82% of Voters Will See at least One Libertarian on their Ballots

There is at least one Libertarian on the ballot across the U.S, in areas containing 81.9% of the voters, for the November 2010 election.  The Libertarian Party, as is usual in midterm years, is on the ballot in more places than any other minor party.

For 2010, the equivalent percentages for other leading minor parties are:  Green, 54.6%; Constitution, 39.0%; Working Families, 8.8%.  Of course, most of the Working Families Party nominees are also Democratic Party nominees.

Also, 7.3% of the voters will see a candidate on the ballot with the Tea Party label, but there is no nationally-organized political party with that name.  Voters will see the Tea Party label in Florida, Nevada, and in a single U.S. House district in New Jersey.  And, 9.5% of voters will see an Independence Party nominee on their ballots, but there is no national political party with that name, just three particular state parties in Minnesota, New York, and South Carolina.


Comments

82% of Voters Will See at least One Libertarian on their Ballots — 12 Comments

  1. The day is coming when the Libertarian Party will be visible to 100% of the population.

  2. even with empty chairs Libs are at least on the ballot —— but on the West Coast they have been known as non responsive candidate[s] for decades ……….

  3. Libertarian Party Future Looks Good
    In About 150,000 Years

    This is no time to boast, MP Richard Winger [Libertarian].

    True, under The USA Parliament, Inc.’s system of pure proportional representation (PR), the Libertarian Party regularly garners 22% to 33% of the representation year after year.

    But at current pace of the USA-PAR’s growth, if the USA-PAR were to somehow become as self sustaining as the Libertarian Party has been under single winner districts and plurality elections, according to my estimates we’d see the Libertarian Party represented proportionately in the real government in about 150,000 years in the future.

    http://www.usparliament.org

    –James O. Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    Volunteer Vote Counter

    “Why do you THINK they called it Google?”

  4. While it is true that there is no nationwide party associated with the Tea Party Movement, there is, however, a national party by that name. The Boston Tea Party of the United States (http://www.bostontea.us), a breakaway libertarian group.

  5. Richard:

    Considering that the Libertarian Party is roughly 20 years older than the Constitution and Green National parties, what was the percentage of voters who had a
    Libertarian candidate on their ballot in 1990? Also, in how many states do these 4 parties have at least ONE candidate for a State-wide office? And do your
    calculations for the Constitution Party include the
    California contingent?

  6. What percent for Socialists? Dan La Botz is running for Senate here (with a party label on the ballot). There are a lot of write-in and independent Socialist candidates, though…

  7. For #6, California is included in the Constitution Party figure, because most of the statewide nominees of the AIP are loyal to the Constitution Party.

    For #7, the Socialist Party is on the ballot in just two states this year, Ohio and Vermont. They only add up to 4.6% of the voters. I didn’t want to get into listing parties under 5% because then I would need to do it for still more parties. Normally the Socialist Party gets on the ballot in New Jersey, but this year it didn’t.

  8. I used all partisan offices for state or federal office, whether statewide, or US House, or state legislature.

    I’m sorry I haven’t answered all of the questions posed in comment #6. I will try later. Those are tough questions.

  9. Deemer: According to the Ballot Access News of Oct. 9, 1990 (available elsewhere on this web site), the Libertarians had candidates on the ballot in 1990 in front of 42.4% of voters.

  10. Chelene nightingale for governor polling at less than 1% per NEW USC/TIMES POLL oct. 24. Dale Ogden got vote. Maybe Nightingale saying she is winning, to keep funds coming in should stop. Its not right to take money for a dead campaign.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *