What if Bolduc is the more principled conservative and would be a better and more consistent vote in the U.S. Senate? Recently, several articles have talked about Bolduc’s career, his time of service to our country, his advocacy for our veterans, and his efforts to bring out the issues of PTSD.
We want to thank Nathaniel Folsom for this Op-Ed. If you have an Op-Ed or LTE
you would like us to consider please submit it to Skip@ or steve@granitegrok.com.
ICYMI: According to Our AG, You Can You be Prevented From Voting For Not Wearing a Mask.
What if he has a better record and there is less “dirt” against him then there might be against Messner? We should all support him, right??? WRONG!
While these are all good questions, a bigger and more important question needs to be asked when voting in the U.S. Senate race in New Hampshire. What question is that you ask? Hold on, I will tell you…
This is a three-way Senate race in New Hampshire. Last week (9/2), Secretary Bill Gardner certified that some of the nominations for third-party candidates would be on the ballot. The list is here of those that have ballot access.
New Hampshire has always been a swing state.
If it were not for a mere 7,211 votes in the year 2000, Al Gore would have been president. “What!?,” you ask… It was the hanging chads in Florida that decided the 2000 election for President George Bush. We all watched the news.
Let’s take a step back and look at those results one more time, but this time through the lens of a three-way race.
In 2000, Ralph Nader captured 22,198 votes because he was the green movement “god” of that time. None of his votes would have gone to “Big Oil Bush.” So had he not been in the race, some—most?—of his 22,198 votes would have gone to AL “I want to be an environmentalist, while driving my big SUV and living in my 20 room mansion” Gore.
This means that Al Gore would have won New Hampshire, and that would have changed the election outcome nationwide. That matters!
If Al Gore had won New Hampshire, he would have had the necessary 270 electoral college votes. The outcome was Bush 271, Gore 266. Had Al Gore won New Hampshire, it would have been Gore 270, Bush 267, and we would never have discussed Florida hanging chads as it would not have mattered. Bush ended up winning Florida to win the presidency, but if Gore had already won without Florida, Florida’s outcome would not have been relevant. Just think about Al Gore being President on 9/11/2001…
What does matter? Control of the U.S. Senate.
According to 270towin.com, there are only six swing senate seats, and Republicans hold all. If we lose just 3 of those seats, we potentially lose control of the U.S. Senate.
What if nominating Bolduc meant LOSS of the U.S. Senate to the Dems?
What do I mean by this question? Bolduc has zero chance of winning the general election in New Hampshire. This is a three-way race, and with Justin O’Donnell being on the ballot, the Libertarians will earn 3 percent to 4 percent [or more] of the state’s votes.
Therefore, a vote for Bolduc means two things long term:
- Shaheen has this race locked up and can spend her resources elsewhere. Where is elsewhere? OTHER SWING STATES WHERE POLLING SHOWS RACES IN A DEAD HEAT!
- The Libertarians will have their 4 percent and will be on the ballot in 2022 as a separate column, hurting other New Hampshire Senate and House races that year.
If you do not believe me, here is why Libertarians matter: In 2016, Rep. Max Abramson ran for Governor, spent less than $500, and had no chance of winning, but still received 30,000 votes. Those same votes will determine the winner of the U.S. Senate race, and these voters will not support Bolduc.
These voters will either vote for the Republican or the Libertarian and Justin O’Donnell, a Libertarian, will be on the ballot. This is a three-way race. If Bolduc wins, then Shaheen is guaranteed a win in November, and her money will be used in other swing races. If Messner wins, there is a chance some Libertarians will support him, and Shaheen will have to spend her money here at home.
What if Shaheen pours her money into Maine, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Montana, and North Carolina? Those races are lost because Shaheen drops $5 million of her $12 million to help her friends.
This vote is about protecting the U.S. Senate and not about winning the N.H. Senate seat. Which candidate will force Shaheen to spend more money in New Hampshire and not other candidates in the other states? As of Aug. 19, here is the cash on hand statements from the Federal Election Commission:
Bolduc has $178,066.
Messner has $2,480,000.
If you recall, when we had a competitive U.S. Senate race in New Hampshire (Ayotte/Hassan), the total cost was close to $100,000,000 between the two candidates. At this point, $200,000 means Bolduc is NOT a political threat to Shaheen, and therefore she can spend her money in other races…
Tuesday, the question is not about who is better as a candidate, but who can force Shaheen to spend her money in New Hampshire defending her seat so we can hope to keep some of the other U.S. Senate seats. Tuesday, the real question is, “Do we want to keep control of the U.S. Senate?”
The Corky vote for me is purely tactical. He is the only candidate who will be competitive and force Shaheen to use her money in a New Hampshire race. This helps us keep some of the other seats in the U.S. Senate and preserve the Republican majority, even though he has a small chance at winning less than 10 percent.
Lastly, every complaint that was laid against Trump is being used against Corky. DUI charges, DV charges, buying the election, etc. Heck! Trump went “bankrupt” several times; he must be bad at running a business, and therefore cannot possibly be president… right? Yet, for his few incorrect actions as President (bump stocks, ATF leadership), the country is in much better shape with this businessman in charge.
Messner is not nearly as polished as Bolduc, but neither was Trump. Support for Messner is support for a Republican U.S. Senate, and it really is that important.
Nathaniel Folsom
