TIME Magazine Says it Costs $20 Million to Get an Independent Presidential Candidate on the Ballot in All States

TIME Magazine’s August 24, 2015 issue has a story, “The Knives Come Out for Donald Trump, but he’s not going anywhere.” It says, “Mounting an independent campaign would require Trump to collect hundreds of thousands of signatures to get on ballots in 50 states, which would mean an investment of at least double the more than $10 million Trump has earmarked for his candidacy.” Thanks to Oliver Hall for this news.


Comments

TIME Magazine Says it Costs $20 Million to Get an Independent Presidential Candidate on the Ballot in All States — 15 Comments

  1. $20 million for a 50 state independent candidacy sounds l little light to me. Although never publicly announced, at least one political commentator noted that Americans Elect planned to spend $35 million for ballot access in 2012 for their presidential candidate as a political party.

  2. Don’t use Amerioans’ Elect’s figure for the purpose of making a realistic estimate. After all, Ralph Nader got on the ballot in 2008 in 45 states and he probably spent less than $1 million.

    Americans Elect was very wasteful, especially its decision to collect 1,030,040 valid signatures in California to get the party on the ballot, instead of the easier registration drive which now requires about 60,000 members. Also there was Americans Elect’s decision to qualify as a party in Tennessee even though an independent presidential candidate needs only 275 signatures and that is not due until August. The Tennessee party petition for 2012 was 40,042.

  3. On the ballot in every state would appear the name Natural Born Citizen either as an independent or as the candidate of the Natural Born Citizen Party ballot line

  4. can still be elected by the vetted Natural Born Citizen Party successful presidential state electors. These NBCP electors having beaten GOP/REP electors in the general election on the various state Rep/GOP ballot line(s).

  5. Richard – As a computer guy, I’m reminded of the old adage that when a team says the project is 95% complete, expect to spend as much time and money on the last 5% as the first 95%, so I note that 45 states isn’t 50.

    My comment assumed a pure purchased-signatures approach like Americans Elect. Trump might be able to do it for less than $20m with a mostly volunteer operation if he gets started now. FWIW, I’m a Trump supporter, mostly because I detest the GOP establishment, and I suspect that the GOP establishment will be throwing everything they’ve got at Trump to stop his nomination if he decides to stay in the GOP, making the pushback against Reagan in 1980 look like a walk in the woods. Whichever way Trump goes (GOP or I) is fine with me because the result could be a significant rearrangement of the “conservative” wing of the one party system we have now.

  6. Don —

    “As a computer guy, I’m reminded of the old adage that when a team says the project is 95% complete, expect to spend as much time and money on the last 5% as the first 95%, so I note that 45 states isn’t 50.”

    Assuming that was accurate, then double the $1 million figure Richard used and it’s still not anywhere close to $20 million.

    That $20m number is total nonsense.

  7. Perot figured out the advantage of creating his own political party to make the ballot access drive easier. I’m not sure Trump would do that, as his conceited nature would conflict with the nuisance of party organization and dealing with others in the party.

    If he didn’t go with a party, at the going rate of $4/signature, California by itself would cost Trump $4 million. As California represents less than 15% of the population of the US, even recognizing that some states are much less onerous, a planning figure of at least $20 million for all 50 states seems to me to be prudent.

    I suspect all of this is moot. He’s doing just fine on his road to the GOP nomination, and he is smart enough to recognize that an independent run would most surely result in a Democrat being elected president.

  8. Natural Born Citizen Party will use the excess of 50 million vetted natural born citizens combined with the $5 billion dollar 2016 campaign ballot access fund to elect the 50 state ballot place holder “Natural Born Citizen” ballot lines to defeat the DNC and RNC establishment candidates assuming the fix is in at conventions/primaries.

    cc: Donald Trump

  9. Nader spent more than $1 million on ballot access, but he did not spend anywhere near Americans Elect money, however, keep in mind the following facts:

    1) When Nader ran as an independent in 2004 and in 2008, he actually did accept the nominations of a few small parties that were only on the ballot in one or a few states, such as, in some states he was on as the Reform Party candidate, and I know he got on the ballot in California in 2008 as the Peace And Freedom Party candidate.

    2) There are some states where it is actually easier to qualify a new party for the ballot than it is to qualify an independent candidate for President, and in these states Nader supporters formed new parties like the Independent Party and the Ecology Party to take advantage of the easier signature requirements.

    3) Nader was a long time political activist that had a big cult following, and this meant that he inspired a lot of people (relatively speaking) to work to get him on the ballot as unpaid volunteers (he had paid people as well, but his volunteers helped bring his costs down).

    If Trump runs as a straight independent for President, as in no party with ballot access nominates him, and he does not form new parties in the states where it is easier to get on the ballot that way, I expect that he would have to shell out a lot more money than Nader did. Maybe not Americans Elect kind of money, but then again, Americans Elect started petitioning for 2012 in the fall of 2010, so Trump would be getting a much later start than Americans Elect, which would drive up his costs, and this could mean that he may have to spend Americans Elect kind of money to get on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC. I doubt that Trump would get as much support from volunteers as Nader did as well.

  10. I also recall hearing that there were a few states where Republicans kicked in money to put Nader on the ballot. I think Missouri in 2004 was one of them. If true, which I am pretty sure it is, this also would have helped keep Nader’s costs down.

    There is no way in hell that Trump would get on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC as an independent for $2 million. Even in a best case scenario I bet he’d have to spend quite a bit more than that.

  11. It all depends on how efficient a campaign is and how many volunteers are willing to line up to help.

    Currently, Trump can fly into town and fill up a decent sized football stadium in almost any state. The number of wildly enthusiastic volunteers he could tap into would make securing a spot on the general election ballot a breeze in most states. And when he encountered difficulty, he could throw some cash at the operation to make it happen.

    Having said that, it’s all academic. He’s in the high 30% range in most national polls (within the Republican primary field) and it looks like he’s about to confirm that he will remain a Republican for the duration of the race.

  12. Ross Perot was pretty popular back in 1992 and 1996, and he still had to shell out millions of dollars to get on the ballot.

  13. Nader did have paid petition circulators in Missouri in 2004, because I know people who worked on it. They must not have collected enough valid signatures.

Leave a Reply

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

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