1.8% isn't really all that close.


It bears noting that the odds of Murkowski being floated to victory on absentee ballots is slim. See this analysis: http://www.swingstateproject.com/diary/7466/aksen-absentees-bad-for-murk-and-provisionals-can-too

The only route I see for her to win the Republican nod is if she gets enough absentees to get a recount declared. At that point, if she has a better legal team she might get enough ballots to win. When you get into recount stage, the legal team is sometimes more important than the votes - it becomes "whose votes are legit" type situation.

If Murkowski chose to go Libertarian before all of that, then I would assume Miller would be the Republican by default. I think she has until September 17th to do that, assuming the Libertarians let her do it.

I think there is a better case for giving Miller the Libertarian nomination than Murkowski as far as issues are concerned. However, expect Miller to be fighting with McAdams for second in that situation, since Murkowski, obviously the most popular of the three in Alaska, is polling BEHIND Miller in the general as a Libertarian. As a Republican, she would simply dominate.

[NewFederalist]

A chance to actually win something (major) for once? The Libertarian party would be f***ing retarded to turn down that opportunity if it presented itself. But, since the Libertarian party is, in fact, kind of retarded; I could see them turning that down and getting another 0.78% this November like they did in the Alaska Senate election in 2008.

Would it make sense for the LP to nominate Harry Reid, for example, if a similar situation existed in Nevada? At what point is winning more important than anything else?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Why are people getting their panties in a bunch? Rand is doing the same thing, supposedly. Pandering to get votes. So according to that segment of the population here on RPF why wouldn't the LP do it? I then expect those same people to mock the LP for doing what they themselves are doing. Of course this is what happens. It's the nature of politics. God knows I've been excoriated for being principled. Ron Paul is literally an aberration. Look at all the people who got mad at Kokesh, Schiff, etc. for not pandering/lying to get votes. If they lie before they even get into office why would you ever trust them?

[RonPaulFanInGA]

Would it make sense for the LP to nominate Harry Reid, for example, if a similar situation existed in Nevada? At what point is winning more important than anything else?

Yeah. If they want to take a step away from being 100% irrelevant, they should.

Mukowski sucks but beggers can't be choosers. When you do nothing but lose big for nearly forty full years, like the Libertarian party has; you got to take what you can get.

[Agorism]

I say no way

[Aratus]

shades of gov crist of FL???
despite sen. spector's loss?
shades of joe lieberman??

the LIBERTARIAN PARTY
could also hand an invite
to Mr. Miller if HE looses?

[Fozz]

A chance to actually win something (major) for once? The Libertarian party would be f***ing retarded to turn down that opportunity if it presented itself. But, since the Libertarian party is, in fact, kind of retarded; I could see them turning that down and getting another 0.78% this November like they did in the Alaska Senate election in 2008.

It looks like you put partisanship above principle :mad:

[angelatc]

I

I think there is a better case for giving Miller the Libertarian nomination than Murkowski as far as issues are concerned.

How awesome would that be, especially if Palin came through again.

[Jeremy]

A chance to actually win something (major) for once? The Libertarian party would be f***ing retarded to turn down that opportunity if it presented itself. But, since the Libertarian party is, in fact, kind of retarded; I could see them turning that down and getting another 0.78% this November like they did in the Alaska Senate election in 2008.

You should be ashamed of yourself. You want the LP to nom a statist for the sake of wining? What kind of backwards logic is this? Why would we want the LP endorsing Republican incumbents? That defeats the entire purpose.

[Elwar]

If they were to accept her and she were to win...she would just renounce her LP membership and re-join the GOP.

Then she would go on to be a horrible Senator with no constituent approval and work only toward the goals of the GOP insiders.

Then she would be the hated Senator from Alaska who was "The first Libertarian Party Senator".

Might as well claim that FDR was one of the original libertarians and end it all.

[jmdrake]

Look at all the people who got mad at Kokesh, Schiff, etc. for not pandering/lying to get votes.

Huh? People got mad at Schiff for pandering and not the other way around. (Have you forgotten the whole "would you bomb Iran" hypothetical?)

[daviddee]

...

[low preference guy]

Murkowski Denied By Libertarian Party (http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/08/murkowski_denie.php)

[NewFederalist]

So... the "Party of Principle" still lives.

[TheTyke]

I'm all about winning, but ONLY if the people are true constitutionalists like Rand Paul, Justin Amash, John Dennis etc. It's the beliefs of the person elected that matter - not the rhetoric or party label - those are a means to victory and nothing else.

The Libertarian Party did the right thing here, and I'll give credit where it's due. Congrats!

[angelatc]

Murkowski Denied By Libertarian Party (http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/08/murkowski_denie.php)

Hey! I got that right!!! Sorry for gloating, but that hardly ever happens. :D

[low preference guy]

Hey! I got that right!!! Sorry for gloating, but that hardly ever happens. :D

It was a 5-0 decision. Good for the LP.

[angelatc]

It was a 5-0 decision. Good for the LP.

Yeah, but I'm enough of a hypocrite that I would still love to see them offer the spot to Miller if Murkowski wins.

[sailingaway]

A chance to actually win something (major) for once? The Libertarian party would be f***ing retarded to turn down that opportunity if it presented itself. But, since the Libertarian party is, in fact, kind of retarded; I could see them turning that down and getting another 0.78% this November like they did in the Alaska Senate election in 2008.

They call themselves the party of principles. If they throw out all their principles, why should anyone EVER vote Libertarian?

[sailingaway]

Yeah, but I'm enough of a hypocrite that I would still love to see them offer the spot to Miller if Murkowski wins.

That would be less hypocritical, though, since his positions are more libertarian than hers.

[brenden.b]

I'm glad to see the LP turned her down.

I cannot believe the people on this board who actually thought it was a good idea to allow her to run on LP ticket just to get the LP more attention. That is the perfect example of a SELLOUT to only garner attention for the party and a quick way to throw every principle to the wayside. Simply stupid...

[Anti Federalist]

Murkowski Denied By Libertarian Party (http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/08/murkowski_denie.php)

From the article:


Interestingly, Clift also said Murkowski had not reached out to the party.

"To be honest, no one from her campaign nor she has approached us," Clift said.

Murkowski must now consider whether to run as a write-in candidate if she goes on to lose the GOP primary. That path would be significantly harder.

If that's true, where did this whole silly rumor start?

[low preference guy]

If that's true, where did this whole silly rumor start?

Assuming she lost, running on the LP ticket was her only choice left, aside from running a write-in campaign. So it was good to know whether the LP would allow it or not.

Also, when she was asked whether she would run on the LP ticket, she didn't deny it, but just said "it's premature" to talk about that.

[parocks]

Hey! I got that right!!! Sorry for gloating, but that hardly ever happens. :D


Yes, very good call, and it was the proper result.

Good for the Alaska Libertarian Party.

[angelatc]

From the article:



If that's true, where did this whole silly rumor start?

The NRSC has its claws in this thing.

[HOLLYWOOD]

More Good News for Joe Miller...

The latest: http://news.yahoo.com/s/dailybeast/9685_alaskassenateprimaryjoemilleronlisamurkowskia ndabsenteevotes;_ylt=AleN1M9k05F6Q2GTSJK08ttH2ocA; _ylu=X3oDMTR1dWtlcjg1BGFzc2V0A2RhaWx5YmVhc3QvMjAxM DA4MzEvOTY4NV9hbGFza2Fzc2VuYXRlcHJpbWFyeWpvZW1pbGx lcm9ubGlzYW11cmtvd3NraWFuZGFic2VudGVldm90ZXMEY2NvZ GUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwM4BHBvcwM4BHNlYwN5bl90b3B fc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDaXNhbGFza2FzbGlz

Is Alaska's Murkowski Finished?

Ahead of the count, Joe Miller greeted supporters at an open house at his Anchorage headquarters. Walking into chants of “Joe, Joe, Joe!” he said he was confident they would remain ahead of Murkowski, specifically citing those military ballots.
“At Elmendorf [Air Force Base, I received] almost 90% [of the vote], 75% at Ft. Rich and that’s the day of the vote,” Miller said in an interview. “And we know a significant percentage of absentee votes came from out-of-state active-duty members, so we think that’s going to reflect a similar percentage there. In addition to that, the questioned ballots you have more committed voters that are voting outside of precinct and so we think that runs in our favor and will at least reflect the spread that we saw on Election Day and maybe even greater. We are convinced that we are going to look pretty good in that, but again the ultimate outcome depends on the count.”
The rumor is that if Murkowski doesn't win the recount and thus the primary, there will be pressure for the LP candidate to step aside and let her run on their ticket. She's got a huge war chest to bring with her.

