Glenn, linking to this article describing how Libertarians helped swing the South Dakota senate race, points out that Libertarians (and other third parties) make their impact primarily by affecting the outcomes of close elections.

Well, the solution is for the Republicans to avoid the big-government intrusiveness that alienates libertarian-leaning voters. But are they smart enough to realize that? The push on the Homeland Security bill, and Trent Lott's comments about reopening the abortion issue, suggest that they're not. But this is how third parties traditionally have an impact -- by costing one of the two major parties close elections.

Well, yes, as a general principle. But in the case of South Dakota, you can't just point the finger at the three thousand Libertarians. Mr. Miller missed the real story, which was that the Republicans lost many thousands more Republican votes from Republican voters who bought the Democratic line that South Dakota would have more clout with two Senators in the majority party.

Obviously, in retrospect, they screwed themselves.

While I'd prefer that Thune had won, I have trouble spooling up the tearworks for SD Republicans, who voted for crass political influence over party principle, and had no faith in their own party to win a majority. Now they've got two Senators in the minority, and it serves them right.

When is Daschle up for re-election? SD voters can rectify that problem soon enough : )

Daschle is up for re-election in 2004. He might try for the presidency instead, especially if he doesn't think that being Permanent Minority Leader will be all that much fun.

As for S.D. voters, note that Republicans elected a governor and a state-wide rep. So it was the ticket splitters voting for the status quo and the vote fraud that keeps Johnson in his seat.

Eugene Volokh has some more thoughts on this subject.

Not an inveterate political observer, I do have to wonder a little about some of the stories from SD about voter registration on the Indian reservations. Was there voter fraud involved?

When the margins of victory are within the margins of error, one has to wonder whether little things that would normally be less relevant, including voter fraud, mismarked ballots, etc., aren't having a disproportionate effect.

One other point is that John Thune went out of his way to slam the door on Social Security reform. That would have been enough to send me to the Libertarian candidate.

An anti-reform Democrat would be easier to replace than an anti-reform Republican.

Even if individual members of a party don't support your goals, if the party as a whole does, that's still a reason to vote for the individual, because it gives the party more power, often disporportionate to its numbers, as long as it has a majority. The Democrats understood this for years. The Pubbies are just starting to figure it out.