Alaska libertarian candidate open to stepping aside for Murkowski?

posted at 7:46 pm on August 25, 2010 by Allahpundit

DrewM, Ace’s co-blogger, took a shot in the dark by e-mailing him and got an, er, interesting response. My proposed compromise: Murkowski gets the Libertarian Party nod in exchange for a “no more bailouts” pledge, some coloring books, and a copy of “The Revolution: A Manifesto” autographed by Ron Paul.

Drew asked him if he had any response to the speculation about her turning capital-L Libertarian and got this reply. Emphases mine:

Hi Drew

The Message is more important than messenger.

If Lisa would of supported “The Peoples Bail Out” she would of over
whelmed Joe Miller so I doubt she would do it now, some people just do
not get it, but it is never to late to see the truth and Lisa is a
smart lady; I voted for her.

David

I think he means he voted for her for Senate in 2004, not this year, but given the rest of the e-mail, I’m … not sure. Here’s the money question, though: If Murkowski makes a deal with the Libertarians and bolts the GOP, how many of her supporters in the Republican primary can she expect to retain? 95%? 80%? 50%? The lower the number is, the more complicated this becomes, because somehow she’ll have to make concessions to the libertarians and then turn around and make concessions to the left. And given the priority spending has right now, I don’t think coming out in support of gay marriage is going to square that circle. An interesting fact: When Lieberman lost the Democratic primary to Lamont in Connecticut, it was by a narrow margin of 52/48. In the general election, though, exit polls indicate that Lamont walloped him among Dems, 65/33. Murkowski will lose Republicans by making this move. Liberals, and their willingness to vote for a libertarian, will decide the race.

Via the Right Scoop, here’s the man of the hour chatting with Mark Levin.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

If a libertarian bows out so that someone who is not a libertarian can run in their place, who is the bigger whore? Politics really does make strange bedfellows.

volsense on August 26, 2010 at 11:03 AM

Supporting cap-and-trade bailouts resistant to an outright appeal of Obamacare other than abortion what aspect of the Libertarians in Alaska to they support anyway? She’ll go the Hickel route and once she’s elected the R is back by her name. This idiot should realize that it’s about the party of Murkowski not the principles of conservative or libertarian thought.

Chrisin206 on August 26, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Remember, the Libertarian party ran Bob Barr for president – a man who’s actual voting record was the exact polar opposite of every single libertarian principle that exists.

Today’s Libertarian party is just a gaggle of drug addled anarchists who will whore their principles for chump change.

Rebar on August 26, 2010 at 11:52 AM

So a supposed libertarian is willing to force a split in the republican vote potentially so severe that a pro-regulation, pro-spending, pro-big government democrat has a much better shot at winning? To keep a smaller government tea party conservative from winning?

Seriously?

PastorJon on August 26, 2010 at 11:54 AM

I think he means he voted for her for Senate in 2004, not this year, but given the rest of the e-mail, I’m … not sure – AP

Wow. Good blogger work here

Here’s the money question, though: If Murkowski makes a deal with the Libertarians and bolts the GOP, how many of her supporters in the Republican primary can she expect to retain?

I would re package the question: if Murkowski wins by a hair, will Haase burn rubber to endorse her? If Murkowski loses by a hair, will Haase work against the winner?

I see the left is working overtime to find a way to get Murkowski into a third party run

entagor on August 26, 2010 at 12:05 PM

“Uh oh”… Allah’s favorite juice line.

leftnomore on August 26, 2010 at 1:21 PM

There will be a lot of money spilled this election and I’m praying that common sense will prevail and we get our country back. I’m afraid that the MSM will be stronger than ever with the lies of politics.

mixplix on August 26, 2010 at 3:01 PM

This close to the election, Murkowski could be the spoiler. She and the Dem candidate would team up to attack Miller, like Perot and Clinton did Bush I. That would mean that Alaska, a red state, would have two Dem senators, both elected solely through dirty tricks.

Aardvark on August 26, 2010 at 4:10 PM

There is one thing any candidate should remember when running for office which some of our candidates are forgetting — you accept your victory with humility and any loss with grace which Ken Buck and Jane Norton showed in the Colorado Senate race. Shame McCollum didn’t get in FL along with Murkowski now in AK with this even thinking of running as a Libertarian.

PhiKapMom on August 26, 2010 at 4:12 PM

If Lisa Murkowski really wants to go the scorched earth “if I can’t have it nobody can” route — and in fairness, we are only speculating that she really thinks that way — wouldn’t it make a lot more sense for her to run as the Democrat? Consider: her politics are much closer to the Democrat brand than the Libertarian brand (to the extent there is one). Further, nobody knows the official Democratic candidate anyway, so a possible resignation and switch of candidates for the Democratic nominee actually has a bit of plausibility to it.

jwolf on August 26, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Not much of a libertarian party if they back Murkowski

pgrossjr on August 26, 2010 at 9:22 PM

This jsut shows that libertarians are often establishment shills who attack the right from the right. Reason.com is also attacking Sarah Palin daily, which is odd, considering she’s perhaps the most high profile politician who has explicitly claimed libertarian leanings. That coupled with this info suggests that the Libertarian party is actively trying to undermine Sarah Palin even to the extent of supporting somebody like Lisa which would make them a joke.

promachus on August 26, 2010 at 10:14 PM

Not much of a libertarian party if they back Murkowski

pgrossjr on August 26, 2010 at 9:22 PM

It will effectively end the Libertarian Party in Alaska. I was listening to Talk Radio and the Libertarians are PISSED!

Army Brat on August 27, 2010 at 3:46 AM

Alaskan Libertarian Candidate accepts pay off to quit.

/precedence?

The Libertarian National Committee exist? Sounds like they’d better send an envoy to Alaska to hold their own powwow.

“David” has literacy problems. Imagine how he’d write a bill.

maverick muse on August 27, 2010 at 8:28 AM

Palin to influence Rand Paul for help to influence the Libertarian Party on this?

maverick muse on August 27, 2010 at 8:29 AM

don’t get your panties all worked up!

NRA Lifer on August 27, 2010 at 9:26 AM

Comment pages: 1 2