The Wages Of Horner

In Virginia last night, the Republican and Libertarian votes together totalled 53% – including about 8% for the Libertarian candidate.  Macauliffe got 47%.

Now, not every Libertarian votes Republican – but it’s a safe bet that most of the Libertarian voters in Virginia – a state where the Libertarian party has barely gotten into single digits in the recent past – were more likely to vote Republican than Democrat.

And Republicans are pointing out that this – the Democrats pumping big money into spoilers that undercut the GOP vote – is the wave of the future.

And like so many of the most noxious trends in current politics, it got its start here in Minnesota, where in 2010 Mark Dayton was saved by a concerted Democrat effort to peel off Republicans to fake Republican Tom Horner.

Horner got 10% of the vote – just enough more of them from Republicans to hand the race to Dayton.

Minnesota’s past, America’s future?


Path for Minnesota “libertarian” candidates to get into that Bentley they’ve been looking at in the next election?

What do you think?

7 thoughts on “The Wages Of Horner

  1. As an opponent to the “it’s got ot be either a Republican or Democrat” mentality, or the attempted coercive “If you don’t vote for the (often big government tax-and-spend, just to a lesser degree) candidate A, you’ll get candidate B.”, I offer two alternatives…perhaps either Republicans yield to the more libertarian, consitutional thrid party candidate or, what should be a no brainer, the GOP start selecting more libertarian, constitutional candidates.

    I’d like to know why these, seemingly, are not options.

  2. So you are encouraged by a closer loss? Until you understand losing is losing, the election process is not likely to go well for Republicans. They should look to Governor Christie if they want to see what a winning Republican looks like.

    The RNC-commissioned poll forecasted a 3-advantage among likely voters. Not the 7–12 pct. wild estimates among registered voters. There were no surprises here. Nothing that was not already known beforehand.

  3. So you are encouraged by a closer loss?

    Er, that’s really not what I meant…

    They should look to Governor Christie if they want to see what a winning Republican looks like

    In New Jersey.

  4. I swear I read Emery’s comments with an open mind …. but they are rarely connected to the topic of Mitch’s post. What part of ‘The Wages of Horner’ would inspire someone to write “So you are encouraged by a closer loss?” I took Mitch’s writing as an attempt to show that Democrats are (wisely) using A) the split in conservative camp and B) the vanity-corruption of the 100 percenters and C) money …….. to win races they might not otherwise win in a straight D vs R matchup. Am I missing something? Is there a Minnesota angle here that I’m not aware of in the fine city of Cincinnati?
    PS – haven’t said lately: Mitch – thanks for all you do/write. Best part of my work day is dropping by here

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.