Ever since 2005, the Constitution Party has experienced internal dissention on the issue of how to handle state party leaders who do not completely agree with the national platform. The state chair of the Nevada branch of the party does not completely agree with the national party’s abortion plank. Some supporters of that plank then tried to expel the Nevada branch of the party, but that move was defeated at the last national party meeting.
Since then, two ballot-qualified state units of the party have expressed displeasure with that outcome, by leaving the national party. They are the Montana and Oregon state units. However, the Idaho and Michigan state affiliates recently rejected the idea of leaving the national party.
Since 2006 is not a presidential election year, the result of state parties disaffiliating from a national party has no practical consequences. However, that would not be true in a presidential election year.
That is a fair and accurate assessment of the current situation. Also, the first sentence of your third paragraph keeps this in proper perspective.
Yes, but very soon the presidential election season starts in earnest and the state parties will have to come together before that time to support a national candidate or risk a Reform like implosion.
Even if those state parties are not part of the national Constitution Party they can still nominate the parties presidential candidate.
Wow, I thought Michigan would disaffiliate. Good for them!
I just surfed in and found your site, I really enjoyed the visit and hope to come back soon. nice Site!
I find this blog very interesting, i will be here everyday till now. Greetings