Wednesday, November 6, 2013


As the post-election spinning and tea-leaf-reading commences, it should be a matter of simple, non-partisan observation to note that Republican Ken Cuccinelli’s 48-45 loss to Democrat Terry McAuliffe in Virginia on Tuesday night was an astounding comeback for Cuccinelli. He was behind by double digits in almost every poll going into the homestretch. - John Hayward/Human Events @Doc_o

The Clinton money man outspent him by an incredible $15 million. A third-party spoiler funded by Obama money men, fake Libertarian Robert Sarvis, pulled over 6 percent of the vote – perhaps not decisive, given that many of his votes were young people who might otherwise have chosen McAuliffe or stayed home, but in a race this close, it was surely a factor.

...There’s no honest way to portray a 3-point win under those circumstances as a triumph. Cuccinelli is the “Tin Cup” candidate. Like Ken Costner’s character in that film about golf, his comeback and narrow loss will be studied long after McAuliffe’s corruption scandals catch up with him.

Some reflections on the Virginia and New Jersey elections - Michael Barone/Washington Examiner @michaelbarone

1. The Obamacare rollout fiasco and Obama's lies hurt Democrats....
2. The government shutdown didn’t much hurt Republicans.
3. Millennials are souring on Democrats.
4. Hispanics and Asians didn't rush out for Democrats.


It’s difficult to make a case from exit-poll results that Libertarian candidate Bob Sarvis threw the Virginia governor’s race to Democrat Terry McAuliffe. Sarvis drew off plenty of likely McAuliffe voters, too. There are some exit polls that suggest Sarvis hurt McAuliffe more. He did well with the youth demographic, which might otherwise have been expected to go Democrat, or stay home during a low-turnout election.

That might not be the way Savis’ campaign was supposed to shake out. The Blaze ran an eleventh-hour expose on his funding that revealed a top Obama money man was one of the Libertarian’s prime benefactors – a revelation that might have made a significant impact on such a close race, if it had come earlier....

Sincere Libertarians aren’t going to like hearing that they’ve been used as stalking horses by Democrats looking to split the small-government vote....

But everyone who fancies themselves politically “independent” should take a step back and ask themselves exactly how they will remain independent in any meaningful way, if the growth of the State is not effectively resisted, immediately. The traditional liberal siren song of social license – vote against those mean old Bible-thumping prudes who want to legislate morality! – grows increasingly faint, drowned out by the thunder of their monster government, which you might have noticed is quite active in our bedrooms, along with every other room in the house.

The State is aggressive. Do nothing, and it will take over more of your life. If you sit out the next political battle, you will not be treated as a political non-combatant and spared from the hunger of government. Active, politically meaningful resistance is the only option for the true libertarian, whether his “L” is capitalized or not. Sadly, that might just mean choosing the lesser of two evils in some unsatisfactory races. If there are enough Republicans in power, the squishes will squish along with the committed small-government conservatives. As for those awful social conservatives – what designs do you imagine they have, what agenda do you think they would enact, that would be half as overbearing and destructive of liberty as ObamaCare?

...At this point, all that matters is whether you’re part of the Resistance, or willing to submit in exchange for your little piece of the pie. Disengagement is equivalent to submission.

Barone Report: Base Instinctively Ahead of GOP Establishment - C. Edmund Wright/American Thinker