PDA

View Full Version : Libertarian excluded from Va. gov debate




JCDenton0451
10-10-2013, 04:46 PM
Libertarian excluded from Va. gov debate (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/virginia-governor-debate-robert-sarvis-libertarian-98161.html?ml=la)
The Libertarian candidate will not be invited to participate in the final debate of the Virginia governor’s race, a break for Republican Ken Cuccinelli.


WDBJ7, the CBS affiliate organizing the Oct. 24 debate on the campus of Virginia Tech, announced late Thursday that Robert Sarvis has fallen just short of the 10 percent threshold for a third candidate to get on stage.


“As of this date, the third party candidate is polling at 9.0% based on the averages on realclearpolitics.com (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2013/governor/va/virginia_governor_cuccinelli_vs_mcauliffe-3033.html) and would, therefore, not meet the guidelines agreed upon by the campaigns,” emailed Kelly Zuber, the station’s news director.


Thursday was the deadline for deciding who would participate.


With both major candidates viewed more unfavorably than favorably, the libertarian option has fared well among voters who don’t want to pick between “the lesser of two evils.” Sarvis received 12 percent in a three-way POLITICO poll conducted over the weekend of likely voters, while Democrat Terry McAuliffe was at 44 percent and Cuccinelli 35 percent.


Cuccinelli’s campaign has warned that Sarvis could be a spoiler. (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/virginia-governor-race-robert-sarvis-ken-cuccinelli-97591.html)The 37-year old ran unsuccessfully for state Senate as a Republican in 2011.


McAuliffe’s campaign had hoped he would be included. Sarvis being on stage would have given him the chance to criticize Cuccinelli’s views on social issues and taken some potential heat off McAuliffe.

Keith and stuff
10-10-2013, 04:52 PM
That's too bad. He was excluded from the last debate, too. Even if I'm not going to vote for someone like this, excluding him is only done to hide truth, options and variation in thoughts. It is only done for bad reasons. People do the same things to keep alternative views out of national debates. :(

cajuncocoa
10-10-2013, 05:06 PM
What a surprise. The two party oligarchy strikes again.

angelatc
10-10-2013, 05:35 PM
And I really hate the way that the LP gets accused of being spoilers. You want the votes, you win them.

Michael Landon
10-10-2013, 05:40 PM
This comment shows exactly what's wrong with our debates and elections, two parties determine who gets the privilege to debate them and what the guidelines are for that person to be included:


“As of this date, the third party candidate is polling at 9.0% based on the averages on realclearpolitics.com and would, therefore, not meet the guidelines agreed upon by the campaigns,” emailed Kelly Zuber, the station’s news director.

- ML

HOLLYWOOD
10-10-2013, 06:00 PM
The Libertarian should strike a deal with Ken Cooch... We Libertarians are polling 9%, give us, say 12.5% government appointments to Libertarian/RP type government workers and we'll endorse/back you Cuccinelli. Right now Cooch, you're trailing to the Democrats.


LET's MAKE A DEAL

angelatc
10-10-2013, 06:30 PM
The Libertarian should strike a deal with Ken Cooch.

I'm sorry, but that made me laugh!

gwax23
10-10-2013, 07:42 PM
End the two party system. Introduce Instant Runoff Elections for Members of congress. At the very least this would solve the whole "LP stealing votes from Ron paul endorsed Republicans" fight.

Keith and stuff
10-10-2013, 08:00 PM
The Libertarian should strike a deal with Ken Cooch...
That's not possible. Sometimes the LP candidate pulls as much from the Democrat as from the Republican. The bigger problem is that the LP cannot control his voters. Sometimes they wouldn't vote otherwise. Sometimes they would write in a name otherwise. Sometimes they would vote for another 3rd party candidate otherwise.

If Cooch was going to make a deal that would be of even minor use, he would need to make it before the candidate filling deadline, anyway. Since obviously, that has past, this way of thinking is completely useless for this particular election.

MichaelDavis
10-10-2013, 09:28 PM
Good. Sarvis is a McAuliffe-loving douchebag. I wouldn't be surprised to learn Sarvis was paid by the Democrats to help the statists defeat Ron Paul-endorsed Cuccinelli.

eduardo89
10-10-2013, 09:29 PM
Good. Sarvis is a McAuliffe-loving douchebag. I wouldn't be surprised to learn Sarvis was paid by the Democrats to help the statists defeat Ron Paul-endorsed Cuccinelli.

+rep

MichaelDavis
10-10-2013, 09:46 PM
+rep

The most interesting thing I have noticed here is how RonPaulForums is composed of two distinct segments, purists vs. allies. I am obviously in the "ally" group, along with you. Some of the members here don't think Cruz or Lee love freedom enough, wich befuddles me.

Keith and stuff
10-10-2013, 09:54 PM
Good. Sarvis is a McAuliffe-loving douchebag. I wouldn't be surprised to learn Sarvis was paid by the Democrats to help the statists defeat Ron Paul-endorsed Cuccinelli.

