First, here is a Washington Post column from Dana Milbank.

Faced with this twin disappointment — desirable candidates being uninterested and interested candidates being undesirable — Americans Elect has announced that it is abandoning its online nominating process because no candidate had reached its minimum threshold. This is profoundly depressing… It’s discouraging because it shows politics may be too broken to fix.

Americans Elect had taken care of just about everything a third-party candidate would need. It spent about $35 million on marketing, technology and ballot access. As of Tuesday it had won a place on the November ballot in 28 states (and it still expects to be on the ballot in all 50 by Aug. 1). It had attracted 3.5 million people to its Web site. But what it couldn’t — or hasn’t yet been able to — do is persuade a plausible candidate to submit himself or herself to the ravages of a presidential run.

See more…

Here is Daniel Larison’s, an AE critic, response.

The annoying thing is that the American public is ready for an alternative. There is potentially an opening for a political movement that appeals to constituencies habitually neglected by both parties. What the organizers of Americans Elect never seemed to realize is that their organization didn’t represent an alternative to the major parties. In order to combat the duopoly, Americans Elect planned to nominate a ticket that represents the very same duopoly. Combining members of two parties that the public already dislikes doesn’t represent an alternative to the two-party system. It is the fusion of the two-party system in one organization. As a result, it rendered itself politically irrelevant from the moment of its birth.

See more…

We also looked at what impact Gary Johnson could have as the Libertarian candidate. He gets 6% and draws slightly more from Romney than Obama, pushing the President’s lead up to 2 points at 46-44. Third party candidates tend to poll a lot better six months out from an election than they actually end up doing on election day- it seems unlikely Johnson will really get 6%.

Johnson has previously polled 15% in New Mexico, 7% in New Hampshire, and 8% in Montana.

Back in 1967, when Gov.  George Wallace of Alabama was running for president on the American Independent Party ticket, Robert Walters was his California campaign manager.

Today, Walters lives in Orange. Last month, he mailed a letter on “Wallace for President” letterhead to 7,900 registered American Independent voters, asking them to support Deborah Pauly in her candidacy for the 3rd District seat on the county’s Board of Supervisors.

Wallace, who called for “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,” famously stood in the doorway of the University of Alabama in 1963 in a symbolic attempt at  preventing two black students from trying to enroll. Walters, then a UCLA student, wrote a book defending segregation, which he self-published two years later after failing to find a publisher.

In his letter to voters, Walters notes that Pauly condemned two Muslim speakers outside a Yorba Linda fundraiser where the two speakers were appearing in February 2011, then adds “We need Deborah Pauly and her brand of hard core limited government, fiscally-conservative positions on the County Board of Supervisors.”

In an interview, Walters said the $3,600 cost of printing and mailing the letter was paid by himself, his wife and his daughter.

“I was moved by her commitment to standing up for what I think are the right causes, so I thought I’d help her,” Walters said.  ”She didn’t ask me to do it.”

He said Pauly knew about the mailer only because he sent her a courtesy copy. “Otherwise, she never would have seen it,” he said.

It is quite possible this mailer did more harm than good, since it is a widely accepted fact that most of the members of the American Independent Party are not conservative admirers of Governor Wallace, but independents who simply registered wrong. Walters, who sent the mailer, says he is no longer a segregationist.

In other American Independent Party news, the party seems to have endorsed two GOP candidates for U.S. Congress – Steve Foley and John Stahl.

Lastly, it seems that every ballot-stub for the June 5th primary election in San Francisco will indicate that the voter is from the American Independent Party. This is a misprint and one that will not be corrected–though voters will be informed as they vote of this inconsistency.

The poll found 28 percent of voters said their political views are represented well by Democrats, an additional 23 percent said the GOP represents their stances, and 3 percent found themselves covered by an existing third party.

But a plurality — 37 percent — said they don’t find their views well-represented by any party in the political system. That was particularly true of voters in swing states, of tea party supporters and middle-aged, middle-income voters.

Asked what the biggest obstacle is to a third party, voters were split. About a quarter of those surveyed said there was just no need for one, while 23 percent said the cost was prohibitive and another 23 percent said it was tough to get voters to notice. Just 13 percent said the problem was getting attention from the news media.

While “ballot access” wasn’t included as an “obstacle” option, one could include it in the prohibitive costs option, though it’s safe to assume most voters in this poll did not know about tough ballot access laws.

Gary Johnson gets 7% when included as a third party candidate in New Hampshire. He draws a little bit more from Romney than Obama, increasing the President’s lead in the state to 13 points at 51-38.

So far, Public Policy Polling has been including Johnson and some other third party candidates in many presidential polls.

Americans Elect failed because it stood for almost nothing, and what it did stand for (bipartisanship, mindless “centrism”) are things that the people who vote for third party candidates dislike or don’t value as something desirable in itself. Americans Elect is a financially opaque, unaccountable organization that pretends to be a vehicle of transparency and political accountability. It has no program or agenda, and it cannot identify substantively where the government has gone wrong under the current two-party system. All that it is capable of doing is complaining that members of the two parties are insufficiently chummy and collaborative, and it has presented this message at a time when there is not much confidence in either major party.

Successful third party candidacies have to tap into discontent with something specific about the incumbent, or they have to represent a more radical challenge to both parties. To the extent that it has a political position, it is the opposite of radical, and it has floundered because its backers don’t really disagree with Obama about very much in terms of policy. It is an organization of Tom Friedmans with ballot access.

See more…

The deadline for Americans Elect is here and they still don’t have a candidate. This failure threatens to kill the effort to field a bipartisan third ticket for president before it ever really began—despite $35 million spent and 420,000 people signed up to serve as online delegates.

Goode Talks Gay Marriage On Local TV Station

Stockman has been endorsed in his race to return to Congress by a former Congressman, Tom Tancredo, who has connections to the Constitution Party himself. Tom Tancredo spoke at several Constitution Party National Committee meetings, ran for Governor of Colorado in 2010 as the Constitution Party candidate–placing second with 36.7%. Tancredo also endorsed and actively campaigned for Jim Gilchrist during his 2005 special election campaign for Congress as the nominee of the American Independent Party of California.

WEBSTER – Border control advocate and former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo has enthusiastically endorsed Congressman Steve Stockman’s bid to return to Capitol Hill.

“On the important issues of immigration, lowering taxes, returning to constitutional spending levels, maintaining a strong national defense, restoring the right to keep and bear arms and ending abortion, Congressman Stockman is the only proven conservative in the race,” said Tancredo.

“On May 29th, conservative Republicans are voting to return Congressman Steve Stockman to Congress. I urge you to join them,” said Tancredo.

Stockman and Tancredo share similar views on the importance of effective border-control.

“The GOP establishment feels that a push for effective border-control might hurt us with the fast-growing Hispanic vote,” says Steve. “But who gets hurt the most when out-of-control illegal immigration from all over the world keeps American hourly wages artificially low? Our hard-working Spanish-speaking families, that’s who. They’re ambitious and want to improve their situation economically. Why should they always have to compete with illegal newcomers who will continually undercut their hard-earned wages?”

Stockman is running for election to Congress in the May 29th Republican primary for the brand-new 36th Congressional District. Congressman Stockman previously much of the new district, including fast-growing Chambers County and the NASA area.

In addition to Tancredo, Stockman’s growing list of such endorsers includes gun owners, right-to-life groups and other conservative organizations.

The 36th District covers all of Polk, Tyler, Jasper Newton, Liberty, Hardin, Orange and Chambers Counties, along with southeast Harris County including Baytown, the Port of Houston and the Johnson Space Center.

Statement by Americans Elect CEO Kahlil Byrd

Over the past two years, Americans Elect has focused on achieving three clear goals:

• Gaining nationwide ballot access for a third presidential ticket to compete in the 2012 race;
• Holding the first ever nonpartisan secure national online primary at AmericansElect.org; and
• Fielding a credible, balanced, unaffiliated ticket for the 2012 presidential race.

Through the efforts of thousands of staffers, volunteers, and leadership, Americans Elect has achieved every stated operational goal. Despite these efforts, as of today, no candidate has reached the national support threshold required to enter the “Americans Elect Online Convention” this June. (Read a detailed summary of the AE process here and the full rules here.)

Because of this, under the rules that AE delegates ratified, the primary process would end today. There is, however, an almost universal desire among delegates, leadership and millions of Americans who have supported AE to see a credible candidate emerge from this process.

Every step of the way, AE has conferred with its community before making major decisions. We will do the same this week before determining next steps for the immediate future. AE will announce the results of these conversations on Thursday, May 17.

As always, we thank everyone who has participated in this effort and will honor the work, efforts and trust so many people have placed in Americans Elect.

Speculation about what the next steps may be has swirled at Irregular Times and AE Transparency Blog.

A sampling:

IRT:

Last Americans Elect Gambit: to put Candidates on the Ballot despite Insufficient Support

Walker tries to become Roemer’s VP

Document: “Grassroots” Committee to Draft David Walker for President intends to take Big Money

AE Transparency Blog:

Fast & Loose: How Americans Elect Scoffs at the Rules

With Failures Rapidly Mounting, What Is Americans Elect’s End-Game?

AECorp Makes It Official: Ackerman Selects The Next President of the United States

Much more at aetransparency.blogspot.com and http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/category/americanselect.

And, from the petition grapevine (numerous anonymous sources):

None of the petitioners I have been in touch with have heard of AE starting petition drives in several states that were expected to start by now, including Illinois, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky and Virginia, among others. I have not heard of ongoing AE drives shutting down, however.

As best I can determine, the announcement on May 17 will come first and news of what will happen with AE ballot access efforts will follow. Unless those planned drives are suspended, they may pay a higher rate than has been the case up to now, because deadlines are approaching in many states without the drives having even begun and because many petitioners are working on initiatives. Additionally, some of the states where AE would need to petition have residency requirements and/or prohibitions on carrying (or getting voters to sign) petitions for more than one party.

If anyone has additional information please post it in the comments, and stay tuned for updates.

Barr quickly shared this tweet around and then made some additional statements of Twitter of her own, announcing the selection of her Vice Presidential running mate. However, Mr. Nelson appears to have re-thought his stance and later backtracked, saying on Twitter, “Im not ready 2 get n2 politics I have stayed away this long I am content 2 sit on the sidelines & criticize every1 else.” and “Good luck with your campaign. Love, Willie”. Barr pleaded with Nelson, via Twitter, to reconsider and to contact her privately.

Perhaps Mr. Nelson discovered that it is mathematically impossible for Barr to win the Green Party nomination?

“As I celebrate my birthday today with supporters in the Bay Area, my campaign has launched the first step in our search for a vice presidential running mate. We ask for people’s guidance at our website at jillstein.org/vice_president,” said Dr. Stein.

The momentum of the campaign is building as Dr. Stein is now 18 for 18 in the Green Party state primaries, conventions and caucuses.

Dr. Stein is proposing a Green New Deal for America that, in her words:  “is an emergency program that will create 25 million jobs, end unemployment, and transition our country to a green economy. It will guarantee public higher education and Medicare for all. It will break up the big banks. And it will end corporate domination of elections.”

The link also contains interesting map-graphics concerning Green Party ballot access, Stein campaign fundraising for matching funds, and the election results in various Green Party primaries.

Goode was critical of the influence of money on politics. He reiterated that he will not accept PAC money or donations of more than $200. He did acknowledge that he has transferred monies from his Congressional account and is looking to invest “some personal money” too.

The former Representative spoke about ballot access generally, about his campaign’s ballot access, and about the situation with California very vaguely–adding that he hoped he would be on the ballot in California, but that that was “an uphill climb”, the result of which will be known in about two months.

Goode also spoke briefly about Americans Elect. He commended them for offering American voters another choice, but was critical of what he says is an invasive registration process. The entire interview lasts forty two minutes.

Attached are the [draft] minutes of the post-convention Libertarian National Committee meeting and subsequent LNC Executive Committee phone conference, as posted by LNC Secretary Ruth Bennett to the LNC-discuss list (unfortunately closed to non-LNC members at present). Please feel free to forward and distribute so that LP members can be more informed about the actions of elected and appointed party leaders, and I look forward to seeing the comments on IPR and elsewhere.

SOME THOUGHTS/CLARIFICATIONS ON THE 5/6/12 LNC MEETING

• I voted “no” on the motion to negotiate a contract with the Johnson campaign because I agreed with LNC regional representative Rich Tomasso that the full LNC should at least *see* the contract *before* it is approved, and have the opportunity to give input. This was unfortunately *not* part of the motion that was passed. I frankly question the need for the LNC to have an Executive Committee at all. The whole LNC could hold votes by email within a short time frame when rapid turn-around is needed. The argument that having a committee (the LNC) negotiating with the Johnson campaign would have been too many cooks spoiling the soup also applies (albeit to a lesser degree) to the 7-member Executive Committee. I would rather leave negotiations with the Johnson/Gray campaign(s) solely to the Chair, and have him report back to the entire LNC.

• Excellent call by Bill Redpath in asking newly chosen VP candidate Jim Gray to have the campaign include the word “libertarian” in its materials and thereby securing Gray’s promise to do so.

• Since I was not sure how I felt about the proposed new membership level structure, delaying its implementation seemed desirable, thus I voted along with the rest of the LNC to do so. Input from LP members (or anyone else dedicated to the cause of freedom) on this or any other points of LNC business is most welcome.

• Despite the supposed triumph of the radical faction at the May 2-6 Las Vegas convention, the mere 4 votes I received (including my own) to sit on the APRC (Advertising and Publication Review Committee), as opposed to 15, 16, of 17 votes received by each of the other five nominees for that committee, shows that the new LNC is perhaps not as different from the old LNC as some may be dangerously assuming. We’ve still got a long way to go before we’re out of the woods, imho. I’m guessing that those who voted for me, and thus along with myself are likely the most reform-minded LNC members were Lee Wrights, J. J. Myers, and Arvin Vorha, but if anyone cares to share knowledge to the contrary, I am open to being shown to be mistaken on that. Naturally my hope is that more discussion and working together will eventually bring more LNC members around to views that are more radical, bottom-up, and in sync with the Five Key Values of the Grassroots Libertarians Caucus which were my campaign platform (see www.groups.yahoo.com/groups/grassrootslibertarians — anyone who agrees with the 5KV is welcome to join the caucus and be added to our 79-member email list).

• On Bill Redpath’s affirmation that it was necessary, I reluctantly went along with the LNC going into a secret meeting — not that my sole nay vote would have stopped this from happening in any case. And I admit that as it turned out, I can see how the secrecy did seem to have been justified in this instance. However, I think the topic of the secret meeting should at a minimum have been described much more specifically than it was. This could have been done without giving away any of the specifics whose revelation could potentially cause problems for the party. I propose that in the future, the LNC immediately upon emerging from a secret meeting, issue a statement describing the content of the meeting as specifically as possible without jeopardizing material legitimately being kept secret, and also that there be a sunset clause limiting the duration of time for which any official secrets are kept. This of course suggests that minutes of secret sessions should be kept, and I favor that as well. In truth I am not fully convinced that the harm of revealing all such secrets outweighs the harm of having a culture in which the LNC holds proceedings kept secret from members. In this case, not bringing the issue to the LNC in the first place might have been the best option, since there was really nothing we could do about the issue anyway. Those who may feel I am being excessively “obstructionist”, failing to “pick my battles”, etc. in my new role as LNC At-Large representative, please note that I am *already* making an important compromise by seeking to find a reasonable middle ground between abolishing the culture of secrecy altogether (as my gut tells me ought to be done), and going along with the views of the LNC majority who appear to believe that secrecy is often necessary (despite the apparent resistance to naming the secrecy for what it is, rather than cloaking it in the “executive session” euphemism).

• I voted no on the appointment of Bill Redpath to be Assistant Treasurer for several reasons:
(1) This post and all other positions appointed by the LNC should be open to non-LNC members
(2) Since the post was only created by a change to the bylaws made during the convention, people should have been allowed at least a few days to spread word about the vacancy and submit nominations before a selection was made (preferably the Assistant Treasurer should be elected by delegates, not appointed).

(3) I would have preferred Joe Buchman, who ran for Treasurer, to be the Assistant Treasurer. The LNC could use more fresh blood. Redpath has been part of the insider group for a long time, and while I appreciate his hard work on ballot access and dedication to our cause, I also think he has tended to vote too often with what I have lately been calling (for want of a better term) the “top-down faction” (Starr, Root, Mattson, etc.) Lest this comment be misinterpreted, I want to stress that I bear no personal hostility toward any of these named individuals, and neither intend nor consider my comments to be uncivil or inappropriate. I simply feel that their priorities for the LP tend to be wrong for the cause of freedom, and thus I oppose their agenda and respectfully feel that our party/movement would be better off if they were not in the party’s leadership (assuming better replacements, of course). I also strongly feel that such political disagreements *should* be out in the open and stated honestly and forthrightly, so that LP members can get an accurate sense of where their elected representatives stand on the important issues and controversies in our party and movement. I understand if some people oppose me politically for this. I hope they do not hold it against me personally as I attempt to follow my conscience.

• Ruth Bennett’s minutes seem pretty good — somewhat more detailed than the minutes we’ve been getting on the California LP’s Executive Committee. I do think there is some room for improvement in capturing additional detail — my take on minutes, which is not shared by everyone, is that their purpose ought to be to present a full and accurate picture of meetings, not just what official actions were taken, so that anyone not present (or anyone with an imperfect memory who was present) can look back and get a sense of what really took place, including the discussion that produced the actions. Of course I also realize that Ruth like all of us is human and it is tough to get everything written down accurately and completely, thus the need for LNC proceedings to be videotaped. I thank non-LNC member Joe Dehn for voluntarily being there and providing that important service, and hope his video will be made available for posterity on the party’s website, LP.org.

• New Libertarian Party chair Geoff Neale has invited me to submit ideas for revising the LNC policy manual, which I also hope to see posted on LP.org if it is not already there. Again I welcome any suggestions and ideas that folks in the libertarian movement may have on this topic, and will listen to your input. Feel free to write or call me any time, and/or post your thoughts publicly. Please let me know if you do *not* wish to have any specific input you send me made public. I do reserve the option of making public any input sent to me by other elected/appointed party leaders that is political (as opposed to personal), and invite you to follow the same policy with regard to anything I may send or tell you — elected leaders should be held to a high standard of transparency when it comes to their political comments and views. If you as an elected/appointed party leader want me to keep something you tell me which concerns the party/movement confidential, you would be well advised to secure my consent to keep your remarks private *before* you express them to me.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee

(415) 625-FREE

6MAY2012Minutes

9MAY2012teleconference.minutes.pdf

Another unofficial account of the May 6 LNC meeting is posted by Dr. Joe Buchman in the comments at http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/05/lnc-elections-thread (see comments 298-321). Although the linked report is by LNC Secretary Ruth Bennett, it is also unofficial until the other LNC members have had a chance to examine and correct the record. There exists an official LNC recording of the meeting, but it is not available to non-LNC members. As far as I know there is no unofficial broadcast/recording of the meeting. Such unofficial recordings were allowed in the previous couple of terms under chairs Redpath and Hinkle; I’m not sure what the policy will be this term.

This is thread to discuss whatever applies to alt parties and independent candidates, and from time to time other stuff, but is not being discussed in a specific thread. News tips, opinions and links all welcome.

As I write this the Libertarian National convention is going on with many of the IPR writers here as delegates, so naturally we are focusing heavily on that, but we do not intend to ignore the other alt parties and independent candidates.

Anyone wishing to discuss non-LP alt party and independent topics and our other writers are certainly encouraged to post about those.

There will be many more of those stories posted this month as well – but I myself with focus only on the LP convention until it is over, other than this post.

-paulie

On May 10, a 3-judge panel of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals refused to block Pennsylvania Democrats from seizing $56,928 from Ralph Nader’s bank accounts located in Washington, D.C. Back in 2004, Nader’s petition had been held to lack sufficient valid signatures. Under Pennsylvania’s unique system for checking signatures on petitions, when a petition is found not to have enough valid signatures, court costs are levied against the candidate. Here is the decision, Nader v Serody, 09-cv-906.

Later evidence revealed that Pennsylvania Democrats used state employees, on state time, for their challenge. They also used state computers for the work of readying the challenge. Some Pennsylvania legislative employees, and even one legislator, were later sent to prison for this. The Pennsylvania state courts had ordered Nader to pay costs before any of this had become known. But the D.C. Court of Appeals said if there is any injustice, the injustice lies in the Pennsylvania state courts, and the federal system requires D.C. bank officials to enforce orders of courts from outside the District in such cases.

Ironically, the D.C. Court of Appeals took so long to decide this case, that even more revelations about the 2004 Pennsylvania process came out after the hearing in D.C. The D.C. hearing was on April 21, 2010, and the judges took over two years to decide the case.

Other non-establishment candidates have been hurt by Pennsylvania’s unique system of making candidates who lose petition challenges pay the costs, including would-be Green Party gubernatorial candidate Carl Romanelli, who was forced to pay an $80,000 petition challenge bill, and numerous other would-be candidates who never petitioned, or never filed petitions they had already collected, for fear of meeting the same fate.

Former Fifth District Congressman Virgil Goode blasted presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney as “the father of homosexual marriages” in a statement released to the news media on the eve of Romney’s visit to Liberty University this weekend.

Goode, now running for president on the Constitution Party ticket, referred to Romney’s move as Massachusetts governor to issue same-sex marriage licenses in the wake of a state-court ruling.

“Gov. Romney did not stand fast in favor of traditional marriage,” said Goode, who lost his Fifth District seat in 2008 to Democrat Tom Perriello.

Goode said he has been a “consistent supporter of defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.”

“At this point in our country’s history, we need a president who will stand firmly behind traditional marriage and the Federal Marriage Amendment. I am suspicious that Gov. Romney, if elected president, could waffle again,” Goode said.

The stakes, to Goode: “If homosexual marriages become normal across the country, the impact on states like Virginia, which prohibit gay marriage, will be huge. State taxpayers will have to pay for the expanded health insurance costs and State retirement costs. At the federal level, the impact on the Social Security Trust Fund and the Department of Defense will be significant when homosexual partners are granted the same monetary benefits that heterosexual married couples have under current Social Security law and provisions covering military spouses,” he said.

By way of contrast, Libertarian Presidential Candidate Gary Johnson has criticized Obama and Romney as being insufficiently supportive of equal marriage rights for Gays and Lesbians, while likely Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein welcomes Obama’s new position on marriage equality.

Per wikipedia Loving v. Virginia

, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), was a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, declared Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute, the “Racial Integrity Act of 1924″, unconstitutional, thereby overturning Pace v. Alabama (1883) and ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States.

