On July 30, the Public Policy Institute of California released a poll for the gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races. The poll included many other questions as well, and can be seen here. The election results start on page 32.
For U.S. Senate, the results are: Barbara Boxer, Democrat, 39%; Carly Fiorina, Republican, 34%; Gail Lightfoot, Libertarian, 2%; Edward Noonan, American Independent, 2%; Duane Roberts, Green, 1%; Marsha Feinland, Peace & Freedom, below 1%; don’t know 22%.
For Governor, the results are: Jerry Brown, Democrat, 37%; Meg Whitman, Republican, 34%; Carlos Alvarez, Peace & Freedom, 2%; Chelene Nightingale, American Independent, 1%; Dale Ogden, Libertarian, 1%; Laura Wells, Green, 1%; someone else 1%; don’t know 23%. The poll had 2,502 respondents.
One of the major reasons for that, I think, is that the differences between Barbara Boxer and Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate; and the differences between Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman for Governor; are so great that most voters want to choose among the “top two” in this situation.
In this election, I am planning on voting for Barbara Boxer and Jerry Brown. I would not vote for a Republican in any case (the GOP can thank the eight years of the Bush-Cheney Administration for my high level of animosity toward their political party).
In the “down ticket” races, I am going to vote for either the Democratic candidate or for the Peace and Freedom Party candidate (some of the PFP candidates are people whom I know personally and feel would be good elected officials).
How many New Age folks LIE to the moron pollsters — so election day results are a *surprise* ???
Great News for the American Independent Party, Ed Noonan
will be the star for the AIP. He made the 2% mark so all there is is up in the polls in November. Ed keep up the good work.
It looks like the word got out that Nightingale will not
be able to use the AIP label, so she is now with a 1 % level. Good news Nightingale will not be part of the
debates with this very poor showing.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
Vice Chairman,
American Independent Party,
affliated with the America’s Independent Party since
June 27, 2008.
It looks like the word got out that Nightingale will not
be able to use the AIP label, so she is now with a 1 % level. Good news Nightingale will not be part of the
debates with this very poor showing.
= How so, because Tom Metzger still ran for Congress as a Democrat after winning their primary, and they couldn’t do a damn thing about it.
Or are you still talking out of your a** as always, like thinking Robinson would’ve gotten all those uncounted votes in Riverside and won the Primary, lol!
Mark Seidenberg. I see you’ve come out from hiding. Of course you know – as well as I and others – the reason ALL of the 3rd party candidates received such low polling numbers is because the “LAMESTREAM MEDIA” does not let the voters of California know these candidates are even running, or even know anything about the candidates and where they stand. Unfortunately, all voters of California do not log onto BALLOT ACCESS NEWS like you and I do.
Mark, why don’t you grow up and stop acting like the spoiled brat you appear to be? Why don’t you show some real patriotism and support the AIP ticket from top to bottom?
You and the way you are acting is a disgrace. I do hope the AIP folks there in due time will replace you with someone who is serious about seeing the AIP growing into a party representing “Christian conservatives” and “Christian patriots” of California.
Chelene Nightingale for governor 2010 aip ca?? Who the heck is that? I live in CA I never heard of her. Why do the quacks always come out to try and steal the lime light.
To river rat. Unless you are just trying to be “funny,” you make my very point. Most Californians have never heard of Chelene Nightingale becaue the “LAMESTREAM MEDIA” has chosen to NOT let you know about her.
This has always been a major problem for 3rd party and independent candidates. The media does not want the American voter to know about them. For if they did, many elections results would turn out with a “major upset.”
Chelene Nightingale for governor 2010 aip ca?? Who the heck is that? I live in CA I never heard of her. Why do the quacks always come out to try and steal the lime light.
= The same logic applies to Ed Noonan.
Cody Quirk,
If the poll is correct, Ed Noonan will at least give the
AIP quilified party status, without looking at party
registration. I was Noonan’s Vice Chairman. I kept my
word to the late William Shearer, viz., by being loyal to Ed Noonan during his entire two year term of office.
Metzger was a Democrat. Are you saying that Chelene Nightingale has a relationship to Metzger? If so, what
is this relationship? This relates to my question, viz., who is “they”?
TO: Alabama Independent,
I was never in hiding. You ask me why don’t support the
AIP ticket from top to bottom? I do support the AIP ticket? Nightingale is not on the ticket, because of the votes taken on June 26 & June 27, by the convention
and state central committee.
To: River Rat,
Chelene Nightingale has received 24,000 votes in a third
party with nearly 400,000 register electors. She is running at near 6 % of the AIP registered electors. Note the AIP registration is only 2.34% This is the poorest showing in the history of the AIP over the last
42 years.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
Vice Chairman,
American Independent Party,
affilated with the America’s Independent Party,
since June 27, 2008
Metzger was a Democrat. Are you saying that Chelene Nightingale has a relationship to Metzger? If so, what
is this relationship? This relates to my question, viz., who is “they”?
= Mark, you are a dumbass, a complete simpleton in revolting standards.
just like Metzger’s run for congress, Chelene will be the AIP candidate for Governor and there’s not a damn thing you can do about it.
Chelene Nightingale has received 24,000 votes in a third
party with nearly 400,000 register electors.
= And Ed Noonan only got 16,704 votes in his Primary race, that’s sad. At least Chelene did better.
She is running at near 6 % of the AIP registered electors. Note the AIP registration is only 2.34% This is the poorest showing in the history of the AIP over the last
42 years.
= You can thank both the infighting and your inaction on growing the Party for that.
Here in the Silver State, IAP registration is over 4% of the voting population statewide, and in some counties, its at 8%!
Nightingale is not on the ticket, because of the votes taken on June 26 & June 27, by the convention
and state central committee.
= Yet she’s listed as the your party’s candidate on the SoS’s website-
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/candidate-stmts/nov-2010/prop-34-candidates-nov-2010.pdf
How about you stop the lies and deceptions.
*as your party’s
Cody Quirk. You can’t rationalize with people like Mark Seidenberg. He knows you and I are both right. I’m sure there is a more appropriate term for describing his actions, but he loves the attention it draws to him, because attention is about all he has accomplished.
Responsible AIPers see him for what he is, and will, when they have the legal opportunity to do so, replace him and his partners with real leaders.
Let’s just try to be patient.
– And pray; don’t forget that.
I predict that Nightingale will get more votes that Noonan in Nov. Also she will receive more votes than Noonan in 2006 in number and percentage.
There is a high number of undecideds more than 1 out of every 5.That will make this more interesting.
“An Alabama Independent” [#5] above wrote:
July 31st, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Mark Seidenberg. I see you’ve come out from hiding. Of course you know – as well as I and others – the reason ALL of the 3rd party candidates received such low polling numbers is because the “LAMESTREAM MEDIA” does not let the voters of California know these candidates are even running, or even know anything about the candidates and where they stand. Unfortunately, all voters of California do not log onto BALLOT ACCESS NEWS like you and I do. … [snip] …
Phil Sawyer responds:
You are, essentially, correct when you point out that the reason for “minor party” candidates doing so poorly in the polls is becasue they can not get fair treatment from the establishment (bourgeois) news media. Due to the reality that that situation imposes; however, most voters, I believe, choose to vote between the “top two” candidates (which helps to prove your point) – especially if they see major differences in the candidates. That is partly why I am voting for Jerry Brown for Governor of California and for Barbara Boxer for U.S. Senator. They are a great deal better than their Republican Party opponents. In addition, I truly think that they are the best candidates of all of those running (including the “minor party” candidates). I always vote for the best candidate (no matter what party), and “let the chips fall where they may.”
Cody Quirk [#12 above] wrote:
July 31st, 2010 at 4:21 pm … [snip] …
= Yet she’s listed as the your party’s candidate on the SoS’s website-
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/candidate-stmts/nov-2010/prop-34-candidates-nov-2010.pdf
Cody Quirk is correct and Mark Seidenberg is incorrect, most probably. Since the AIP voters chose to nominate Chelene Nightingale for U.S. Senator, she will likely remain on the ballot. I remember that, in the 1974 General Election in California, the Peace and Freedom Party State Central Committe did not like that some of their candidates chosen in the primary election for state officers were libertarian rather than soc.s [abbreviation used here so that I don’t have to wait for the Yahoo! censors] – so they ran some write-in soc. candidates. In that election, I voted for the Peace and Freedom candidates right down the line, whether they were libertarian or soc.
