The big green machine: McAuliffe, Mann, and Megadollars

From the irascible Joe Romm at Climate Progress:

climateprogress_mcauliffe

But how did this happen? Follow the money. The Daily Caller has this story:

Big ‘green’ dollars propel McAuliffe to victory

Environmental activists poured millions of dollars into the Virginia gubernatorial campaign to help propel Democrat Terry McAuliffe to victory over Republican opponent Ken Cuccinelli.

Environmental groups put up $3.8 million to help McAuliffe defeat Cuccinelli, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. That’s about four times as much as fossil fuel interests gave Cuccinelli.  

Energy and environmental concerns became a major focus during the campaign, as McAuliffe planned to jump-start Virginia’s renewable energy production and bring green jobs into the state.

Of course, we all know about ‘green’ jobs. They tend to be subsidized, transient, and only available to a select group of people.

Green groups also spent millions on TV ad buys during the campaign. NextGen Climate Action, which was founded by San Francisco billionaire Tom Steyer, spent more than $2.4 million — the most spent on TV buys by any group.

The League of Conservation Voters was able to mobilize volunteers to knock on 100,000 doors in the Richmond area and 300,000 across the state, reports the Hill.

Environmentalists were successful at making global warming a central issue in the campaign, having former University of Virginia climate scientist and global warming activist Michael Mann stump for McAuliffe.

The stigma of political stink will always be over Michael Mann now, as he has transformed himself from scientist to political activist, much like Dr. James Hansen (formerly of NASA GISS) has.

If big environmental outfits can so easily spend millions buying an out-of-state candidate like Terry McAuliffe, then how hard is it to buy a climate scientist or two?

Is team climate science now the best science money can buy?

Those “secret” UVa emails Mann has been viciously defending might give some clues. More later.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Politics and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

125 Responses to The big green machine: McAuliffe, Mann, and Megadollars

  1. Theo Goodwin says:

    No, Joe Romm, climate action had nothing to do with McAuliffe’s win. Democrats run on a platform of “Green Jobs” as a substitute for the economic policy that they do not have. Everyone knows that, even the Democrats putting forth the Green message.

    If you will look at the map of voting returns for the state, you will see the same old, same old. The Democrats took their usual bastions. Those bastions consist almost entirely of the counties bordering D.C and the college towns. If any one of the counties that is a D.C. suburb were removed from Virginia it would be impossible for a liberal to win a statewide office for the foreseeable future.

  2. Reblogged this on biting tea and commented:
    “Is ‘team climate science’ now the best science money can buy? Those ‘secret’ UVa emails Mann has been viciously defending might give some clues. More later.”

  3. Merrick says:

    Which is exactly what I said two months ago when WUWT featured an article on Mann getting involved in the race, but didn’t hear a peep back. Face it folks. We have little time to save the republic, and unless people start voting with their brains it’s all over.

  4. milodonharlani says:

    If the GOP candidate wins the recount for Attorney General (unlikely, since Democrats usually manage to find enough “lost” ballots to win recounts), Mann is still on the hook.

  5. Bloke down the pub says:

    Was that money spent to get McAuliffe elected, or to keep Mann’s emails secret?

  6. Michael Cohen says:

    I’d just like to point out that Cuccinelli is not universally popular among those of us who think Mann’s emails should be released. Skepticism about various topic in climate science is not a signifier of general political views or of party affiliation. I’d have voted for McAuliffe on balance, given the positions of Cuccinelli on other important issues.

  7. Resourceguy says:

    Get ready, Hillary will be pumped with climate talking points to such an extent it will look like robotic responses (bad robot). That leads to the question of whether presidential candidates should be tested for steroids.

  8. @Bloke down the pub,
    Yes.

  9. Merrick says:

    Michael Cohen,
    Yes. Vote for Terry, on the issues. In one debate a reporter brought up the issue of gay marriage (virginia has a definition of marriage in its state constitution) and even pointed that out to Terry in his question. Terry, typical know-it-all liberal that he is, said he’d get the legislature working on a bill day one if he became Governor and get it signed into law in his first year. In his response, Cuccinelli said that, owing to the fact that it was in the constitution it would require a constituaitonal amendment and neither the legislature nor governor had the authority to act contrary to the constitution and would therefore have to go to the voters for an amendment.
    But, yeah, you keep voting on “the issues”, completely made up for your consumption by the media, and elect people ready to “rule day one” instead of someone who actually understands the law and the authority, power, and restrictions of the office they seek to fill.
    Remember when the federal government was closed because the Republicans refused to take “no” for an answer to simply delay the individual penalty on Obamacare for one year (which they actually have the constitutional authoity to do) and within a week of the government opening up Obama came back and by presidential fiat he ordered a six week delay in exactly the same individual tax penalty (which e does NOT have the constitutional authority to do) and has since “promulgated a rule” which will excuse most labor unions from all of the penalties that exist for their plans in the ACA – through the next presidential election!
    Yeah, you keep viting on those “issues” and don’t worry your pretty little head about that pesky constitution.

  10. milodonharlani says:

    Michael Cohen says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:11 am

    Please state on what other important issues about which a VA governor can do anything you prefer McAuliffe to Cuccinelli. Thanks.

  11. Max Hugoson says:

    I think the Libertarian (Losertarian!) idiot was the USEFUL IDIOT in this case.

    Alas, may the Losertarians rot at the end of Mann’s Hockey Schtick!

  12. Peter Miller says:

    So, this just goes to prove greenies will spend fortunes to keep the misdemeanours of their ‘scientific elite’ secret.

    Looking at the US from the outside, I suspect the Tea Party’s attempt to nearly bring down the world economy a few weeks ago is having an impact on Republican support. I doubt if even more than a few per cent of Virginians have ever heard of Michael Mann and his routine abuse of real science.

    Obamacare may be a big mistake, due to its obviously poor conception and implementation (plus huge cost) but attacking it in a way that put the US and world economy in extreme danger is going to have consequences. In a perverse way, the Tea Party managed to forward the cause of climate alarmism by causing an electoral backlash against the Republicans.

  13. Merrick says:

    milodonharlani,

    Well there is that “war on women” thing. Did you know that one of the candidates for governor was only at the hospital for the birth of two of his five children? And that, in that candidates own autobiography, he describes how, when coming home from the hospital with his wife and new baby after one of the births he stopped and in his own words his wife:

    “was starting to well up in the backseat. She was having trouble understanding how I could be taking my wife and newborn baby to a fund-raiser on our way home from the hospital. We got to the dinner and by then Dorothy was in tears, and I left her with Justin and went inside. Little Peter was sleeping peacefully and Dorothy just sat there and poor Justin didn’t say a word. He was mortified. I was inside maybe fifteen minutes, said a few nice things about Marty, and hurried back out to the car. I felt bad for Dorothy, but it was a million bucks for the Democratic Party and by the time we got home and the kids had their new little brother in their arms, Dorothy was all smiles and we were one big happy family again. Nobody ever said life with me was easy.”

    That’s a real man who has his priorities straight! You go out and defend women’s rights politically so they can feel empowered to divorce you after proving what a thoughtless, heartless, and selfish jerk you really are. Ken Cuccinelli never did that, so he must hate women!

  14. Rachelle says:

    The RNC did nothing to help, and the Dems pushed money to a so-called Liberterian’s campaign to draw off votes from Cuccinelli. There were reports that the Dems also ran robo-calls accusing Cuccinelli of supporting Obamacare. Virginia will pay for its stupidity when they see how the new governor really wants to operate.

  15. Merrick says:

    Max Hugoson,
    Sarvis is no Libertarian. The Democrat machine geared up with money and foot soldiers to get signatures to put him on the ballot. Democrats even funded a challenge to the Virginia law which requires signature gatherers to be citizens of Virginia and got a court to suspend the law pending appeal, then blanketed Virginia with out-of-state signature gatherers for hire.
    Sarvis is in favor of putting GPS units in every car and having your every move every day telemetered to the state so that they can tax you based on miles driven. Please point out to me where in Libertarian doctrine one can come up with a argument that the state knowing every move you make is a legitimate authority?
    Finally, at an election rally the day before the election, Libertarian Ron Paul said that any Libertarian or liberty loving Virginian would be “insane” to vote for “so-called Libertarian” Sarvis. Sarvis got 145,000 votes. Cuccinelli lost by 55,000 votes. You do the math.

  16. Dr. John M. Ware says:

    Cuccinelli’s loss was far closer than predicted. Given the money supplied to and spent by McAuliffe, the margin should have been closer to 30% than 3%. As it is, McAuliffe will still be a minority-vote governor, having received substantially less than half the votes; more people voted against him than for him, in spite of his millions spent on lying television ads. McAuliffe hasn’t a clue how to govern; all he will be able to do is ask Hillary and Obama for directions. He is a silly, shallow man, with no qualifications or experience for the job; I pray for Virginia under his “leadership.” As for the climate initiatives, all I can do is hope that he encounters sufficient resistance to stay his hand.

