In article , "G.R. Patterson III"
writes:

Wdtabor wrote:

Well, would you vote LP if it meant that someone like Ron Paul would be
replaced by someone like Chuck Schummer?

Well, personally, I will vote for *anyone* running against Schumer that has a
chance of winning. With the possible exception of Clinton (either one). Since
I don't live in New York, however, I don't presently have that opportunity.
That also means that I don't have to call him "my" senator.


Yes, but the problem is that an LP party candidate can siphon off enough votes
that would otherwise go to a "Ron Paul Republican" to allow a "Schumer
Democrat" a win in a close race. I advocate, within the LP, that we only run
candidates in races where we either have a real chance of winning, or no chance
of changing the outcome.

We should run someone against Ted Kennedy, who will surely be elected anyway,
to introduce the public to LP ideas, but in the last two elections, we instead
caused two senate seats to go to Dems that otherwise would have been GOP. The
result has been a successful Kennedy led filibuster keeping Strict
Constructionist appointees off the appeals courts, a perfect politcal example
of carefully shooting ourselves in the foot.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG