Archive | Virginia RSS feed for this section

Corruption is Legal

8 May

I wanted to personally thank you for interest in my campaign.  It really means a lot to me.

I have put a lot of effort in my campaign so far. I have over 475 Facebook likes, more than two of my Democrat Opponents. I have been told by Libertarians all over the country that my website is amazing. New Jersey Libertarian, Adam Brown stated my website is “one of the best state Libertarian sites I have seen.” My website is making it across the country.

I also created TWO new campaign fundraisers. One is the Liber-Tea Store and the other is the Loser for Liberty Swag Shop. 100% of the profits will go directly to the Loser for Liberty Campaign.

There is currently a problem with my opponents being bought out by corporate interests. I hope you will check out the State Board of Elections Website that discloses Candidate Campaign Committees’ funds. The paper trail says it all. I am currently facing big money opponents who will spend over $100,000 dollars on their campaign and have donations over $25,000 from single corporate contributions. Let’s make this clear, THEY ARE BOUGHT!

Click HERE for the Video that explains why it is wrong to be “bought.”

I plan to use my resources efficiently to bring competition, but Bruce, I have noticed you haven’t donated to my campaign yet. I have raised about $2,000 from people and no corporate interests. If I am elected I am sending the message that these corporate interests do not want to see and that is the message of the people.

Bruce, by donating to the Loser for Liberty campaign, you are telling them “No, I will not support the Big Money, Big Government politics.” Instead, you are supporting someone who plans to run on a platform based on protecting individualism and limiting government.

Creating economic opportunity, ending prohibition, and enforcing equal treatment under the law are what Virginia is missing. I plan to bring these three principles to Virginia, but Bruce, I need your help.

You can help by donating to or buying Liber-tea & Loser for Liberty Swag.

Thank you Bruce, once again for your interest in my campaign. I request your support. Let me know if there are any other ways I can help make Virginia a better place to live.

Bruce, Donate now! Then post your proud donation to social media.

Bruce donated $0.00 to #Loser4liberty

Bruce please Donate here:
Follow the Campaign:      
                                                Twitter: @Loser4Liberty
                                                Text “Good Life” to 72727 for Campaign updates via Text Message.


Carl R. Loser
Libertarian Candidate for VA Senate District 10
Loser For Liberty

Corey M. Fauconier
Campaign Manager
Twitter: @Coreymfauconier
(973) 901-6481 (Text or Call)

An appeal from Rob Sarvis

3 Dec
Virginia needs a more open and competitive political system. Here are three proposals that would help:
1) Reduce the threshold for ballot-qualified party status to 2% of the vote in statewide elections.

2) Reduce the ballot signature threshold to 5,000 for all statewide offices (Gov., Lt. Gov., Atty. Gen., U.S. Sen.).

3) Enact ranked-choice (instant-runoff) voting in Virginia elections. No more claims of spoilers or wasted votes.

We need to get these bills introduced, and the deadline is fast approaching. Please help by taking action NOW. Find out how:
Thank you!

Robert Sarvis


Virginia Job Listing

3 Oct
A friend tells us:

Speaking of getting involved with allied organizations in order to win endorsements and spread the gospel…

I attended a NOVA NORML monthly meeting last evening (Allen St Pierre, President of National NORML, was the guest speaker) and I learned that Jeremy Grandstaff will be stepping down as President of Virginia NORML. Yes, that’s the top statewide position in Virginia. An election is planned to be held at the Annual Virginia NORML Conference next month in Williamsburg. There is no heir apparent and no one I spoke with — including Jeremy — knows where we’ll find the interest/capability/commitment.

And, no, I’m not interested.

However, this still seems like an opportunity. Do any of you have thoughts or suggestions on an available libertarian with these qualities? Good organization skills? It might also be nice if s/he is also a member of NORML…

Libertarian Sarvis censored from Virginia debates

25 Jul
Libertarian candidate for the U.S. Senate in Virginia, Robert Sarvis, has qualified to be on this year’s ballot alongside Democrat Mark Warner and Republican Ed Gillespie.

The first debate is being hosted by the Virginia Bar Association on Saturday, July 26th. Although there are only three candidates on the ballot, Robert Sarvis has again been excluded from debating his opponents. (See

Please use the phone numbers, email addresses and social media addresses below to contact the debate host, the Virginia Bar Association, and the moderator, Judy Woodruff of PBS NewsHour (the show will livestream the event), to politely ask them to invite Robert Sarvis to the debate.

Also, please share this event on Facebook/Twitter and invite your Facebook friends to help build support.


Virginia Bar Association
Contact information for invididual VBA leadership:

Judy Woodruff

PBS NewsHour


VBA Debate Announcement:–VBA-Summer-Meeting.html?soid=1108302653785&aid=0LKypZN_4qo

Washington Post: “Va. Libertarian Sarvis joins Senate ballot” – 6/26/2014 “Va. Libertarian makes U.S. Senate ballot but not debate” – 6/26/2014

Ballot Access News: “Robert Sarvis Showing was Best Gubernatorial Showing for a Minor Party Candidate in the South Since 1970” – 11/6/2013

Robert Sarvis:

Robert Sarvis, Libertarian for Senate (Virginia) Q&A

10 Feb

Are Republicans (and Democrats) inferior goods?

