UPDATE: IPR’s Tom Knapp received a phone call from Angela Keaton. Now the conservative faction — or the “evil bastards” as Knapp refers to them — is trying to oust her from the LNC.
ElfNinosMom reports hearing with her “own two ears (well, one ear, it was on the phone)” the LNC “bullying” Angela Keaton and threatening to censure her for writing on blogs.
“If Angela Keaton is censured for exercising her First Amendment rights in the so-called ‘Party of Principle’,” says ENM, then “the LP should be censured by its members. No money, no support for the Gestapo organization that it has become.”
Last Free Voice will keep readers up to date on this developing story.
114 responses so far ↓
1 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Latest: Sullentrup trying to have AK kicked off LNC; a motion to order her to leave the room has failed
2 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:06 pm
“Sullentrup, Flood, Starr, Karlan voted to remove from the room.”
3 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“Called Knapp. Sullentrup told the room that he was a felon.”
4 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Who was a felon?
5 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Knapp
6 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:12 pm
http://twitter.com/AngelaKeaton
7 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Hawkridge/Ruwart are providing some intelligent alternatives. And yes, the Admiral is cute.Kraus is pissed about everything-Years of abuse. 5 minutes ago from web
Kraus is right. We do treat employees harshly. 3 minutes ago from web
Hawkridge wants Starr and me to read a book called “Why Marriages Fail.” Starr is going to have to buy one hell of ring. 3 minutes ago from web
Internet connection is barely moving so I can’t really use hotmail. P.O., please keep updating. Wrights says, “going to war doesn’t work.” 2 minutes ago from web
Some body tell G.E. that someone printed it off IPR. They are reading that site. Keep it up! less than 20 seconds ago from web
8 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:16 pm
I love that the LNC criminal gang reads IPR. Let’s see if they pass a motion to censure and censor this site for telling the truth about gungrabber Redpath and his gang of looters.
9 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:19 pm
“The charges that I violated ExSession and that I sexually violated two employees. Yes, you read that right.”
10 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Whose quote is this?
11 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:21 pm
All quotes I’m posting are AK unless otherwise noted
12 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:22 pm
AK: “Starr: Motion to direct Angela Keaton to apologize two the sexually violated employees. Wrights and Hawkridge think this is merely muscle flexing.”
13 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Sullentrup is technically incorrect as to my status vis a vis the criminal justice system — and he knows it, having been rebuffed by Missouri’s Secretary of State when he attempted to have me removed from my county LP committee several months ago.
GE, you know that I have no love for conservatism, but please don’t insult that political philosphy and/or personal orientation by using it to describe that faction on the LNC. “Stalinist” faction would be much more appropriate.
14 Seth Cohn // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Sullentrup will have to find someone new to webmaster RockTheDebates. Going after Angela offends me, on top of other things I’ve been good so far about ignoring in the interest of shared common goal.
15 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Maybe the Workers World Party will issue a statement lauding the LNC.
16 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:24 pm
AK: “I noted that Casey Hanson and Austin Petersen are attractive. That’s a problem.”
17 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:24 pm
AK: “I spoke about something in open session that was said in open session.”
18 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Wow. That’s “sexual violation”?
The LNC Redpath faction = Commie-Nazi hybrids
19 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:26 pm
In order for someone to be sexually violated, they have to not consent.
Anyone who feels violated by anything Angela Keaton does is clearly not a human being … or even a mammal.
When did LPHQ start putting lower animals on payroll? Do we need an audit?
20 George Donnelly // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Is it really a good idea to mirror her twitter stream here? We can just follow that at twitter.
21 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:28 pm
It’s the sort of harassment-run-amok stuff I’d expect from the radical left. I had a female friend at a past job who liked to ask me for my opinion on new clothes she was wearing, and I always worried I might get sued or fired for even answering…
22 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:28 pm
AK asked me to keep updates going, so I will for now.
23 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Keep it up, Peter. It’s easier to see it here than to click over to Twitter, and I (and other readers, I suspect) appreciate your work.
24 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:31 pm
AK “Starr makes a very bizarre apology to me, very patronizing. I say nothing.”
“I voted with the @ssholes. Why not? They’ve destroyed the party with the Barr/root.”
