Lawrence Lessig, prominent law professor and author of several books on campaign finance reform, has this Atlantic Monthly column, urging his readers to vote for Buddy Roemer in the Americans Elect nomination system. Lessig says that his previous support of Americans Elect has garnered an angry reaction from many of his readers, who claim that the Americans Elect nominee might “spoil” President Obama’s chances for re-election, or Mitt Romney’s chances.
Lessig responds to this argument by pointing out that about a week ago, Roemer said he would withdraw from the election if he can’t win. In this recent column, Lessig is more specific. He says a few days before the election, Roemer would ask his voters not to vote for him, if polls show he can’t win. Lessig points out that, in a sense, the U.S. does have an informal version of Instant Runoff Voting. The polls can be considered to be the “first round”.
The problem with the Roemer maneuver is that in many states, early voting now means that elections are conducted with a month of voting, not just one day as in the past. Furthermore, not every voter would learn that Roemer had asked voters not to vote for him. It would be impossible to withdraw Roemer’s name from the ballot, just a few days before November 6, 2012.
Lessig is either ignorant about Buddy Roemer and makes this statement as a naive political ingenue, or he is intentionally joining with Roemer in fabricating this big lie.
Roemer is notorious in Louisiana for being a strange and unbalanced person who lies for the enjoyment of seeing if he can get away with it. Look at this well-documented history of Buddy Roemer explained in articles and books by independent and reliable historians and journalists cited in the comment of “Say Amen” at this webpage:
http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2012/04/buddy-roemer-says-he-has-list-of-23-vice-presidential-possibilities/
As can be seen from Roemer’s history, he would never drop out, because he loves the chance to pontificate and have people listen to him. He has no aptitude for performing in public office, but loves to campaign and bask in the adoration of his supporters. He does not care whether he wins or loses; he just enjoys the action of the campaign.
Roemer now claims that he is polling nationally at 7%. Actually there was only one single poll done by a small privately hired firm and the only choices given to the few people called were Roemer, Obama, and Romney. It is obvious that Roemer paid for that poll and it is not reliable. Even with no other third-party choices, only 7% would choose Roemer. That is pathetically small. That poll is not something for Roemer to brag about.
Roemer claims that if he is on the ballot against Obama and Romney, he will receive some votes from both major parties, Democrat and Republican, and will receive the independent voters, giving him 41% of the electorate, which will win the election, because Obama and Romney will divide up the rest, each in the 20% -30% range. So for him to receive only 7% in this set-up poll shows that his BIG STRATEGY is a fantasy. Actually, with other independents in the race, such as Libertarian, Green Party, etc., Roemer’s 7% would almost disappear.
Roemer falsely states that he would give up the campaign “if [he] has no realistic chance of winning.” He never has had any realistic chance of winning! His own poll, maximizing his count at only 7% with Roemer as the only third-party choice, confirms he never will have a realistic chance of winning. No third party candidate has ever won, not even the very popular Teddy Roosevelt. It is apparent now that Roemer has no realistic chance to be the first third-party candidate in history to win the presidency. Yet he still refuses to give up — (because he enjoys running more than winning).
Roemer does not even have a realistic chance of qualifying for the AE nomination, according to its rules for the minimum supporters. Yet he still refuses to acknowledge the truth and even fabricates a false state of the voting. He says he needs only 10,000 support votes at AE and that he already has over 5000. The truth is that he has over 5000 total supporters from all 50 states but only about one-half of those are from the 10 states with the highest votes– the 10 states from which he must receive 1000 votes each in order to qualify. His voting has consistently been about that ratio: one-half in those 10 states. So he is not half-way to qualifying; he is only one-fourth of the way and he would need 15,000 votes per day for the final day to qualify. He has been receiving only 30 – 100 votes per day, with a few exceptions up to a high of 200 votes in one day. It is impossible for him to receive 15,000 votes per day. So why does he not quit now?
And, my understanding is that AE and its Board members are to remain neutral as to the choice of the nominee. Mr. Lessig’s blatant advocacy for Buddy Roemer would therefore be a flagrant breach of AE ethics. Will the Board expel him? If not, it invalidates the moral status of the entire enterprise.
Anyone who runs as a third party/independent candidate for President of the U.S. ought not to have a strong preference for one of the major party candidates over the other one. After all, if it is that important to you that Obama be elected instead of Romney, or Romney be elected instead of Obama, you shouldn’t be running against both of them — you ought to just vote for the one you prefer.
Someone who cares that they might “spoil” the election by drawing off the supporters of one major party candidate and thus cause the other major party candidate to win shouldn’t even be running as a third party/independent candidate in the first place.
With all due respect, #2, your logic would be seen as absurd in the many countries that have runoff/instant runoff systems — for instance, in France’s recent presidential election, several key candidates quickly endorsed one of the runoff candidates after the first round, while parties and candidates routinely endorse second choices in instant runoff elections.
With proportional representation in multi-party systems, it’s common for certain parties to be in alignment in cmapaigns and government. That’s only natural when you have candidates and parties running from across the spectrum.
Only in America would we say that the only candidate who should run third party is someone who doesn’t have a “lesser of two evils” between the current major parties.
Pingback: Lawrence Lessig Urges U.S. Voters to Support Buddy Roemer for Americans Elect Nomination | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
#3 Rob: I realize that other countries conduct their elections in different ways, and that’s why my comment began, “Anyone who runs as a third party/independent candidate for President of the U.S. …”
If, instead of the Electoral College, the U.S. had a system whereby the President would need a majority of the popular vote to win with a runoff between the top two candidates if nobody got a majority in the first round — similar to the French presidential election — then the “spoiler” problem would not be an issue, because voters would normally have the chance to vote for their “lesser of two evils” in the runoff.