Did the Lino Cost the TP Darling the Election?

By 12 Comments 822 views

Robert-Sarvis-RT-Virginia

“If you elect the other guy, you are [giving up on liberty],”
Ron Paul on Monday, calling anyone who votes for Sarvis, “insane”

Yesterday, Virginia saw fit to elect Terry McAuliffe to be its next governor…but not by much. The margin for victory ended up being slim. How much of it was affected by Robert Sarvis?

Some conservatives have perceived Sarvis, a self-proclaimed libertarian, as a Democrat plant, funded by an Obama campaign bundler. Meredith Jessup of the Blaze writes:

Austin, Texas, software billionaire Joe Liemandt is the Libertarian Booster PAC’s major benefactor. He’s also a top bundler for President Barack Obama.

~~~

Donations linked to Liemandt’s company, Trilogy, also has split its political giving between libertarian third-party efforts and liberal Democrats. During the 2012 election cycle, Trilogy poured $100,000 into another libertarian group — Libertarian Action Super PAC — while simultaneously making generous contributions to the Democratic National Committee ($92,400), the Democratic Party of Ohio ($12,453) and Barack Obama ($10,000), as well as more than $25,000 for Democrat Party organizations in Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire.

The Liemandts have some other friends in common with the Obamas. The couple and some friends flew to New York to have dinner with Berkshire Hathaway billionaire Warren Buffet in October 2011.

On Sunday, the Danville Register & Bee, a Virginia newspaper owned by Berkshire Hathaway, announced that, for the first time in its history, it would back a Libertarian for public office. It endorsed Sarvis, a political neophyte, saying he “offers a real alternative this year, a break from the two-party paradigm that has not served us well.”

FA readers who have followed some of my comments for the last few election cycles already know my derision toward those who throw in for third party candidates (how does losing elections equate to “standing on principle”?). Some arguments against voting third parties in American politics are given by Michael Medved:

The third party temptation discredits its candidates

Constitution Kills Third Party Bid

In close elections, a third party candidate can siphon off votes that would otherwise have gone to the one-of-two candidates who most closely is aligned to the third party voters’ dream choice.

This may or may not be the case in yesterday’s Virginia’s election. And any voter influence might actually have been siphoned off from McAuliffe as much as from Cuccinelli (should not come as a suprise to those who have been pointing out Sarvis’ non-Libertarian/conservative credentials).

What is interesting to examine about the candidates and the election results is not so much the question of third party poisoning, but on the question of whether or not Sarvis’ candidacy was all a Democratic ploy to siphon off votes from Cuccinelli.

Something that no one else seems to be connecting, is the relationship between Liemandt and Sarvis, which MataHarley did some light research on. She points out that Sarvis- who’s Libertarian cardinal sin is advocating for GPS/black boxes in cars to track mileage – has been working in the software engineering and development business since 2008, including start up for the Google mobile app, Wertago. Liemandt, as Jessup reported, is a software billionaire whose company Trilogy just happens to provide software products for the automotive industry.

It’s quite possible that Liemandt is one of those “true believers” fed up with both parties who sees it as principled to cast his vote for a candidate who has no chance at all of winning (note that he’s also donated to the Libertarian National Committee).

It’s also quite possible that his motivation in contributing a large bundle of cash to Sarvis’ campaign had nothing at all to do with being a “Democratic ploy” nor Sarvis a “Democratic Party plant”, but in simple, good ol’ fashion, capitalist self-interest, with Liemandt interested in electing to office a politician who can help influence policy-making that will benefit his business company.

Hat tip: MataHarley

12 Responses to “Did the Lino Cost the TP Darling the Election?”

  1. 1

    Ditto

    Certainly Sarvis had Democrat campaign supporters. This has happened in other states where a third party candidate received Democrat support in order to siphon votes away from a Republican candidate (including candidates who falsely used the name “Tea Party” as their “party affiliation, yet local TEA Party organizations denied such affiliation.)

    More serious is the Republicans who supported Terry McAuliffe, and who need to be remembered for being party turncoats:

    Three former Republican Virginia legislators who announced their support for Terry McAuliffe. Delegate Panny Rhodes, Delegate Robert Bloxom, and Delegate Preston Bryant. former RNC Finance Chair Dwight Schar, and former tourism chair of Governor McDonnell’s Economic Development and Jobs Creation Commission, Bruce Thompson. Earle Williams, who ran for the GOP nomination for Governor of Virginia in 1993. Virginia Republicans Judy Ford Wason, Senator John Chichester, Senator Russ Potts, John Sherman, Delegate Katherine Waddell, Delegate Vince Callahan, and Delegate Jim Dillard.

    We also should note that the RNC gave no support to Cuccinelli. Given that Cuccinelli’s campaign was grossly outspent thanks to out of state contributions to the McAuliffe campaign, and that most of the Democrat stars including the Clintons, Biden and Obama, came out to stump for McAuliffe, it should be more notable that; not only did the Democrat candidate not win in the expected landslide, but that TEA Party supported Cuccinelli, with a poorly run campaign and lackluster monetary support only lost by 2% of the vote. Thus, the TEA Party, is much more heavily supported than the MSM and Washington establishment claims.

