nnoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, Septemb

It is political season, and incumbents will try anything to save their jobs.

This year, unfortunately, is just another example of politicians stopping at nothing to win their re-elections. There are several races in this year’s election where a third party candidate could steer the election results in one direction or the other. One perverse example is the Pennsylvania senatorial campaign between Republican Sen. Rick Santorum and Democratic challenger Bob Casey.

The embattled incumbent’s campaign has instructed donors to support Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli in his election bid. In some polls, Casey is ahead of Santorum by double digits, according to an article in Wednesday’s USA Today. Some polls, however, show the gap narrowing and Democrats fear that Romanelli will “siphon” votes away from Casey and allow Santorum to be re-elected.

Santorum’s campaign hasn’t denied the support, with spokeswoman Virginia Davis saying that the campaign “encouraged those who inquired to help with the Green Party effort.” Davis went on to say that the campaign welcomes “Romanelli’s entry into the race because at least he’s expressed a real interest in being up front and honest about where he is on the issues.”

Spare us the spin, Ms. Casey. The Santorum campaign is supporting Romanelli because he may help Santorum win re-election, not because he’s expressing a real interest in being up front and honest on issues. Democrats, while thinking that they have a legitimate complaint, should bite their proverbial tongues, because third party candidates have helped their embattled incumbents win Senate re-election several times in the past decade, according to the USA Today article written by Kathy Kiely.

In 1998, a Libertarian candidate helped Harry Reid of Nevada to win re-election. In 2000, Maria Cantwell of Washington held on because of a Libertarian candidate and in 2002, Tim Johnson’s reelection in South Dakota was influenced by a Libertarian candidate, according to Richard Winger, who monitors minor-party campaigns for his newsletter, Ballot Access News, who was quoted in Kiely’s article. Libertarian candidates generally take votes away from Republican candidates while Green candidates do the same to Democrats.

What’s the bottom line? Democrats and Republicans alike don’t care about third party candidates unless they have the potential of keeping the other party out of office. When a third party candidate can take votes away from a Democrat, the Democrats will be annoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, Septembe

ad of Santorum by double digits, according to an article in Wednesday’s USA Today. Some polls, however, show the gap narrowing and Democrats fear that Romanelli will “siphon” votes away from Casey and allow Santorum to be re-elected.

Santorum’s campaign hasn’t denied the support, with spokeswoman Virginia Davis saying that the campaign “encouraged those who inquired to help with the Green Party effort.” Davis went on to say that the campaign welcomes “Romanelli’s entry into the race because at least he’s expressed a real interest in being up front and honest about where he is on the issues.”

Spare us the spin, Ms. Casey. The Santorum campaign is supporting Romanelli because he may help Santorum win re-election, not because he’s expressing a real interest in being up front and honest on issues. Democrats, while thinking that they have a legitimate complaint, should bite their proverbial tongues, because third party candidates have helped their embattled incumbents win Senate re-election several times in the past decade, according to the USA Today article written by Kathy Kiely.

In 1998, a Libertarian candidate helped Harry Reid of Nevada to win re-election. In 2000, Maria Cantwell of Washington held on because of a Libertarian candidate and in 2002, Tim Johnson’s reelection in South Dakota was influenced by a Libertarian candidate, according to Richard Winger, who monitors minor-party campaigns for his newsletter, Ballot Access News, who was quoted in Kiely’s article. Libertarian candidates generally take votes away from Republican candidates while Green candidates do the same to Democrats.

What’s the bottom line? Democrats and Republicans alike don’t care about third party candidates unless they have the potential of keeping the other party out of office. When a third party candidate can take votes away from a Democrat, the Democrats will be annoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, Septemb

Casey. The Santorum campaign is supporting Romanelli because he may help Santorum win re-election, not because he’s expressing a real interest in being up front and honest on issues. Democrats, while thinking that they have a legitimate complaint, should bite their proverbial tongues, because third party candidates have helped their embattled incumbents win Senate re-election several times in the past decade, according to the USA Today article written by Kathy Kiely.

In 1998, a Libertarian candidate helped Harry Reid of Nevada to win re-election. In 2000, Maria Cantwell of Washington held on because of a Libertarian candidate and in 2002, Tim Johnson’s reelection in South Dakota was influenced by a Libertarian candidate, according to Richard Winger, who monitors minor-party campaigns for his newsletter, Ballot Access News, who was quoted in Kiely’s article. Libertarian candidates generally take votes away from Republican candidates while Green candidates do the same to Democrats.

What’s the bottom line? Democrats and Republicans alike don’t care about third party candidates unless they have the potential of keeping the other party out of office. When a third party candidate can take votes away from a Democrat, the Democrats will be annoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, Septemb

ndidate and in 2002, Tim Johnson’s reelection in South Dakota was influenced by a Libertarian candidate, according to Richard Winger, who monitors minor-party campaigns for his newsletter, Ballot Access News, who was quoted in Kiely’s article. Libertarian candidates generally take votes away from Republican candidates while Green candidates do the same to Democrats.

What’s the bottom line? Democrats and Republicans alike don’t care about third party candidates unless they have the potential of keeping the other party out of office. When a third party candidate can take votes away from a Democrat, the Democrats will be annoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, Septemb

nnoyed and vise versa. This is no big surprise.

Indirect influence of third party candidates in an election is ok, but all out supporting a third party candidate just shows how weak the incumbent is, in this case Santorum. If Santorum skipped the political bull and actually ran on the issues, he wouldn’t have to support a third party candidate. Democrats shouldn’t cry foul, however, because they would do the same thing. It’s all about winning re-election, so anything goes, including jumping across ideological lines.

SOURCE Kathy Kiely. “Third candidates could tilt number of races.” USA Today, Wednesday, September 6, 2006.