Germany’s Pirate Party won seats in North Rhine-Westphalia, making it their fourth state parliament.

The Pirate Party has grown in strength recently with its calls for transparency and internet freedom.

Nationally, Sunday’s election will not change the balance of power, whatever the outcome, but opposition leaders warn it may send an important signal ahead of national elections expected in late 2013.

Left out

Official results give the Social Democrats (SPD) 39.1%, the Christian Democrats (CDU) 26.3%, the Greens 11.3%, the Free Democrats (FDP) 8.6%, the Pirates 7.8% and the Left, 2.5%, reported AP news agency.

The FDP, the CDU’s national coalition partner, performed better than expected, increasing their vote by nearly two percentage points and thereby giving the lie to speculation that they might fail to win seats.

The Left, which won 11 seats at the last election in 2010, failed to pass the 5% threshold and are out of the state parliament.

When the CDU and FDP recently lost elections in the northern state of Schleswig-Holstein, Mrs Merkel’s party scored its lowest tally there for 50 years.

North Rhine-Westphalia has a history of influencing national politics.

Sign The Petition to Open The Presidential Debates

The goal is to send one million signatures to the “Commission on Presidential Debates” by September 1st. We hope this will encourage the commission to consider opening up the Presidential debates to more than two parties. Please sign below if you support this cause. Thank You!

They also have links to share the site via facebook and twitter.

Dear paulie,

Today, like almost every day this year, is a work day for Jill Stein. She’s been up since early this morning doing what you expect from our presidential candidate.

A newspaper interview.
A radio interview.
A magazine interview.

Phone calls. Meetings. Travel. More phone calls.

Today is also Jill Stein’s birthday. But she is not alone today!

Just down the hall from me, here at national headquarters in Wisconsin, a crowd of volunteers and staff are gathered around a computer, video conferencing with Jill and her two sons as well as supporters across the country.

We just finished singing happy birthday to Jill. And you can wish her a happy birthday too.

Yesterday, for Mother’s Day, the campaign sent a message entitled “Put a Mom in the White House.”

At this point it appears likely that Stein will be the only woman on enough state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning the presidential election, although it is still possible that Americans Elect could nominate a woman.

And from another update from the Stein campaign today:

After winning Green Party primaries in Maryland and Delaware, Dr. Jill Stein announced this weekend that she crossed the 50% threshold to winning the Green Party’s 2012 presidential nomination. With 200.5 delegates required to win the nomination, and 105.5 delegates in hand, Dr. Stein has moved from frontrunner to prospective nominee. She has won over 75% of all delegates allocated, with the next nearest candidate, Roseanne Barr, at 14%.

“I am thrilled to be well on my way to representing the Green Party in this year’s presidential race,” said Dr. Stein, who is beginning her search for a vice presidential running mate. “We’re the only national party that isn’t corporately owned, and I am proud to stand for those who are committed to putting their votes where their values are.”

“As I celebrate my birthday today with supporters in the Bay Area, my campaign has launched the first step in our search for a vice presidential running mate. We ask for people’s guidance at our website at jillstein.org/vice_president,” said Dr. Stein.

The momentum of the campaign is building as Dr. Stein is now 18 for 18 in the Green Party state primaries, conventions and caucuses.

Dr. Stein is proposing a Green New Deal for America that, in her words: “is an emergency program that will create 25 million jobs, end unemployment, and transition our country to a green economy. It will guarantee public higher education and Medicare for all. It will break up the big banks. And it will end corporate domination of elections.”

This campaign will not be the first time that Dr. Stein and Mitt Romney have faced off. The last time was in the 2002 Massachusetts gubernatorial debates where media accounts described Dr. Stein as the biggest winner of those debates, and in one case as “the only adult in the room.”

Carla Howell, currently the Executive Director of the national Libertarian Party HQ, was also a candidate in that same election, for the same office.