15 votes

Fake Libertarian candidate spoils Virginia governors race

Fake Libertarian candidate spoils Virginia governors race
http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/66163660246/fake-libertaria...

In a race that was closer than expected, Republican Virginia governor candidate Ken Cuccinelli (who was endorsed by Ron Paul) was defeated by socialist Democrat Terry McAuliffe by one point after fake Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis managed to garner around 7% of the overall vote.

http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/66163660246/fake-libertaria...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

And gays and baby killers.

And gays and baby killers.

The right to life

does not guarantee you the right to the use of another person's body, even if that person's body is necessary for your survival. Or would you support mandatory kidney donations?

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

That is the dumbest piece of

That is the dumbest piece of shit I've heard ever in support of abortion! Ever! I don't even want to answer this but I will. If you choose to have sex without birth control then yes the baby has a right to use your body for survival. I've never heard such disgusting ignorance.

And mandatory kidney donation has nothing to do with it.

Are you saying the mother is entering into a contract

with the fetus by having unprotected sex? But how could that be, if the fetus does not exist yet, during the act? Who is the contract with? God?

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

Contract law has nothing to

Contract law has nothing to do with it either. We are talking about a human life and murder is wrong no matter how it's done ie drone, gun, or sucking it out of a whom. Period. End of discussion.

I agree that murdering a fetus is wrong

But enslaving the mother against her will is also wrong. We have ourselves a dilemma, wouldn't you agree?

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

No. What we have is an issue

No. What we have is an issue about morals.

Um...Ron Paul has been around

Um...Ron Paul has been around a lot longer than that fake libertarian.

And it is looking like he's going stale

We may have to send him to the Murray Rothbard retirement home for cranky old libertarians

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

Murray never got cranky

He was jovial to the end.

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

I met Murray and knew people who knew him

In the 80s. He was insane in his old age.

His protege Williamson Evers became a political appointee in the Bush (Sr.) administration. I suppose Rand's being Christie's Veep will be a bigger blow for Liberty

Bruce Majors, Libertarian for Mayor

Www.DCLibertarians2014.blogspot.com

so then why didn't your cooch

so then why didn't your cooch debate sarvis to prove it? exactly. I disagree with Ron Paul on his endorsement. He was just spoon fed this bs in va. ken was a joke and could of easily defeated sarvis and gotten the votes he needed if he could of debated sarvis and proven himself to the voters ,but ken knew he could not so he ran way from sarvis and lost the election by doing so. the blame is on ken. i feel sorry for ron paul wasting his time on a bs republican candidate who is full of crap and cannot even debate his opponents but then wants toblame his opponent.

if you wanted to win sarvis vote, maybe you should ofcalled ken and demanded he debate sarvis. i guess you forgot or ken didn't want to.

Ron Paul 2016

instead of down voting this,

instead of down voting this, answer the question, show me the debates , ken ran way from debating sarvis then wants to blame him, funny stuff, put your money where your mouth is, show the debates that ken did with sarvis not just one debate . ken refused to debate sarvis repeatly and did everything they could to deny him a spot to debate. ken and the ken camp alone lost this election no one else. to say otherwise shows you deny the reality of ken running away from debating libertarian ideals or proving his wass more libertarian then sarvis. he(ken) failed at both.

Ron Paul 2016

Funny, I don't remember

Funny, I don't remember Cuccinelli running on the LP ticket. Last I checked he was running as a Republican.

Exactly...

Yes, Libertarians were well aware that Cuccinelli was not one of them. That's why they didn't vote for him. What does that have to do with the GOP's consistent and reliable refusal to debate anyone but their partners, the Democrats?

He said Ken wouldn't debate

He said Ken wouldn't debate Sarvis because Sarvis would show that Ken wasn't libertarian. The Libertarians didn't vote for Ken because of the R in front of his name. They could have had a Ron Paul endorsed republican but instead elected a Obama Jr.

And "Cooch"

...was a Ron Paul Supporter throughout the 2012 campaign.

How soon people forget...or...are they trying to rewrite the real story?...y'know...like a propaganda campaign to minimalize, rationalize, and justify a horribly-flawed position?