“Dixon pisses off Ruwart by appointing her as the mediator b/t me and Starr. The look on her face on priceless.”
25 George Donnelly // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:31 pm
You guys create so much duplication. 2 threads at IPR, one at LFV so far, duplicating even comments in some cases across all the threads, including twitter. It’s counterproductive.
26 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:33 pm
George – Dude. You don’t own the site. No one asked for you opinion on the productivity of the posts. I for one appreciate Peter posting here. I’m sure our other readers — who don’t necessarily read LFV — will agree. If you don’t, then go away. What’s “counterproductive” is telling us how to run the site.
27 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:34 pm
AK “Wrights and Hawkridge want me to accept the apology. As long as M Carling in his life, there will never be peace. Can’t do it. Won’t.”
“The Admiral says he is thrilled to discover that I have a sense of humor. Makes a speech about the First Amendment.”
28 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:34 pm
I’m a reporter. I report.
29 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:34 pm
And besides, Angela asked Peter to post at IPR and LFV. Who the fuck are you to overrule her?
30 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:36 pm
George is entitled to his view, and I’ve found his critiques of LP systems and culture over at LFV very insightful. But in this case, I’m going to keep up with AK’s request, at least until I go back to sleep — work in three hours!
31 George Phillies // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:36 pm
As this is being read at the LNC meeting:
Rachel, Mary, Lee, Mike, et al.:
Contemplate biting your tongues and letting the other side commit political suicide: It’s for the good of the party.
And to the folks pulling this: Remember, I still have to get my electors to agree to substitution, and the discovery that in March-April Bob Barr lied about his candidacy plans in order to get free speaking time has already poisoned the waters. Purging the NatComm of the radicals is not a bright move.
32 Mike Guess // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:37 pm
Report all that goes on. FuBarr and his cronies have ruined the LP. Fight the bastards!
33 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:37 pm
He’s entitled to his view and I’m entitled to tell him what I think of it!
34 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I’m reading Twitter now, but until I caught on to where Peter was pasting from, that was my line in, except for Angela’s extremely upset phone call. Keep it up … she needs to know that a whole bunch of people are WATCHING and ON HER SIDE.
If I had to throw either Angela Keaton or the LNC’s executive committee over the side of an overcrowded lifeboat, she wouldn’t even get her toes wet. And that’s not (just) because she’s a goddess, it’s because they’re useless fucking ballast that’s sinking the LP.
35 Jeremy Young // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:39 pm
I’m one lurker who’s enjoying the twitter cross-posts. Keep it up!
36 George Donnelly // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:40 pm
GE – Dude. I did not CLAIM to “own the site”.
If you don’t want comments on “the productivity of posts” then you would do well to post a comment policy stating that.
I will now go away, unsubscribe from the IPR RSS feed and never return to your website again.
By all means delete my account if you like.
37 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Jeez, George. Overreact much? Do whatever you like.
38 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:41 pm
BTW, who is “M Carling”? Is this his name, “M”? Like in Bond movies?
39 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Part of why I’m mirroring is that I’m not sure everyone will see the link to Twitter. It took me a few mins to even realize that’s where AK was posting from. I also don’t know if non-Twitterers can see stuff there.
40 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:43 pm
The CP needs a new California affiliate. Food for thought.
41 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:44 pm
You offered your opinion, a bunch of people disagreed, and still you persisted. I stated the objective truth that you could go somewhere else if you didn’t like the site, which you can. But I won’t delete your account. Feel free to come back any time you want, but take off your Web site consultant hat when you enter. Or not.
42 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Not everyone is subscribed to RSS feeds. We’ll post whatever we want to post, and if you don’t like it, yeah, you can unsubscribe. Ain’t freedom grand?
43 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:46 pm
I also don’t know if non-Twitterers can see stuff there.
I never heard of it before, so I assume I’m a non-twitter, and I can. I think keeping the updates going works good, when it’s all over it’ll be helpful for them all to get pasted or summarized into this post for the casual reader coming in late.
44 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Nothing new from AK in past 15 mins — things settling down?
45 NewFederalist // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Gee, perhaps the remnants of the LP and the CP could start a new party!
46 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:50 pm
AK: “The Admiral believes in free speech.”
47 Mike Theodore // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:51 pm
My God, the whole thing is falling apart.
48 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Who is the Admiral?
49 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:52 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Colley
50 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:53 pm
I thank you!
51 Peter Orvetti // Sep 6, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Ok folks, I need to sign off, but you can follow Ms. Keaton’s live updates at http://twitter.com/AngelaKeaton
52 Thomas L. Knapp // Sep 6, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Anyone get the feeling that the Admiral is expounding at length on the virtues of free speech?
53 Fred Church Ortiz // Sep 6, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Maybe some could use it.
54 Gene Trosper // Sep 6, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Ok. This is uber-retarded.
I’m casting a straight LP ticket in November, but this treatment of Keaton is beyond the pale. I’ve never met Angela (though my two dear friends Mike and Lidia Seebeck do and I am impressed by what they have to say about her), but this is causing me to join the BTP in protest of this. Whether I completely cut myself off from the LP after November waits to be seen.
These past few years has seen me engaged in a near-constant bitchfest about Aaron Starr. It’s good to see that people are finally waking up about him and his control-freak modus operandi.
*runs off to join the BTP immediately*
55 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Good to hear you’ve finally reached your limit, Gene.
56 Brian Miller // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:03 pm
If everyone just cuts and runs because of Starr, he gets what he wants.
Much better to stay, fight and win.
57 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Agreed. We should at least give it one last go.
58 Gene Trosper // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Oh, I’m staying in the LP for now. But my patience for this sort of crap has ran extremely thin and the older I get, the less patience I have.
Regardless, I’ve joined the BTP *just in case*.
59 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Gene, Brian, etc. – If the Gang of Four has a stranglehold on the LNC and the LPUS, then instead of joining the BTP, the proper route may be to encourage our state affiliates to disaffiliate from the national.
60 darolew // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Good to know the LP is in good hands. /sarcasm
61 Denver Delegate // Sep 6, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Libertarian Party members should consider whether giving the Secretary and Treasurer a vote on the Executive Committee is too high a price to pay for their services.
In this age of audio/video, electronically keep a record of the meeting, and have staff prepare official minutes.
And hire an accountant instead of using a volunteer.
Then, if Starr and Sully then want a vote on the LNC, they can run At-Large or from their regions.
62 G.E. // Sep 6, 2008 at 10:14 pm
FYI: I apologized to George Donelly and invited him to come back to IPR. Hopefully he will. I just wanted to state that publicly so that if he does come back, he doesn’t lose any face over it. My reaction was inappropriate, and that’s why I apologized.
63 Brian Miller // Sep 7, 2008 at 12:34 am
If the Gang of Four has a stranglehold on the LNC and the LPUS, then instead of joining the BTP, the proper route may be to encourage our state affiliates to disaffiliate from the national.
I agree.
It looks like things are starting to fragment already.
64 Mike Theodore // Sep 7, 2008 at 1:24 am
Ok, just got through a whole day IPR-less. It would seem we’re at the climax of the faction wars, and everyone’s a little testy.
George, stay with us man. Everyone loves constructive criticism, but no one loves GE’s response to it.
Let’s put it this way, if you plan on running in 2010, IPR is essential for donations and endorsements around the country.
65 Dodge Landesman // Sep 7, 2008 at 1:29 am
I’m still a little confused. It does seem like the LNC is acted a little hostile towards Keaton, who, as I said in my last post, seems to be a very dedicated member of the LP. I asked why she got flack for her work on antiwar.com, and GE said because the LP are pro-war. I’ve never heard this, though I am shocked that her work with antiwar.com would even be an issue. I would think it would be a good credential if anything. And what on Keaton’s blogs are causing controversy? Nothing controversial has come up from her blog from what I’ve heard until now. So I don’t see what their fuss is about. Excuse me for my naivety, but I’m new to the party, and I appreciate you all answering my question. On another note, I hate to shamelessly promote myself, but if you want an anti war candidate, I’m running for New York City council: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35970955534&ref=ts
66 wesbenedict // Sep 7, 2008 at 1:32 am
California bean counter should stick to his area of expertise, preferably in a basement somewhere. His farts are smelly.
67 Dodge Landesman // Sep 7, 2008 at 1:40 am
If you’re speaking of me, I’m just asking questions. for clarification. I don’t see anything wrong with that. And many people have been happy to answer them.
68 Brian Miller // Sep 7, 2008 at 1:49 am
He’s speaking of Someone Whose Name Rhymes With Barren Car, Dodge.
69 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 2:32 am
Wes says the guy’s farts are smelly and Dodge is like: “Are you talking about me?”
Stay away from Dodge!
70 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Folks, as long as our conventions don’t have full delegate slates, no one has a stranglehold on anything in the LP. Everyone in power there is either elected or appointed by folks who are elected, and largely at sparsely-populated elections. Stranglehold. Right. All fear the awesome power of Aaron Starr and Bill Redpath! (?)
People seem to forget how close the vote margin was for every single person in power in the LP today. Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t there enough open delegate slots that if they were filled by a bloc of like voters, they could have easily flipped pretty much any vote at the convention? The Green Papers claims there could have been over 1000 delegates, but the prez races, presumably the most-voted-upon, clocked in around 600 delegates. To me that means that convention was as open as Angela Keaton would like us to think her legs are when a hot younger male comes around.
Then again, changing (for example) the Chair election would have required gathering a whole 60 concerned Libertarians together. And making Steve Kubby the VP nominee would have required the massive effort of a bunch of wussy defeatist delegates not walking out early after the prez vote. A whole 31 people would have had to stick around for an extra hour to stop “the cabal” from overrunning our half-filled convention with their mad caballing.
71 Peter Orvetti // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Thanks for that excellent link, Lance. Turns out there are 33 LP members in D.C. — I’m three percent of my “state” party! Cool.
72 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Lance – Everything you say is true. However, the cabal’s objective is depressing turnout. Their loyalists have cash and can get to the convention wherever it’s held. The plot is to make attending as costly as possible to keep out so-called “Povertarians” who happen to be radicals and/or non-cabalists. So yeah, IF we could have had another 100 people show up, we would have won — but we WOULD HAVE had the people if the convention were held in Chicago instead of Denver.
73 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:42 pm
If the Green Papers are right, not only were there enough open delegate slots to flip any convention vote, there were enough open slots for a total third competitor in any given two-way election. 400 delegates voting together would have beat Bill Redpath and his nearest competitor combined. They could have topped Barr by 75 votes.
So when someone talks about the LP being locked down by some sort of powerful consortium, it makes me wonder about the accuser’s own sense of power as an activist. I mean, rallying 400 Libertarians together isn’t exactly the 12 Labors of Hercules. (Maybe it’s one of the twelve, but still…)
74 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:45 pm
G.E.
Bullshit. And Waaaaahh. Find a way to fund the poor delegates. Denver’s not the Moon.
75 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:48 pm
I will concede that some folks (I’m far from conceding “cabal”) may be trying to make the conventions harder for poor folks to get to…I was “bullshit”-ing your claim that the whiners would have rocked the LP had the convention only been in Chicago. As if getting to Denver is the hurdle that broke the movement.
76 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:48 pm
I’m not whining. I’m stating the truth. I was in Denver.
77 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Denver was more expensive to get to than Chicago for most people. Only a few more people needed to come to give the radicals victory. It isn’t like the cabal had a “fool proof” plan — they just maximized their odds of winning and were lucky enough to scrape by.
78 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 10:50 pm
A fund to help people get to the convention is a good idea, by the way.
79 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Oh, and Dodge:
The LP is not pro-war, but there are definitely some Libertarians who buy into the “global war on terror” mindset, and therefore tend to be more pro-war, and even of a neocon-ish stripe in terms of foreign policy.
Keaton has come under fire for: –her extremely “open books” approach to reporting the happenings inside the LNC; –her sometimes abrasive, feisty, and some might say lewd verbiage toward fellow LNC members; her public questioning of a large post-partum payment to Shane Cory, former Executive Director of the LP, and other stuff that all pretty much falls under the category of her trying to expose, provoke, or otherwise unsettle the…I don’t know what to call them…the “power elite” of the party? Either G.E. or Keaton herself could come up with much better terms, I’m sure.
And welcome to the party, and mad kudos for running for City Council!
80 Spence // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:46 pm
“I mean, rallying 400 Libertarians together isn’t exactly the 12 Labors of Hercules.”
There’s 400 Libertarians?
81 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Thanks, G.E., for giving me a funny picture. Rather than the Gang that Can’t Shoot Straight, it’s the Cabal that’s Lucky Enough to Scrape By. I think that was a Little Rascals skit, wasn’t it?
82 G.E. // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Dodge Landesman is about the sweetest name for a political candidate I’ve ever heard. Kudos to him for running for local office.
Lance – I call them various names. The Gang of Four someone coined; I like that. But it goes behind just Redpath, Starr, Sullentrup, and Davis (that’s the four, right?). I call them “Redpath and his criminal cronies,” the junta, the cabal, the DeFraud Caucus… Those are better names.
83 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:48 pm
401, Spence. Dodge is new.
84 Spence // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:49 pm
2010 will certainly be interesting. Hopefully, they’ll pick Austin or Cleveland.
85 Lance Brown // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:51 pm
BTW, G.E., at this point, your decrying of Redpath has reached the point where I think a little better of him every time you bag on him. It’s like, “There’s no way he’s as bad as G.E. is making him out to be.”
Just a little propaganda feedback for you. It’s starting to backfire, at least from where I’m sitting.
86 Spence // Sep 7, 2008 at 11:55 pm
The Reformers are just as bad as the Radicals in my book. They don’t know how to build party bases either, and to boot, are more prone to corporate bribes and other pandering.
87 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:02 am
Lance – You asked a question, I gave you an answer. Sorry!
88 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:11 am
So yeah, IF we could have had another 100 people show up, we would have won — but we WOULD HAVE had the people if the convention were held in Chicago instead of Denver.
Huh? Why?
89 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:13 am
Chicago is in the center of the country and much closer to major population centers. A far larger percentage of human beings live in proximity to Chicago than Denver. Denver is also difficult to approach by land. I know people who did not go because of the expense who would have gone if it were located somewhere more accessible. Paul, apparently you’re the only one not aware of this insidious plot — which is being continued with the cruise-boat plan, etc.
90 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:13 am
Denver was more expensive to get to than Chicago for most people.
If anything, cheaper. The LP membership is skewed westwards, and the current US population center is in Texas for the general (non LP) population.
91 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:14 am
No way.
Turnout was down HUGELY from ‘04, even with the bus loads of Barr-barians.
92 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:19 am
Chicago is in the center of the country and much closer to major population centers.
The geographic center of the lower 48 is in western Kansas, closer to Denver than to Chicago. I already addressed the population center above.
A far larger percentage of human beings live in proximity to Chicago than Denver.
A larger percentage of LP members are on the West coast, and Denver is closer to them than Chicago is. Also, many people fly in, and Denver is a major airline hub. So I don’t see Denver as equivalent to Portland, much less a cruise ship.
I thought it was a good choice.
Denver is also difficult to approach by land. I know people who did not go because of the expense who would have gone if it were located somewhere more accessible.
That would be true wherever it was. If it was in Chicago, some Westerners who made it to Denver may not have been able to go.
Paul, apparently you’re the only one not aware of this insidious plot — which is being continued with the cruise-boat plan, etc.
That would be a neat trick on my part since I have blogged several articles about that very issue.
I was also trying to organize rides and roomshares, and a door to door wake up call effort at the convention hotel, but I failed miserably.
93 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:22 am
Turnout was down HUGELY from ‘04, even with the bus loads of Barr-barians.
What busloads? The van with 15 people from Atlanta that picked up Knapp, or the bus with 5 people on it from Ohio?
Turnout was down from 04, true. And in 04 it was down from 00, when it was in Anaheim, CA, which is a lot further from Chicago than Denver is.
Then again, membership and money was down in 08 from 04, and in 04 from 00, so why would we expect attendance to be any different?
94 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:22 am
BTW the attendance was not that far down. It actually declined less than the overall membership did, proportionally speaking.
95 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:26 am
A fund to help people get to the convention is a good idea, by the way.
Yes.
96 Lance Brown // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:27 am
G.E.,
Lance – You asked a question, I gave you an answer. Sorry!
I wasn’t referring to that one time, but rather the other hundreds of times you’ve casually insulted Redpath.
97 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:31 am
Denver is also difficult to approach by land.
I-70 and I-25, two of the most major freeways in the country. I-80, which is even more major, is a very short distance north; just drop down 76 if Westbound.
98 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:35 am
I’d like to compare the attendance, state by state, in 2004 vs. 2008. The huge majority of the country is on the eastern half of the nation — a huge, huge majority. I can’t believe there’s any way that LP membership demographics could possibly swing so far in the other direction.
Wow, I guess the dozens of delegates who made it to Denver complaining about the difficulty of going through the mountains, etc., as well as the dozens more who said they didn’t come because it was in Denver, are wrong, and you are right, paulie.
99 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:56 am
The huge majority of the country is on the eastern half of the nation — a huge, huge majority.
Nope.
However, I was wrong: the population center has not moved as far SW as I recalled. Still a good was SW of Chicago, in SW Missouri as of 2001, and the trend is clearly westward.
http://gislounge.com/us-census-2000-population-trends-mapped/
http://www.gislounge.com/images/aoi.gif
The LP membership is more Western based than the general population. See Lance’s link.
Wow, I guess the dozens of delegates who made it to Denver complaining about the difficulty of going through the mountains, etc.,
Those would be people coming from the West, since the mountains are West of Denver. I thought you were just claiming that the vast majority of people come from the East?
Eastern Colorado is flat, and rises gradually to a mile high in Denver. There are some mountain passes in Western Colorado that can be difficult, but not so much in late May.
as well as the dozens more who said they didn’t come because it was in Denver,
Of course. If it was in any other place, Chicago included, a different set of dozens would have had the same problem.
Let’s just say that if my objective was to pick a difficult to get to location for most people, I would not have picked Denver. Portland, on the other hand, was a “good” choice from that perspective.
100 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 12:56 am
“Still a good was SW of Chicago,”
*good way
101 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:00 am
The people complaining about the mountains could have come from the West — and that still proves my point. Hard to approach from the West, long from the East.
Your “nope” link proved nothing except that I was right. I think you were looking at the population GROWTH map. Here is the map of population density.
I’m going to find out what portion of Americans live on the Eastern half of the country. My guess is it’s at least 2/3, maybe 3/4.
102 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:02 am
As far as Barr’s buses… Was any large delegation but Georgia full?
There’s nothing insidious about a campaign bringing supporters along.
The insidiousness is the LPHQ working to depress the turnout of undesirables.
103 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:04 am
Try the second link, GE.
http://www.gislounge.com/images/aoi.gif
Then adjust it for LP membership from Lance’s link.
The (general) population center is in SW Missouri, somewhat West of the last dot (from 2001. ) That means 50% of the general US population lives West of that point, 50% East, 50% North, and 50% South.
104 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:05 am
Try this in case that was not clear
http://www.gislounge.com/images/centerssm.gif
105 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:06 am
test
106 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:06 am
107 darolew // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:33 am
The mean center of the United States population is in Missouri. (According to Wikipedia and the U.S. Census Bureau [PDF].)
By comparison, the geographic center of the United States is in Kansas — one state over, to the West of Missouri. That would not seem to indicate a “huge, huge majority” of the population lives on the eastern half of the nation. More people? Yes, but not that many more.
The West coast is hardly sparsely populated (see California) which makes up quite a bit for the somewhat sparsely populated mountain states.
108 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:38 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geographic_Center_of_the_Contiguous_United_States
109 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:38 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanon,_Kansas
110 darolew // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:39 am
By the way, doesn’t it seem silly to be arguing about geography? =P
111 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:39 am
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/T08/Li-Alloc.phtml
112 paulie cannoli // Sep 8, 2008 at 1:41 am
By the way, doesn’t it seem silly to be arguing about geography? =P
No. But then I’m a geographer, although not employed in my field of study.
113 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 2:27 am
Okay. I stand corrected.
114 G.E. // Sep 8, 2008 at 2:30 am
Corrected, but not defeated.
I’d like to compare population within, say, a 6-hour drive radius from Chicago and Denver. 9-hour? 12-hour?
The bulk of the West-Coast population is in LA and the Bay, etc. Denver is still quite a hike for them.
Leave a Comment