3 votes

Why Ken Cuccinelli Lost

He opposes abortion in all cases other than to save the mother's life.

He backs the state constitution's same-sex marriage ban.

He backs an anti-sodomy law that punishes people for having oral and anal sex.

That is why he lost plain and simple. Were his views too extreme? Yes.

This is 2013, not 1813.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Abortion and gay marriage are

Abortion and gay marriage are decoy issues, as are the rest on your list. The powerful people couldn't care less which way people vote on decoy issues, so they get the American people to focus on them instead of real issues.

SteveMT's picture

They are decoy issues, but they are state issues, not federal.

Sodomy, abortion, and marriage are not federal issues. So they are state issues. I don't believe that they are even state issues (they are individual decisions), unless they are made state issues by the candidates and by the states themselves. Cucinelli made them issues, which was his undoing in addition to garnering no support from the GOP.

First. Abortion is

First. Abortion is murder
Second. Who cares about his social views when the United States is burning to the ground?

Based on your assessment, people voted for Sarvis because of his liberal views. Congratulations. You now have a Obama Jr governing your state. And what would have been a swing state and up for grabs will most likely pave the way for a win for Hitlary in 2016. But who cares as long as you can still kill the unborn and take it up the bung.

But you are missing the point. He likely would not have even been on the ballot if it weren't for the healthy donation of the democratic bundler which was an obvious plot to siphon votes to secure a democratic victory. Sarvis and all his supporters were used as a political tool.

Cuciinelli was not perfect but he would have been a good ally for us. He was far more excepting of libertarian leaning views then McObama.

You have to play the game to win folks.

These types of social issues

These types of social issues should only be a minor percentage of what someone considers when supporting a candidate. If people didn't vote for him based on these things alone, that is a sad commentary on the thinking of the electorate. The real impact of government is what they do economically. If people have economic freedom, and prosper, social changes ensue through nonviolent cultural adjustment over time as the population's views change.
I'm not sure about the 200 year reference, however. These views would not have been seen as extreme even 20 years ago. In fact, they're not viewed as extreme by a large percentage of the population even today, as indicated by the high number of votes that he did receive.
We all know that most people don't vote based on principles, but rather on personality. The Dem's are just simply better salesmen lately, and they have a dedicated block of dependents who will always vote for them regardless of what the candidate stands for, because they want to secure their benefits.

and he still got 45% of the vote

not bad for supporting what you believe in. That 3% less than what the (D) got.

to get 3% more next time around is an easy compromise.

and mitt romney lost

because he supported abortion and his state was the first one to legalize same sex marriage. And mitt romney ran against the worst president in history.

Be careful with using logic in your arguments.

Some of Sarvis' people might accuse you of living in the 19th century. (sarcasm)

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton


Cant forget about those shady gifts he accepted and his defense of the McDonnell corruption. Isnt the purpose of AG to uphold the law?

Also, did not include Cuccinelli ignoring the case of Brandon Raub, which was a big issue for me but maybe not the average person.

SteveMT's picture

KaBoom. The truth is here.

Where are all of the comments?

The truth hurts

That and there are a lot of homophobic, anti-semitic, fanatical right to lifer Republicans on the DP who get their "facts" from Glen Beck. Not to mention the conspiracy theorists.

The irony of the smears and hate directed at Sarvis is too much. Im beginning to think Ron has never given up on Rothbard's ill fated "neo-libertarian" coalition represented by his notorious newsletters.


I don't know? Maybe it's because...

I don't know? Maybe it's because a lot of people are getting a bit bored with leftist progressives yammering about stupid social issues as a justification for helping a corporate backed pile of scum like Terry McAuliffe win the governorship and probably deliver the state for Obama's successor. Just a thought.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton