Sanford Levinson, a well-known law professor at the University of Texas, has this column at the legal blog Balkinization about Americans Elect. Professor Levinson suggests that Americans Elect will nominate General David Petraeus for President. Petraeus is retired.
Levinson also worries that a strong showing by Americans Elect would prevent anyone from getting a majority of the electoral college vote, thus letting the U.S. House choose the President. He seems unaware that Americans Elect has already provided that if no one gets a majority in the electoral college, Americans Elect would hold another nominating event on the internet to let its members decide whom Americans Elect presidential electors should support in December in the electoral college voting.
Levinson also criticizes Americans Elect because it doesn’t plan to run any candidates for Congress. But, even though he is right that this is what Americans Elect says now, Americans Elect will always be free to change its mind on that. And in many states, it will be entitled to nominate by primary for all partisan office, and individuals will be free to file to run for Congress and other office, regardless of the wishes of the founders of Americans Elect. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
Hmmm. David Petraeus the AE nominee? I think not. If you look at their website and the demographics of who AE people generally are, it’s a fat chance that he’ll be chosen. More likely Bloombe…oops, did I say that out loud?
Pingback: Law Professor Suggests Americans Elect Presidential Nominee will be David Petraeus | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
I wonder what happens if the California petition is successfully challenged.
So otherwise if Americans elect do have primaries, wouldn’t that apply to other 3rd parties as well. I know many 3rd parties don’t wish to have primaries. Would this AE be considered a major or minor party?
#3, California doesn’t have a procedure for individuals to challenge petitions. The county clerks check petitions and if they find enough valid signatures, the petition is approved.
#4, generally “major party” and “minor party” are political science terms, not legal terms. In my usage, I consider a “major party” one that has a realistic chance of winning control of the government. So, in my opinion, Americans Elect is a minor party just now, but there is always the possibility that it could become a major party, although that seems unlikely just now, especially since it doesn’t plan to run candidates for Congress or state office.
Do the various MORONS want a Civil WAR II ???
See the Prez gerrymander plurality math in 1860.
Count the about 620,000 DEAD Americans in 1861-1865 on both sides with multi-thousands more mentally and physically maimed for life — no eyes, hands, arms, feet, legs — DIRECTLY due to such 1860 Prez math.
Abolish the super-timebomb Electoral College N-O-W.
P.R. and App.V.
Petraeus!
I knew he was behind this all along. Chime in the vast military complex conspiracy theory.
Levinson may be a well known lawyer from my alma mater, but is he well known for something good or is it for making knuckleheaded statement like in his blog.
America Elect is part of the Obama campaign to steal the 2012 election. The Dirty Trick strategy is obvious to prevent the anti Obama votes to go to a third party candidate. Perot, Nader and Buchanan, third party candidates, did change the outcome of the presidential election.
Nader received 100,000 votes in Florida that would have gone to Gore who then would have won Florida and would have defeated Bush for president.
#9
Tony, you sound like a double agent trying to protect Obama. If a centrist AE candidate is nominated he/she will pull votes from Obama potentially throwing it to the GOP. So shouldn’t you be shrilling “America Elect is part of the GOP campaign to steal the 2012 election!”
What is a so-called *centrist* in this New Age of more and more left/right control freak statism ??? —
i.e. having a tribal gerrymander monarchy/oligarchy regime trying to control everybody and everything in the U.S.A. 24/7 via the regime laws, regulations, executive orders, court judgments, etc.
See the books 1984 and Animal Farm — with some folks even more equal than others.
#5 Elections Code 5100(c) under which Americans Elect is attempting to qualify is explicitly for purposes of qualifying for the primary. The basis for qualification of a presidential candidate for the general election is participation in the primary. Can the Californian Americans Elect party prevent a presidential preference primary next June, or if it does, can it have a presidential candidate on the ballot?
Of course, having a congressional or legislative candidate express a preference for the Americans Elect party is not dependent on the party qualifying, but simply on the candidate changing his voter registration.
#12, there are lots of precedents from California alone that not all qualified parties participate in a presidential primary. California has had a presidential primary starting in 1912 and in most presidential election years, no qualified minor party in California participated in a presidential primary.
In Arizona in 1996, a state court ruled that if the Democratic Party and the Libertarian Party didn’t want a presidential primary, the state should not hold presidential primaries for those parties.
All minor party presidential primaries are beauty contests anyway, except the Green Party has internal party rules that say presidential primaries are binding. Presidential primaries don’t actually nominate any presidential candidate. They are for the purpose of electing delegates to a national convention.
#13 Americans Elect is filing under 5100(c).
5100(c) says that by signing the petition “[the] voters desire to have [the party] participate in that primary election.” Further each page of the petition must be captioned in 18-point boldface type, with the name of the party and the words “Petition to participate in the
primary election.”
The purpose of the petition is to participate in the primary. If it was intended for some other purpose, it is fraudulent.
It would not be unreasonable to read the California Constitution as amended by Proposition 14, to require a direct presidential primary. It literally says that the State may not deny the party having its top vote-getter on the general election ballot. So the legislature could not pass a law saying that the candidate in 2nd place would appear on the ballot. But that is a rather ridiculous presumption that the State would pass such a law. The more logical interpretation is that it requires the State to ensure that the winner of a partisan primary appear on the general election ballot.
Going back to 1980, it appears that the qualified parties have been on the primary ballot, though the Libertarians did not always have presidential candidates. In 1992, the Green Party only elected central committee members, so I’m assuming there was an issue with the timing of their qualification(?)
In 2004, the Natural Law Party had a primary ballot, but no candidates.
The California Constitution has been changed several times with regard to presidential primaries since 1912 (the so-called open presidential primary; the 2004 wrong-footing amendment; and Proposition 14). So the history of minor parties prior to the modern 3rd-party era, beginning with the qualification of the American Independent and Peace&Freedom parties in 1968 is not relevant. Would you know if the AI and P&F parties had primaries in 1968, 1972, or 1976?
Amusing tidbit: The San Francisco voter’s pamphlet from 1980, when punch-card ballots were used, said that most counties gave voters from the American Independent, Libertarian, and Peace&Freedom parties a paper clip and a block of styrofoam and sent the voters off to a corner to punch their ballot. But San Francisco set up a voting booth for the three parties combined. The pamphlet then said, since the voter was astute enough to not register with the Democratic or Republican parties, that they should be able to skip to the page for their party with no problem. Then in the next paragraph, and if you do, our computer is smart enough to not count votes in the wrong primary.