This year, Massachusetts voters elect all 160 members of the State House of Representatives. There is a contest between a Republican and a Democrat in only 29 of those races. This is because of the massive weakness of the Republican Party, which has nominees in only 37 districts.
The only minor party nominee this year for Massachusetts state house is one nominee of the Veterans Party. The Green Party is ballot-qualified in Massachusetts, but Massachusetts makes it so difficult for a small ballot-qualified party to place nominees on its own primary ballot, the Green Party has no candidates this year for state house, or U.S. House, or U.S. Senate. There is one Green running for State Senate. The Working Families Party is also ballot-qualified, but it has no nominees for any office in Massachusetts this year, and will lose its qualified status. The Green Party will also lose its ballot status unless Cynthia McKinney polls 3%, which is unlikely.
In Texas this year, we have 56% of state house races contested by a minor party. Is that the record?
I don’t think that’s quite as good as the Libertarian position in Texas in 2006, when there were 88 Libertarians running for the 150 seats.
What do they need to do to get on the ballot in Massachusetts?
A group can transform itself into a qualified party if it has registration membership of 1% of the state total. That method has existed in the law since 1991 and has never been used. Also, groups can circulate candidate petitions, and place nominees on the November ballot, and if a statewide nominee gets 3%, it is ballot-qualified with its own primary in the next election.
Once the Constition Party is qualified, if it is not already, they should have no problem receiving at least 30% in all of these vacant races. Then as voters see the CST label more often, they will be more likely to vote for Constitution Party candidates in House races.
So Richard, what happens if Nader recieves the 3% in
Massachusetts? Does his Independent campaign there
have a party name or structure? It’s quite likely that
Barr will do better than Harry Browne did in the past
for the Libertarians. However, what are the chances
that he can poll even 2% in Massachusetts? Also, does
this law work when there is a Special Election for a
State-wide office including U. S. Senate? Also, once
a party becomes ballot qualified how often are they
required to keep having a candidate poll 3%?
I think the Libertarian candidate for US Senate may poll 3%. If Nader gets 3%, I don’t think that will establish the “Independent Party”, because there was an independent candidate for Governor in 2006 in Massachusetts who got over 3%, and his vote didn’t bring an “Independent Party” into existence in Massachusetts.
ALL State regimes are EVIL ANTI-Democracy regimes.
Half the votes in half the gerrymander districts is about 25 percent ANTI-Democracy indirect minority rule — by the EVIL party hack monarchs / oligarchs.
UNEQUAL votes for each gerrymander district winner.
UNEQUAL total votes in each gerrymander district.
Much worse primary math by the party hack gangs picking extremists — who later get elected.
Democracy NOW via 100 percent P.R.
Total Votes / Total Seats = Equal votes needed for each seat winner.
Difficult math ONLY for party hacks and MORON party hack judges.
NO primaries are needed.
Richard,
I did some research for you regarding Indiana State and House races. In the House, there are 100 races, with the D’s and the R’s running unopposed in 14 each. In 4 contests, a D faces an L and in 3 other races, an R faces an L. In the 25 State Senate races, 3 D’s are running unopposed and 5 R’s are running unopposed. No LP candidates are running in two-way races for State Senate.