Christine O'Donnell Defeats Mike Castle

[Boris Godunov]

Man, I should have just taken BK's silly bet:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/10/31/republicans_give_up_on_miller.html

Jonathan Karl of ABC News: "A high-level GOP source tells me party leaders have essentially given up on Republican Senate candidate Joe Miller and are now banking on a victory by write-in candidate Lisa Murkowski as the best bet for Republicans to keep the Alaska Senate seat... With Miller's campaign faltering, the source tells me that Republican leaders are now worried that Democrat Scott McAdams has a shot of winning and that Murkowski may be the only way to stop him."

"The nightmare scenario for Republicans is that McAdams comes in second... trailing 'write-in candidate.'... If enough [write in votes] are tossed out, second place McAdams would be the winner."

Miller has tanked in the polls thanks to revelations he's an unethical lying douchebag (shock!). Unfortunately for the Republicans, they've previously spearheaded an effort to get an unprecedented number of write-in candidates eligible because they wanted to take down Murkowski.

What a glorious cluster****.

[DinoDoc]

When was the last time a write in candidate won a Senate seat, Boris?

[Boris Godunov]

When was the last time a write in candidate won a Senate seat, Boris?

Why are you asking such a stupid question? Something not happening often does not mean it can't happen. The gargantuan cluster**** that is the Alaska Senate race is precisely the kind of scenario under which a write-in candidate like Murkowski could win. Or, even better, the last sentence I quoted above comes true.

If Thurmond could do it in 1956 (there's your answer), there's no reason to think it's impossible.

[DinoDoc]

Something not happening often does not mean it can't happen.

The point wasn't that it won't happen. It's unlikely to happen based on historical precedent though. The NRSC has denied the veracity of the ABC story though.

[Boris Godunov]

The point wasn't that it won't happen. It's unlikely to happen based on historical precedent though. The NRSC has denied the veracity of the ABC story though.

There's not enough precedent to make any kind of prediction like that. How many high-profile write-in campaigns have been waged by candidates with huge statewide name recognition?

Of course the NRSC is going to deny it, what else would they do? If they admitted they'd given up on their own nominee, it would be a PR disaster. Well, a bigger one than Miller's already-nightmarish campaign.

[DinoDoc]

So if they deny the veracity of a story without any source then the story is true? Especially when the most recent polling data I can find has Miller up by 7.

[KrazyHorse]

The markets don't seem to be crediting the democratic candidate with much of a chance in Alaska.

http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/#

[Guynemer]

If your candidate's best hope is that enough write-in votes get thrown out for misspellings, then I think the markets probably have it right.


Still, Miller must be thanked for providing some much needed comedy by bringing the full Bull Moose crazy; he makes Angle and O'Donnell look positively reasonable.

[Boris Godunov]

Ahem.

Carter, Tim NA 712 0.36%
Gianoutsos, Ted NA 327 0.16%
Haase, Fredrick LIB 1084 0.54%
McAdams, Scott T. DEM 47414 23.74%
Miller, Joe REP 68288 34.20%
Write-in Votes 81876 41.00%

Looks like Murkowski will win it. Yes, thanks Joe Miller, for the comedy.

[Lorizael]

Hey, we don't know that Murkowski's won it. Half those write-ins are probably for Mickey Mouse.

[Arrian]

They've got to have the spelling exactly right, correct?

-Arrian

[Boris Godunov]

They've got to have the spelling exactly right, correct?

-Arrian

We'll see on that. So far, the Alaska Board of Elections has been extremely... friendly towards Murkowski's bid. Miller's already lawyered-up for the counting, and I'm sure Murkowski will as well. This could make Minnesota 2008 look like a piece of cake in comparison.

Glorious cluster****!