    To Peter: Please check your facts. The Tea Party had nothing to do with the issue you raise; the Democrats did it all by themselves, with Republicans trying (in vain) to save them from their own foolishness. No one ever spent his way to prosperity, and even the Democrats will eventually run out of other people’s money.

  17. F. Ross says:

    Max Hugoson says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:33 am

    I think the Libertarian (Losertarian!) idiot was the USEFUL IDIOT in this case.

    Agreed. I think the Libertarian candidate with the conniving financial aid of the Democratic machine pretty clearly cost Cuccinelli. the election. …not to mention the lack of suppurt from the Repubilcan party hacks.

    The final result was really a shame as, in my opinion, a win for Cuccinelli would have shocked the DC proles no end.

  18. leon0112 says:

    FYI. Tom Steyer, CA billionaire climate alarmist, spent quite a bit of money in the special election for Washington State Senate (26th district) as well as in the Virginia Governor’s race. Basically, he tried to buy the election for an appointed Democrat by funding an outside negative campaign against Republican Jan Angel. Steyer’s folks were extremely nasty.

    Steyer’s folks were trying to pin the “War on Women” message on Jan saying she opposed mammograms. Then she went public with the fact that she is a breast cancer survivor. Ooops.

    Anyway, Jan won despite the massive negative campaign against her. The Washington State Senate will now be a roadblock for much of Governor Inslee’s efforts to raise the price of energy in the state.

    Steyer did not win all of the races he wanted to win.

  19. milodonharlani says:

    Peter Miller says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:35 am

    Explain please how the Tea Party is responsible for Obama refusing to negotiate on a budget, as he is constitutionally required to do. Then kindly explain how the Tea Party is responsible for the Obama administration & Senate majority leader Reid never passing a budget, as also required by the constitution, but instead ruling by continuing resolution since 2009, except for sequestration, designed to cut the programs & departments most favored by the public. Then if you will explain how running over a trillion dollar deficit every year, on track to double the national debt in eight years which took 220 years to accumulate, doesn’t threaten the global economy. And finally say how the shutdown could possibly have hurt the global economy, since default was never a risk, as US debt obligations can be met out of continuing tax revenue.

    Thanks.

  20. Mac the Knife says:

    Peter Miller says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:35 am
    Looking at the US from the outside, I suspect the Tea Party’s attempt to nearly bring down the world economy a few weeks ago is having an impact on Republican support.

    Peter,
    Stick to topics you may have some factual basis to comment on. Your comment above exposes your shameful ignorance…. or your willingness to repeat fictional ‘talking points’ hyperbole from exceedingly biased political commentators. Either way, you just look foolish.
    MtK

  21. milodonharlani says:

    F. Ross says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:52 am

    leon0112 says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:53 am

    The Democrats pulled the same fake Libertarian stalking horse trick in Montana, to keep a Senate seat there in 2012. They’ve done the same thing for decades in Oregon, backing supposedly conservative third & fourth party candidates in Senate elections, with great success.

    If McAuliffe’s deceit-, lie-, fraud- & money-fueled victory in VA lulls Democrats into a false sense of security over the likely effect on their chances in 2014, then Cuch may well prove a lamb whose sacrifice in a battle helped to win the war.

    National voter ID laws would help even more.

  22. Mark Bofill says:

    Peter,

    In a perverse way, the Tea Party managed to forward the cause of climate alarmism by causing an electoral backlash against the Republicans.

    If you look at the polls in the months leading into the election, McAuliffe had a large lead going in which eroded. It is of course speculative to some extent, but the widely accepted explanation for this is that he suffered due to the current unpopularity of Obamacare.

  23. Robin says:

    I have a book that came out a few weeks ago called Credentialed to Destroy: How and Why Education Became a Weapon. The last Chapter lays out the political and economic vision tied to these education reforms globally. UNESCO calls it Green Growth and it is a public sector oriented planned economy that uses CAGW as the excuse for the long sought (since at least 1962) transformation. Lots of cited documents and reports so there is no dispute on where this is going.

    McAulliffe knows all this because of the involvement of Clinton Global Initiative in C40.org.

    Also the anti-science label goes to those pushing constructivism in education in order to make the social sciences dominant in future policy planning.

  24. dbstealey says:

    I almost always agree 100% with Peter Miller. But in this case I must point out that there is no official “Tea Party”. It is simply a group of people who have similar values: a balanced budget, government abiding by the Constitution, etc.

    Also, Michael Mann was sweating bullets in this election. In the outcome, he dodged a bullet. Mikey was lucky this time. But those bullets are coming closer…

  25. Merrick says:

    Theo Goodwin,

    In fact, as a part of the deal that created DC, Virginia (it was a bit bigger back then) gave what is now Arlington County to the District, just as Maryland gave what is now the District. But after a few years DC took a close look at Arlington County and said, “no thanks, we don’t want it.” Arlington spent a few years in limbo with Virginia wanting no part of taking it back, but evetually was. There have been multiple attempts by the rest of Virginia to “secede” Arlington from the state but, alas, all to dat ehave failed. If we got rid of Arlington McAulliffe (nor Kaine nor Warner nor Obama) could ever have won the Virginia vote.

  26. Jquip says:

    Merrick: “Sarvis is no Libertarian. … Sarvis got 145,000 votes. Cuccinelli lost by 55,000 votes. You do the math.”

    What math? I’m not sure if your thesis is that Republican voters can’t tell the difference between an establishment Republican and a Statist, or that they can. Because one way says the GOP should have helped Sarvis peel votes off the Democrats. And the other says the GOP are the other Democrat party.

  27. milodonharlani says:

    Merrick says:
    November 7, 2013 at 11:14 am

    Arlington County (~34K edge for McAu) alone would not have done it, nor even with throwing in (or out!) Alexandria (~20K edge for McAu) as well. It would have taken Falls Church, too.

    http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2013/results?pw

    But I agree that DC should have those bits of the Commonwealth.

  28. Merrick says:

    Jquip, polling showed that for those voters who supported Obamacare Terry McAuliffe garnered >95% of the vote, but for those voters who were gainst Obamacare Cuccinelli got about 80%, and Sarvis about 16%, with the rest going to McAuliffe,
    More than half the voters in Virginia are against Obamacare. Again, if Sarvis weren’t in the race, where would his “against Obamacare” votes have gone? You do the math.

  29. Merrick says:

    milodonharlani, while your raw numbers are true in this case, you discount the fact that it’s a completely different race. Also, do just a little bit of googling to find out about all the voting “irregularities” that happened in Arlington County and Alexandria in the 2012 election and perhaps even just those numbers you quote look a little different. And, were you aware of the reported voting “problems” in Loudoun County Tuesday morning, which was a County that Cuccinelli had to do well in in order to win?

  30. Bob Greene says:

    NextGen “green” money and rollout in Northern VA. Bloomberg with a big ad campaign for McAuliff who suddenly turned anti-gun, the Lt. Governor had a fit when he didn’t get the nomination he thought he deserved without campaigning, a “Libertarian” shill bought by Democrat bucks and his funding was not discovered until election day, “Repubulican” mainliners cutting McAuliff ads, limited national republican funding for Cuccinelli and Christie refusing to campaign in Virginia all contributed to a relatively narrow defeat.

    Just for fun, I got lots of emails celebrating Christie’s big (setup) victory and requests for contributions starting 11/5. My guess is that the mainline republican party will have a devil of a time getting conservative votes in VA. The state may well go blue because they probably got responses like mine: When hell freezes over.

    PS. It was obvious Sarvis was a shill, but no one went after him. I believe enough of his vote, had they known his funding, would have turned toward Cuccinelli. Remember 53% of the voters, voted against McAuliff.

  31. milodonharlani says:

    Merrick says:
    November 7, 2013 at 11:31 am

    Yes, I read about them while they were happening. I mentioned fraud in a previous post. In 2012 & 2013, fraud was more widespread than just in suburban northern VA. In 2008 & 2012, you would also have needed to shed more counties than Arlington for Obama to lose.

    If you want to make sure about VA, then add Loudon & Fairfax Counties to the exclusionary list. If DC gets that big, then it would be hard to deny it a US representative & two senators.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Virginia,_2008

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Virginia,_2012

    Another problem for the GOP in VA is all the liberal Yankees who have moved to Virginia Beach & elsewhere in eastern VA.

    The 2012 election was close enough in OH, VA, FL, NV & some other battlegrounds to lie within the margin of fraud.

  32. lurker, passing through laughing says:

    It took a corrupt libertarian funded by democrats to put the clinton sock puppet in office.
    Virginians are fising to be take to the cleaner between McAuliffe’s insider scams and the Clinton’s ever increasing need to be fed for the coming 2016 election.
    Mann, and his phony hockestick will crumble with or without political cover. With political cover may take a bit longer.

  33. more soylent green! says:

    Also being conveniently overlooked is the Republican party establishment worked against Cuccinelli. They would rather elect a big-government crony capitalist elitist than support their party’s nominee.

    After all, if somebody is for limited government that means they won’t throw as much of the public mullah into the corporate trough.

  34. FundMe says:

    never take on a fight that you might lose… Cuccineli took on too many fights and lost…more is the pity

  35. Mark Bofill says:

    more soylent green,

    I don’t claim you’re wrong, but I haven’t heard evidence to that effect. I have heard arguments that the GOP didn’t do much to help Cuccinelli, but I always assumed that was simple triage (I.E., he was assumed to have already lost and therefore resources weren’t allocated to the battle).

  36. techgm says:

    @ Peter Miller.

    Peter, if your reference to “the Tea Party’s attempt to nearly bring down the world economy a few weeks ago,” is due to your belief that the US hitting its debt ceiling would have triggered an automatic default by the US Treasury on its sovereign debts, then you are uninformed (as are the overwhelming majority of the Congress and the US public). No such default would have occurred as there is ~ 9x the amount of revenues coming in each month than there is interest due on the debt. It’s a situation equivalent to my reaching the credit limit on my Visa; I would simply be obliged to reduce my new spending until I had paid off some of the principle until I had headroom for new debt (i.e., live within my means).

  37. Peter Miller says:

    The point I was trying to make is this: most of the world and much of the American electorate perceive the Tea Party part of the Republican Party as being intransigent nay sayers, who are ruthlessly prepared to play chicken with the US and world economy.

    As such, there was an inevitable voter reaction to this nihilist strategy. Whether or not the Republicans are correct to oppose the highly flawed Obamacare program is not the point.

    The point is this, the use of extreme confrontationist tactics have created a voter backlash. The problem is: this backlash has allowed those who support climate alarmism to achieve political power – and that is in no sensible individual’s interest.

    If the US – the world’s most powerful and richest nation – had defaulted on servicing its debt, no one can possibly predict the outcome, other than it would have been economically catastrophic. If you do not understand this, then you might as well be a Mann acolyte, with no understanding of economic or scientific reality.

  38. Mark Bofill says:

    Peter,

    I’m not trying to insult you, yet it’s difficult to find a gentle way of phrasing this. When you say,

    If the US – the world’s most powerful and richest nation – had defaulted on servicing its debt

    I believe that you demonstrate that you don’t know what you are talking about. This is media sensationalism that would not happen, regardless of what the House did or did not do in response to Tea Party pressure.

  39. milodonharlani says:

    Peter Miller says:
    November 7, 2013 at 12:06 pm

    There was never any risk of the US actually defaulting. The intransigence wasn’t from the GOP, but from Reid & Obama, who refused to do their constitutional duty. It takes two to tango.

    Voters in northern VA might have blamed the Tea Party more than Obama, but that is not the national opinion, which is about evenly split between faulting the administration & the House GOP, whether Tea Party or not (mostly not). The more the debt rises & the worse Obamacare is shown to be, the more will voters thank the GOP for trying to fix both problems, by whatever means.

    Reality doesn’t comport with your view, not surprising given media bias.

  40. john robertson says:

    So is this the law of diminishing returns?
    Even with a fake Libertarian candidate to split the vote, massive spending and probably voting booth fraud, the Democrat just squeaks in.
    Maybe Americans are wising up to the game.
    The panic spending by green activist groups was just enough to buy a little more time.
    As soon as any government actually investigates the evidence for the CAGW policies, the scam is over.
    This is why the “Greens” poured money in to oppose Cuccinelli,
    CAGW created by, promoted by and now protected from investigation by, our Kleptocracy.
    The unholy blend of bureaucrats,career do-gooders, spongers,parasites and bought politicians

  41. Mark Bofill says:

    Let me clarify,
    When I say ‘would not happen’, I mean it much the same was as I mean, let’s speculate that the President is in a bad mood one morning and orders a massive nuclear first strike on Iran. Is this utterly impossible? No, I guess not. The man might go insane I suppose, or perhaps suffer some sort of head trauma or brain chemistry imbalance or something. For all reasonable intents and purposes though, this would not happen. This is more or less what I meant.

  42. TomRude says:

    It’s funny how “anti-science” is the favorite insult that green zealots and their highly censuring outfits throw to anyone who is not yielding to their diktat. The semantic slide from science to politics is now complete and the more shaky the climate science is, the more political the issue is becoming: no more masks, no more pretending.

  43. Don Tabor says:

    I am a Libertarian in Chesapeake Va, and I find this speculation unfounded.
    I doubt the money spent on Climate Change adds changed 100 votes. It is a non-issue here in that the adds did nothing to change anyone’s mind. Warmists were going to vote for McAuliffe anyway.
    The issues that tipped the election were demographic change and social issues.
    Most of VA’s population growth lately has been around DC, and that is a region dependent on the growth of government. They will vote Democrat if Satan was their nominee.
    Cuccinelli’s efforts at stealth abortion bans angered a lot of women. Cuccinelli compared our immigration problems to a rat infestation, insuring that every single Latino who could vote would and would vote Democrat.
    Its amazing the election was as close as it was.
    Exit polling of Sarvis voters showed there were more Democrats disgusted by McAuliffe’s cronyism than Republicans joining the real Libertarians. The actual Libertarians would have written in Donald Duck before voting for either major party. Had Sarvis not been in the race, McAuliffe would have won by more than he did.
    Republicans are looking for someone to blame, but it s their own fault. Had they nominated Bolling, the current Lt Governor, he would have easily defeated McAuliffe. But the religious right(not the Tea Party) insisted on Cuccinelli who was unelectable from the start.

  44. OssQss says:

    Don’t forget the tea party was directly targeted by the IRS after the 2010 midterm elections. They were effectively prohibited formal tax exempt status to formally organize. You can bet the POTUS and his cronies were directing things from behind the curtain. That initiative directly impacted the 2012 elections.

  45. Tom in Indy says:

    The Libertarian candidate was funded by an Obama campaign bundler, so the democrats stole this election by footing the bill for a 3rd party candidate, who apparently was for policies that were not consistent with Libertarianism.

    The solution is simple. Conservatives need to make sure they always pay for a Green Party candidate on every ballot.

  46. cynical_scientist says:

    Money in politics is a real problem. It means parties that represent the poor and downtrodden like … er … the Republicans … find it difficult to beat the candidates from parties that represent the interests of the rich and powerful, like … um … the Democrats. Hang on a minute. Is that right?

  47. Merrick says:

    So, as I think all can see in Peter Miller’s arguments, a perfect example of someone whom, if he lived in Virginia, would be otherwise predisposed to vote for someone like Cuccinelli but is naively willing to buy into the media disinformation campaign (and how could it be classified in any other way if the media is actually supposed to be reporting facts) and change his vote accordingly. Much like Michael Cohen whom we’ve not heard back from on the “other issues.” You don’t have to look hard to find them.

  48. milodonharlani says:

    Don Tabor says:
    November 7, 2013 at 12:20 pm

    Actual polling data both before the election & in exit polls show that the fake “Libertarian” Sarvis definitely damaged Cuch. Look at the AG race, for instance. Sarvis most likely cost Cuch the election, as Perot did Bush in 1992. Except for the Greens, third parties hurt the GOP. Democrats know this, which is why they bankroll & recruit “Libertarian” candidates, as in VA this year & MT last.

    You bought into the Democrat lie about the rat infestation. Cuch didn’t compare immigrants to rats. He said, rightly, that DC cared more about rat families than they did about immigrant families. Naturally, the Democrats used their huge cash advantage to spread the lie about rats, which Cuch couldn’t afford to answer.

    You are right however that Cuch is more of an old-fashioned social conservative than a Tea Party adherent. Too often now, as in NV, CO & DE in 2010 & MO & IN in 2012, the fiscal conservative, constitutionalist Tea Party has been hijacked by candidates who more properly belong to Focus on Family. Democrats naturally benefit from this conflation in their attempts to demonize the Tea Party, also by calling them racist when prominent among their leaders are ethnic minority figures & women.

  49. Merrick says:

    Don Tabor,

    Your comments about Northern Virginia are true, but make sure you address the issue at home as well. The vote deltas for McAulliffe:

    Chesapeake +2000
    Suffolk +3300
    Portsmouth +11,000
    Norfolk +20,000

    And while you pick interesting issues, then reflect back the media take on them, you avoid other issues like the white Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor refusing, on camera at their debate, to chake the hand of the black Republican candidate for Lt. Governor. Imagine how the press had played that if it was a Libertarian or Republican who’d refused to shake the hand of a black man. But keep focused on those issues the media tells you you should be focused on.

  50. Merrick says:

    For anyone interested, google “virginia lt. governor hand shake”. Top ten hits:

    Breitbart
    theblacksphere
    Washington Examiner
    Life News
    Reclaim Our Republic
    Republican Assemblies
    Weasel Zippers
    American University
    Patriot Update
    Lonely Conservative

    I guess that a white man refusing to touch a black man, two public figures live on TV, isn’t news if you’re a liberal reporter.

  51. more soylent green! says:

    @Peter Miller

    Who is the extremist, the people who want government to borrow 40% of every dollar spent, the people who want government to say what health insurance you can or cannot buy or the people who want government to live within its means, want government obey the laws and want people to be able to keep their health insurance if they like it?

    Who is extreme, the chief executive who compares his domestic political opposition to criminals and terrorists or the people who want to sit down and negotiate? Who is the extremist, the person who repeatedly lies or the ones who are pointing out the truth?

    If you’re trying to say the public perception is the Tea Party is extremist, then I must unfortunately agree.

  52. philjourdan says:

    The $3.8 million, while significant, was a drop in the bucket. McAwful outspent Cuccinelli by a total of $15 million.

  53. Mac the Knife says:

    milodonharlani says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:56 am

    Doesn’t look like Peter is going to respond to your cogent questions, Milo!
    Thanks for trying, though. You are a man of my own heart and mind. Your analyses posted above are very similar to my own conclusions on the VA Governor’s and Lt. Governor’s races.
    MtK

  54. milodonharlani says:

    Mac the Knife says:
    November 7, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    We can only hope that Obamacare will inoculate another generation against socialism, whether creeping or rampant.

  55. Robin says:

    Now that carpool is over the rest of the story. Federal revenue sharing with the states is now tied to pushing the Green Growth/Low Carbon vision in the state’s economic devt policies. In addition, what used to be education is increasingly centered in the Governors’ offices as Workforce Devt. So Governors of both parties are giddily eyeing the prospect of combining Workforce Devt (favors for Big Business) and Eco Devt (favors for Big Business) with the taxpayers getting the bill or more public debt.

    And again if I know this from the documents, McAuliffe’s Green Vendors would know it from conferences and lobbyists and breakfasts we were not invited to. A lot of this is being pushed by the Brookings’ Institute as part of its Metropolitanism initiative.

  56. Peter Miller says:

    Sheesh!

    It is not about who was right or wrong about the benefits or otherwise of the Obamacare program, it is about the tactics used to oppose it.

    As I said before, playing chicken with the world economy, is something which has hugely harmed the US in the eyes of the rest of the world and helped – stress the word ‘helped’ – those favouring climate alarmism into positions of political power.

    The bottom line is if you want to help those like Mann and his ilk to increase their influence, then by all means support the views of those who want to play poker with the world economy.

    Democracy is all about being the least worst form of government and unfortunately all too often the buffoons get elected to positions well above their levels of competence .

  57. Jquip says:

    Merrick: “More than half the voters in Virginia are against Obamacare. Again, if Sarvis weren’t in the race, where would his “against Obamacare” votes have gone?”

    This is not responsive to my question. By your own statement Sarvis wasn’t any sort of Libertarian as he supported DNC favored things. So either Sarvis sapped votes of the DNC. Or supporting DNC favored things is what Republicans do. Which is it?

  58. milodonharlani says:

    Peter Miller says:
    November 7, 2013 at 2:04 pm

    Sheesh!

    It is not about who was right or wrong about the benefits or otherwise of the Obamacare program, it is about the tactics used to oppose it.

    As I said before, playing chicken with the world economy, is something which has hugely harmed the US in the eyes of the rest of the world and helped – stress the word ‘helped’ – those favouring climate alarmism into positions of political power.

    The bottom line is if you want to help those like Mann and his ilk to increase their influence, then by all means support the views of those who want to play poker with the world economy.

    Democracy is all about being the least worst form of government and unfortunately all too often the buffoons get elected to positions well above their levels of competence .

    —————————-

    Obama & his staff were certainly elevated to positions well above their levels of competence.

    You are committing the logical fallacy of begging the question by assuming that the government shut down in any way played chicken with the world economy. It didn’t. What is a threat is the US running over a trillion deficit every single year that Obama has been in office.

    Perhaps you’re unaware that almost every year during the Reagan Administration there was a government shut down while Democrats in Congress negotiated with the executive branch over the budget, which was always declared dead on arrival by House Speaker Tip O’Neil. Did those shutdowns threaten the world economy, then even more dependent on the USA & during the Cold War?

    However you may think the world views the shutdown through the filter of Leftwing media, the fact is that it never threatened the global economy & was undertaken on the GOP side in an attempt to rescue the economies of the country & world from the ruinous effects of Neo-Keynesianism.

  59. F. Ross says:

    more soylent green! says:
    November 7, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    @Peter Miller

    Who is the extremist, the people who want government to borrow 40% of every dollar spent, the people who want government to say what health insurance you can or cannot buy or the people who want government to live within its means, want government obey the laws and want people to be able to keep their health insurance if they like it?

    Who is extreme, the chief executive who compares his domestic political opposition to criminals and terrorists or the people who want to sit down and negotiate? Who is the extremist, the person who repeatedly lies or the ones who are pointing out the truth?

    If you’re trying to say the public perception is the Tea Party is extremist, then I must unfortunately agree.

    [+emphasis}

    Good post; agree with every word except your word borrow.

    When referring to government funding I think something like, say, confiscation might be more fitting..

    The Federal Government has been borrowing from Social Security almost since its inception with no intention of ever paying back the funds.

  60. milodonharlani says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 2:13 pm

    Sarvis gave pro-abortion Republicans & Independents who couldn’t stomach McAwful a candidate to vote for. The polling clearly shows that the majority of Sarvis’ support came from moderates who otherwise would have backed a Republican. No one can know how many Sarvis voters might simply not have voted, but had they done so, there can be little doubt that most of them would have gone with the GOP nominee.

  61. eyesonu says:

    A map of Va voting results. http://www.politico.com/2013-election/results/map/#/Governor/2013/VA

    Much of Virginia’s population (outside of DC area) would probably like to dump what is referred to as Northern Va in much the same way as most of New York state would probably like to drop New York city and the surrounding area. The demographics in both locations are so different they should no longer be in the same pot. Time to redraw the maps?

  62. Alvin says:

    If McAuliffe had so much green money and so many liberal/environmental supporters, what happened to the double-digit lead he had in the polls? The one that collapsed into a paltry 2 point win with a fake libertarian candidate taking 5 points away? Sounds to me someone is trying to take fake responsibility for a win they almost turned into a major upset.

  63. Alvin says:

    Rats = I can see Russia from my house. Both lies, created by liberals and expanded by the press.

  64. Alvin says:

    Liberals peed in the river, then bragged about the flood.

  65. R. de Haan says:

    Max Hugoson says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:33 am
    I think the Libertarian (Losertarian!) idiot was the USEFUL IDIOT in this case.

    Right, if Robert Sarvis would have retreated from the election process Cuccinelli would have won.
    http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/screenhunter_43-nov-06-05-57.jpg

    In my opinion the article therefore is wrong. The loss is caused by bad strategy, read stupidity, nothing more nothing less.

  66. Theo Goodwin says:

    Merrick says:
    November 7, 2013 at 11:14 am

    Thanks for the information on the counties and prospects of returning some of them to D.C. Maybe Virginia could work a deal where the District becomes a state. Or maybe there is a better idea.

    While many are celebrating the ascendancy of Christie, permit me to remind all that he is anti-gun. Need I explain what that means? Please recall that to win the Republican primaries one has to carry a lot of red states.

  67. u.k.(us) says:

    I read stuff like this in my left-leaning newspaper (delivered upon my driveway) everyday.

    The authors start by saying the opposition is reasonable (if deluded), then go on to disparage them at length.

    The whole reason for the article is just an excuse to disparage the dissenters.
    I guess accountability has been lost by the press corps.
    I know, so what else is new ?

  68. Jquip says:

    milodon: “No one can know how many Sarvis voters might simply not have voted, but had they done so, there can be little doubt that most of them would have gone with the GOP nominee.”

    Yes, I understand the ‘other possible worlds’ argument on it. But that doesn’t improve things a bit. The complaint is still that the ingrates didn’t vote for your team. And that neither did they vote for your ‘approved opposition’ team. Because seriously, if there was only the Raiders and Broncos, then only one of the approved teams would win the Superbowl. But Steelers fans? Spoilers and wreckers. “Something must be done so long as it doesn’t involve improving the Raiders’ game.”

  69. milodonharlani says:

    Theo Goodwin says:
    November 7, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    Adding three big northern VA counties (plus three little ones) & three MD counties to DC to make the State of Potomac would guarantee two extra Democrat Senators, while not guaranteeing four GOP ones from the rump VA & MD.

    That said, America is settled now, & it might be time to rationalize state borders, while also lowering the disparity in population among them.

    Failing that, right-to-work & voter ID states & parts thereof might want to secede & form their own capitalist nation, allowing those who want to emulate socialist Europe go their own way.

  70. milodonharlani says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 4:04 pm

    The fate of the nation isn’t sports. The fact of the matter, the political reality, is that Libertarian candidates, whether real or fake, like Sarvis, guarantee one-party domination, ie by Democrats. In our system, it’s not “approval” of two teams that matters. It’s the fact that third parties of the moderate center-right or radical libertarian bent will invariably hand victory to Democrats. A realignment from the two-party to a three-party system would still leave ~40% in the Democrat Party or its ideological equivalent, so that an even stronger Libertarian Party would make statist control more certain.

    Given these realities, IMO it’s better for Libertarians to fight it out with social conservatives within the GOP, since that’s the only alternative realistically to influence public policy. Unless of course you’re happier making meaningless protest votes every election which only further the interests of statists.

  71. Theo Goodwin says:

    milodonharlani says:
    November 7, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    Clearly, you should run for president of the US. We could have the US-A and the US-EU. You would be remembered as the Partition President. /sarc (That means that I am joking, in case it is not clear to someone.)

  72. Gail Combs says:

    Peter Miller says: @ November 7, 2013 at 10:35 am

    So, this just goes to prove greenies will spend fortunes to keep the misdemeanours of their ‘scientific elite’ secret.

    Looking at the US from the outside, I suspect the Tea Party’s attempt to nearly bring down the world economy a few weeks ago is having an impact on Republican support…..

    Hate to tell you but the last bill sent to the Senate conceded Obama EVERY POINT including a raising the debt ceiling EXCEPT it would require “President Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden and other top political appointees to participate in health insurance exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act.” No special deals.

    So the shut down was because the democrats wanted to keep their special privileges but don’t expect to here that from the MSM.

    I could not find the original article I read it had every budjet bill listed,should have book marked it. This only deals with Obamacare:
    “…”This bill ensures that all Members of Congress and the White House will finally have to live by the same laws that have been passed, just like all Americans,” RSC Chairman Steve Scalise said in a statement. “Either Obamacare is good enough that it should apply to all or it is so bad that it should apply to none. It is time for the sweetheart deals and backroom exemptions to end.”….

    Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is waiting on the House to send the Senate another amendment to keep the government running.

    When— if—the House does send the Senate its next iteration of a continuing resolution, Reid will move to table the measure, according to a Democratic Senate aide. It will be the third time Reid has punted back the CR [Continuing Resolution] to the House…”
    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/state-of-play-the-government-is-shut-down-20130930

    So now we see more deals… Certain business then congresional staff and the latest (from yesterday Nov 6) is the Unions are getting exemptions from Obamacare.
    http://washingtonexaminer.com/health-and-human-services-quietly-giving-unions-obamacare-fix/article/2538621
    “…The Department of Health and Human Services quietly released a final rule last week that includes an intention to exempt some union insurance plans from a substantial new tax known as the reinsurance fee.

    As part of Obamacare, the tax was supposed to be levied against all insurance plans to share the risk for insurers taking on the sickest patients next year.”

  73. Merrick says:

    milodonharlani, your conclusion is exactly correct and the conclusion drawn by every rational Libertarian in the nation (Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Neal Boortz, Dennis Miller (ex-liberal), John Stossel (who used to be a liberal and bought a clue), Herman Cain, etc.). I can’t count the number of arguments I’ve had with Liberals who believe their “independent” and claim they are “libertarians who are more in tune with the social issues of the libertarian party than the fiscal issues.” BS. True libertarians understand that NOTHING is free and that every social “freedom” comes at a cost of some kind and agree that when you have to go into someone else’s pocket to fund a “freedom” it probably isn’t really freedom any more, but just another form of tyranny.
    These are the same people who get confused every time I point out that if it were really true that Democrats WEREN’T Socialists and Libertarians came in both Liberal and Conservative flavors then EVERY SINGLE Socialist and Communist that has ever been elected to national office wouldn’t have caucused with the Democrats and EVERY SINGLE Libertarian that has ever been elected to national office wouldn’t have caucused with the Republicans. But, surprise of surprises, that’s exactly what has happened to date.
    Not to mention that NO ex-Democrat has EVER gone on to run for a major office as a Libertarian but MANY ex-Republicans have – do I need to list them?
    Libertarians need to JOIN with the Republicans to tamp down the Statists, then, there can be a more principled discussion about the size of the much smaller government (that’ll be a tough pill for some of the establishment Republicans that may still be around) and where the boundary between public and private belongs.

  74. Jquip says:

    milodon: “The fate of the nation isn’t sports.”

    Well, to the degree that a popularity contest, a beauty pageant of sorts, is not a sporting event.

    ” It’s the fact that third parties of the moderate center-right or radical libertarian bent will invariably hand victory to Democrats.”

    It’s also the argument that the DNC backs such splitters to to keep the GOP out of office. But assume the GOP is so incomprehensibly stupid as to back groups that split the DNC vote. The prima facia the GOP isn’t competent to govern as they’re too incomprehensibly stupid to be trusted with the task. Especially if it involves any sort of PR, such as the whole of diplomacy.

    Now assume that the GOP isn’t incomprehensibly stupid. Then it isn’t splitting the DNC vote precisely because it *wants* the DNC to win. Which either means the GOP is the other DNC party. Or that the establishment GOP types would rather cut off their nose to spite their face. In the latter case they are again, prima facia, not competent to govern. In the former case, they’re doing just the task they want to accomplish.

    In which of these cases is a GOP voter not incomprehensibly stupid?

  75. Merrick says:

    Gail Combs – yes, apparently Peter Miller agrees with the Democrats that some animals are more equal than others…

  76. Merrick says:

    Jquip, frankly, you’re just unwilling to concede an argument you lost before it started. If having a third candidate in the Virginia race WASN’T to Democrat advantage then the Democrats wouldn’t have funded him and provided legal assistance to him to make sure he got on the ballot and was more than an asterisk in the race. Or perhaps you think they did all that out of their sense of charity?

  77. Merrick says:

    Jquip, your premises are absurd. Republican aren’t engaged in electoral chicanery because they’re not as craven as the Democrats. It’s just that simple. And they aren’t because regular influx of groups like the Tea Party keep them that way.

  78. Gail Combs says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 11:17 am
    ….And the other says the GOP are the other Democrat party.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    They are read “America’s Ruling Class ” http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print

    “…Today’s ruling class, from Boston to San Diego, was formed by an educational system that exposed them to the same ideas and gave them remarkably uniform guidance, as well as tastes and habits. These amount to a social canon of judgments about good and evil, complete with secular sacred history, sins (against minorities and the environment), and saints. Using the right words and avoiding the wrong ones when referring to such matters — speaking the “in” language — serves as a badge of identity. Regardless of what business or profession they are in, their road up included government channels and government money because, as government has grown, its boundary with the rest of American life has become indistinct. Many began their careers in government and leveraged their way into the private sector. Some, e.g., Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, never held a non-government job. Hence whether formally in government, out of it, or halfway, America’s ruling class speaks the language and has the tastes, habits, and tools of bureaucrats. It rules uneasily over the majority of Americans not oriented to government.

    The two classes have less in common culturally, dislike each other more, and embody ways of life more different from one another than did the 19th century’s Northerners and Southerners — nearly all of whom, as Lincoln reminded them, “prayed to the same God.” By contrast, while most Americans pray to the God “who created and doth sustain us,” our ruling class prays to itself as “saviors of the planet” and improvers of humanity. Our classes’ clash is over “whose country” America is….”
    The encouraging thing is because the Ruling Class or Political Class is so uniform and mostly ignores the rest of us they don’t really understand us especially since the man in the street is starting to wake-up and is now distrustful of the MSM.

    The Biggest Loser of 2013: the Political Class: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/09/14/biggest_loser_of_2013_the_political_class_119939.html

    (2010) “Only four percent (4%) now support the Political Class. These voters tend to trust political leaders more than the public at large and are far less skeptical about government.” http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/65_now_hold_populist_or_mainstream_views

    Tuesday, April 16, 2013 …survey finds that 84% of Likely U.S. Voters are at least somewhat angry at Congress, including 54% who are Very Angry. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2013/54_are_very_angry_at_congress

  79. milodonharlani says:

    Theo Goodwin says:
    November 7, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    I don’t like having to ask people for money.

    But partition could well happen without me, given the results of the 2014 & 2016 elections. Divvying up the country would probably produce more than two nations, however, as the EU-like zones would have to form enclaves separated by American-style swaths of heartland, which would themselves likely form different polities.

    New England, eastern NY & PA, central MD & northern VA would be cut off from an Akron-Flint state along Lake Erie, another larger “Blue” (but really “Red”) enclave from Gary to KC to Duluth, maybe one in the Rockies of NM & CO, then two or three on the West Coast.

  80. milodonharlani says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 5:04 pm

    It’s entirely possible that the Mainstream GOP, or its representatives in DC, is happy just being Democrats Light, not being in control, except of the House, so that they can get reelected by not rocking the boat, & enjoy the perks of power, doing well for themselves instead of doing good for the country. I know some GOP members of Congress who fit that description, going along to get along.