Either it's damage-control or ingratitude.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

so, then why didn't he debate

so, then why didn't he debate sarvis and get the voters/ oo yeah ken would of exposed himself and the gop platform and would of had to debate his opponent. ken lost all on his own. ken tried to ignore the fact and ignore sarvis and it cost him an election. love to see all these debates they had:) they didn't happen becuase ken/ken camp ran away from debate and facts and were too scared to show they were more libertarian then sarvis.

Ron Paul 2016

The beltways libertarians...

...have never forgiven Ron Paul for being more successful than them. They were the chosen ones you know, they had all the money, the contacts, the influence. Now they're just a bunch of sad, middle-aged guys still trying to dress like college hipsters, looking out from their well-feathered DC nests at this decidedly un-hip socially conservative country doctor from Texas leading their revolution.

Tough luck Gillespie, go buy some more girl jeans at Hot Topic.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

you are delusional, this has

you are delusional, this has nothing to do with ron paul. the bottom line is ken had a chance to sway voters by debating sarvis but ken tried to play the sarvis means nothing and ran away from debates on the libertarian issues and it cost him an election .then after the fact you want to blame lp voters .When ken had months to debate sarvis and win the votes and ken choose to do neither. love to see all these debates they had between sarvis and ken. just can't seem to findthem anywhere. why is that? oo yeah ken refused to debate or win over these votes and now you shills want to blame sarvis, no wonder the gop is DYING and SHOULD DIE!! sincerely ron paul delegate 2008/2012

Ron Paul 2016

RIGHT-O!

RIGHT-O!

please give me the links to

please give me the links to all these debates ken agreed upon to show himself more libertarian then sarvis, exactly! you cannot. you folks are delusional the blame is on ken alone and the ken camp. show me the debates. ken ran away from them with sarvis. so the blame is on ken not voters..

Ron Paul 2016

Your argument is weak. There

Your argument is weak. There doesn't need to be a debate to know what a candidate stands for.

please give me the links to

please give me the links to all these debates ken agreed upon to show himself more libertarian then sarvis, exactly! you cannot. you folks are delusional the blame is on ken alone and the ken camp. show me the debates. ken ran away from them with sarvis. so the blame is on ken not voters..

Ron Paul 2016

Libertarians

ignored Ron Paul and voted for Sarvis taking votes away from Republican to aid socialist, disgusting, there are scum Republicans of course, but Cuccinelli wasn't one of them.

5 Socialist loving

downvoters, idiots

Your attitude is what got us in this mess. You think doing more

of it will magically produce a "good" candidate?

I don't know much about any of the candidates in that race other than what I can find to read online. I don't have a dog in that hunt as I don't live there.

But if Dr. Paul really did simply play the "a vote for the LP is a vote for the DNC" bullshit move, then shame on him, he should know better.

So...SHAMEon RON PAUL??

...Obviously an attempt to shift the blame.
There is the real shame, Sam.
Cooch was an ally all throughout the 2012 campaign
......have you forgotten that?

The FACTS are THE FACTS, and have adequately been aired here in the light of day, to ignore them, and all they illustrate, smacks of an unalterable, blind allegiance to a "party-line".

Not much different than those voters who only vote in Row A,B,or C for that matter.
Another chapter in LP-Damage-Control-History.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Shift blame for what? What blame?

I specifically said if Dr. Paul pulled the usual MSM hack nonsense then yes, "shame on him."

A vote for Sarvis was NOT a vote for McAuliffe. That's just asinine.(and an exit poll proves it to be patently false)

I'm not passing judgment on either Sarvis or Cuccinelli or their LP street cred.

One could as well, easily see Dr. Paul (and many people here) as attempting to encourage exactly the "blind party loyalty" you apparently despise - for the GOP.

People should do as much research on the candidates as they can and then make a choice.

If you don't like their choice - do a better job next time on getting out information about your preferred candidate.

And for the record, I'd never heard of Cuccinelli until a few weeks ago. That doesn't mean he may not have helped Dr. Paul in 2012 - but I simply was not aware of him, or recall hearing his name. I don't live in Virginia. I don't pay particular attention to the internal politics of other States than my own. This race happened to cross my radar.

From the comments I've read

From the comments I've read on this thread, it would appear that the Libertarians here posting all supported Sarvis because he was pro abortion and pro homo. Sounds to me like a bunch of liberals. This country is burning to the ground and we've got bigger fish to fry. Your little 2% vote won't mean dick in 2016 so why not use that big head of yours and do something that actually could make an impact.