    Spoiler candidates are nothing new, and rather than whining about it, what we should consider doing in the future is to start playing the same ‘whatever it takes’ tactics the Democrats practice. Such as giving money to Green Party and other third party opponents to siphon off Democrat votes.

    Heck, come to think of it, the extreme left who think Obama didn’t swing far enough left might be enticed to vote for a “Worker’s Party” candidate instead of a slightly socialist Democrat.

  2. 2

    retire05

    @Ditto:

    A good run down on the Virginia race:

    http://thefederalist.com/2013/11/05/10-lessons-republicans-virginia/

    It’s quite possible that Liemandt is one of those “true believers” fed up with both parties who sees it as principled to cast his vote for a candidate who has no chance at all of winning (note that he’s also donated to the Libertarian National Committee).

    If anyone believes that, I have some really cheap ocean front property to sell them in Lubbock. Liemandt uses his money to create spoilers, and as we saw in Virginia, it worked. Perhaps people should have read about the “libertarian” candidate in Reason Magazine, the flag ship of libertarian publications.

    I guess Word is now the proxy author for the one that left.

  3. 3

    Nan G

    As Ditto points out:
    TEA Party supported Cuccinelli, with a poorly run campaign and lackluster monetary support only lost by 2% of the vote.
    Either the TEA Party is huge compared with what we’ve been led to believe, OR a whole bunch of Republicans simply voted for their Republican candidate despite his weak campaign message, his low ad buys and the propaganda machine from the Left.
    I don’t know many Republicans who refuse to vote Republican, but MANY Independents do so.

    The Independent voter runs many elections into the win for what they claim is the worse of the two evils.
    Will they ever learn?
    Or are they masochists?

  4. 6

    Wordsmith

    Retire wrote:

    Liemandt uses his money to create spoilers, and as we saw in Virginia, it worked.

    as I said in the post, that’s one possible motive. However, it’s possible that he’s not loyal to party (like many conservative independents claim in expressing their disgust with the GOP) but to political ideology, given that even before sarvis, he’s contributed outside of the Democratic Party:

    During the 2012 electioncycle, Trilogy poured $100,000 into another libertarian group — Libertarian Action Super PAC — while simultaneously making generous contributions to the Democratic National Committee ($92,400), the Democratic Party of Ohio ($12,453) and Barack Obama ($10,000), as well as more than $25,000 for Democrat Party organizations in Florida, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire.

    Like yourself, he might believe in “standing on principle” and vote and support for a third party candidate even if he knows his guy doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance of winning.

    The other supposition, the one sleuthed by mata, is the examination into profit motive by electing into office someone who can help his business (most voters take into account to one degree or another, “what can politician x do for me to push policy that will benefit me economically?”

    Would you like me to be your personal GPS guide in drawing you a roadmap into how liemandt may be connected to sarvis through sheer capitalistic self-interest? Or can you read the road signs yourself, even if you don’t agree?

    Perhaps people should have read about the “libertarian” candidate in Reason Magazine, the flag ship of libertarian publications.

    what of it? Where in the post did I not draw attention to the questioning of sarvis’ libertarian credentials? Why does the term “lino” headline the subject heading on this post? Why do you suppose I pointed out how sarvis may have siphoned more votes away from mcauliffe than from cuccinelli?

    I guess Word is now the proxy author for the one that left.

    . 🙂

    Awww, do you miss her retiree?

    you dare not speak her name lest she appears. Shhhh…. 😉

  5. 7

    johnnygeneric

    I for one am sick of throwing my votes away on a party – Republican in my case – that won’t even come close to backing the Republican candidate like they did last VA governor election. I’ll give DIRECTLY to candidates, but no way will I give to the GOP.

    The former LT Governor of VA who bowed out of the race wouldn’t endorse Cuccinelli. WHAT? Sorry, I don’t want any part of a party that does that to their candidate.

    The GOP has LEFT the party of Reagan. So, I’m leaving the GOP. Because they left me.

  6. 8

    Nan G

    @Skookum:
    Bad sentence structure on my part, Skook.
    I meant that many Independents vote for a Dem or a Rep as opposed to voting Ind.
    This is especially noticeable during primaries.
    But, according to exit polls, it is also the case on election Day.
    When too many people, not of a party, crossover to vote in its primaries it causes the party’s candidate to end up being a watered-down one or an extreme one.
    Then the major party is stuck with that candidate, a loser before the race begins.
    According to exit polls in THIS election, this Libertarian cost both Dems and Reps almost equally.
    So, his part in this election was a wash.
    I think the momentum was on the move before the election BUT the timing was not good.
    Day late, dollar short on Reps part.

