California held a presidential primary for six parties on June 7, including the American Independent Party. None of the seven candidates whose names were printed on the AIP ballot were well-known. It is now been determined that approximately two-thirds of the voters who used an AIP ballot wrote in someone for president, instead of voting for any of the listed candidates.
Amador County election officials kindly made the write-ins available, even though there were no declared write-in presidential candidates in the AIP primary. Donald Trump received the most write-in votes, and polled substantially more votes than anyone listed on the ballot. Bernie Sanders received the 2nd highest number of votes, and Hillary Clinton received the third highest. Thanks to Mark Seidenberg for this news.
So the question is, will Tom Hoefling honor the wishes of the majority of AIP voters in California and let Donald Trump have his party’s nomination?
Does California law allow Donald Trump to be nominated by two parties?
California appears to prohibit fusion.
California explicitly permits fusion for president. However even if Donald Trump wanted the AIP nomination, it is not likely that the Republican candidates for presidential elector in California would accept the AIP cross-nomination. Back in 1940 Wendell Willkie was on the November ballot in California as the nominee of the Republican and Townsend Parties. And in 1928 Herbert Hoover was on the November ballot in California as Republican and Prohibition.
Richard, Thanks for the information, but I am wondering how a fusion ticket would work if their candidate won the majority of a state’s vote. How would the presidential electors be determined since I am assuming that each party would have submitted their own slate. That may be why the Republicans would want to abstain here.
Whenever two parties use fusion in a presidential election, they must work out a single joint ticket of presidential elector candidates. The Republican Party and the American Independent Party might make a deal in which 53 of the candidates are chosen by the Republican Party and 2 are chosen by the AIP. Then both parties would jointly nominate that same slate of 55 individuals.
How many trillions of ANTI-Democracy machinations are possible with the EVIL rotted Electoral College ???
Abolish the E.C. NOW.
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
DR – the electoral college is not going away unless the entire Constitution is tossed out via coup d’état or a break up of the USA (e.g. the breakup of the USSR). Get over it.
Thank you to Richard Winger, Mark Seidenberg, and Amador County election officials for making this information available. (I have lived in Amador City in the past. Amador City and Amador County are truly wonderful places to live. I believe that Amador City is the smallest incorporated city in the State of California. Jackson is the County Seat of Amador County.)
If I had been registered with either the American Independent, Green, Republican, or Peace and Freedom Party (all of which I have been registered with in the past); I would have written in Senator Bernie Sanders for President of the United States. Since I wanted to have my vote counted, I changed my registration from Peace and Freedom to Democratic on February 5th of this year. Consequently, I voted for Senator Bernie Sanders for President and for Rep. Loretta Sanchez for U.S. Senator — and I am sure that my votes were counted.
By the way, I have never missed voting in an election in my life (not even a small, school board election). My first vote was in California’s Primary Election in June of 1968. I was a registered Republican at the time and I cast my presidential vote for the only candidate on our ballot: Governor Ronald Reagan (the state’s “favorite son candidate”). My ballot was an absentee ballot because I was in South Vietnam at the time, serving in the United States Army.
After giving some more thought to my comments above, I must say that, had I been a member of the Green Party, I probably would have voted for Dr. Jill Stein in the June Primary Election (rather than cast a write-in vote that would not have been counted). Even though Dr. Stein is not a well known person in our country, she has earned her credibility through her dedication and perseverance (and the fact that she was the Green Party nominee for President of the United States four years ago). In addition, she has shown a lot of humility by consistently saying that she would stand aside for Senator Bernie Sanders if he would accept the Green Party nomination.
After giving this subject even more thought, I must now write that if I had been registered in the Peace and Freedom Party for the Primary Election mentioned above; I probably would have voted for Dr. Lynn Kahn for President of the United States – rather than cast a write-in vote that would not have been counted. As with Dr. Jill Stein before her, Dr. Kahn appears to be gaining credibility through sheer determination and perseverance. I actually met Dr. Kahn, in person, on the evening of February 3rd of this year. It was at the monthly meeting of the Sacramento County Central Committee of the Peace and Freedom Party of California. She was there to give a presentation on her presidential campaign. I found Lynn to be a very intelligent and thoughtful person and her campaign seems to be well organized. Obviously, I should have thought through my original message, above, much better.
Richard Winger calls this cross-nomination, I call it cross-contamination.
Richard,
Candidates do have to say its OK for them to be on the ballot, but is there anything about accepting subsequent nominations? I’m guessing not.
Richard,
Candidates do have to say its OK for them to be on the ballot, but is there anything about accepting subsequent nominations? I’m guessing not.
Also the proportion of registration of Republican to AIP is about 10 to 1. 50 is 10 to 1 to 5 so the AIP fair share is not 2 as you suggest, but 5.