    IMO the GOP should fund Green Party candidates the way the Democrats do “Libertarians” who are really just statist social liberals. IMO the fate of liberty in the USA rests on much more substantial grounds than the rights to smoke dope & abort eight-month old babies.

  81. Don Tabor says:

    Its not that the Democrats didn’t TRY to gain such an advantage, it is that it didn’t work. Exit polling by the Washington Post shows that twice as many self identified Liberals voter for Sarvis as self identified Conservatives.

    So yes they probably tired, but the jokes on them.

    In any case, I don’t think the money spent on Warmist ads had any affect whatsoever.

    Finally, you know nothing abut Libertarians. Libertarians oppose victimless crimes laws, but probably indulge less than Republicans.

  82. eric1skeptic says:

    Don Tabor (November 7, 2013 at 12:20 pm) I am a Libertarian in Chesapeake Va, and I find this speculation unfounded.

    Don, I am somewhat libertarian and used to be a big supporter of the Libertarian party. I think your demographic explanations are pretty good. I would add that many of the comments above about national issues like Obamacare are irrelevant. Most voters vote locally on likability and that is especially true in conservative districts in Virginia like the one I live in. I’m not sure Cuccinellii was all that likable.

    I opposed his fishing expedition into Mann’s records at the time and I said so here. I have not found any reason to change my mind in the meantime. The law he used only applied to fraudulent billing. All researchers like Mann have assistance in filling out grant requests. They may make an honest mistake or two but that would be pretty rare. don’t think taking on one crappy scientist who pretended to be a statistician is very useful as a signature issue. OTOH taking on the EPA was very useful for principles and standing up for ordinary people (electric rate payers).

  83. Gail Combs says:

    Peter Miller says: @ November 7, 2013 at 12:06 pm

    The point I was trying to make is this: most of the world and much of the American electorate perceive the Tea Party part of the Republican Party as being intransigent nay sayers, who are ruthlessly prepared to play chicken with the US and world economy.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    WHOA,
    All the Tea Party is saying is Taxed Enough Already. They want Washington to abide by the Constitution instead of using it as “Loo paper” and to quit using THEIR money to buy votes while spending the country into the ground.

    How many more years can we support politicians like Reagan, Obama, Clinton and the Bushes before they bankrupt the USA? The USA already has the highest per capita debt in the world:
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/-1.img_assist_custom-640×421.png

    If you are worried about the world economy then you should be FOR the Tea Party.

    Also the actual US unemployment has been 22% ==> 23% since Obama has been in office. The shipping of US jobs was set-up by Clinton (actually started under Bush Sr.) via NAFTA and the WTO, his getting China into the WTO and also selling US technology to China so they could out compete us.
    http://www.artistmarket.com/writers/piraino/clintonchina.htm

    “GOVERNMENT ECONOMIC REPORTS: THINGS YOU’VE SUSPECTED BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK!” http://www.shadowstats.com/article/employment
    …..

    Oh and speaking about US bankruptcy it seems the IMF is whispering in The politician’s ears:
    “The International Monetary Fund (IMF) quietly dropped a bomb…the report paints a dire picture for advanced economies with high debts that fail to aggressively “mobilize domestic revenue.” It goes on to build a case for drastic measures and recommends a series of escalating income and consumption tax increases culminating in the direct confiscation of assets.

    Yes, you read that right. But don’t take it from me. The report itself says: “…..The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to precrisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of 15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth. (page 49)”…..

    Note three takeaways. First, IMF economists know there are not enough rich people to fund today’s governments even if 100 percent of the assets of the 1 percent were expropriated. That means that all households with positive net wealth—everyone with retirement savings or home equity—would have their assets plundered under the IMF’s formulation.

    Second, such a repudiation of private property will not pay off Western governments’ debts or fund budgets going forward. It will merely “restore debt sustainability,” allowing free-spending sovereigns to keep tapping the bond markets until the next crisis comes along—for which stronger measures will be required, of course….”
    The report also said measure would have to be taken to prevent “capital flight” and loss of “productive citizens”.

    So are the Tea Party “intransigent nay sayers” or people intelligent enough to see the oncoming train?

    (No I am NOT a member of the Tea Party.)

  84. Gail Combs says:

    OOPs forgot last link. The International Monetary Fund Lays The Groundwork For Global Wealth Confiscation: http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfrezza/2013/10/15/the-international-monetary-fund-lays-the-groundwork-for-global-wealth-confiscation/

  85. RockyRoad says:

    Some people have said the Libertarian candidate drew off an equal proportion of votes from both candidates.

    Such people are smoking something that alters their brain’s ability to function.

  86. milodonharlani says:

    Don Tabor says:
    November 7, 2013 at 6:04 pm

    You’re wrong as to the exit polls. Maybe the WaPo conducted its own, but it appears to use the same polls as CNN, to which the following directs me:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/11/06/libertarians-silver-lining-in-virginia/

    http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/11/05/va.gov.exit.polls.1120p.110513.v2.final%5B1%5D.copy.pdf

    Note that more self-IDed Republicans voted for Sarvis than Democrats.

    The CNN article linked on the WaPo blog says that, according to exit polling, if Sarvis had not been in the race, McAuliffe still would have beaten Cuccinelli by two points, 48% to 46%, which means that more Sarvis voters leaned toward Cuch, although not enough. Maybe the missing six percent simply wouldn’t have voted in the governor’s race.

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/05/politics/election-2013-exit-polls/

    Perhaps less clearly than with Perot in 1992, the third party candidate hurt the GOP. Sarvis’ deal with his Democrat backers wasn’t as corrupt as Perot’s promise from Clinton of huge Hillarycare contracts for his software company, but still stinks to high heaven, as did the phony Libertarian candidate in Montana last year.

  87. Jquip says:

    @Merrick: “Republican aren’t engaged in electoral chicanery because they’re not as craven as the Democrats.”

    Yes, exactly. So long as you consider that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” to be chicanery rather than a sound principle diplomatically and militarily, then you have no business being in a position that requires either.

    @milodon: “IMO the GOP should fund Green Party candidates the way the Democrats do “Libertarians” who are really just statist social liberals.”

    Yep, It’s an interesting game theory problem. If you have two primary competitors for ideas, party A and B, and both are assumed to be marginally intelligent then each should assist minor parties at both ends of the idea spectrum for their opponents. eg. Team A should assist moderate-B and extreme-B people find a candidate to vote for; that fits their ideological criteria.

  88. milodonharlani says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 6:48 pm

    I’ll be making out a check to the Green Party of Oregon next year!

  89. RoHa says:

    “If big environmental outfits can so easily spend millions buying an out-of-state candidate like Terry McAuliffe, then how hard is it to buy a climate scientist or two?”

    Yoo Hoo! Big environmental outfits! I’m a climate scientist. (I.e. I post on WUWT and JoNova.) Toss a million or so my way and I’m yours.

  90. eyesonu says:

    Time to redraw the maps? How about 57 states?

    Let me suggest Va dump northern Va. New York state dump New York City. Colorado dump the Denver area. DC, northern VA, and eastern Md becomes a state. That’s three new states. California could be split 3 ways. That makes 56 states. Just need one more to make it 57 and America will be truly transformed. How would Illinois like to be rid of Chicago? That would make 57 states a winner.

    Now give the states authority in managing their own affairs and reduce the overwhelming responsibility of the federal govt to issues of national security. The feds could consult with the individual states on matters of the collective many. Sounds good to me.

    Not sure if those newly created states with their great population centers would be a threat of invasion to the more rural states/areas, but I’m sure the rural areas will be able to handle it should it ever materialize.

  91. milodonharlani says:

    eyesonu says:
    November 7, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    I’m good with that, but Obama thought there were 57 states, plus HI & AK, so need two more. Maybe five states out of CA, or split TX & FL, too. Just cutting loose everything east of & including the Delaware River drainage & the SF Bay would be a good start, though.

    Important thing is to limit the power of the federal government. Let states be as commie as they wanna be, or as free. Spread power as broadly as possible among federal, state & local government, private organizations & charities, communities, families & individuals.

  92. R. de Haan says:

    In Washington two candidates have won the elections. The only problem is they’re both dead.
    http://www.breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/11/07/2-Dead-Candidates-Winning-In-Washington-Elections

    Don’t you love it.

  93. rogerknights says:

    milodonharlani says:

    The fact of the matter, the political reality, is that Libertarian candidates, whether real or fake, like Sarvis, guarantee one-party domination, ie by Democrats. In our system, it’s not “approval” of two teams that matters. It’s the fact that third parties of the moderate center-right or radical libertarian bent will invariably hand victory to Democrats.

    The alternative is the Australian system of instant runoff elections, where voters rank candidates in order of preference, with votes for the last-running candidate being repetitively reassigned to the next-favored choice among the remaining candidates. Then there’d be no throwing one’s vote away on minor candidates.

  94. rogerknights says:

    eyesonu says:
    November 7, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    Time to redraw the maps? How about 57 states?

    And ditch “E plurubus unum” in favor of “57 varieties”!

  95. Chad Wozniak says:

    While many Republicans may be cheering Christie’s victory in New Jersey and thinking he may be an answer to Hillary Clinton – among his other RINO/DIRC (democrat in republican clothing) positions is believing gung ho in CAGW. In fact, he’s criticized der Fuehrer’s administration for not being aggressive enough (!) in dealing with climate change.

  96. Chad Wozniak says:

    @Gail Combs -
    Not a member of the Tea Party? You make a compelling case for it (which I do not criticize, but admire). My own observation is that a lot of climate skeptics lean towards Tea Party thinking, as it is consistent with the general philosophy of not wasting resources and letting people keep the fruits of their labor.

    In any case, it is a serious mistake to accept the leftist media and RINO/DIRC demonization of people who seem to be only the most vocal supporters of the Constitution and of American liberty and prosperity. How will what they advocate hurt anybody that isn’t part of the kleptocrat class?

  97. Txomin says:

    Cuccinelli got funds from fossil fuel interests? How about that.

    Anyway, the Romm’s hysteria made me smile. Thanx.

  98. Gail Combs says:

    cynical_scientist says: @ November 7, 2013 at 12:27 pm

    Money in politics is a real problem. It means parties that represent the poor and downtrodden like … er … the Republicans … find it difficult to beat the candidates from parties that represent the interests of the rich and powerful, like … um … the Democrats. Hang on a minute. Is that right?
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Actually Yes.

    You are making the usual mistake of thinking Bankers and corporate Ceos are capitalists, they are not. EM Smith (ChiefIO) explains it much better than I could:
    http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/forget-gen-x-now-its-generation-hot/#comment-14483

    Mother Jones gives a terrific example of why: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1995/07/dwaynes-world

    and so does Top Senate Democrat Dick Durban: http://www.salon.com/2009/04/30/ownership/

    The democrats also excel at twisting the truth
    http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/history-of-democrat-racism/

    Of course that is typical politics. The take home is the ordinary American has NO representation and they are finally understanding that. 78% Want To Throw Out Entire Congress and Start Over So the next election could be VERY interesting.
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/october_2013/78_want_to_throw_out_entire_congress_and_start_over

    I do not remember if anyone has mentioned it yet, but Obama NEVER signed a budget his entire first term. The government ran on a Continuing Resolution the entire time. So why the heck did Reid and Obama suddenly dig in their heels now and shut down the government in the most painful way possible?
    Gestapo’ tactics meet senior citizens at Yellowstone
    “….For many hours her tour group, which included senior citizen visitors from Japan, Australia, Canada and the United States, were locked in a Yellowstone National Park hotel under armed guard.

    The tourists were treated harshly by armed park employees, she said, so much so that some of the foreign tourists with limited English skills thought they were under arrest.

    When finally allowed to leave, the bus was not allowed to halt at all along the 2.5-hour trip out of the park, not even to stop at private bathrooms that were open along the route…..”
    http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x1442580353/Gestapo-tactics-meet-senior-citizens-at-Yellowstone

  99. Gail Combs says:

    milodonharlani says: @ November 7, 2013 at 6:36 pm
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On third party candidates and their effects.
    Darn, I can’t find the article. Anyway the poll showed the GOP edged out the Dems. if only two parties were given as a choice but when a neither choice was added the Dems won by a large margin. It seems the GOP is viewed as the lesser of two evils by many who vote for them whil the Dems have a solid following.

    Here is a similar poll: 48% Feel Connected to A National Political Party: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/march_2013/48_feel_connected_to_a_national_political_party

  100. Gail Combs says:

    Txomin says:
    November 7, 2013 at 11:51 pm

    Cuccinelli got funds from fossil fuel interests? How about that.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    We know the fossil fuel interests are behind CAGW. Greenpeace and their buddies have never been able to dig up a really solid link between ‘Den!ers’ and fossil fuel interest except for the Kochs Brothers, sort of and a bit from Exxon. The piddling amount Cuccinelli got from fossil fuel interests was not enough to give him a win but it sure helped Greenpeace in their ‘Den!ers’ are fossil fuel interests disinfo. campaign now didn’t it?

  101. philjourdan says:

    @Jquip – Sorry, while Sarvis was a put up by the democrats, he recited the lines of a libertarian well. He did not promote the democrat points, as that would have been counterproductive to his purpose.

  102. lee forward says:

    Ah – politics
    Poli – Many
    tics – Bloodsucking parasites

  103. Blade says:

    FundMe [November 7, 2013 at 11:55 am] says:

    never take on a fight that you might lose… Cuccineli took on too many fights and lost

    What? Only fight a battle you somehow know in advance you will win? Are you crazy? There’s a word for not fighting, it’s called surrender. It’s a damn good thing that surrender monkeys didn’t prevail during the first American Revolution, or in any number of later conflicts. Lead or get out of the way coward.

    Peter Miller [November 7, 2013 at 12:06 pm] says:

    If the US – the world’s most powerful and richest nation – had defaulted on servicing its debt, no one can possibly predict the outcome, other than it would have been economically catastrophic. If you do not understand this, then you might as well be a Mann acolyte, with no understanding of economic or scientific reality.

    “Servicing its debt”! ROTFLMAO! They are adding to the debt, got it? ADDING! The issue was about one thing, jacking up the limit on the government credit card. Do you have a credit card? When you blow past the limit and it gets refused, and then you call them up and ask for it to be increased would you classify this as “Servicing its debt”?

    Peter Miller [November 7, 2013 at 2:04 pm] says:

    As I said before, playing chicken with the world economy, is something which has hugely harmed the US in the eyes of the rest of the world and helped – stress the word ‘helped’ – those favouring climate alarmism into positions of political power.

    All you’re really saying is that our friends from overseas are just as dumb or dumber than our own homegrown liberal traitor scum. Are they that dumb? Can they not understand the difference between paying a bill and adding more debt? The government fiscal criminals which you are trying to excuse are spending wildly and pushing all the debt forwards, kicking the can time-bomb down the road for some future generation to have detonate in its face. And you support this? Congratulations, you are an enabler. You parents would be so proud.

    Max Hugoson [November 7, 2013 at 10:33 am] says:

    I think the Libertarian (Losertarian!) idiot was the USEFUL IDIOT in this case.

    There are several useful idiots in this thread too!

  104. more soylent green! says:

    Once again, we see the GOP establishment staring victory in the face and walking away. They spent a fraction on what they spent in the last VA governor’s race. This is understandable when McAwful had a double-digit lead but incomprehensible when the polls began to tighten. And the ads they did run were about China and global warming, not ObamaCare or McAwful sleazy involvement with pimping out the Lincoln bedroom in the Clinton White House.

    On the other hand, The GOP establishment did spend money in New Jersey because???

  105. Jim G says:

    Max Hugoson says:
    November 7, 2013 at 10:33 am
    “I think the Libertarian (Losertarian!) idiot was the USEFUL IDIOT in this case.

    Alas, may the Losertarians rot at the end of Mann’s Hockey Schtick!”

    Funded by the left to win the election by splitting the vote. And it worked. Remember, that’s how Slick Willy won as well. Republicans fight by the Marquis de Queensburry rules while Democrats are kicking them in the nuts. And then you have idiots like John McCain, for whom I voted as the lesser of evils, who trash their own guys. The republic is definitely in deep do-do.

  106. Jim G says:

    Oh, and then there was the use of the IRS to suppress conservative votes in the last presidential election, and the Acorn shenanigans, and the various recount debacles like in the Minnesota senatorial campaign, and all the dead folks and illegal aliens voting, and no ID’s required to register to vote, drive through voting, etc., etc. The Dems will do ANYTHING to win, Rrepublicans, not so much.

  107. Mac the Knife says:

    Jquip says:
    November 7, 2013 at 6:48 pm

    @Merrick: “Republican aren’t engaged in electoral chicanery because they’re not as craven as the Democrats.”
    Yes, exactly. So long as you consider that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” to be chicanery rather than a sound principle diplomatically and militarily, then you have no business being in a position that requires either.
    @milodon: “IMO the GOP should fund Green Party candidates the way the Democrats do “Libertarians” who are really just statist social liberals.”
    Yep, It’s an interesting game theory problem. If you have two primary competitors for ideas, party A and B, and both are assumed to be marginally intelligent then each should assist minor parties at both ends of the idea spectrum for their opponents. eg. Team A should assist moderate-B and extreme-B people find a candidate to vote for; that fits their ideological criteria.

    Jquip,
    Game Theory problem? Honesty, integrity and self-respect are not ‘games’ or ‘theory’. They are absolutes. You either have them engrained….. or you don’t. If you have them, you are ethically bound to not lie, cheat, and mislead to ‘win’.

