In a rational world, voters understand that a vote for one of the third party
candidates is a wasted vote, and that the minor party candidates will not win.
(How many Libertarian officer holders are there nationwide after many decades of
their trying? Not very many!) I am sure that the rabid followers of the
Libertarians, whatever Rocky Anderson's party is, the Communists, and the
handful of other will disagree. They are free to do their thing, but they
should admit that they will not win, and may prevent the election of good (if
not "perfect" in their view) candidates from one of the two major
parties.Mr. Vein certainly deserves credit (or blame) for taking
5,000+ votes away from a candidate who could win. Too bad, we could have had a
real conservative who would vote for policies a lot closer to Mr. Vein's
than Matheson ever will.
Time for a reality check. It's easy for those who are disheartened by
Love's loss to blame and point fingers, but let's look at the math and
see if Vein really was a "spoiler" as some claim.Vein got
5,703 votes to Matheson's 108,275 and Love's 105,629. Assuming each
individual voting for Vein would have still voted, and would have voted for one
of the two major party candidates, of those 5,703 individuals, 4,176 of would
need to vote for Love in order for the vote totals to surpass that of Matheson.
That would have put the tally at 109,804 for Love, and 109,802 for Matheson.More than 73% of voters supporting Vein would have needed to vote for
Love. It's clear that many Libertarians lean to the right on fiscal issues,
but they tend to have more liberal stances on social issues than the average
Republican. Moreover, Matheson is known as a fiscally conservative Democrat. Do
you really think Vein supporters would have favored Love 3 to 1 over
Matheson?True, the absentee ballots might adjust these numbers a
bit, but based on current numbers, the spoiler argument holds little
They wouldn't have voted for either candidate. That's a fact jack. In
response to the first comment, it is both parties that are ruining America. If
you really cared about your country and were a person of principle you would
vote for a third party. Not the other way around.
Rep. Matheson (D) isn't all that liberal and some in the Democratic Party
aren't gushing over his election. It may be he really is an Independent.
His conservative voting record on important national Democratic issues has
cemented his Blue Dog status. So the reason he may have won is because he
reflects his perception of his constituents instead of either political party as
his ad stated. He has voted against Democratic proposals enough to have put off
some of his supposed natural electoral base. It's not all black and white
here. The Libertarian Party isn't liberal OR conservative, but a fusion of
ideas that requires a Third Party outlook. So it's unlikely that a
Libertarian would have taken mostly Republican or Democratic voter. There are
people out there that really don't like either the Republican or Democratic
The people of Utah allowed themselves to be fooled again.
DN Subscriber 2,Most of us are aware that the chances of a
Libertarian (or other 3rd party candidate) winning an election, especially in a
state like Utah, are slim. That's not why we're voting. To be
honest, for many of us, we actually love to see a 3rd party candidate derail a D
or R's chances to win in the hopes that it will force that party to
re-evaluate its platform in order to remain viable. If the Republican party,
for example, actually represented the Constitution and the principles it is
founded on, we would be happy to vote for Republicans. Unfortunately it
doesn't, and until it does, it will continue to lose votes to those of us
who actually care about principles instead of towing the party line. And hey,
maybe some day, if the Republican party continues to be the big-government,
war-hawking, authoritarian party that it is, it will completely lose all support
to the Democrats and the Libertarians and a Libertarian, or other third party
candidate might actually win.
I am a Marxist but had I the opportunity I would have voted for the Libertarian
too. I often support third party candidates, often with views considerably
different from my own, trying to break the two party duopoly. If people
don't like either of the major party candidates they owe it to themselves
to vote for someone else. Oh and BTW, WAY TO GO VEIN!
Perhaps Matheson represents the needed 3rd party. The Republicans and Democrats
still don't get it. They are back to the same positions.
"I don't think it was really a spoiler role."Like so
many other thoughtless and self-absorbed people, he did not look to what the
consequences of his actions would be.
How grown up of you to accuse someone of "wasting" their vote because
they didn't vote for one of the two sheeple party candidates. A vote is
never wasted. Even if you write in the name of another qualified person,
exercising your right to vote is never a waste. It is one of the very basic
freedoms of our democracy.
Utah, you had an opportunity to make history by voting in Ms. Love. You missed
It is quite gratifying to see the Republicans blame everyone but themselves for
their losses on Tuesday.
Mia Love lost because she was a poor candidate, period."Mitt Romney
needs Mia Love in Congress" is hardly a valid reason to elect someone with
NO credability to Congress.Especially when Mitt Romney didn't even
win.So, Get over it.Meanwhile-When will the GOP
wake up and stop blaming and pointing fingers at everyone and everything else on
their bad choices?Thanks to -- Moderate ThinkingAstana,
Kazakhstan, 008:39 p.m. Nov. 8, 2012for his/her sounding
reasoning.CHS 85Sandy, UTAgreed,and well said once
Mia love represents a fallen outdated philosophy. If you want to beat Obama, you
have to look towards Ron Paul's brand of constiutional libertarianism and
embrace it. You are not going to beat Obama or any Democrat for that matter
running on a platform of islamophobia and job creation. I voted for
Vein and I will do it again.
I'm looking forward to seeing the articles where Mia Love blames the
"liberal media" for her loss.
LDS Lib,If she was a poor candidate, Matheson would have beat the pants
off her. Too bad you cannot see ANYONE with an idea that varies one iota from
yours being a quality person.
Love lost because she ran a very disorganized campaign. Her messaging was all
over the place. It's hardly been reported in the media for some reason, but
it's common knowledge in Republican circles that she fired the entire
campaign staff that helped her win over 70% of the vote at the Utah Republican
Convention in April. Apparently she wanted "a fresh perspective."
I've never heard of a candidate doing such a thing.
Cats said: 'The people of Utah allowed themselves to be fooled
again."and again and again and again, but it isn't by
Matheson, I'd say it's by the party that tried again to gerrymander
the man out and Failed to fool the people of Utah.
Lead Farmer!You never heard of a candidate firing her entire staff
obviously you know nothing about Newt Gangrich. Even though the third
party vote made a difference that's the voting privilege we all have the
right to exercise.Like it or not. Actually I'm more concerned with
Marxist on these comments but hey he may have found his idealelected
president. We'll see.
utah loves career politicians like matheson and hatch. time for term limits