Anyone who follows politics – likely knows the VA governor’s race has been very heated and “down and dirty”. The ad campaigns are really bad – just one attack after another. Many voters are saying they will vote for the lesser of two evils. But that does the same thing the media has done – it ignores there is a third candidate. There is a Republican, a Democrat and a Libertarian – and these three men are very different.
The media across the board is ignoring the Libertarian candidate – and the decision to keep him out of the last debate has fired up his supporters. If there were 20 candidates I can see limiting the number of participants in the debate. If there was someone just on the ballot to get attention – I can see limiting their participation. But Sarvis is a real candidate who has real ideas and he is out there campaigning – and (gasp!) he’s staying positive AND offering solutions. That alone makes him stand 10 feet above the other two candidates. It would bring a breath of fresh air to have fresh ideas and a fresh voice in the debate.
I find a person with fresh ideas and a strong personal background to be much more appealing than long term career politicians who have questionable backgrounds. I don’t know about you all – but I’ve had it with career politicians….
Here are some excerpts from the article –
Our choice for governor in 2013: none of the above
The major-party candidates have earned the citizenry’s derision. The third-party alternative has run a more exemplary race yet does not qualify as a suitable option. We cannot in good conscience endorse a candidate for governor.
This does not gladden us. Circumstance has brought us to this pass. This marks, we believe, the first time in modern Virginia that The Times-Dispatch has not endorsed a gubernatorial nominee.
If Armstrong had not lost his seat, he would have rated as a formidable candidate for governor. The Times-Dispatch would have endorsed him over Cuccinelli; we would have endorsed Republican Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling over McAuliffe.
Libertarian Robert Sarvis has neither embarrassed himself nor insulted the commonwealth. He lacks the experience the job demands, however.
Moreover, while The Times-Dispatch finds considerable merit in the libertarian ethos, the libertarian ideology is a luxury afforded by a political, economic and social climate that, despite the nation’s commitment to liberty, was not created by libertarian doctrine. We fear Sarvis would be in over his head.
Still, a vote for him would not be wasted but would serve notice to Republicans and Democrats that the electorate rejects their surly antics. Citizens whose votes reflect their ideals do not throw away their ballots.
For another perspective on the Richmond Times Dispatch non-endorsement – http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/10/21/the-richmond-times-dispatchs-non-endorsement-and-what-it-means/