    In the movie The Alamo, John Wayne stated it succinctly “There’s right and there’s wrong. You gotta do one or the other. You do the one, and you’re living. You do the other, and you may be walking around, but you’re as dead as a beaver hat.”
    MtK

  108. Ali Babba says:

    Michael Cohen says:I am at the wrong blog, I should be over at the huff & puff post or maybe Real Climate.

    Thanks Michael. Will will be sure to ignore your future comments

  109. Ed Mertin says:

    “Read my lips, no new taxes!” Bush was also pinko statist and a liar, that’s why he lost.
    Ross Perot supporters were equally from the left, right and center. No net effect on the election outcome. Perot was an independent Reform, not a Libertarian, though many of his early supporters were Libertarian and his campaign manager had been.

    Cooky as Jesse Ventura (Reform) is he did…
    —Four balanced budgets in a row
    —Signed the largest tax cut in the history of the state
    —A scandal free administration

  110. Michael Cohen says:

    Some pretty interesting comments here in response to something I said regarding the intersection of skeptical views on climate issues and political persuasion. Cuccinelli is dripping with misogyny and contempt for gays. If approval of that is going to be the standard by which acceptable views on climate change are judged, I will not participate in the comments here again. I think the moderators ought to make some sort of statement concerning what this blog is about.

    [Reply: The site masthead explains what this site is about. Also, we do not censor unpopular opinions, so please do not appeal to moderators to cut comments you do not agree with. You have the right to respond back with your own views. So long as they do not violate site Policy, we publish them all. — mod.]

  111. Ed Mertin says:

    The US has defaulted in the past for a short time and it wasn’t pretty.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2013/10/08/actually-the-united-states-has-defaulted-before/
    And that is why the Tea Party is so illogical and Reform is not. I don’t know how folks history gets so messed up, perhaps because billionaire funded Heritage Foundation maintains a boiler room operation that constantly edits Wiki articles to reflect their right wing made up version of history.

  112. dbstealey says:

    Peter Miller says that “the use of extreme confrontationist tactics have created a voter backlash.”

    What, the Left is not confrontational??

    The fact is that the ‘Tea Party’ [a loose confederation of like-minded individuals] took control of the House of Representatives.

    If that is an ‘extreme tactic’, give me more!

  113. Ed Mertin says:

    For over a generation, whichever party had control of the White House invariably lost in the Commonwealth of Virginia. So on paper at least Republicans were poised to have a good year. And the Democrats nominated a candidate for governor who wasn’t well liked by voters, had never held office and didn’t have deep roots in VA. The tea party wing got the extremist candidates they wanted.

    I think the Millenials were the deciding force. They turned out the vote in larger than expected numbers and they went for Democrats. Chris Christie with his landslide victory still lost the minimum wage increase referendum that he opposed. Face it, every year a new crop of Millenials turns eighteen and they are the largest generation in history. Even out numbering the Baby Boomers. Rush Limbaugh ditto heads are passing on to their reward every year and that demographic was what kept Republicans in business. At some point Gerrymandering and voter suppression won’t be enough and thebsooner the better.

    Blade goes on about the debt increasing… well I tell ya, there is a ton of pent up demand in the USA after thirty years of neglect since Ronald Reagan. 3 to 5 trillion dollars worth of infrastructure repairs are badly needed. Bernanke must issue up to $5tr in 0% 100yr credit to rebuild US infrastructure. That will put a lot of people to work even without even doing 21st century upgrades comparable to what the Chinese are building. Half the world’s large construction cranes are owned by China and they produce half the worldwide concrete. Prior to Reagan the US was like that and it could be again. Hopefully these Millenials will get er done!

  114. Jim G says:

    Ed Mertin says:
    “At some point Gerrymandering and voter suppression won’t be enough and thebsooner (sic) the better.”

    You mean like the criminal voter suppression of the IRS that assisted Obama in the last election? Printing money via the fed open market operations and increased debt and handing $$ out to political cronies does not improve infrastructure and that turkey will come home to roost, eventually. Free/cheap money to large financial institutions is inflating stocks, bonds and commodities of all types and that money never hits main street, yet, as it is not being loaned out but “invested”. Another bubble. Poor education and left wing media cause uninformed voting by the young as well as, evidently, some of the comments posted here.

  115. Ed Mertin says:

    No, I’m talking about stuff like the voter id laws in Texas. Stuff like North Carolina students fighting back against voter suppression.

    http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/09/03/1235962/-NC-elections-board-addressing-three-challenges-Tuesday-to-state-s-suppression-of-student-voting

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/173685/7-ways-north-carolina-republicans-are-trying-make-it-harder-vote

    Yeah, the stock market run-up really isn’t linked to the economy in any meaningful way. It’s just a way skim money from people’s retirement accounts, there will be another ‘harvest’ of wealth in the next couple of years. The billionaires will likely try to time a 80% drop in the markets to right before the 2016 elections. That is unless the p ant Republicans are so pathetic by then that they can’t make that a ‘takeover’ work, then it be a more subtle crash.

    Right back to your same old deal, Jim. You have to personal attack after presenting nothing.

  116. Ed Mertin says:

    I’m so happy even Jimbo’s insults cannot get me down today. I’m so happy I no longer work for that discriminating right wingnut CEO Tonn Ostergard. Where if you don’t share his political party then you just face starvation and abuse. My life is so much better now with a Democrat, I’m making more money than I ever have in the past. Go young folks! Have a good weekend, ttyl…

  117. dbstealey says:

    Ed Mertin says:

    “…if you don’t share his political party then you just face starvation and abuse.”

    Obviously talking about Obama.

  118. milodonharlani says:

    Ed Mertin says:
    November 9, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Do you have any actual evidence of “voter suppression”, except of course by the thugs in Philadelphia with baseball bats outside election sites & similar intimidation & promotional activities within polling places, which AG Holder refuses to investigate?

    Every state that lets busloads of Democrats vote “early & often” as many times as they want or can get away with, lets the dead vote, lets illegal aliens vote, lets nursing home aides vote for their patients, lets politically active students vote the absentee or mail-in ballots of their apathetic dorm mates, lets officials keep “finding” more ballots until their candidates “win” or lets activists bribe bums with cigarettes to vote, disenfranchises voters in states that try to run fair, honest elections.

    The US cannot have real democracy until every state has laws like Texas’, & even then Democrats will find ways to get around them.

  119. milodonharlani says:

    Ed Mertin says:
    November 8, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    You’re wrong about Perot. Two-thirds of his supporters were Republicans or GOP-leaning independents. How else to explain the reliable GOP states won by Clinton, & the Congressional results in 1992? Exit polling showed the same thing.

  120. milodonharlani says:

    Michael Cohen says:
    November 8, 2013 at 7:22 pm

    Please cite instances of “misogyny” by Cuccinelli, father of five daughters. Thanks.

    While living in a group house in college, Cuccinelli heard a woman shriek when an intruder climbed into her bed. After the incident, he established a peer-to-peer sexual assault prevention group on campus, & became a confidant for survivors of sexual assault. Cuccinelli worked together with feminists on campus to convince the university to create a full-time sexual assault education coordinator position.

    Cuccinelli has been a staunch advocate against human trafficking during his time in office, describing it as “one of the most egregious human rights violations”. He has slammed popular media for portraying prostitution & other forms of selling sex as “just another career choice”.

    He’s faithful & respectful to his wife Teiro (unlike Clinton & McAuliffe) & five of his seven kids are girls. It’s preposterous to slander him as a woman-hater.

  121. milodonharlani says:

    Gail Combs says:
    November 8, 2013 at 4:01 am

    That’s my impression, too. Irreducible, “big lever” Democrat vote now appears around 38%, vs. hardcore GOP probably no more than 33%. But the right GOP candidate can win a higher share of the ~29% “persuadables”, regardless of party registration or lack thereof, ie in a free & fair election, which Democrats do their best, which is very good, to suppress.

    To reduce the effect of strategic, rampant, massive election fraud in presidential races, I favor the proposal to keep the Electoral College, but allocate the vote by congressional district, with the statewide winner getting the extra two EVs, as do ME & NB.

  122. Jim G says:

    Ed Mertin says:

    I presented plenty, you just cannot see it. Read it again and don’t take it personally. IRS suppression of conservative grassroots groups, soaring government debt, continuous printing of money, Solyndra, Benghazi, NSA, “you can keep your health plan” ,etc.

  123. philjourdan says:

    @Ed Mertin – you realize that the movie “Predator” featured 2 future governors? Kind of spooky when you think a B movie has 2 of them star in it.

  124. kramer says:

    I wonder if Mann supported McAuliffe because he feared Cuccinelli might try another push for his emails as governor? Or maybe McAuliffe is going to pass some law that permanently locks up his emails.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if we find out in the future that there is some connection between Mann’s support of McAuliffe and his emails.

Comments are closed.