Libertarians handed Senate to Democrats in '06
Apparently, the Libertarian vote in Montana and Missouri was greater than the Democratic margin of victory in both states:
Missouri SenateI'm tempted to say that Republicans finally paid the price for wanting to shrink government small enough so that it'll fit into your bedroom. However that would be a generalization that probably doesn't apply to either state's voters.McCaskill (D) 1,047,049
Talent (R) 1,001,238
Gilmour (L) 47,504Montana Senate
Tester (D) 198,302
Burns (R) 195,455
Jones (L) 10,324
Maybe a more accurate observation would be that mingling religion into policy decisions on stem-cell research was a bad idea. That's closer to the truth of what happened in Missouri, where Claire McCaskill campaigned heavily in favor of the state's stem-cell initiative.
As for Montana, I'm not sure why the Libertarians turned on incumbent Repulbican Sen. Burns. After all, he was a gun-totin, horseback-ridin cowboy, right? Maybe they just saw him as another corrupt member of the big-spending-Washington-insiders' club.
Whatever it is, it shows (again -- remember Florida 2000?) that 3rd parties can still make a big difference in a close election, even when their candidates lose.
(HT to Kos)