That's completely unacceptable. You sound substantially worse than the opposition. Seriously, why do you have to be so offense to women? The point of this forum isn't to make women hate liberty.

specsaregood
10-10-2013, 09:58 PM
This comment shows exactly what's wrong with our debates and elections, two parties determine who gets the privilege to debate them and what the guidelines are for that person to be included:
- ML

Yeah, there should totally be a law forcing them to include 3rd party candidates. The free market clearly cant be trusted with the job.

eduardo89
10-10-2013, 09:59 PM
That's completely unacceptable. You sound substantially worse than the opposition. Seriously, why do you have to be so offense to women? The point of this forum isn't to make women hate liberty.

Oh shut the fuck up.

Saint Vitus
10-10-2013, 10:02 PM
Good. Sarvis is a McAuliffe-loving douchebag. I wouldn't be surprised to learn Sarvis was paid by the Democrats to help the statists defeat Ron Paul-endorsed Cuccinelli.

you mean Rick Santorum endorsed Cuccinelli? He's much closer to Santorum than he is to Ron Paul.

eduardo89
10-10-2013, 10:07 PM
you mean Rick Santorum endorsed Cuccinelli? He's much closer to Santorum than he is to Ron Paul.

A lot closer to Ron than Rick. Ron endorsed Ken back in September 2009 for AG and September 2012 for Governor. Santorum endorsed Ken in December 2012, after he was the clear front runner for the GOP nomination in an attempt to stay relevant. Rand endorsed him a week or so before Ron.

Keith and stuff
10-10-2013, 10:26 PM
Oh shut the f@@@ up.

That is so highly offensive. What is wrong with you? I ask you please, stop harassing me. Thank you very much.

eduardo89
10-10-2013, 10:27 PM
That is so highly offense.

Good, your support for women being able to murder the unborn is highly offensive.


What is wrong with you? I ask you please, stop harassing me. Thank you very much.

I'm putting you on ignore, your posts are idiotic.

Matt Collins
10-10-2013, 10:46 PM
That's not possible. Sometimes the LP candidate pulls as much from the Democrat as from the Republican. Yeah, I know a guy who used to work for the LP professionally, and he kept saying this. I still don't know if I believe it or not :confused:

HOLLYWOOD
10-10-2013, 10:48 PM
That's not possible. Sometimes the LP candidate pulls as much from the Democrat as from the Republican. The bigger problem is that the LP cannot control his voters. Sometimes they wouldn't vote otherwise. Sometimes they would write in a name otherwise. Sometimes they would vote for another 3rd party candidate otherwise.

If Cooch was going to make a deal that would be of even minor use, he would need to make it before the candidate filling deadline, anyway. Since obviously, that has past, this way of thinking is completely useless for this particular election.

Again Democrat wins with the USELESS Libertarian draining the votes from the right... That's the bigger lose and a useless election once again for the Libertarians. At least Cuccinelli has more Libertarian in him than any other GOP candidate running or holding a governorship, he has preformed pretty good. Once again, splitting votes on the right is handing the election to the Marxists.


Deals are ALWAYS done(mostly behind closed doors), no matter where the timeline in the election may be... withdraw, make ally, and let Cuccinelli win... he'll take the LP in afterwards.

eduardo89
10-10-2013, 10:49 PM
Again Democrat wins with the USELESS Libertarian draining the votes from the right... That's the bigger lose and a useless election once again for the Libertarians. At least Cuccinelli has more Libertarian in him than any other GOP candidate running or holding a governorship, he has preformed pretty good. Once again, spliting votes on the right is handing the election to the Marxists.


Withdraw and make an endorsement to Cuccinelli

+rep



Deals are ALWAYS done(mostly behind closed doors), no matter where the timeline in the election may be... withdraw, make ally, and let Cuccinelli win... he'll take the LP in afterwards.

That goes against the unwritten LP rule: stay as politically irrelevant as possible.

Keith and stuff
10-10-2013, 11:00 PM
Again Democrat wins with the USELESS Libertarian draining the votes from the right... That's the bigger lose and a useless election once again for the Libertarians. At least Cuccinelli has more Libertarian in him than any other GOP candidate running or holding a governorship, he has preformed pretty good. Once again, splitting votes on the right is handing the election to the Marxists.

Deals are ALWAYS done(mostly behind closed doors), no matter where the timeline in the election may be... withdraw, make ally, and let Cuccinelli win... he'll take the LP in afterwards.

You don't seem to understand, neither Ron Paul nor libertarians are to the right. Libertarians frequently often draw nearly equally from the GOP candidate and the DEM candidate. I thought I saw a poll showing that for this race. Cooch is a good politician even if he is corrupt. But he isn't libertarian.

MichaelDavis
10-11-2013, 12:20 AM
That's completely unacceptable. You sound substantially worse than the opposition. Seriously, why do you have to be so offense to women? The point of this forum isn't to make women hate liberty.

