Dan Morain, senior editor for the Sacramento Bee, has this article about Americans Elect. It carries interesting details about some of the experienced political consultants that are now working for Americans Elect.
Dan Morain, senior editor for the Sacramento Bee, has this article about Americans Elect. It carries interesting details about some of the experienced political consultants that are now working for Americans Elect.
Sacramento’s Russ Marsh [the ‘wizard’ behind the SUCESSFUL 2003 dump California Governor Davis effort] also involved ?????????
How many of the consultants are closet Donkeys trying for a 1992 repeat ??? — DIVIDE and Conquer — see the EVIL tyrant Julius Caesar.
Americans Elect is setting everything up, but any chance for success, other than just upsetting the other two, depends on the candidate they choose, and there are only two or three choices. In fact, I can only think of one.
If one of these very select few doesn’t sign on, then all the organization and ballot access is of no value.
Who, other than Bloomberg, might have a realistic chance of sneaking in for a actual victory during the economic turmoil. Anyone?
Not Huntsman.
Not a military general.
Not Trump.
OK, how about a realistic name. Someone who could gain a plurality in enough states.
And their VP choice? Can’t choose a Stockdale type.
“Who am I, Why am I here”
In this case is WINNING where they are going? I think they are looking to stop a majority electorial vote, but that throws the election to Congress. Is that what we want?
That is why anyone short of a possible “winner” may not be better than doing nothing.
I just can’t think of any other name right now.
Certainly not anyone with a extra billion to burn.
I see on Forbes latest 400 list, that Bloomberg is #12 in the USA with $19.5 billion.
That is almost too much money. Some wouldn’t vote for him just because he is too rich.
I don’t think his religion is a major problem, but his height may be.
Especially if his running mate is 6 inches taller, and even more so if she is 6 inches taller and female.
Still, he has presence.
Del,
It won’t be Bloomberg.
Former Senator Chuck Hagel (R). Respected statesman. Would be an excellent presidential candidate. The AE nominee doesn’t need to be a self funding billionaire.
The writer of the article in the Bee is a total waffler. “It’ll never work, but it might. No way it can work, but in this day and age it just might. Spoiler alert, unless they pull something off”. What a jackass.
Actually I do think it will be Bloomberg as either P or VP. Patraeus could be a winning P candidate esp. with Bloomberg as VP.
Mike (#4), Winning is probably not where AE is going. But they won’t throw it to the House of Representatives. They have a very shrewd plan to broker the outcome in the electoral college. If AE gains enough electoral votes to give another ticket 270 votes, AE delegates would hold a post-election vote to decide which ticket to give their electoral votes.
Brad (#6), I was hoping Chuck Hagel would be the nominee when Unity08 was operating in 2008. I wrote to him urging him to run as an independent. Got back a very nice personal letter from him. Decorated combat veteran, a respected statesman with a great personal story. I’m not crazy about Bloomberg. Think Hagel would be stronger at the top. But as veep nominee, Bloomberg could still fund the campaign.
Bloomberg would never run as VP. Why do it? He is more important as mayor of NY City and wouldn’t have to move.
Hagel is known to a few here, but to the nation he is a “nobody”. Starts from a major deficit.
Patraeus, like most generals, looks impressive until you place him in the political arena. Put in crowds where kissing babies is important, and he comes off like a stiff.
This isn’t like after WW2 where Eisenhower was a true national hero.
Powell may have been a exception if he decided to run way back when.
In fact he might have still been a good choice if he hadn’t gotten tainted by the “WMD” debacle in Iraq.
I’d vote for Hagel, but ask anyone on the street and you get a blank stare.
Bloomberg, economic expertise, social issues moderate enough.
If Republicans nominate Perry, Bloomberg will look like a sensible alternative to the Obama Economy stuck with over 9% unemployment.
Del,
Keep in mind that AE is going to be picking up a tremendous amount of press and media interest in 2012.
Dems won’t have a primary campaign and, most likely, the Repubs will be done by mid spring with an effective winner. That leaves a relative void of media hype to fill until the Dem/Rep conventions. A political entity (AE) with ballot access in most states by that time with an AE nomination race of credible candidates and/or draft a candidates efforts will be very attractive to the media in the spring and summertime and, frankly, to voters who on the left are disappointed in Obama and on the right disappointed in Romney or Perry (unless someone else jumps in). And let’s not forget the plurality of voters in this country who are independents.
If Hagel even hints at becoming an AE candidate the media exposure will go through the roof.
I agree with you that Bloomberg would not be interested in a VP slot, but with the dynamic of AE it could present some interest for him if it was a teamwork P/VP scenario given the right men or women. And, of course, that is what AE is shooting for. We are in uncharted territory with AE. I am hoping for strange and wonderful things to happen in 2012.
All this talk about candidates presupposes a vote that will have credibility w/ the public. AE is making a HUGE mistake by not preparing the public for the attack that will come AFTER the vote. Anti-Internet predators are sharpening their claws. They killed the Department of Defenses SERVE project in 2004, and they will kill AE’s credibility in 2012. See the dialogue at,
http://t.co/EzPMCx3
William J. Kelleher, Ph.D.
Twitter: wjkno1
Internetvoting@gmail.com
Anti-Internet voting predators
Bloomberg would never run as VP. Why do it?
He can spend enough money to win and govern from behind the throne, a la Cheney and Bush Sr.
Brad, your idea of a “teamwork” ticket seems plausible with the new dynamic AE is bringing in. A “co-presidency” idea between Reagan and Ford was briefly floated in 1980, although I seem to recall it was quickly discarded. Dr. Kelleher, I’m not sure internet voting is going to be a big problem. A greater controversy may come if AE’s leadership feels the need to intervenes on the convention to assure the nomination of a “centrist” ticket and not one that leans too far left or right.
#14
Lee – a great fear is the ability of an internet onslaught vote for Ron Paul. His ability to call out his troops at a moments notice is quite extraordinary. And then you have an AE Leadership crisis as you described.
Also more problematic is a denial of service attack by whoever’s majority side is perceived threatened by a possible presumptive AE nominee. I.e. if a Center/Right presidential candidate is apparently headed for an AE nomination don’t think for a second that hackers who support Republicans won’t try to disrupt service for the AE internet vote. Similarly on the Dem side should it be a Center/Left candidate.
Pingback: Americans Elect coverage at Ballot Access News, Irregular Times and ThirdPartyPolitics.us | Independent Political Report
Brad, you could be right about vulnerabilities of the voting system. But surely AE has plans for optimizing the security. If Ron Paul wants to run for president after the Republicans have designated their nominee, he could do so on the Libertarian line. The Libs always seem to manage to get on all 51 ballots in every election.
Personally, I think the AE nomination is Roseanne Barr’s to lose. All she has to do is go on the Tonight Show, where she announced her candidacy, and explain how to become a registered AE voter, and how to vote for her. Of course, since she hasn’t formally filed with the FEC yet, I doubt if her candidacy is serious on her part.