The Fort Worth, Texas Star-Telegram has this interesting speculation about a press conference in Washington, D.C., on September 10, featuring Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Cynthia McKinney.
The Fort Worth, Texas Star-Telegram has this interesting speculation about a press conference in Washington, D.C., on September 10, featuring Ron Paul, Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin, and Cynthia McKinney.
I’d like to see Dr. Paul use his influence to get an alternate debate televised between these four candidates. I’m sure there are a lot of supporters of all five, so that the demand would be great!
It’s on like Donkey Kong!
Barr and Nader should hold a joint press conference right outside the first upcoming presidential debate (and join in with a league of marching protesters).
Rich,
Could you briefly summarize the (ill-fate) of lawsuits/injunctions against the Commission on Pres. Debates for minor party inclusion, their debate criteria for it, and what criteria u think would be fair, e.g., polling X% in the national polls and why.
k…
Tomorrow, September 10, right?
I’m thinking C-span might cover.
I believe it will be that Ron Paul is urging his supporters NOT to write in his name on their presidential ballots as those votes often don’t get counted. That is what I was told by someone wearing both Ron Paul and Chuck Baldwin buttons at the Rally for the Republic last week.
Instead, Paul is asking his supporters to split their votes between Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin–perhaps voting for one as president and the other as vice president?
My guess is that Nader and McKinney will be asking their supporters to do likewise.
thats stupid, you cant vote separate for VP. I’m betting on it is about the debates.
It has to be on the debates. Otherwise, why spend all that money and effort on ballot access and then say “don’t vote for us on the regular ballot line”?
It either has to do with debates, or Paul is telling voters to abandon Obama/McCain for the candidates on the stage with him.
“thats stupid, you cant vote separate for VP”
Okay, my bad. I’m voting for the first time in a presidential election this year so I didn’t know you couldn’t choose. I was making an uneducated guess!
So, when did it happen that you can’t vote separately for president and vice president? Surely that’s unconstitutional.
Technically, no voter in November votes for anyone but presidential elector candidates. Presidential and vice-presidential candidates are on November ballots, not in their role as candidates, but just as labels for competing slates of presidential electors.
Ah! Of course!
Nonetheless, it does seem to me that unless Amendment XII has been surpassed by some other amendment, the US Constitution requires Electors to vote separately for the President and Vice President, so what right do states have to make it impossible–by the design of the ballots–for voters to indicate their separate preferences to the Electors?
Amendment XII
(Ratified June 15, 1804)
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.
The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.
The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
Rosalea, when you vote, you’re voting for one and only one slate of electors who then cast their votes for president and vice president. In this way, your own prefernce is irrelevant: if you vote for Bob Barr’s electoral ticket then you are voting for a slate of electors who have pledged themselves to Barr for Pres. and Root for VP. They can, when casting their votes, change their minds, but it would be a personal action.
“People will waste their time in voting for the lesser of two evils,” according to Paul’s prepared remarks. “Reject the two candidates who demand perpetuation of the status quo and pick one of the alternatives that you have the greatest affinity to, based on the issues.”
Advance text from the Houston Chronicle:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/5992258.html
Rosalea is a troll. I’m surprised Richard responded to her. She’s ignorant of a basic fact of American democracy yet she knows exactly where in the Constitution she can make a half-assed arguement to hide her ignorance?
I think Rosalea made helpful comments and I think she sounds bright and thoughtful.
That is wonderful, Rosalea, that you are “voting for the first time in a presidential election this year.” Thank you and God save the Constitution!
“In this way, your own prefernce is irrelevant” – Bill, why do you accept that a voter’s preference is irrelevant?
As a new citizen, perhaps I’ve been more recently and more fulsomely given the idea that the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that the nation was founded to do away with anything resembling a monarchy and to make its government answerable to its citizens.
The notion that the presidential candidate (or the national committee or registered members of the party he or she belongs to)selects his or her successor (VP) in the event of something happening to the President seems antithetical to that founding premise.
Amdmt XII clearly states that the Electors enumerate the votes separately for President and Vice President. Nothing in the Constitution says those two candidates have to be from the same party–or from any party, for that matter.
“Tickets” and “slates” aren’t mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution; Electors are merely bound to report the results of the election in the states they reside in.
As for bolshevik-leninist… I wasn’t ignorant of a basic fact of American democracy (by which I assume you mean the Electoral College); I’d just never seen a ballot for a presidential election. In the 40 minutes between my two previous posts, I found out more about the subject by looking at the primary sources–archived Y2K ballots and the U.S. Constitution.
It is interesting that Senator Nelson’s (Florida) proposed amendment to the Constitution would substitute citizen voters for the “electors” appointed by the States, but would prevent them from voting for two separate candidates.
Even more fun would be to revert to a pre-12th Amendment system and let everyone vote for two presidential candidates.
No one really answered Rosalea’s question….when did you stop being able to vote for the President and VP? My memory is terrible, but it seems like I remember from history that Congress used to elect the president up until some point, then I suppose we went to the electoral system. Was that the 12th amendment?
I think they should all come together, and throw their support behind mckinney. if you are still unsure why?
see our video.
hip hop.
politics.
independent issues.
http://www.youtube.com/someofallparts
what do you think?
It would be something if we could choose 2 candidates.
Dr Ron & Ralph
“The two parties should be
almost identical, so that
the American people can
‘throw the rascals out’
at any election without
leading to any profound or
extensive shifts in policy.”
– Carol Quigley
Cynthia Mike Dennis Jesse Ross Jimmy
And the men* who hold high places
Must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality
Closer to the heart
The American Ruse &
when Black Friday comes.
Honesty or lies?
Compassion or greed?
Intelligence or narrow-minded?
Guts – or go along to get along?
Ralph Nader
Cynthia McKinney
Ron Paul
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Jesse Ventura
H. Ross Perot
President Carter
JFK RFK MLK Malcolm