W. James Antle III of the American Spectator writes in the Boston Globe this morning that Bob Barr “has performed better in national polls than any Libertarian Party presidential candidate in history,†and in Massachusetts, “polls have showed Barr winning as much as 5 percent of the vote — 2 points more than Libertarians need to regain automatic ballot access. … But the Commonwealth’s voters may not get the opportunity to choose Barr in November†because the “secretary of state’s office insists that Barr should be, well, barred. The Massachusetts Libertarian Party listed its state chairman, George Phillies, as a stand-in presidential candidate before the Libertarian National Convention in May. Phillies was seeking the national party’s nomination, but told state election officials he wanted the actual nominee to be listed on the ballot if he lost. … While Phillies is certainly entitled to object to Barr’s policy positions, especially as they relate to the religious and cultural concerns of his state committee members, Massachusetts Libertarians need ex-Republicans like Barr. When the GOP’s statewide candidates have been weak or nonexistent it has benefited Libertarian Party candidates.â€
Meanwhile, the Kansas City Star this morning has brief items today debating whether Barr will impact the results of the presidential race, or have little impact.
5 responses so far ↓
1 Trent Hill // Aug 15, 2008 at 11:17 am
I like James Antle–he’s a nice guy.
2 johncjackson // Aug 15, 2008 at 12:07 pm
All this polling is BS. Barr will not break 1%, let alone 5-6%.
3 Trent Hill // Aug 15, 2008 at 12:32 pm
JohncJackson,
I used to agree–im not so sure anymore. I think Barr MIGHT break 1%. Certainly he wont get 5%.
4 Steve Perkins // Aug 15, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I officially do not care about the Massachusetts ballot… and after 3 months of discussing it, I STILL don’t fully understand what all the rules are and whether Phillies’ hands are tied or not. If the state Party doesn’t want Barr on the ballot, then they can spend the next cycle wasting thousands of dollars in resources rather than enjoying automatic ballot access.
I’m sorry that years ago the guy implied that some religion was invalid. Ehh, never mind… I pretty much believe that EVERY religion is invalid (looking at you too, atheists!). Hey, ya can’t accuse me of discrimination!
5 George Phillies // Aug 15, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Antle’s reference to ballot access is completely wrong. Barr getting 5% will certainly not get us ‘automatic ballot access’ for any reasonable interpretation of that phrase.
The rule for putting people on the ballot in MA, other than for President, is the same no matter whether we are a political party or a political designation. No matter what, we have to collect signatures, more than twice as many if the statewide candidate does well. The performance of Bob Underwood as US Senate candidate, which is much more likely to be significant, only affects ballot access in 2010, not in 2012, and that only by making it harder to collect signatures.
Leave a Comment