Constitution Party Ballot Access

[moostraks]

Okay...since we are in a bit of a pinch here with the Dr. re-evaluating his point/purpose in the revolution some of us would like to have the opportunity to support someone with his talking points in the presidential elections, and have it count. Without ballot access for the constitution party many of us will be left without a candidate.

So here is a link to the Constitution party ballot access:http://www.constitutionparty.com/ba_stats.php
Hope this motivates some of us to get ourselves in gear and make our voices heard with a candidate we feel represents us and not mainstreams media's points of interest.

I will notvote for Barr, and feel many others share this view. To those of you who do, best wishes. I am tired of candidates who constantly campaign on a platform of how much they regret everything they stood for before running for the current office they are seeking.

Looks like divide and conquer is what will happen again for the 2 party power players of our political system. I sure do hope the atheists realize just where Barr stands on freedom of religion. The vehemence with which Barr spewed forth about mainstream religions being the only ones worthy of tolerance will forever stain him in my view. It is a view that I think is not put to the side for anything other than to garner votes. I understand your chagrin with the Constitution party platform, but this should not mean Barr gets a pass with his views. Turn the heat up on him(Barr) and don't ever let your guard down, because he is (IMHO) another politician that plays the game.

 

[stevedasbach]

Okay...since we are in a bit of a pinch here with the Dr. re-evaluating his point/purpose in the revolution some of us would like to have the opportunity to support someone with his talking points in the presidential elections, and have it count. Without ballot access for the constitution party many of us will be left without a candidate.

So here is a link to the Constitution party ballot access:http://www.constitutionparty.com/ba_stats.php
Hope this motivates some of us to get ourselves in gear and make our voices heard with a candidate we feel represents us and not mainstreams media's points of interest.

While I'm strongly supporting Barr, I hope that everyone who prefers to vote for Baldwin will help make sure he is on the ballot. Likewise, I hope that Barr and/or LP supporters will donate to make sure Barr is on the ballot in 48-50 states
+ DC.

 

[kombayn]

I hope both parties get on as many ballots as possible. I do like how Chuck Baldwin has registered as a Write-In candidate where he couldn't get enough signatures. Hopefully Bob Barr does the same thing.

 

[Nathan Hale]

I wish the Constitution Party would just get behind Barr. What a waste it is, having people duplicating efforts to fund two campaigns and get two candidates on the ballot. Better to support Barr.

 

[Kludge]

I wish the Constitution Party would just get behind Barr. What a waste it is, having people duplicating efforts to fund two campaigns and get two candidates on the ballot. Better to support Barr.

The CP and LP are not duplicates, though both are libertarian.

 

[Nathan Hale]

The CP and LP are not duplicates, though both are libertarian.

They're not exact faxsimiles, but they're similar enough that it's a wasted effort for both to field a candidate, especially when the LP candidate is one like Barr who leans to the right. Remember, this isn't about electing a candidate who is 100% what you want, it's about compromising between ourselves to build a coalition capable of winning. If the LP and the CP insist on fighting over the scraps from the GOP and the Dem's table, then they'll remain in 0.5% land. Perhaps Barr isn't a perfect CP candidate, but he's on board with 90% of the CP's platform, and that should be good enough for them.

 

[SovereignMN]

I wish the Constitution Party would just get behind Barr. What a waste it is, having people duplicating efforts to fund two campaigns and get two candidates on the ballot. Better to support Barr.

Why should it be the Baldwin backers who get behind Barr and not vice-versa? It was Baldwin who has been outspoken against the Patriot Act and Iraq War from the beginning...Barr voted for both. It has been Baldwin who has resisted the DOMA...Barr introduced it. It was Baldwin who endorsed Ron Paul back before the Ames Straw Poll and who has campaigned for him since summer of 2007...Barr sat on his thumbs HOPING for Paul to drop out so he would have an opening.

Baldwin is a friend to the Revolution...with Barr I remain unconvinced.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

Why should it be the Baldwin backers who get behind Barr and not vice-versa? It was Baldwin who has been outspoken against the Patriot Act and Iraq War from the beginning...Barr voted for both. It has been Baldwin who has resisted the DOMA...Barr introduced it. It was Baldwin who endorsed Ron Paul back before the Ames Straw Poll and who has campaigned for him since summer of 2007...Barr sat on his thumbs HOPING for Paul to drop out so he would have an opening.

