The Alaskan Independence Party is continuing to stick with Chuck Baldwin as its presidential candidate. The party has turned in its paperwork to have the Constitution Party national nominees on the AIP’s line.
According to an interview with Bob Bird, the Alaskan Independence Party’s U.S. Senate candidate, posted at www.independentpoliticalreport.com, the Alaskan Independence Party is not currently pleased with Sarah Palin. Palin supports a natural gas pipeline from the North Shore of Alaska through Canada and down to the lower 48 states. The Alaskan Independence Party prefers a natural gas pipeline south to Valdez, where the natural gas could be liquefied and sent in ships to various ports on both sides of the Pacific, North American and Asian.
UPDATE: ABC News carried this story on September 1 about Palin’s membership in the Alaskan Independence Party before 1996. Thanks to Eric Dondero’s LibertarianRepublican blog for that link; see it here. The ABC Story quotes Lynette Clark as saying Clark likes Palin, but can’t understand why she would support John McCain; Clark also confirms Palin’s pre-1996 membership. Finally, Clark notes that Palin’s husband was also a member of the Alaskan Independence Party before 1996; in 1996 he switched to being registered in no political party.
Did Palin support Perot in 1992 and 1996?
Palin supported Pat Buchanan in both 1996 and 1999. Pat was seeking the Republican nomination both those years. He quit the Republican race in October 1999 and started seeking the Reform nomination, but Palin wasn’t interested in Buchanan as a Reform Party candidate.
Look, keep talking about this and that on-line. What really matters is what in the world is the 3rd party movement going to do about this?
Here’s one of our own being viciously attacked by the leftwing media, and you guys are debating whether or not she voted for Buchanan or the Reform Party in 1992? Who the heck cares?
Talk about how you’re going to get back at Daily Kos, ABC News, CNN and the other Far Left media for bashing a woman for being a member of a 3rd political party.
Here’s one of our own being viciously attacked by the leftwing media,
In what sense is she “one of our own?”
Talk about how you’re going to get back at Daily Kos, ABC News, CNN and the other Far Left media for bashing a woman for being a member of a 3rd political party.
A former member. But are they bashing her for belonging to a third party, or for the particular third party she belonged to? There is nothing wrong with bashing someone’s membership in a third party if it is based on your disagreements with that party’s stances (as opposed to just being against third parties in general).
and you guys are debating whether or not she voted for Buchanan or the Reform Party in 1992? Who the heck cares?
This website is interested mainly in issues of ballot access for third parties; its interest in Palin is largely based on whether or not her background has enough third party activity in it to make third party activity more mainstream. So many of the people who read this website care.
This website advocates easier ballot access, not a particular third party. So I don’t think that the fact that you label Palin a “libertarian Republican” makes supporting her an obligation of this site.
Sarah Palin wants to keep marijuana illegal. She says legalizing it would send the wrong message to her children.
Richard,
looks like one of her children has the right uhm fucking idea?
Actually the media needs to get the story straight about the AIP. In the 90s Alaska had a governor from the AIP, Walter Hickell, who didn’t believe in Alaskan secession himself. As you all know, the party now is affiliated with the Constitution Party nationally. The reason Palin was in the AIP is because, since the AIP had ballot access, the party has been co-opted by different independent and third party groups. That’s the story we need to get out. There’s a lot of misinformation around because the media is generally undereducated about third parties and ballot access, and we need to use this opportunity to educate them.
“Talk about how you’re going to get back at Daily Kos, ABC News, CNN and the other Far Left media for bashing a woman for being a member of a 3rd political party.”
First of all, WTF is ‘Get Back At’ supposed to mean? Second of all, I doubt your silly threats would mean nothing to these groups…. grow up.
And lastly, it’s not bashing anyone for being a member of a third party that people are doing – it’s utter confusion at the lack of vetting by McCain and his puppet masters that have most people up in blogging arms, coupled with his touting ‘lack of experience’ arguments prior to the introduction of this little known person.
…. get back at them …. lol … that’s funny.
TBaker,
You really don’t know how much McCain vetted her. Just because these issues are coming out doesn’t mean McCain didn’t know about them
Eric,
Since you know a lot about this you should add an explanation of Palin’s history with third parties to her Wikipedia article.
I’ve already added an addendum to the mention of the AIP, noting Walter Hickel and the Constitution Party and the Alaskan Libertarian endorsement. But there’s a lot more relevant information and I wouldn’t have the sources that you do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin
It would also be meaningful to note her general support of third parties.
I don’t do Wikipedia. It’s entirely a bastion of Far Left Liberal hackers from Daily Kos, Moveon.org and other Soros-backed groups. It’s just another avenue on the web to spread whacko America-hating Leftist ideals.
The Alaskan Independence Party is not affiliated with the Constitution Party. There is a difference between the Alaskan Independence Party choosing to nominate the presidential candidate of the Constituton Party, and the Alaskan Independence Party being a state affiliate of the Constitution Party. By analogy, the Vermont Progressive Party nominated Ralph Nader in 2000, but that certainly didn’t mean the Vermont Progressive Party became the affiliate of the Green Party in Vermont. Similarly, the Independence Party of New York nominated John Hagelin in 2000, but by no means therefore became the NY state affiliate of the Natural Law Party.
Please have the State Board correct a major typo on their unofficial candidate page..
They Show both Baldwin and Barr as Libertarian, Baldwin is AIP, right?
DailyKos is now savaging Sarah Palin over her ties to the AIP. It’s the headline story.
How will the 3rd party movement react? Will they come to her defense, or will they sit on their hands?
OREGON REPUBLICANS & DEMOCRATS TEAM UP TO END THIRD PARTY COMPETITION
By NWV News Director, Jim Kouri
Posted 1:00 AM Eastern
August 25, 2008
© NewsWithViews.com competition
Oregon voters may find themselves being confused over a ballot initiative being added this coming Election. According to observers, who have researched how Measure 65 would change their state’s election process, Oregon voters would be limited to choosing between only two candidates even if they are both members of the same party.
During the primaries, Oregonians will all be given the same ballot, regardless of their party affiliation. The two top vote-getters will move on to the general election, even if they both happen to be Republicans, Democrats or one of each.
“In other words, it eliminates partisan primary elections for state and local political offices in Oregon. Instead, all candidates for a political office, regardless of party affiliation, would appear on the same ballot, and all voters, regardless of party registration, could vote in the primary. Only the top two primary vote-getters for each office would be on the November election ballot,” claims conservative strategist Mike Baker.
Former Oregon Secretary of State Phil Keisling, a Democrat, teamed up with a liberal Republican predecessor, Norma Paulus, to sponsor Measure 65. He said he’ll be watching this Tuesday’s election results in Washington for evidence he can use to make the case to Oregonians that voters get more choices under the top two format. Voters in Washington State already passed a similar measure.
“If passed, Measure 65 will spell the end of all third parties in Oregon. They will NEVER be on the General Ballot again if this measure passes and will most likely lose their certification to be on ANY ballot in the state of Oregon,” former Oregon gubernatorial candidate and news anchorwomen Mary Starret told NewsWithViews.com.
During her run as the Constitution Party candidate for governor in 2006, the Republicans attempted to exclude Starret from the ballot, but the Oregon court and secretary of state ruled in her favor.
“If this process spreads across the United States, third-party candidates such as Bob Barr (Libertarian Party) and Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party) will be excluded from state ballots,” said Baker.
“This is an attempt by liberals to stack the deck against true representatives of the people and make voting by citizens almost a meaningless gesture,” he added.
An immigrant from a Communist country interviewed by NewsWithViews.com said “This is exactly what they have in communist Russia. The only choices people have are either Communist candidate A or Communist candidate B. All other competition is eliminated,” he added. “Khrushchev was right when he pounded his shoe on the desk at the United Nations in the 60’s and said that Americans will accept communism and not even know it.” “The difference is, here in America most people are gullible and ignorant of Communism and are freely forging their own chains of slavery and voting away their freedoms” added the immigrant.
Washington’s voters adopted a “top two” system in 2004. But legalities kept it on hold until a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last March allows the current primary to be conducted as a top two format. Washington voters will use the format to select finalists for state, legislative and judicial offices.
Organizations and activists on the left and right of the political system agree that Measure 65 is bad law. For example, Brianne Hyder, spokeswoman for the Oregon Republican Party, questioned the value of reforming a nominating process that seems to work just fine.
“The closed primary system that we have now has been working for us, and opening the primary is going to create more problems than it’s going to solve,†she said in a press release.
“The time and resources of the legislature are already strained by efforts to deal with the critical issues facing Oregon, such as education, public safety and others. Measure 65 would make it easy for groups or individuals to literally paralyze the legislative process by referring large numbers of administrative rules,” said their spokesperson.
Democratic Party of Oregon spokesman Marc Seigel told reporters that while Washington’s advocates of the top two primary are touting predictions of higher turnout, interest in the general election could wane if candidate choices are limited to only two candidates.
“One of the concerns is that the top two primary will reduce participation and Washington could be one of many examples of that,†Seigel told a reporter from the Register-Guard.
Joseph Cornwell, vice chairman of the Libertarian Party of Oregon, said his counterparts in Washington oppose the new format because it makes it harder for third parties to access the general election ballot. “It’s not exciting,†he said. “It’s basically taking a choice away from the voters by pushing out any of the smaller parties.â€
“It will also guarantee there will probably NEVER be another REPUBLICAN on the General Ballot in Multnomah County – EVER!!! There will only be two Democrats to choose from. So much for diversity and choice!!” Suzanne Brownlow of the Constitution Party of Oregon told NewsWithViews.com.
Meanwhile, former NYPD detective and security firm owner Sid Frances believes this spells the beginning of the end of the conservative wing of the Republican Party, which means “the end of the Republican Party as we knew it.”
“This fall in Washington, for example, no Republicans are even running for attorney general or the Fourth Congressional District in the upcoming November election,” said Francis.
Under current election regulations, party members get to put their top choice forward — through the major parties’ May primaries and the minor parties’ nominating conventions. The Libertarians will hold their convention in Portland while the Pacific-Greens nominated candidates in Eugene for the general election ballot.
The conventions assure minor-party access to the November ballot. But under the top two system, they’d appear on the primary ballot but would not necessarily go on to the general election.
“The important elections take place in the fall,†Cornwell said. “That’s when (people) look to see the lawn signs come out … and start reading the voters’ pamphlet.â€
Observers in other states are concerned about this latest political “scheme.” Mike Baker, a political strategist in New Jersey, views Measure 65 as a way to eventually limit the number of political parties participating in local and national elections.
“Slowly but surely, Americans are being denied fair elections. As it is the system already favors the two major political parties, both of which have been taken over by liberal-left politicians and activists,” claims Baker.
Baker told NewsWithViews.com that Measure 65 will have serious consequences even for the two major political parties.
“Try to imagine the sheer horror of having both Democrat and Republican Parties under the control of the liberal-left. It’ll be the downfall of the United States and will open the door to the Internationalists who believe America is simply a cash-cow for the world,” said Baker.
© 2008 NWV – All Rights Reserved
http://newswithviews.com/NWV-News/news100.htm
Does Chuck Baldwin have a stance on the pipeline issue? Does he stand with the AIP who want to send U.S. natural gas overseas? or does he stand with Palin who wants U.S. natural gas to be used by and for Americans?
You can make more money selling natural gas abroad or you can help break America’s dependence on foreign energy by using our own resources.
I support the Palin position over the AIP position.
Eric,
I have been defending Sarah Palin in my blogs since she was named VP.
Michael Thompson
National Chairman
New American Independent Party
“DailyKos is now savaging Sarah Palin over her ties to the AIP. It’s the headline story.
How will the 3rd party movement react? Will they come to her defense, or will they sit on their hands?”
Why should they come to her defense? They’re not attacking her because it’s a third party – they’re attacking her because of what that third party apparently believes.
She’s not “one of our own”, she’s a Republican who used to be a member of the AIP. I don’t agree with their politics, so I won’t defend their politics.
The only possible way I’ll defend the AIP is if someone calls them “spoilers”.
Richard,
From what I understand the Indepedence Party of NY was affiliated with the Reform Party, and nominated Hagelin because they were upset about the national nomination of Buchanan.
Do you know that the AIP hasn’t acted as an affiliate of the Constitution Party?
And to correct the facts, Hagelin was vying or the nomination of the Reform Party in 2000.
Leaders of the Alaskan Independence Party are just as focused on keeping their own party “independent” as they are in keeping the state of Alaska “independent”. Alaskan Independence Party leaders say they don’t like the other minor parties in Alaska (Libertarian, Green) because those are nationally-organized parties, controlled in the national structure by non-Alaskans. So it just goes against their natural grain to want to affiliate their Alaskan Independence Party with any nationally-organized party.
Richard is correct. The AIP wants to remain “independent” and not affiliated with a national party.
The AIP does not meet the requirements to be an affiliate of the CP because the do not choose to. They have been allowed to vote for Prez and VP at the convention because they have agreed in those years to place the CP candidate on the ballot. Also Bob Bird AIP candidate for US Senate was endorsed by the CP by a montion at the convention.
Alaska Mormons do not vote for Baldwin. He is anti- Mormon. A vote for Baldwin is a vote for Huckabee.
Chuck Baldwin is not anti-Mormon.