1. P.R. legislative bodies

   A.V. Nonpartisan executive / judicial offices

   NO party hack primaries, caucuses and conventions are needed === to be sent to the history junkyard along with divine right of kings, slavery, etc.

2. I’ll probably get shot down for this, but it seems of the 3rd parties in California allowing independents to vote in their primary, only the American Independent Party is demonstrating its ability to be the savvy party there. Richard can correct me, but I think these “independents” are technically registered as “Declined To State” in California but since Richard used the word “independent” I will also in my reply.

   Some of these “straight-out” or “no-party” independents actually share the philosophy of the AIP even though they are not registered as members of the party. By allowing and encouraging them to vote in the AIP primary, they develop the “habit” of doing so and in time will “bond” with the party. This is another way of cultivating support and loyalty to a particular party as well as making the party larger and stronger. Every voter does not join a party because they are an ideolog.

   There are many voters who vote in either the GOP or Democratic primary from longtime “habit” or even family tradition of doing so. Usually they remain loyal to the nominees of that party in the General Election. 3rd parties need to learn this truth.

   The Libertarians, Greens and other ballot-positioned 3rd parties in California are only “cutting off their nose to spite their face” by refusing independent voters opportunity to participate in their resepctive primaries.

   3rd parties need to reach out to the some 38% or more of the American electorate who consider themselves “independent” or else they can forget it.

   And to those who would argue that the overwhelming majority of those current California AIP registrants, accidentally registered “AIP” thinking they had registered as “independent,” this may be true, but there is no hard statistical data to prove otherwise. Anyway, these voters are not stupid. By now most of them know the AIP is a political party and would have left the AIP in droves and re-registered “independent” had they desired to. I would suspect, that if each of them could be individually polled, the overwhelming majority would say they are content with the way they are registered – American Independent Party.

   And this is the point I am trying to make.

3. The American Independent Party of California is very much in “the catbird’s seat,” as the old saying goes. I have been saying and writing, for the past few years, that the Republican Party will be a minor-sized party by 2012. If that is correct (which I’m pretty sure it is), the AIP is in an enviable position to strike for becoming the second largest party in the Golden State.

   If the AIP changed to being a progressive, populist party – instead of a conservative, populist party – it could actually accomplish the above. While I am not going to “hold my breath” waiting for that to happen, I think that it needs to be pointed out. Perhaps one of the smaller left parties in California could join the AIP as a block and take over the party machinery. That certainly would be interesting!

4. The problem with Independents and AIP is that if they all voted for their presidential nominee wouldn’t that nominee have received over 100,000 votes that correspond with the registration numbers?

5. The American Independent Party of California had 370,405 registered members just before the November 2008 election, so Allen’s point is even stronger than he indicated. Alan Keyes, listed on the California ballot as the AIP presidential candidate, only got 40,673 votes in California; also Chuck Baldwin got 3,145 write-ins in California.

6. I have registered hundreds of voters in California and I find that most voters,including American Independent Party registrants, do not realize that it is a political party. Some reason that they are Americans and they are independents so they check the American Independent box. Before parties were listed on the registration forms AIP registration dropped below that of the Peace and Freedom Party. Let’s face it the AIP picked a good name. Nationally, they are affiliated with the Constitution Party but they dare not change their name because they would loose their ballot status in California. That is why over 85% of the Constitution Party registrats are in California using the name American Independent.

7. NYS needs this legislation to to explain the independent voter scheme to every registered voter.

8. This is to Richard and Phil Sawyer:

   The American Independent Party as a “conservative
   populist party” may be more effective in displaying
   the current contradictions between the ‘Moderates’
   like our Governor and the conservative opposition
   wing within the party. It’s unclear to me if within
   California an effective progressive populist party
   can exist. It seems to me that since there are now
   6 ballot qualified parties here the positions most
   likely to be used are already being promoted by the
   current parties. Admittedly, none of our parties here
   fully covers them directly but the voter does have
   sufficient choices to decide which elements within
   the progressive, populist agenda they most wish to
   support.

   Whenever an Alternate (3rd) Party candidate wins over
   5 or 6 % in a race with both major parties are in that
   election the winner should take notice on just which
   issues their local electorate was willing to not vote
   major party. That is probably currently the main way
   a 3rd party candidate be effective until the financing
   of campaigns becomes more evenly matched between the
   large and small parties. Somwheres within all of the
   give-and-take on campaign finance reform is something
   that the 4 small parties can agree on and should work
   together to gain as much leverage as possible.

   Back in the ’90s when the voters approved the idea of
   a single primary ballot for all candidates the AIP was
   not a member of the suit to overturn it. As a group we
   felt that the Unified ballot was an idea beneficial to
   all small parties. Then, all of the primary voters who
   are the more politically minded could choose from the
   widest array of viewpoints. It is unfortunate that the
   present Special elections rules can’t be transferred
   to all of California’s partisan elections. I believe
   that it would be helpful in drawing more voters to the
   polls who would put greater consideration into just
   who they desire to support.

9. In September 2008, when Washington held its first “top-two” primary election ever, the turnout declined, compared to the September 2004 primary when Washington was using a classic open primary.

10. Any reasonable person would agree with Richard’s, and C.T.’s, point about the American Independent Party of California having a good name and that many of the Party’s registrants probably think that they are signing up as true independents when they get on board. One can only go so far with that argument, though. It does not really make that much difference why people register into the AIP. What really matters are the numbers.

    What also matters a great deal is what group of people controls the Party machinery. It would be foolish for any new party organizing committee to take a pass on trying to obtain control of the AIP’s levers of power and turning the Party into something that will really connect with most of the voters who are wanting to change the system.

    By the way, C.T., there is a legal battle going on about which national party the AIP is actually affiliated with: The Constitution Party or America’s Independent Party. What would really be cool would be if a group of progressive, populists took the party away from the two groups of conservative, populists who are now fighting for control of the Party. Then, the Party could affiliate with a national, progressive Party. The Peace and Freedom Party of California could affiliate with the same national Party and then the two Golden State Parties could merge into one. We could then just take the name of the national, progressive Party that we would then be affiliated with.

    Phil

    Philippe L. Sawyer, Member
    Sacramento County Central Committee
    State Central Committee
    Peace and Freedom Party of California

11. C.T.Weber may be right that most AIP registrants don’t know they are registering into a party. But it really is a moot point. As Phil Sawyer points out, it is the numbers that count, and again is stressed by C.T. Weber’s point, the party was wise in picking the savvy name of “American Independent Party.” I mean, whether you are a Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, or a Green by philosophy, who can argue with being an “American” and being an “Independent” when you’re asking voters to support you as a candidate? Something to think about.

12. #9 In 2004, 1,480,247 persons voted in the primary. But of these, only 1,365,389 picked a party, and only 1,303,024 (88.0%) cast a vote in the top of the ballot gubernatorial primary, which was contested by Christine Gregoire and Ron Sims. There was also a US senate race.

    In 2008, 1,455,756 persons voted in the primary, and 1,442,457 (99.1%) voted in the gubernatorial primary which was merely a tuneup for Christine Gregoire vs. Dino Rossi rematch. There was no US Senate Race.

    So turnout was down by 1.7%, but votes successfully cast for governor were up by 10.7%.

    Clearly many voters were either unwilling or unable to color inside the lines of the Pick A Party Primary that was established by Gary Locke’s ill-advised veto of the Top 2 Primary which replaced the blanket primary.

    While it appears that turnout was down by 1.7% between 2004 and 2008, it would be superficial and inaccurate to attribute this to the change in the primary system.

    Let’s look at the turnout by county:

    Thurston (+16.1%)
    Clark (+13.4%)
    Whatcom (+13.4%)
    Spokane (+1.2%)
    Kitsap (+0.7%)
    Snohomish (-0.8%)
    Pierce (-6.7%)
    King (-22.2%)

    Which county is King County Executive Ron Sims from?

    Which county went from a 31.5% share of the statewide turnout in 2004 to 24.9% in 2008?

    Trick question: Which county is named for a US President?

13. At post # 10, Phil L. Sawyer states “What would
    really be cool if a group of progressive, populists,took the party [viz., “American Independent Party”]away from the two groups of conservative, populists who are now fighting to control the party. Then the party could affiliate
    with a national, progress party. The Peace & Freedom Party of California could affiliate with the same national Party and the same two Golden State Parties could merge into one.” Phil Sawyer,
    when and who came up with this plan? Why does Peace & Freedom Party plan to be really cool and
    and hip and do a take over of the merged party of
    the “Republicrats”? So you like a one party State.
    How many in the Peace & Freedom agree with you on
    a take over of the American Independent Party by the Peace & Freedom Party?

    This is not the first time outside groups tried to
    takeover the American Independent Party. In 1971
    -72 it was the Republicans through the Committee
    to Re-elect the President [Nixon] with the paid
    assistants of the Nazi Party de-registration plan
    of Attorney General John Mitchell that tried to
    end the AIP. Then came Willis Carto and the Populist Party that tried a take over to get the
    Nazi David Duke elected president. That failed
    also. Now it a former state chairman name James
    King that is try to hijack the American Independent
    Party with is side kick Don Grundmann that trying
    the same thing. So you think is so-cool to end
    the American Independent Party. We will fight you
    on this.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

    [

14. ” This is not the first time outside groups tried to takeover the American Independent Party. ….Now it a former state chairman name James King that is try to hijack the American Independent
    Party with is side kick Don Grundmann that trying
    the same thing.”

    Response : The ” outside group ” currently attacking the AIP is led by Alan Keyes, a coward and a outright liar, who has his Republican money funded flunkies, also liars and cowards all; such as Mark Robinson, Mark Seidenberg, and Ed Noonan; doing the dirty ground work such as deliberately filing fake documents with the Secretary of State office claiming that the AIP disaffiliated from the CP when no such vote was ever taken. Jim King and I are the legally elected officers of the party and we will stop the corruption of Keyes, et. al., and return the party to its true conservative principles and roots.

    Don Grundmann Vice-Chairman American Independent Party, California branch of the Constitution Party

15. Mark Seidenberg Says:

    May 19th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
    At post # 10, Phil L. Sawyer states “What would
    really be cool if a group of progressive, populists,took the party [viz., “American Independent Party”]away from the two groups of conservative, populists who are now fighting to control the party. Then the party could affiliate
    with a national, progress party. The Peace & Freedom Party of California could affiliate with the same national Party and the same two Golden State Parties could merge into one.” Phil Sawyer,
    when and who came up with this plan? Why does Peace & Freedom Party plan to be really cool and
    and hip and do a take over of the merged party of
    the “Republicrats”? So you like a one party State.
    How many in the Peace & Freedom agree with you on
    a take over of the American Independent Party by the Peace & Freedom Party?

    Phil Sawyer responds:

    No, Mark, I’m “an Army (‘of the Night’ – thank you, the late, great, Norman Mailer) of one.” The words that I wrote are my own and do not represent the views of the Peace and Freedom Party of California. I was just pointing out what should be the obvious, as I like to do a lot.

    The scenario that I came up with seems like a good idea to me but I do not expect that it will happen. Who knows, though? With the two conservative, populist factions fighting for control of the AIP, it is not beyond the realm of possibililty that some group from the outside will come in, en masse, and take over. If that does happen, I hope that it is a progressive organization that does so. Why should the conservatives control the Party for so long? They have not made it a major party yet.

    By the way, “An Alabama Independent,” thank you for the wise words.

16. WARNING! Dr. Don Grundmann is not a vice-chairman
    of the American Independent Party. He has not held
    a office in the American Independent Party since
    September 2, 2008.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American
    Independent Party

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