I’m always reticent about weighing-in on CA AIP threads for fear that the usual cranks and kooks will confuse things even more. Question for Richard or any other calm and politically knowledgeable politico: can a small group of people with party titles strip a primary winner of ballot status? That doesn’t make sense to me: Nightingale won the gubernatorial nod fair and square – even by an impressive margin – but now an AIP clique says she’s being denied a place on the ballot.
Some years ago, in Illinois, LaRouche followers – before they were outed – secured nominations via a primary. A combined force of Democrats and Republicans defeated them in the general election when the LaRouchies couldn’t be taken off the ballot. There are numerous examples of this – party leaders try to derail dutifully nominated candidates, whether those candidates are mainstream or extremists, but to no avail.
Can Nightingale be arbitrarily and capriciously taken off the CA ballot?
Can Nightingale be arbitrarily and capriciously taken off the CA ballot?
= NOPE!
There are some states in which it is possible a party can eliminate a non-presidential candidate who won its primary. In Tennessee in 2008, the Democratic Party eliminated one of its legislative nominees. The nominee sued but lost in U.S. District Court. She is appealing to the 6th circuit. The briefs were all filed months ago but the 6th circuit still hasn’t set a date for argument.
-Just not in California, however.
With all those registrations the AIP has why do those candidates still get around 1 to 2 percent. Sounds like most people thought they were voting purely independent and not AIP.
Allen. From what I have been able to decipher from other election figures provided by the California Secretary of State, there were about twice as many AIPers who voted on the Amendments, the non-partisan Superintendent Of Public Instruction office, or who voted on local non-partisan elections, than who voted for all the candidates in the AIP Primary.
Richard may disagree with me. Someone in the SOS office initially told me the vote for the amendments, etc., would be broken down by party. It was not. However, if you add up one column regarding AIP voters (I forget now what it was called) you can tell the number of those AIP voters were about twice the number what the SOS shows voted for candidates in the AIP primary.
So even if my numbers are close to being correct, it is still hard to say these voters thought they were voting in an “independent” primary, rather than the AIP Primary. Perhaps half of them did, perhaps the other half did not.
I suppose the only true way would be to ask each of the some 400,000 registered AIP members if they realize they are members of a political party, or if they acutally thought they were simply registered as “independent” or at least as “non-partisan.” Of course, such would be almost impossible.
I still say it doesn’t matter. The AIP provides a means for those who don’t want to be a member of any party, or any other party, to register as such, and it also provides candidates – regardless of their political philosophy – a means of seeking public office if they don’t want to do so through another political party.
Those who make an issue of this are usually jealous because their little 3rd party has few registered members.
Eventually, when there is a major political re-alignment in this nation (including California) the AIP in that state will double if not triple in registrations. And when the AIP finally gets some leadership who knows how to grow the party and elect candidates, the AIP will hold offices from the statewide level down to the local level.
It just takes time. But that time is coming.
To “An Alabama Independent” (#23 above): Well, I am a native Californian and have held a permanent address in the Golden State for all of my sixty-three years now; however, I am not going to make any more predictions. (I have been saying and writing for several years now that the Republican Party will be a minor-sized party – in this state and nationally – by the year of 2012; and I am sticking with that prediction.)
There has always been enormous potential for the American Independent Party of California. Up to now, though, the party has not done all that much with that potential – except for in its very first presidential campaign in 1968, when George C. Wallace ran a very strong race.
Phil Sawyer, any interest in posting original comments for Independent Political Report, http://www.indep……..com ????? contact.ipr@gmail.com
Any interest in anti Criminal Chiropractor Don Grundmann and anti Wackie Actress Nightmare Nightingale action with the recognized AIP operators? donlake@ymail.com jcoffey9991911@yahoo.com 619.420.0209
The article that precedes the survey does not mention the smaller parties. One has to scan to the end of the survey to find the results. The comments thus far do not talk about the Governor’s race. I find it interesting that the Peace and Freedom Party nominee, Carlos Alverez has 2%. I would like to see a poll of all the candidates for a statewide office. My guess is that Peace and Freedom Party will get the 2% needed in at least four seats, but to what avail. Proposition 14 if it is not overturned will almost surely keep the four smaller parties off future general election ballots.