I sound like the opposition? You sound like the opposition. Cuccinelli was endorsed by Ron Paul, not shithead Sarvis. I think you're on the wrong site. You're looking for the abortion lover who supports Sarvis, Gary Johnson: http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/front.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAsLPrnJGc

WM_in_MO
10-11-2013, 05:17 AM
http://stlouistreehouse.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/081408treehouse-02.64224241_large.jpg
"It's OURS and you CANNOT FUCKING COME UP HERE!"

Chop the tree down.

Todd
10-11-2013, 05:42 AM
and he's pulling 12% in some polls. :(

LibForestPaul
10-11-2013, 06:04 AM
Why not just have Cuccinelli withdraw and make an endorsement, if the GOP does not want a democrat in?

MichaelDavis
10-11-2013, 12:46 PM
You don't seem to understand, neither Ron Paul nor libertarians are to the right. Libertarians frequently often draw nearly equally from the GOP candidate and the DEM candidate. I thought I saw a poll showing that for this race. Many libertarians aren't conservatives but no libertarians are. Cooch is a good politician even if he is corrupt. But he isn't libertarian.

You keep repeating this lie, but it's just not true. There is a reason why ALL of the good Congressmen are Republicans. This is what 2012 would have looked like if libertarian Ron Paul decided to run as an independent in the general election. Notice how he pulls WAY more from the GOP than Obama? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/behind-the-numbers/post/poll-paul-as-third-party-candidate-could-doom-gop-in-2012/2011/12/13/gIQAvviF6O_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/behind-the-numbers/StandingArt/Paulspoilerchart2.jpg?uuid=CdN5oirREeG7tFhOAe9TjQ

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/behind-the-numbers/StandingArt/Paulspoilerchart1.jpg?uuid=EPYwsirREeG7tFhOAe9TjQ

Varin
10-19-2013, 08:01 AM
His wife appeals for spot in the debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeLMI3LdHpk

RonPaulFanInGA
10-19-2013, 08:37 AM
I'm a believer in the idea that you should have some kind of support to be included in debates. A candidate polling 0%-1%, and having raised next to no money, and not even really actively campaigning being included is a disservice to the public.

klamath
10-19-2013, 08:39 AM
End the two party system. Introduce Instant Runoff Elections for Members of congress. At the very least this would solve the whole "LP stealing votes from Ron paul endorsed Republicans" fight.We have that in California. I got the option of voting for two democrats in the general. lucky me.

compromise
10-19-2013, 08:42 AM
Great news. This means that the Libertarian gets less attention and so causes less of a split in the liberty-minded vote. Sarvis is taking very few votes away from McAuliffe, but a lot away from Cuccinelli.

klamath
10-19-2013, 08:46 AM
I'm a believer in the idea that you should have some kind of support to be included in debates. A candidate polling 0%-1%, and having raised next to no money, and not even really actively campaigning being included is a disservice to the public. I agree. At some point you have to draw the line. If I have fifty candidates running I do NOT want to watch a 3 hour debate with each candidate getting one question. That IS a disservice to me. However I think 9% is two high a number to be excluded.

WM_in_MO
10-19-2013, 08:48 AM
How about we privatize debates?
you have lost your way...

Varin
10-19-2013, 08:51 AM
I agree. At some point you have to draw the line. If I have fifty candidates running I do NOT want to watch a 3 hour debate with each candidate getting one question. That IS a disservice to me. However I think 9% is two high a number to be excluded.

Latest polls have him at 13% http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/libertarian-robert-sarvis-rises-to-13-in-polls-virginia-still-excludes-him-from-gubernatorial-debate-64014/ and an average of 9.8% http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2013/governor/va/virginia_governor_cuccinelli_vs_mcauliffe_vs_sarvi s-4111.html

klamath
10-19-2013, 09:03 AM
You keep repeating this lie, but it's just not true. There is a reason why ALL of the good Congressmen are Republicans. This is what 2012 would have looked like if libertarian Ron Paul decided to run as an independent in the general election. Notice how he pulls WAY more from the GOP than Obama? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/behind-the-numbers/post/poll-paul-as-third-party-candidate-could-doom-gop-in-2012/2011/12/13/gIQAvviF6O_blog.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/behind-the-numbers/StandingArt/Paulspoilerchart2.jpg?uuid=CdN5oirREeG7tFhOAe9TjQ

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/behind-the-numbers/StandingArt/Paulspoilerchart1.jpg?uuid=EPYwsirREeG7tFhOAe9TjQY eaw that lie does get spread around a lot. Sure the L candidate pulls some from the democrat but ALWAYS more from the Republican. A democrat may like the L party on social issues but hates them far worse for free market economics.

klamath
10-19-2013, 09:05 AM
Latest polls have him at 13% http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/libertarian-robert-sarvis-rises-to-13-in-polls-virginia-still-excludes-him-from-gubernatorial-debate-64014/ and an average of 9.8% http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2013/governor/va/virginia_governor_cuccinelli_vs_mcauliffe_vs_sarvi s-4111.html They have to go with the poll averages. One poll might be just trying to manipulate the number to aid one side or the other.