Posted on 11/08/2006 2:10:11 PM PST by rond
Jim Talent's loss wasn't so much a slam-dunk by the Democrats.
Talent WON in 2002 with 49.8 percent of the vote, to Jean Carnahan's 48.7 percent.
Talent LOST in 2006 with 47.4 percent of the vote, to McCaskill's 49.4 percent.
The Dem gains .7 percent; Talent loses 2.4 percent.
A glaring difference: The Libertarian candidate went from 1 percent in 2002 to 2.3 percent in 2006.
Libertarian gains were more pronounced in southwest Missouri's 7th District:
•In Lawrence County, McCaskill pulled 35.2 percent -- exactly as much as Carnahan in 2002. But Talent's share dwindled from 62.2 percent to 59.7 percent. The Libertarian candidate received 1.9 percent in 2002 and 3.9 percent in 2006.
•In Polk County (home to Southwest Baptist University), Talent defeated Carnahan in 2002, 62.4-35.5 percent. This year, Talent was held to under 60 percent -- 58.7-36.5, with the Libertarian share growing from 1.4 to 3.8 percent.
•In Taney County, Talent went from a 64.3-33.9 split in 2002 to a 60.6-34.8 victory in 2006. The Libertarian vote grew to 3.4 percent, from 1.3 percent in 2002.
•In Christian County, Talent lost more than 3 percent of his support (63.6 in 2002, 60.5 in 2006). The Democratic share grew only slightly, from 34.6 to 35.3 percent. But the Libertarian vote more than doubled, from 1.2 to 3.1 percent.
•In Barry County, Talent was held under 60 percent (59.2, from a high of 63.3 percent in 2002). Dems inched up from 34.8 to 35.5 percent. Libertarians increased their share from 1.4 to 3.9 percent.
In all five counties, Democrats didn't grow their share by more than a point.
And like always Libertarians suck.
I'm guessing he would have lost anyway.
" A glaring difference: The Libertarian candidate went from 1 percent in 2002 to 2.3 percent in 2006."
Talent defeated Talent
Or perhaps they are libertarians who voted for the person they wanted to win.
I'll take people who believe in smaller limited government, which is fine, but who will get votes in close elections therefore putting Socialists and Communist in power, Alex.
Who are Libertarians?
Libertarian = Republican Green Party ;-)
They are people who want no government interference with their sex lives and pot smoking.
Wait a minute...I thought Libertarians only get .0001% of the vote anyway.
"Who are Libertarians?"
the a-holes who just gave the congress to the lib/dems!!!
" Or perhaps they are libertarians who voted for the person they wanted to win."
In my opinion, people who vote Libertarian would be better served to pick one of the major parties and try to influence its platform. Voting for a third party candidate most often gives the election to the candidate who is the polar opposite of your ideals.
And libertarians probably think the same about republicans.
They're an antiwar party. They probably would have voted democrat if there wasn't one of their own on the ballot.
Time for some self responsibility, I think.
That's a laugher.
LOL.
Yep! That's why my pot smoking transsexual brother is a Libertarian... /And YES I'm serious
For all the encouragement we (as Repubs) got via talk radio, I don't believe many people were as energized as Hannity, Rush, Hewitt, etc. liked to claim.
I worked closely with my local GOP campaign headquarters, and we could not get thousands and thousands of normally reliable GOP voters to come out an vote.
They simply gave an excuse, or refused, or said they were upset with the national GOP.
Unfortunately, it cost many a local conservative Repub candidates their office.
Unfortunately, not as much as the democrats and republicans, which is why there is such a thing as a libertarian in the first place. 
No more dues from me.
Talent has no fire in his belly. A nice enough fellow but not somebody people naturally follow. He didn
t do real well with men voters and I think I understand why.
This is the attitude that will kill off the conservative wing of the republican party.
The facts don't matter to the GOP bootlickers who want to blame Libertarians when their RINOs go down in flames.
Talent lost because he's Mr. Nice Guy who wanted to be "bipartisan". In fact, that's exactly why the Republicans lost to begin with, trying to "reach out" to the Dims. Notice that RINOs Chafee and DeWine lost. You didn't see any Dims helping them like the GOP helped Lieberman, did you?
Libertarians Defeated Talent?
So the hairy anti-Americans strike again?
As election day wore on, and we cross checked our list of who DID and DIDN'T vote, we scrambled to get the DIDN'Ts out to the polls.
They wouldn't come.
Mostly, I blame the normally reliable Repub members for falling prey to the day after day after day negative sky-is-falling coverage put out by ABC-PMSDNC-CBS-PBS, etc.