Baldwin is a friend to the Revolution...with Barr I remain unconvinced.

+1

 

[Nathan Hale]

Why should it be the Baldwin backers who get behind Barr and not vice-versa?

Because Barr is a more viable candidate. He has credibility that Baldwin lacks. More on this below.

It was Baldwin who has been outspoken against the Patriot Act and Iraq War from the beginning...Barr voted for both. It has been Baldwin who has resisted the DOMA...Barr introduced it. It was Baldwin who endorsed Ron Paul back before the Ames Straw Poll and who has campaigned for him since summer of 2007...Barr sat on his thumbs HOPING for Paul to drop out so he would have an opening.

None of this matters. Barr has a greater chance of going mainstream and winning. If Baldwin was a more viable candidate I'd say that Barr should drop out and the LP should support Baldwin. But that's not the case.

Baldwin is a friend to the Revolution...with Barr I remain unconvinced.

Okay. But keep thinking it over, I hope you come around.

 

[Nirvikalpa]

If you are so concerned about going 'mainstream' and having a better chance at 'winning,' I think you should be voting for McCain or Obama...

This isn't a game of 'who has the better chances.' If that's the case, we wouldn't be here. It's about voting for the most liberty-minded candidate - and Barr has proven on more than one occasion personal liberties are not his top priority.

Neither Barr nor Baldwin will win this election...

 

[Nathan Hale]

If you are so concerned about going 'mainstream' and having a better chance at 'winning,' I think you should be voting for McCain or Obama...

If we're not in it to win it, then there's no reason to be in it. A third party candidate has a chance to win, so long as quite a few chances work out and quite a few things go in their favor. But it's worth the fight because it can reasonably happen if we play our cards right. That involves picking a candidate capable of being at the fore of the effort.

This isn't a game of 'who has the better chances.' If that's the case, we wouldn't be here. It's about voting for the most liberty-minded candidate - and Barr has proven on more than one occasion personal liberties are not his top priority.

Not so. All politics is compromise. This is about picking a candidate who a) believes in liberty, and b) is viable.

Neither Barr nor Baldwin will win this election...

Then what's the point? Informational or educational campaigns are not smart uses of activist dollars and manhours. We need to be in this to win it. Remember, that we have an entire revolution at our back - a lot of possible that was not possible before - so long as we don't splinter apart and make the typical libertarian mistakes that have shot this movement in the foot a thousand times before.

 

[WRellim]

Because Barr is a more viable candidate. He has credibility that Baldwin lacks. More on this below.

Barr has virtually ZERO credibility. He's a "sideshow" for the media to pop out -- like bringing a juggling clown act out on a slow news day.

He's got so many skeletons in his closet that it's just NOT funny.

None of this matters. Barr has a greater chance of going mainstream and winning. If Baldwin was a more viable candidate I'd say that Barr should drop out and the LP should support Baldwin. But that's not the case.

Barr has ZERO -- understand that , ABSOLUTELY ZERO chance of winning. ANd as for the "going mainstream" -- that could only be done by selling out the LP on virtually EVERY single principle (I'm not saying Barr WON'T do just that, in fact I think it is likely he will try -- but what I am saying is that it STILL won't do him any good.)

As I posted in another thread -- a vote for the "CONSTITUTION Party" at least sends the simple, but very clear message that:

"It's about the CONSTITUTION!"


Whereas the "Libertarian Party" only sends a "wacko" message that has something to do with Pot, Porn & Prostitutes... or something like that. (Because THAT is what people think about when the word "Libertarian" comes up -- it has become a derogatory term to 90% of the population... calling someone a Libertarian in politics is a way to SMEAR them... it's like calling someone a "hippie.")

 

[familydog]

Why should it be the Baldwin backers who get behind Barr and not vice-versa? It was Baldwin who has been outspoken against the Patriot Act and Iraq War from the beginning...Barr voted for both. It has been Baldwin who has resisted the DOMA...Barr introduced it. It was Baldwin who endorsed Ron Paul back before the Ames Straw Poll and who has campaigned for him since summer of 2007...Barr sat on his thumbs HOPING for Paul to drop out so he would have an opening.

Baldwin is a friend to the Revolution...with Barr I remain unconvinced.

I like your style.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Barr has virtually ZERO credibility. He's a "sideshow" for the media to pop out -- like bringing a juggling clown act out on a slow news day.