That is not quite accurate, C.T. PFP-CA will be on the ballot in 2012 for the presidential and vice-presidential elections, no matter what. The significant question is this: What is the Party going to do to make the most of that? As long as the Party remains a one-state party, it is not going to go anywhere.
By the way, C.T. Weber is the PFP-CA nominee for Lieutenant Governor of California and I am planning on voting for him in November. Don Lake: Please take some deep breaths and count to ten before responding to that comment. Thank you very much. I know that you and C.T. do not get along. However, you are both my friends and I do not like getting caught in the middle of persoanl animosities.
To Don Lake (#25 above): The interest is there but the time is not. I will try to find some time, however, to check out that website again soon.
To C.T. Weber: To add further to my comment (#27 above): It is all the more important now (not that it ever was not important) for PFP-CA to affiliate with a national party. If the Party loses its ballot status for the 2016 elections, it could still petition to get independent candidates on. Let’s say (for a very good example) that PFP-CA affiliated with the Soc. Party USA (abbreviation used here to quickly get past the Yahoo! censors). Then, if PFP-CA/Soc. Party USA lost its ballot status for 2016, the Party could petition to get Soc. Party USA candidates on the ballot as independents.
Phil Sawyer. You make my very point in #24. When George Wallace ran as the 1st AIP candidate for President in ’68, he knew how to campaign – something most AIP candidates who followed him did not – and still do not – know how to do.
Most of the AIPers who followed Wallace, preferred to campaign on doctrine, where Wallace realized voters don’t give a crap about doctrine – they only want to know what you’re going to do about unemployment or crime. This is why the Constitution Party nationally is never going to get anywhere, and the Libertarian Party also.
The leaders of both these parties can’t get it through their thick skulls that most voters in this country want government services such as Social Security, Medicare, public schools, highways, and hospitals. These same voters want a nation defense 2nd to none, a sovereign republic, and a stop to illegal immigration.
Wallace – despite the unfortunate racial baggage attached to him – had his finger on the pulse of the nation and understood the way people felt. This is why, despite these handicaps, he ran a strong race in ’68, carried 5 states, and if he had concentrated more in Tennessee, South Carolina, and North Carolina, would have thrown the Election into the House of Representatives.
Constitution Party and Libertarian Party leaders need to understand the people of the United States today are NOT going back to 1810 and hold the views toward government which the people then held.
I say, if you can’t understand that, and accept these truths, you need to stop playing this little game of 3rd party politics.
Well, at least the IAP and a few other state affiliates understand them.
But yes, you bring up some food for thought.
Nightingale is a stupid person. The truth may hurt, but its the truth. She can’t answer simple questions about stats in California, she just stumps and goes back to “water rights!!” ha ha seriously she needs an education on the State of California. Thats what happens when people who don’t read, and only take information fed to them as truth. Vote for a brick, before voting for this highly unqualified person.
TO: sara stugra,
Thanks for the comment in post 31. Look what Nightgale did in her ballot statement in the primary, viz., claiming that the illegal aliens cost California yearly a whole $12 million dollars. This is her why of making an important issue on the illegal aliens as trivial in the eyes of the California electors, viz., costing each
person in California less that 34.5 cents a year.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
So why are you complementing yourself Mark?
TO: Cody Quirk
I do not understand your post at #33. Please explain?
Yesterday, August 5, 2010, The Orange County Central
Committee of the American Independent Party had its
organization meeting on the call of the Orange County
election official under the terms of the California EC.
I was elected Chairman for term 2010 – 2012. Wiley Drake (who ran for Vice President of the United States in 2008 under the American Independent Party) was elected Vice Chairman. Lawrence Beliz was elected Treasurer.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
Chairman, Orange County Central Committee of the AIP.
Vice Chairman, American Independent Party, affiliated
with the America’s Independent Party, since June 27,
2008.
Bankruptcy and foreclosure of Chelene Nightingale for governor aip should automatically disqualify her from even running for that position. She has a lot of nerve.
I do not understand your post at #33. Please explain?
= Maybe Don Lake can explain it for you, after all you appointed him to your ‘State Committee’.
Google “Chelene Nightingale minutemen” for the real lowdown on this person trying to run for governor of CA. Page after page of articles about her past/present/future.