How else to explain a country where we haven't been attacked in five years, the DOW stock market is at record highs, unemployment is at record lows, housing ownership is at record highs, yet THE PRESS PUBLISHED NEGATIVE stories over and over and over.
What that tells me is that Fox News, and the Internet don't have the influence we like to THINK they have.
1. They're too insignificant to have an impact on anything
2. They're more closely aligned with the Democrats anyway (that's why they're called "liberaltarians")
3. They stole enough votes from GOP candidates to impact the election
See any flaws in that logic?
Damned dogs in the manger Libertarians strike again.
LOL!
Exactly!
The cut of your nosers NEVER learn!
Just wait until their taxes go up. Bush can prevent that during the rest of this term. But if a Dem gets the Whitehouse in 2008, the tax cuts get repealed in the first 30 days.
No response when Michael J Fox was slamming him with that stupid stem-cell ad. That really turned off a lot of people. Talent just sat there and took it like Milhous from The Simpsons.
Exactly so.
Not if the sky is blue in their world. :p
OUCH!
So if Stan Jones hadn't run, those 10,000+ votes would have went to Burns? I seriously doubt it, those votes would have probably stayed home.
No, a lack of votes for Republicans in key elections gave the congress to the libs. People voted as they saw fit, and some of those people saw fit to vote for the Republican, some the democRAT, some the Libertarian, and so on. It remains an individual choice.
I don't think I'd blame Burns' loss on 10,000 Libertarian voters when many, many times that amount of people voted for the democRAT or stayed home.
I think we can look at some of the races and see that pro-family & marriage issues passed, but the Republican candidate didn't win. I think that's a clear message that a good number of voters with reasonably conservative values didn't want the Republican candidate for some reason or another. Perhaps some soul-searching is in order rather than lashing out at the Libertarians.
For the record, yes, I voted Republican in nearly all races including the Senate and House.
Like I said, no fire in the belly. Some may like that but it's not my cup of tea.
Tagline.
Maybe it's the devastation and depression of losing this election.
But my mind is jumping back and forth with agreeing with your above statement --- and with the knowledge that many Republicans fell prey to the incessant negative stories about the "wageless" recovery, or that Bush "lied" us into war, or that America is "less safe today" than it was five years ago.
I have friends who normally are logical, center-right thinkers (non-partisan, though) and even THEY had eventally let their brains get washed by the overwhelming propaganda put out by PMS-CBS, ABC (Foley had sex with minors), MS.DNC, etc.
It was pathetic.
They are spoilers and that is their function.
They have every right to run, just as the Green Party does and we have to accept that.
"Who are Libertarians?"
Libertarians are armed liberals that don't want to pay taxes.
Or maybe they are Libertarians who didn't want to reward the Republicans for doing nothing over the last six years despite contolling the White House and both houses of Congress.
He lost by less than 2000
The Libertarians gained 1.3%, and Talent lost 2.4%. Where the hell did the other half of his loss come from?
So why do Republicans squeal like stuck pigs when they lose close elections then?
2. They're more closely aligned with the Democrats anyway (that's why they're called "liberaltarians")
Libertarians and Democrats are totally night and day. You're comparison is truer with today's Republicans and Democrats. Apparently, you've heard of Log Cabin Republicans, Republicans for Choice, or Main Street Republicans, right?
3. They stole enough votes from GOP candidates to impact the election
BS - and this totally contradicts your first point. Republicans LOSE because they run as gutless, liberal, wanna-be Dim RINOs. If the GOP embraced some aspects of Libertarianism (like reducing penalties for marijuana possession or getting us out of the UN), they wouldn't have to worry about Libertarians.
Hey at least we're armed and exercising our 2nd Amendment.
I am serious about that, One of My "brothers" is a transsexual a pot smoker AND a Libertarian.. why i have "brothers" in quotes i because he has already had his testicles removed... more to come i guess... :\ ?
Add in the fact that every newscaster I heard in the past month, I mean EVERY newscaster (not talk show hosts), claimed in their newscasts that Republican so-and-so is "opposed to stem cell research."
Here in Philly, the 24-hour news radio am station constantly said that Rick Santorum "opposed stem cell research" during the recent stories about Missouri's ballot initiative, or stories about Limbaugh's comment about Michael Fox.
It is really pathetic how many news readers/reporters went out of their way to paint Repubs as mid-evil, archaic loons rather than family oriented dads and moms.
Yes the media has always been opposed to the GOP, but I've never seen it so blatantly skewed this time, and I believe I would be saying the same thing had the Republicans kept the Congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.