1. If they succeed they will probably wish that they had made the name “Progressive Green” or “Green Progressive” so that votes in Missouri would always be linked to the Green Party in the reports issued about elections.

2. Gene for complex legal reasons the Green Party affiliate in Missouri can not use Green in the name. There’s a local unaffiliated group in one city already using the name.

3. The Green Party needs to not only qualify for the ballot in Missouri as the Progressive Party, but it ought to seriously consider changing its name nationally to the Progressive Party.
   The label Progressive Party has been used in several national elections. The name is a generic name, but represents reform and liberal-oriented viewpoints. The name “Green Party” has limitations. It comes across as a one-issue party, mainly concerned about the environment.
   But will the Green Party leaders take advantage of this opportunity? I doubt it!

4. I’m not sure if that’s even possible for the GP to try nationally, Gene. For instance, there’s already a Progressive Party in Vermont that’s not a GP affiliate. And besides, once people actually hear what Greens have to say (Greens do make it into Congressional debates at times), and when voters do the simple process of researching the party’s website or sites like I Side With, it becomes obvious that the GP isn’t a one-issue party.

5. Correction: My previous comment was meant for Alabama Independent, not Gene.

6. Any national use of the name Progressive Party ended with the 1948 Henry Wallace/Communist-run Progressive Party.

7. Can they use out of state petitioners?

8. yes.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.