Brian, Yes, mentioning Olivier's feeble election returns was a cheap shot. Intentionally, and, in my opinion deservedly, so.
If an action is being suggested, in this case temporarily switching registration to vote for the most effective libertarian candidate in the Presidential race, it should be sold on its merits, and not because some supposed "leader" tells us we should do it. Regards, Allen Rice --- In [email protected], "Brian Holtz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Allen Rice wrote: > > AR) Mr. Olivier's returns, running for Governor in 2006, were the lowest of > all of the statewide candidates. Not my idea of a great political advice > giver or motivator. (AR > > That's a cheap shot. In the previous two regular gubernatorial elections, > our candidates polled lower than all but one of the other Libertarian > statewide candidates. LP presidential candidates always poll even lower > than that. The likely explanation is that for executive contests between > candidates with the name recognition of potential governors or presidents, > people are less likely to vote for third-party unknowns. Also, in 2006, the > vocational relevance of the ballot line description for a couple of our > statewide candidates was clearly crucial in boosting their returns to the 4% > neighborhood. > > Oddly, the spitting druid who had his LP gubernatorial nomination rescinded > got 2.1% in 2002, while 2008 presidential candidate Steve Kubby got 0.9% > running for governor in 1998. To Tom Knapp: you should have a response > ready if an opponent cites this comparison to question Kubby's ability to > draw votes. >