This is simply not true. Barr has gotten a steady stream of media hits since he declared. As a former Congressmen, he's in the class of people considered "viable" by the media for the Presidential run.

He's got so many skeletons in his closet that it's just NOT funny.

Such as?

Barr has ZERO -- understand that , ABSOLUTELY ZERO chance of winning. ANd as for the "going mainstream" -- that could only be done by selling out the LP on virtually EVERY single principle (I'm not saying Barr WON'T do just that, in fact I think it is likely he will try -- but what I am saying is that it STILL won't do him any good.)

Party of principle is a contradiction in terms. Politics isn't about principle, it's about compromise. Now, while compromising you seek to retain enough principle that your candidate is better than the other candidates, but compromise is the name of the game. Now, perhaps that's not a game you're willing to play (its a game the LP has been unwilling to play up until now), but that's politics. If you're running for President, it's essential. And I agree with you, to an extent. There is little chance of Barr winning, but there is a chance, so long as this revolution steps up to the plate for him, other third parties concede to his viability, and Barr employs the correct strategy.

As I posted in another thread -- a vote for the "CONSTITUTION Party" at least sends the simple, but very clear message that:

"It's about the CONSTITUTION!"

Whereas the "Libertarian Party" only sends a "wacko" message that has something to do with Pot, Porn & Prostitutes... or something like that. (Because THAT is what people think about when the word "Libertarian" comes up -- it has become a derogatory term to 90% of the population... calling someone a Libertarian in politics is a way to SMEAR them... it's like calling someone a "hippie.")

I agree with you that the LP has name issues, but it's still a bigger party with better media access and ballot access. Despite the weaker name, it's the better vehicle.

 

[bucfish]

We are the people and have local meetups lets get both on the ballot by petition and save them both lots of money. WE ARE THE PEOPLE!

 

[SovereignMN]

Because Barr is a more viable candidate. He has credibility that Baldwin lacks.

Which is just what every single Republican candidate said about Ron Paul

None of this matters.

The hell it doesn't! During the Republican primaries were we supposed to forget about the record of all the Republican candidates?

Barr has a greater chance of going mainstream and winning. If Baldwin was a more viable candidate I'd say that Barr should drop out and the LP should support Baldwin. But that's not the case.

Again, I can't believe so many Ron Paul supporters are willing to compromise all their principles for a 3rd party candidate whose voting record represents everything Ron Paul has run against. If Dr. Paul has taught us anything it is that we should hold our leaders to HIGHER standards not lower.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Which is just what every single Republican candidate said about Ron Paul

Not true. Paul was above the credibility threshold for inclusion in the debates. Perhaps he wasn't considered a frontrunner, but he was considered viable, and it was that consideration that allowed for his traction to form and the revolution to truly develop.

The hell it doesn't! During the Republican primaries were we supposed to forget about the record of all the Republican candidates?

No, but when a candidate says that he voted and certain way and has since changed his position, I respect that, so long as the candidate doesn't appear to be "changing his opinion" just for political gain. I don't see that with Barr, especially since it was libertarians who booted him from office.

Again, I can't believe so many Ron Paul supporters are willing to compromise all their principles for a 3rd party candidate whose voting record represents everything Ron Paul has run against. If Dr. Paul has taught us anything it is that we should hold our leaders to HIGHER standards not lower.

If you think that the Bob Barr running for office is the Bob Barr of 1996 then there's nothing I can do to assuage your fears. I don't see things that way.

 

[Lisa S]

Why should it be the Baldwin backers who get behind Barr and not vice-versa? It was Baldwin who has been outspoken against the Patriot Act and Iraq War from the beginning...Barr voted for both. It has been Baldwin who has resisted the DOMA...Barr introduced it. It was Baldwin who endorsed Ron Paul back before the Ames Straw Poll and who has campaigned for him since summer of 2007...Barr sat on his thumbs HOPING for Paul to drop out so he would have an opening.

Baldwin is a friend to the Revolution...with Barr I remain unconvinced.

EXACTLY!!!!!

 

[Fox McCloud]

Yay! He'll be on the ballot in Ohio...this'll give me the chance to vote for him if I suddenly decide I don't want to write-in Ron Paul's name.

 

[Nathan Hale]

Yay! He'll be on the ballot in Ohio...this'll give me the chance to vote for him if I suddenly decide I don't want to write-in Ron Paul's name.

Well if you suddenly decide not to waste your time, the option is open to you.