12 Nov
You might think an inferior good is something like the lesser of two evils.

It’s actually a piece of basic economics jargon.  An inferior good is a good that people buy less of as they earn higher incomes or accumulate more wealth, unlike a normal good.  For example as people earn more money they usually buy more square footage of housing (as well as buying more in terms of a higher price as they move to better locations and more luxurious construction and finishes) – housing is a normal good.  Vacation homes are a normal good; people buy more of them as they become (or in inflationist economies, believe) that they are wealthier.

Inferior goods are things like second hand mobile homes, or cheap beer, or dented bin items, or merchandise at the dollar store.  Few people buy more of these as they get wealthier.  But they buy more of them as they become poorer.

Now let’s consider what “being wealthier” means to an economist.  Ultimately it means being able to make more and more exchanges so you can trade what you have for more of the things that you want, thereby satisfying more of your desires.  So having more options is having a higher psychic income, just as having a higher monetary income tends to give you more options (since you can buy or rent a wider range of goods and services).

So the question is:  is the conventional two party election a form of poverty?

Having more options on the ballot makes voters wealthier, in that they have more options, even if they continued to choose to buy the same product.  Which is what they would do if the products they had been buying were normal goods.

But apparently the establishment parties and their candidates are not normal goods.  When you end barriers to entry to the political market, either by managing to get past the barrier to entry created by ballot access laws and getting a new party on the ballot, or by raising even a fraction of the money the establishment parties have and doing enough advertising that a small share of the marketplace of voters knows there is another product, people stop buying the product they used to buy and start buying the new product by voting for the new party.  As the recent Virginia gubernatorial race shows, this happens even when the new product (the Libertarian Party) spends $3 per customer on advertising and the old firms outspend it, paying $15-30 per consumer in advertising.

Republicans and Democrats are inferior goods.  People only buy them when they are impoverished in terms of choices and information.

When Ron Paul Lost His Moral Authority

11 Nov
In the wake of Ken Cuccinelli’s squeaker loss Tuesday the interwebs and local Virginia and DC political events are tortured by conflicts between Republicans, Libertarians, and Ron Paul and other libertarian Republicans.

For example, a former staff economist for Ron Paul’s Congressional office, and an executive at Paul’s Campaign for Liberty, not only defriended me on FaceBook, but banned me from the Virginia Campaign for Liberty group, for a tweet I made in reply to Ron Paul and for my posts defending Robert Sarvis against the Paul’s and others. (My posts in the Virginia C4L group and those of other Sarvis supporters were being censored for weeks anyway.)

The tweet that got me banned was in response to Ron Paul’s statement at a Ken Cuccinelli rally where he called all Sarvis supporters “insane,” kind of a nasty and loose and sloppy charge from a medical doctor. (Did he intend to have them committed so they could not vote?)

He apparently thought we should bow to the Pauls because of their contributions. Uh huh. As we all know from Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard, lots of great people get a little nutty, abusive and full of themselves in their dotage. My tweet he got hissy about was this: “Ron Paul says voting for Sarvis is insane, which is a subject some would say he is an expert on.” He thought that I was claiming that Ron Paul is insane. 

He doesn’t see it as a claim that Ron Paul’s experience should make him wary of charging that (other) people are insane because they disagree with his position, since that is what happened to him his entire career.  I don’t think anyone in the Paul camp realized that’s what they were saying, because they share the general GOP delusional mentality that not only do libertarian voters belong to them, but that we are their children whom they may abuse.  (And did Dr. Paul never pay attention to his own fans – did he really think calling us names and telling us “No!” would make us follow along?)

Overall I think the Paul supporters behind Cuccinelli, with their propensity to parrot lies, betray exactly this type of (I hope temporary) rashness and lack of subtlety and intelligence.  The Paul’s wanted to centrally plan the liberty movement, and collectivize our libertarian eggs, and put them all in the Cuccinelli basket.  It was a bad investment.   The Libertarian spent less per vote than Cuccinelli did since all spending for Sarvis was $380000 and Ken spent $15 million. The GOP spent almost 45 times what the Libertarians did. But they got less than 7 times their vote. And the GOP didn’t have to first spend money to collect 18,000 signatures to get on the ballot.  So apparently Republican candidates aren’t cost effective.

The result of Ken Cuccinelli acting as a spoiler to keep the LP from getting ballot status is that now Libertarians will have to concentrate their resources again next time on getting the 10% required by the GOP coauthored ballot access law in the next gubernatorial race and do it all over again.  And Rand Paul doesn’t have have a reliable governor to support his next race.  And Ron Paul has lost his credibility with libertarians.  It’s bad timing for the Paul’s, coming in the same week when Rand Paul faces a second wave of plagiarism charges

This campaign may be a kind of watershed moment, when Ron Paul lost his moral authority and dug a new hole for Rand Paul 2016.