  7. 9

    retire05

    @Wordsmith:

    as I said in the post, that’s one possible motive. However, it’s possible that he’s not loyal to party (like many conservative independents claim in expressing their disgust with the GOP) but to political ideology, given that even before sarvis, he’s contributed outside of the Democratic Party:

    That would be possible if………………

    Savis was an outlier. Everyone knew it. Was he really a Libertarian? Absolutely not, and he was not supported by even Wayne Allen Root, the consummate Libertarian. So let’s see, you are a political junkie with money. You don’t like the D candidate, but fear the R candidate stands a chance to win. What to do? What to do? Donate to a phony Libertarian and throw the election. Remember Ross Perot?

    Would you like me to be your personal GPS guide in drawing you a roadmap into how liemandt may be connected to sarvis through sheer capitalistic self-interest? Or can you read the road signs yourself, even if you don’t agree?

    But wait, didn’t you just offer the possibility he supported Sarvis because of “political ideology” and no other reason? Which is it?

    Would you like a GPS guide to direct you to the mistletoe hanging on the back of my jeans?

    I guess Word is now the proxy author for the one that left.

    . 🙂

    Awww, do you miss her retiree?

    you dare not speak her name lest she appears. Shhhh…. 😉

    Do I miss her? Nope. Frankly, I could not care less if she’s here or not. But there is no reason for you to be her personal lackey. If she has something to say, fine. It should come from her, not you as her messenger boy.

  8. 10

    Wordsmith

    editor

    That would be possible if………………

    Savis was an outlier. Everyone knew it. Was he really a Libertarian? Absolutely not,

    Not sure how you’re addressing my point with what you’ve blockquoted. If anything, you’re supporting one possible explanation as to why liemandt might have donated to sarvis’ campaign. Not all self-described libertarians swing right.

    Because sarvis ideologically may be more in line with the left, it might be that ideologically liemandt may have found more appeal in supporting sarvis than with mcauliffe.

    I also mentioned that it may be the case that sarvis actually drew more votes away from mcauliffe than from cuccinelli. This appears to be the case. Republicans came out to vote for cuccinelli; and there weren’t any “true” conservatives that sat out in claims of a RINO candidate, since cuccinelli was favored by tea partiers. With cuccinelli painted as the more extremist candidate, he lost that oh so valuable moderate vote by 22 points.

    Cuccinelli’s chief strategist, incidentally, holds blame for the government shutdown as distracting the news cycle focus from the obamacare rollout- dissatisfaction of which could have helped cuccinelli gain support from voters.

    and he was not supported by even Wayne Allen Root, the consummate Libertarian.

    nor the much-loved libertarian dream candidate, Ron Paul, whose support for cuccinelli is the post lead-in.

    So I still don’t think you are following the correct arguments being put forth.

    But wait, didn’t you just offer the possibility he supported Sarvis because of “political ideology” and no other reason? Which is it?

    I offered it as one possible explanation. The other is what you just blockquoted. The third is the conservative theory that was being pedaled around in the conservative sphere. If you had read my post more carefully, you’d see that I’m not making assertions but offering possible other explanations to be further looked into/discussed.

    Would you like a GPS guide to direct you to the mistletoe hanging on the back of my jeans?

    is that where your mouth is? 😉 No thanks. I can see the mistletoe from here and will steer clear. 🙂

    But there is no reason for you to be her personal lackey. If she has something to say, fine. It should come from her, not you as her messenger boy.

    If I cite ideas or quote from others- say Thomas sowell or Charles krauthammer- would that make me their messenger boy?

    Why the need to shake the sand out when I mention she whose name you dare me not speak?

  9. 11

    Wordsmith

    editor

    johnnygeneric wrote:

    I for one am sick of throwing my votes away on a party – Republican in my case – that won’t even come close to backing the Republican candidate like they did last VA governor election. I’ll give DIRECTLY to candidates, but no way will I give to the GOP.

    if you’ll forgive and Indulge me for one moment as I act as personal lackey and messenger boy for Zeke miller:

    Tea Party groups are blaming tight-fisted mainstream Republicans for a close loss in Virginia’s gubernatorial race. But many of the most vocal critics never gave the GOP candidate a dime.

    So conservatives angry at “the Establishment” refuse to donate money to the GOP yet expect it to donate more money to a gubernatorial race; and when the same angry as hell not going to take it anymore conservatives have the opportunity to give money directly to the campaign funds of who they do want to see elected….and then don’t…

    Tsk, tsk.

    snicker bar anyone?

  10. 12

    ilovebeeswarzone

    when you see McAULIFF get the visit of Obama, and CLINTON,and HILARY,
    THOSE ATTACH TO FEDERAL AFFAIRS, WHICH IS A GROSS
    INTRUSIVE INTERVENTION, INTO A STATE ELECTION,
    ALL TOGETHER AND CUCCINELLI GET MARCO RUBIO,
    ALONG WITH A TROLL PICKING VOTES AWAY FROM HIM,
    THAT IS A BLATANT UN BALANCE SITUATION,
    WHICH CALL FOR A RE START ELECTION, WHY?
    BECAUSE OF OUTSIDE INFLUENCES WHICH IS FRAUDULENT,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *