By Norman Leahy and Paul Goldman November 7 at 6:00 PM <\/p>\n
Does Mark Warner now owe his career to Virginias perennial Libertarian candidate,Robert Sarvis? <\/p>\n
SarvissSenate campaign touted a 10 percent solution to our political woes. If 10 percent of the voters would vote for him, then the Libertarians would automatically get a line on the Virginia ballot, a la Republicans and Democrats and keep the major party candidates honest. <\/p>\n
Sarvis got barely a quarter of that number. But his 2.5 percent solution did work wonders, just not for him. Exit polls provide powerful evidence he attracted enough Republican protest votes to swing the election for Democratic Sen. Mark Warner. <\/p>\n
The Libertarians 53,000 voters mostly came from younger voters, particularly white males, unhappy with President Obamas leadership. They generally leaned independent. Very few (almost none, in fact) wereDemocrats. But a good chunk did label themselves Republicans. <\/p>\n
Exit polls on fringe candidates are to be read with abundant caution. Yet it isclear the Sarvis Republican voter wanted to protest President Obamas leadership. If Gillespie had been the only option, they most likely would have backed the GOP nominee.But Sarvis gave them a second option. <\/p>\n
The result? Instead of drowning in anti-Obama tidal wave runningfrom the wind turbines off the Virginia coast all the way to the Alaskan oil fields, Mark Warner found a life-preserver in the Libertarian candidate. <\/p>\n
Third-party protest voting is a great American tradition. The most memorable in recent times wasGreen Party candidate Ralph Nader sinking environmentalist Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election and handing the election (after a Supreme Court ruling) to George W. Bush. <\/p>\n
Thats politics. But 2014 is apparently the first time in Virginia that a protest candidate decided the outcome of a major election. Some vocal Democrats disagree, blaming racism for Warners near-loss. According to this theory, white voters antipathy toward President Obama is skin-deep. But since his name didnt appear on the ballot, they projected these prejudices on to Mr. Warner. Crying racismhas become a cottage industry among too many this cycle. <\/p>\n
Warners supporters do him no favors by blaming white people for his election-night troubles. Twenty-five years ago, Doug Wilder made history by prevailing in a far closer statewide race with a far higher percentage of white voter support. He didnt blame racism for his narrow win. He praised voters for helping him make history. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
See the rest here:<\/p>\n
All Opinions Are Local: Warner owes Sarvis a big thanks<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" By Norman Leahy and Paul Goldman November 7 at 6:00 PM Does Mark Warner now owe his career to Virginias perennial Libertarian candidate,Robert Sarvis? SarvissSenate campaign touted a 10 percent solution to our political woes. If 10 percent of the voters would vote for him, then the Libertarians would automatically get a line on the Virginia ballot, a la Republicans and Democrats and keep the major party candidates honest Continue reading