47 responses so far ↓

• 1 Robert Milnes // Aug 9, 2009 at 1:21 am

  Here are the names & numbers for 2012; Robert Milnes, Progressive Libertarian Alliance Independent, Green, Libertarian, 48 million, Barack Obama, Democrat, 44 million, Sarah Palin, Republican, 40 million, Ralph Nader, Independent, 300,000.

• 2 Peter Orvetti // Aug 9, 2009 at 1:50 am

  Give or take.

• 3 Mike Theodore // Aug 9, 2009 at 2:22 am

  Throw my name in there with Orvetti, things will just explode!

• 4 Steven R Linnabary // Aug 9, 2009 at 2:26 am

  Having observed a couple of recounts, I can assure any reader that “Mickey Mouse” did receive more votes than ANY of the official write-in candidates. For that matter, even “any damned jack-ass” got more votes!

  Even though there is a song that spells it out, there were even more people who misspelled “Mickey Mouse” than voted for all the official write-in candidates combined!

  PEACE

• 5 Melty // Aug 9, 2009 at 2:41 am

  How’d Nevada get the none of the above option? Fabulous! I wonder who all was on ballot in Nevada. . . wonder what would happen if Oklahoma had that option.

• 6 Peter Orvetti // Aug 9, 2009 at 2:44 am

  Nevada actually has a law requiring NOTA, for every office I believe.

• 7 Thomas M. Sipos // Aug 9, 2009 at 6:24 am

  It seems from this that the FEC only counted Ron Paul’s votes from states where he was on the ballot (Montana and Louisiana).

  The FEC appears not to have counted Paul’s write-in votes, including 17,006 he received in California.

• 8 Robert Capozzi // Aug 9, 2009 at 6:59 am

  A lot of Ls on this list…too many, IMO.

  Barr, Paul, Jay, Stevens, Phillies

• 9 Third Party Revolution // Aug 9, 2009 at 7:05 am

  How did David Jon Sponheim get only one vote? Last time I checked, he had a support group and also another member of his party running for office.

• 10 Peter Orvetti // Aug 9, 2009 at 8:14 am

  One tallied vote. Who knows how many more he or other candidates actually received?

  I voted for a registered and qualified write-in presidential ticket in D.C., but my vote was not counted. The District simply decided not to bother counting the 1,138 write-in votes for president.

• 11 Bradley in DC // Aug 9, 2009 at 8:42 am

  The totals do not include the write-in votes for Barr in DC. There is a current suit filed to force the board to count and tally them.

• 12 Richard Winger // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:03 am

  Nevada has “none of the above” only for statewide office. It is a big bore. When it is an important statewide office, like president, US Senate, or Governor, the NOTA vote is quite small. When it is an unimportant statewide office, like State Treasurer, it gets a much bigger vote because many voters have heard nothing about the candidates in these less-publicized races.

• 13 libertariangirl // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:04 am

  Nevada’s NOTA is a non-binding NOTA, where the candidate with the most votes is elected no matter what the NOTA vote, so voting for non-binding NOTA is basically an expression of sentiment which does not determine election to office.

• 14 Melty // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:09 am

  so no matter how many votes NOTA gets NOTA cannot win? still a swell option

• 15 Aaron Starr // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:43 am

  Proposition 23 was on the ballot in California back in 2000, which would have established the placement of NOTA on the ballot as a non-binding option. It was funded by businessman Alan Shugart. It was opposed by 1980 independent candidate John B. Anderson and the Green Party of California, which argued that we should be promoting IRV and Proportional Representation instead. Strangely, I believe the GPC used to have NOTA in its own bylaws. Perhaps Richard Winger knows for certain.

  In any event, the measure lost 36% to 64%.

• 16 libertariangirl // Aug 9, 2009 at 11:16 am

  Melty , exactly .
  So in some form it’s useless except as a protest vote for folks like us .

  However , just like Libertarians it can still make the difference in an election .

  Myself , unless there’s a Lib on the ballot and if another candidate hasnt shown him-her self to be better then the average statist , NOTA is always my choice .

• 17 libertariangirl // Aug 9, 2009 at 11:32 am

  Melty__I wonder who all was on ballot in Nevada

  me_ the IAP , Lib , GOP , GRN, IND and Dem tickets. however the GRN and IND had to petition to get on the ballot .

  Thank you to LIB candidates Joe Silvestri and Nathan Santucci who won the LPNevada ballot access for next election!

  we squeak by every election:) thank god

• 18 Thomas Knapp // Aug 9, 2009 at 11:50 am

  “A lot of Ls on this list…too many, IMO.”

  Except in New Hampshire, there was never more than one “L” on any given ballot.

• 19 Robert Milnes // Aug 9, 2009 at 12:19 pm

  Tom, granted, but Robert Capozzi still makes a very important point. More than one lib candidate splits the national vote making it exponentially even LESS viable. The Ron Paul counterrevolution has hopefully taught libs a valuable lesson. Do not allow libertarian support go to the counterrevolution rightist direction-towards the GOP.` The exact opposite-towards the left & the progressives is called for. BTP can serve in some ways, esp if the LP continues its rightward leaning. Nominating or endorsing a fusion ticket & providing it with valuable ballot access could be crucial in 2012. In the meantime, I’d like to see a BTP candidate try the Progressive Alliance Strategy. Call for the entire libertarian-not just the radical- vote AND the progressive vote.

• 20 Robert Milnes // Aug 9, 2009 at 12:30 pm

  AAron Starr, I noticed you commenting on IPR. What’s going on with you?///Tom, just out of curiousity, while I am busy trying to learn from 2008 & set up 2012 for a Progressive Libertarian victory, what is Charles J. up to?

• 21 R // Aug 9, 2009 at 12:36 pm

  Tom, perhaps it is just as well that I lost the BTP nomination to C.J. Because as soon as they nominated you as vp I would have declared a fusion ticket, despite my preference for a female lib. vp. Evidently that would have caused all sorts of chaos.

• 22 Justin Anthony Knapp // Aug 9, 2009 at 1:53 pm

  Is the “Charles Jay” who only got one write-in vote the same as the “Charles Jay” who got 2,422 votes for the Boston Tea Party?

  -JAK

• 23 Thomas Knapp // Aug 9, 2009 at 2:42 pm

  Bob,

  If the BTP had nominated you for president, I wouldn’t have been its vice-presidential nominee.

  Regards,
  Tom Knapp

• 24 Mik Robertson // Aug 9, 2009 at 3:29 pm

  @4 “Even though there is a song that spells it out, there were even more people who misspelled “Mickey Mouse” than voted for all the official write-in candidates combined!”

  This is an amazing phenomenon. In my small township I noted three write-in votes cast for Mickey Mouse, each of them spelled differently.

• 25 Mik Robertson // Aug 9, 2009 at 3:29 pm

  None of them were tallied, of course.

• 26 Peter Orvetti // Aug 9, 2009 at 3:32 pm

  I believe that’s called a “Reverse Eagleton”

• 27 libertariangirl // Aug 9, 2009 at 3:54 pm

  TK , is Justin Knapp your son?

• 28 Jeremy Young // Aug 9, 2009 at 5:33 pm

  The three Socialist/Marxist parties need to really think about how they are presenting themselves. All three turned in abysmal showings, losing by large margins to candidates like Keyes and Paul who were on the ballot in far fewer states.

  The SWP acquitted itself the best, drawing the largest number of votes despite being on fewer state ballots than La Riva was. However, they really need to rethink their stunt of nominating ineligible candidates and stand-ins. The result is that Calero’s and Harris’s totals are reported separately, which makes it look like Calero did worse than La Riva, when in fact he did better. In future they should simply nominate one ticket that is eligible to serve and let all the votes be tallied together.

  La Riva’s PSL is definitely the party with the most energy. Only two years after they were founded, they managed to get on the ballot in 16 states (if I remember correctly), more than either of the other parties. La Riva also came close to securing the Peace and Freedom nomination in California, and probably would have if Nader hadn’t been running (her only competitors were McKinney, who already had her own ballot line, and the hapless Brian Moore). However, the numbers for La Riva were dismal. Unlike the SWP, which nominates people no one has heard of, La Riva is an experienced third party advocate who’s run for office many times before and done well, and who’s nationally known for a variety of causes (most prominently the International ANSWER Coalition). If I recall, most of her votes came from Arkansas, which is strange considering that she’s not based in that state. La Riva should have done a lot better, and she needs to reevaluate her campaign pretty seriously.

  The Socialist candidate, Brian Moore, was a disaster. Under David McReynolds, this party was the strongest Socialist party; under Moore, it’s become the weakest. I expected some retrenchment given that McReynolds was a bigger name, but this is ridiculous. Moore worked very hard to make a go of this, but he’s a terrible speaker and was dogged by health problems throughout the campaign that made it difficult for him to get out the vote. If I’m not mistaken, his is the worst showing the Socialist Party has ever had, going back to the days of Debs and even earlier. Moore needs to step aside and other people need to right what has clearly become a sinking ship, or they need to abandon it.

• 29 Robert Milnes // Aug 9, 2009 at 5:37 pm

  Peter Orvetti, lol! See I have a sense of humor. Tom, hold on. Cease and desist. You are digging yourself a pretty deep hole here. So you would have resigned-promptly-your nomination? To BTP, your “baby”? I find that hard to believe. Maybe you would have been surprised. Maybe upset. I’m Shithouse Rat Crazy? & that is compared to?…Bob Barr? Ron Paul? W.A.R.? Who besides yourself do you think would be the best POTUS? Mary Ruwart? Why didn’t you put her name in to nominate her then?

• 30 Ayn R. Key // Aug 9, 2009 at 6:53 pm

  Jeremy Young @ 28

  Where does the Green Party fit into your calculations?

• 31 Thomas Knapp // Aug 9, 2009 at 6:59 pm

  LG,

  No, Justin Knapp isn’t my son (not sure if we’re discoverably related at all).

  Bob,

  I made a simple statement of fact. Interpret it any way you like.

• 32 Darryl W. Perry // Aug 9, 2009 at 8:27 pm

  The BTP will continue to grow and possibly in 2012 or 2016 the BTP and LP will nominate the same candidate.
  Unless of course, the LP continues its slide to “Republican lite”.

• 33 Melty // Aug 9, 2009 at 8:56 pm

  Aaron, to counter what you say John Anderson and the California Greens were saying . . .
  NOTA is good to have with any worthwhile voting method. It compliments Approval, Range, Condorcet, and more. It does not compliment IRV, but IRV is not a worthwhile method. Proportional Representation is only good for filling boards of appointees based on some other kind of vote already done. . .
  . . . in my pompous opinion, of course

• 34 Jeremy Young // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:01 pm

  Ayn, the Green Party is a bit of a mixed bag. They rode the most high-profile horse they could get their hands on, knowing full well that she was also more polarizing than some of their other choices. Last cycle they went with non-polarizing and got crushed, so this time they decided to try something different. McKinney succeeded in that she kept the party from self-destructing and did better than Cobb did four years ago. She failed in that she didn’t achieve any other objectives, and did turn some people off from the Green Party. I don’t expect her to run again, so the party will probably turn in a different direction. I also don’t expect Nader to run again, which will help them immensely. In four years, they should be looking at someone less polarizing who’s got a proven record of doing well. The people I can think of who fit that profile are Jesse Johnson, Rich Whitney, and maybe Matt Gonzalez (depending on how they feel about his Naderism).

  BTW, the minor party on this list that should feel the best about its 2008 results is the Constitution Party. They fielded a quality candidate who did an excellent job with very little money, and who far exceeded the party’s best efforts in past years (particularly if you factor in the votes he would have gotten on the AIP ballot line). Baldwin turned in a solid effort and legitimized the party to the degree that it now has a real shot at getting a more major candidate in four years.

• 35 Melty // Aug 9, 2009 at 10:27 pm

  Yeah, Chuck did a bang up job. What did it for me was how he emphasized freedom of religion, be it Quaker, Islam, Wiccan, Unitarian, Atheism or what have you. His voicing religious tolerence helped to legitimize the CP in my mind.

• 36 Jeremy Young // Aug 9, 2009 at 11:42 pm

  I’m not certain I’m ever going to believe that Baldwin believes in freedom FROM religion. The rest, maybe.

• 37 Robert Milnes // Aug 10, 2009 at 4:27 am

  Tom, you would have had to resign subsequent to the election. There is no way of knowing beforehand whether I or Jay would win. You let it go that far without resigning. What did you do, breathe a sigh of relief upon Jay’s victory? What is it about you-and Paulie. You talk the talk but do not walk the walk-re: left libertarianism, outreach to the left. Or is it just me personally? I spent several years in Boulder. I know the leftists. & I am quite typical. In fact I was shocked when I discovered there were “rightist” i.e. libertarian, anarchists. A true fusion anarchist ticket would be one of each. Like it or not.

• 38 Thomas Knapp // Aug 10, 2009 at 1:07 pm

  Bob,

  “Tom, you would have had to resign subsequent to the election.”

  Check.

  “There is no way of knowing beforehand whether I or Jay would win.”

  I was reasonably confident in predicting the outcome of that contest.

  “You let it go that far without resigning. What did you do, breathe a sigh of relief upon Jay’s victory?”

  Not really. Like I said, I didn’t see how it could likely come out the other way.

  “What is it about you-and Paulie. You talk the talk but do not walk the walk-re: left libertarianism, outreach to the left.”

  On the contrary — I’m an active left-libertarian, and for the most part I aim my outreach work toward the left.

  I’d offer to compare resumes, but I’m unaware of the extent of your own outreach activities (begging libertarians to nominate you for president and provide you with an attractive female running mate isn’t “outreach”).

• 39 Darcy G. Richardson // Aug 10, 2009 at 6:02 pm

  “If I’m not mistaken, his is the worst showing the Socialist Party has ever had, going back to the days of Debs and even earlier.” — Jeremy Young

  While nobody was more disappointed in his relatively poor showing than Brian Moore himself, it simply isn’t true that the 6,538 votes cast for him represents the “worst showing” in the party’s history. As meager as it was, Brian still managed to outperform at least a half-dozen Socialist Party candidates for President in the post-Norman Thomas era.

  During the Cold War, Darlington Hoopes, a former Socialist state legislator from Pennsylvania and Thomas’s vice-presidential running mate a dozen years earlier, garnered less than a third of Moore’s total during the 1956 presidential election.

  In terms of popular votes, Brian also outpolled former Milwaukee Mayor Frank P. Zeidler, the party’s nominee in 1976 — no small feat given Zeidler’s considerably higher name recognition. Including write-in votes, Zeidler garnered 6,062 votes nationally, 4,298 which were from his native Wisconsin.

  In addition to improving on the 5,602 votes cast in 2000 for David McReynolds — one of the party’s most appealing and articulate candidates in the post-Thomas period —Brian Moore also garnered more votes than the party’s presidential nominees in 1988, 1992 and 1996.

  In terms of media coverage — and exposure for the party and its principles — Brian aguably did as well as any Socialist Party candidate since Thomas’s 1948 campaign.

  There’s nothing worse than a self-described historian who doesn’t bother to read history, or at least do a little basic research before commenting on a given subject.

• 40 Robert Milnes // Aug 10, 2009 at 10:53 pm

  Instead of just voting for her, why didn’t you offer to be McKinney’s vp?
  I’m hoping your use of the word “attractive” means viable or electable. Sure I admit to being open to possibilities being single, but I assure you that is not my main concern. I voted for Palin & she’s not my type. The most attractive political woman I’ve seen so far is Chelene Nightinglae & I wouldn’t approach her with a 10 foot pole.

• 41 Robert Milnes // Aug 10, 2009 at 11:02 pm

  Tom, I did try to communicate to as many as possible my endorsement of Gravel/Ruwart as a fusion ticket. But nobody listened to me except Gravel’s interference runner Skyler, who patronized me. Like he had the faintest idea of what I was talking about.

• 42 Robert Milnes // Aug 10, 2009 at 11:10 pm

  Again, what’s Charles up to these days?

• 43 Robert Milnes // Aug 10, 2009 at 11:20 pm

  I see in his wikipedia article he has been involved in the sport of boxing as a manager etc. Hmmmmmmm.

• 44 Vermin Supreme // Aug 11, 2009 at 1:57 pm

  Interesting fun fact :
  43 : The number of write in votes during the 2008 popular presidential election received by
  Mr. Vermin Supreme.
  43: The exact same number of votes recieved in the 2008 New Hampshire presidential primary by republican Vermin Supreme.

  Coincidence or something else ?

• 45 Third Party Revolution // Aug 11, 2009 at 4:12 pm

  It would have been more of a coincidence if you would have been the 43rd comment.

• 46 castlepoint fire marshal,fire chief theodis brown sr // Jul 13, 2011 at 1:43 am

  if all gave same coveage on qualifications like my having police chief, fire chief, fire marshal work history spanning nearly 5o yrs public services, as hero police veteran for saving lives as public safety expert,! would have gotten more votes?for county committeeman, fd chief brown; listee in whos who american law books past and currently as famous chief

• 47 Concerned Chuck and Hetro Harry // Jul 13, 2011 at 2:52 am

  Let it be known Theodis Brown Sr is really Thomas Knapp or Wayne Allyn Root who are both engaged in a homosexual love affair for the purpose of defiling the bounds of marriage. This person is neither a Fire Marshal or Police Chief but an agent of Satan and the vast progressive-libertarian conspiracy of the Catholic Church to oppress the Palestinian people and establish a New Zion in Missouri as predicted by their false prophet Joesph Smith. Tom Knapp and Wayne Root in the (probable) love triangle with Alan Keyes (KNOWN Catholic and KNOWN father of a lesbian) are deep believers in this evil Catholic plot and have devoted their entire lives to it, even stooping as low as impressinating police and fire officials.

Leave a Comment