Today, Alaska Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of seven charges of corruption. He said, “I’m not stepping down,” but what does it mean for the November 4th election, and especially the minor party candidates in that election? It certainly does not bode well for Stevens, who [read more]
If you notice any errors, please list them in the comments. If you have anything to add, please do so in the comments. If you want to compile a list for your own state, please post it in the comments. Thanks to commenter Fanta for both this list and and the Alaska list.
Another note: The Pacific Green Party is the state affiliate of the Green Party. And Ralph Nader is [read more]
Ballot Access News reports
This year, 23 presidential candidates are on the ballot in at least one state. That is the highest in U.S. history except for 1992, when there were also 23. Generally there are more such candidates in periods of great public unhappiness.
Here is a list, with the predominant party label for each, and the percentage of the voters that will see their names on the ballot:
Barack Obama, Democratic, 100.0%
John McCain, Republican, 100.0%
Bob Barr, Libertarian, 94.5%
Ralph Nader, independent, 85.2%
Cynthia McKinney, Green, 70.5%
Chuck Baldwin, Constitution, 59.8%
Gloria La Riva, Socialism and Liberation, 26.8%
Roger Calero or his stand-in James Harris, Socialist Workers, 25.0%
Brian Moore, Socialist, 21.5%
Alan Keyes, America’s Independent Party, 18.1%
Charles Jay, Boston Tea, 10.0%
Gene Amondson, Prohibition, 9.6%
Thomas Robert Stevens, Objectivist, 8.0%
Richard Duncan, independent, 4.6%
John Joseph Polachek, New, 4.3%
Jeffrey Boss, Vote Here, 3.0%
Jeffrey Wamboldt, We the People, 2.5%
Ron Paul, Taxpayers/Constitution, 2.0%
Jonathan E. Allen, HeartQuake ‘08, 1.7%
Bradford Lyttle, U.S. Pacifist, 1.7%
Frank McEnulty, unaffiliated, 1.7%
Ted Weill, Reform, .9%
George Phillies, Libertarian, .6%
These are just the candidates who are listed on the ballot, not counting any write-ins. Ballot Access News reports that Frank Moore is not on the ballot on any state, but he has qualified as a write-in presidential candidate in 25 states, [read more]
From the campaign’s press release sent to email@example.com
The following Republican and Democratic former congressional candidates and current Republican candidate for Hamilton County Commissioner have crossed the aisle to support current Independent candidate David Krikorian.
* Nathan Bailey (R), 2008 Republican Primary
* Tom Brinkman (R), State Representative and 2008 Republican Primary
* Peter Fosset (R), 2005 Special Election Republican Candidate
* Thor Jacobs (D), 2006 Democratic Primary
* Nathan Noy (R), 2005 Special Election Republican Candidate
* Jim Parker (D), 2006 Democratic Primary
* Ed Rothenberg (R), Currently running for Hamilton County Commissioner
The campaign’s email goes on to say that
Republicans and Democrats throughout OH2 are supporting David Krikorian because he is the candidate most qualified to lead the district through our current economic crisis.
“Restoring confidence in our financial system can only happen if we demand integrity in Washington,” says David Krikorian. “Our congressional leaders have traded campaign contributions with Wall Street in exchange for foolishly eliminating regulations and changing the rules that enabled our current economic crisis. When you elect me this November, you will be sending someone to Washington who has a plan to restore our nation’s economic security (The Krikorian Plan). The Schmidt plan calls to socialize losses with our tax dollars! Republican and Democrats alike are supporting me because they understand we are Americans, above all, and our country is more important than partisan politics. If you feel the same, please vote Krikorian for Congress on November 4th!”
The Krikorian Plan to restore economic security can be found at KrikorianForCongress.com
or call #513-271-2987.
From [read more]
According to Ballot Access News
The Democratic, Republican, Green, Reform, and Socialist Parties have fewer state legislative nominees on the ballot this year than they did in 2006. However, the Libertarian and Constitution Parties have more legislative nominees on the ballot this year, compared to 2006. Also, the Socialist Workers Party has the same number (one) on the ballot for state legislature this year as in 2006.
If the Working Families Party is considered to be a nationally-organized party, then it also has more legislative nominees this year than it did in 2006. However, there really is no national structure for the Working Families Party; instead there are separate state WFP’s.
For purposes of this comparison, in fusion states, if a candidate has the nomination of more than one qualified party, that candidate is only credited to the party that the candidate belongs to. In the case of the Socialist Party and the Party for Socialism and Liberation, when that party is not on the ballot in a particular state, but that party’s candidate wins the nomination of a party that is ballot-qualified, then the candidate is grouped with the party which actually put him on the ballot. For example, Matt Erard is a Green Party nominee on the Michigan ballot, so he is classed as a Green, even though he is also a member of the Socialist Party, which is not on the Michigan ballot. However, if he had qualified as an independent, he would have been classed as a Socialist Party nominee.
Some little-known parties that are only organized in a single state have legislative nominees. One is the Blue Enigma Party of Delaware, which has 3 legislative nominees. See this interesting article about that party. Another is the British Reformed Sectarian Party of Florida; see this article. Still another is the Connecticut for Lieberman Party, in Connecticut. The party has 5 legislative candidates. All of them consider themselves political opponents of U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman. They took over the “party” that Lieberman created when he ran for U.S. Senate in 2006.
A state-by-state breakdown for legislative candidates, and also U.S. House candidates, for each political party, will be in the November 1 paper edition of Ballot Access News. For a free sample of that issue, send a self-addressed stamped envelope to BAN, PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147.
To address one likely objection in the comments, the Boston Tea Party’s endorsed candidates are not listed on the ballot under that party’s name. [read more]
SteveKC writes at [read more]
Writing in the New York Daily News. Alan Dershowitz attacked Cynthia McKinney as Judaeophic and pro-Islamic terror:
The one issue about which candidates McCain, Obama, Palin and Biden seem to agree is Israel. During the debates each candidate has gone out of his and her way to emphasize strong support for Israel as an American ally and a bastion of democracy in a dangerous neighborhood. They have also all expressed support for Israel’s right to defend itself against the nuclear threat posed by Iran, which has sworn to wipe Israel off the map.
There may be some difference in nuance among the candidates, especially with regard to negotiations with Iran. But supporters of Israel should not base their voting decision on which party or which candidates support Israel more enthusiastically. They should vote based on more general considerations about what is best for America, the world and the values that they hold dear. In the United States, Israel is not a divisive issue, and voting for President is not a referendum on support for Israel, at least among the major parties.
When it comes to third parties, however, support for Israel is very controversial. The Green Party, for example, has nominated candidates whose hatred for Israel is so visceral as to border on bigotry.
The Green Party’s current candidate for President is an overt anti-Semite named Cynthia McKinney who has surrounded herself with storm-trooper like neo-Nazis who frequently shout anti-Jewish slogans at her rallies. McKinney implied that the Jews were responsible for 9/11 and has supported the rantings of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. Her father blamed her defeat for reelection to Congress on “the J-E-W-S.” According to the Anti Defamation League, McKinney has refused to distance herself from these “anti-Semitic comments,” and “her service in Congress has been clouded by a perception that she also harbors such feelings.”
The historical record shows that this is an understatement. A fellow congressman characterized her as an overt “racist and an anti-Semite.”
Yet the Green Party nominated this bigot for the presidency of the United States. Previously they nominated Ralph Nader for President and Peter Camejo for vice president, both of whom have long records of anti-Israel bigotry and sympathy for terrorists. The Green Party itself has supported divestiture against Israel but not against tyrannical regimes that incite and facilitate the murder of innocent Israelis and Jews.
Has Green become the new color of anti-Semitism in the United States as it has in parts of Europe? And why would so-called environmentalists oppose the most environmentally sensitive country in the Middle East and one of the most environmentally-responsible countries in the world?
Nor is this one-sided “blame everything on Israel” attitude limited only to third parties. It extends to the extremist fringes of both major parties. Former President Jimmy Carter blames Israel, and Israel alone, for the lack of peace in the Middle East. The bad news is that a former President would express such bigotry toward the Jewish state. The good news is that the Democratic Party refused to give him the usual speaking role reserved for a former President at the party’s Presidential Convention. Although Carter endorsed Barack Obama, Obama went out of his way to ignore an endorsement that he knew would do him more harm than good.
I wish the Republican Party had treated Pat Buchanan with the same disdain. Both Carter and Buchanan share a bias against the Jewish state. Yet Buchanan was invited to speak at the Republican Convention in 1992 – a speech in which he declared a culture war against non-Christian fundamentalists.
In the United States, as distinguished from Western Europe, centrists of both parties generally support Israel. Bigotry against the Jewish state in this country comes primarily from the extreme left and from the extreme right.
Let’s keep it that way.
Today, the Green Party responds: [read more]
Posted at [read more]
Posted at [read more]