The Alaska LP has a news conference scheduled for Monday, I think. I predict they'll use it to make a big fuss about the LP seat not being for sale and as a way to introduce their candidate to the public.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20015112-503544.html

August 30, 2010 5:36 PMAlaska Libertarian Party Rejects Possible Murkowski Bid
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim//2010/08/30/murkowski_2_370x278.JPG
(Credit: AP)
The Alaska Libertarian Party said today that it would not name Sen. Lisa Murkowski their Senate nominee if she loses her Republican primary bid to Tea Party-backed challenger Joe Miller, the Anchorage Daily News reports (http://community.adn.com/adn/node/152953).
Last week's primary is still too close to call (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/25/politics/main6803641.shtml); Miller currently leads by nearly 1,700 votes, but more than 23,000 ballots remain to be counted, according to the Associated Press.
The Libertarian Party's decision leaves Murkowski with one less way to proceed with her re-election bid, if she were to lose the Republican primary. The Libertarian Party is the only third party in the Senate race, meaning Murkowski could still run as a write-in candidate but is now left with no chance at a third-party bid.
Alaska Libertarian Party chairman Scott Kohlhaas told the Daily News that the party's five-member executive committee held an emergency meeting yesterday to consider whether to accept Murkowski as their candidate, should that become an issue, and unanimously decided against it. Murkowski does not reflect the values of the party, Kohlhaas said.
Neither Murkowski nor her campaign staffers ever approached the Libertarian Party about joining their ticket, the Daily News reports, but there was still speculation about the possibility.
In response to the Libertarian Party's decision, Murkowski spokesman Steve Wackowski said the campaign was "solely focused on ensuring a fair vote count tomorrow," Politico reports (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41590.html).
The Alaska Division of Elections will start counting remaining votes tomorrow, a process that could last through next week.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Murkowski Gains... Joe Miller calls Voter Ballot Tampering and Fraud!

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-31/murkowski-gains-in-bid-for-party-nomination-absentee-vote-tally-shows.html

Campaign Voter Fraud Accusations
http://www.ktva.com/ci_15943918?source=pkgThe first count of primary election absentee ballots will be counted Tuesday and accusations from both Republican U.S Senate candidates are intensifying.
Alexis Fernandez
Created: 08/30/2010 11:34:08 PM PDT

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTVA-CBS 11 News) The first count of primary election absentee ballots will be counted Tuesday and accusations from both Republican U.S Senate campaigns are intensifying. The Joe Miller campaign is accusing the Lisa Murkowski campaign of trying to skew the votes, something her team calls "ridiculous."
"It's a paranoid reaction and he's trying to set the stage for him to say we are electioneering. We want Alaskans' votes to be counted fairly," said Murkowski spokesperson Steve Wackowski.
Thomas Van Flein -- the attorney for the Miller campaign --submitted a request this morning to Lt.Gov Craig Campbell to investigate potential voter tampering by the Murkowski campaign. Inside the filing, he accused a Murkowski observer in Wasilla of accessing the state election database. Lt.Gov Campbell called the accusation "not possible."
"We have a very secure voting system called GEM, within the state of Alaska security system. The issue we're going to be talking about, in fact wasn't even available to the Wasilla area," said Campbell.
Lt. Gov. Campbell said the counting of absentee ballots has always been open to the public and the votes will be secure.
"Tomorrow (Tuesday) what we're going to do with the ballots is going to be open to the public. So the system will be used and be able to be observed by anybody. All we're doing is feeding the cards into the computer to count the votes and that's a public process," said Campbell.

GOP Attorney to Monitor Ballot Counting in Alaska Senate Race

A National Republican Senatorial Committee attorney will monitor vote counting, at Sen. Lisa Murkowski's request, in the close primary election contest between her and Fairbanks attorney Joe Miller.
http://www.ktva.com/ci_15915551?source=pkg