According to this story, Roseanne Barr is toying with the idea of running for President in November, even though it is extremely unlikely she will win the Green Party nomination. Her ballot label might conceivably be the Green Tea Party. There has been some indication that her backers in Minnesota are thinking of circulating a general election petition for her with that label.
In 2000, Minnesota allowed both the “Reform Party” and the “Reform Party Minnesota” to appear on the November ballot. Each group used the independent candidate petition, which allows a partisan label. John Hagelin had the “Reform Party” label and Pat Buchanan had the “Reform Party Minnesota” label.
Major parties and minor parties alike have been injured by the U.S. electoral college system, in which all the power to determine the presidential nominee of a party is in the hands of the state party officials and activists, and national convention decisions have no binding force. In 1968 the Alabama Democratic Party said George Wallace was its presidential nominee. In 1948, the Democratic Parties of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina said Strom Thurmond was their presidential nominee. In 1912 the Republican Parties of California and South Dakota said Theodore Roosevelt was their presidential nominee. In 2000, the Arizona Libertarian Party said L. Neil Smith was its presidential nominee.
Join the 1000-member national American Parliament!
Based on marked eballots and paper ballots kept as proof.
Obtain Eballot Here:
http://usparliament.org/votehere.php
_
There is no way she can get on the ballot in enough states to have a significant impact on the election. She should stay with the Green Party.
Richard, it discourages me from reading these usually interesting and well informed comments when you allow people like #1 to spam.
#1, I left your comment in place, but since you provided a clickable link to your ballot, I deleted that long list of over 500 candidates that you included in your comment. It takes up way too much space here.
@2 Thanks Nick, I think she should stick to the Green Party too as much as possible. I’m trying to encourage her to work with the American Parliament in a unity ticket, and to promote our election as a national voter registration drive through August 6th, 2012.
We allow all categorizations like Green Tea, Green Libertarian, Green-Pot-Christ, Green Roseannearchist Party members, as well as independents and all others except slander and hate, and we’re more of a “join WITH the Green Party” psychology, rather than a “join the Green Party” psychology.
But most people can’t grasp the concept of trying to work with all people.
Roseanne has made a lot of headway with the “unity of all” concept and she’s finally being more and more conciliatory towards all people, but she still needs a lot of encouragement and support.
She’s made a career from creating divisions in her humor, and it’s difficult to change, especially with how single-winner districts treat female candidates.
Any comments on her web sites that are linked to her name in the parliament are appreciated.
http://www.usparliament.org
@3 & 4 I love to write and speak about pure proportional representation (PR), and I thank you for the opportunity to be able to post here in order to engage with people who don’t understand the mathematics and/or the importance of communication.
It’s a system where 1/1001ts (or .999%) plus one vote elects each of the 1000 names in consecutive order, with plenty of consecutively ranked names as back-ups. It’s more like a team psychology than what people are used to in virtually all US plurality single-winner district elections.
Roseanne Barr is a joke. I listened to one of the Green debates with her and when you hear her she just cracks jokes and is so far out there. Rosanne is just doing this for PR. Thank God greens aren’t taking her seriously.
How many $ TRILLIONS will leftwing minor party candidates get from rightwing Elephants ??? — to DIVIDE and CONQUER in the about 8 marginal gerrymander Electoral College States ???
How many plurality winners in all States having popular votes for Prez since 1832 ???
ONLY the BAN database knows for sure ??? — i.e. NOT even SCOTUS or the national archives ???
Demo Rep, I have been active in the Michigan Green Party since 2005 and have seen no signs of right wing money flowing in. the republicans slipped a ringer in to run as a Green once to try and pull votes from the Dem challenger but the Dem won anyway.
#1 “Based on marked eballots and paper ballots kept as proof” How does this protect voter secrecy? Does it encourage vote buying and selling? (since the voter has “proof”)How about coercion? Back to topic – I agree w/ #7
#10 Secrecy? There’s a stack of ballots cast as proof. So far, there has been no problems, and anyone may have a stack and see the names or any information on the ballot. They may inspect the paper ballots, and contact the voter if they wish to verify, or try to track down the facts based on the evidence.
The ruling coalition has the time to improve the rules anytime there are any improvements to be made. We’re eager to make improvements.
Since there is 1000 seats, what does it matter if one person tries to buy votes? The name still get 1/1000ths of the “power” and they’re out numbered 1000 to one.
If you don’t like a committee of 1000 elected under this scenario, where each name wins with .999% plus one vote, thus electing 1000 names, then what sort of scenario would you suggest?
I appreciate the criticism, but can you take this a bit further? How much secretary do you want in order to be happy? Would you require a certain method?
Good to hear from you, I welcome your scrutiny and your questions, and I reiterate, we’re eager to improve.
And what do you mean coercion? A voter marks a ballot voluntarily and the ballots are gathered in a stack. Often a name will be on the ballot, sometimes not. If you want to verify the votes, you can get a stack and count them yourself, if you pay the printing costs.
Feel free to contact me if/when you want to follow this up. As I said, I love to write and talk about this.
Sorry, meant to write that each elected member has one of 1000 “seats” so they are out voted 999 to one once elected. We don’t have a problem with people financing the distribution of the ballots, because that’s how we register more voters and get more participation. It’s a voter registration drive.
Regarding #7. OK, so the Green Party is in the presidential race, as a typical party (like all the others) that has no means for working with all voters.
The parliament’s system, allows all voters to work together. So what if one is a comedian? So what about, how each person is different? Is that really a flaw, or is that an attribute?
The thing about this parliament operation is that every person is important, and every person is an equal.
Personally, I think diversity and humor are welcomed, and I am not in agreement with people who are so eager to reject others and their participation. The parliament helps protect these equalities of diverse people. Get it?
She should run for Congress in 2014. It takes two years (minimum) to run for POTUS. She started way too late to run for POTUS. Plus they let celebs actually get into Congress, sometimes.
#14 It doesn’t take 2 years minimum to run for POTUS. You need to read the US Constitution.
I’m all for people’s right to run for president. However, this would be pointless. Barr should now just seek the Green Party’s vice presidential nomination.
@11, paragraph meant to write:
How much secrecy do you want in order to be happy? In the past, the information on each voter was cut off the ballot to keep the name who voted secret, but I found that people don’t really care.
I mean, do you really care if/when someone sees who you rank voted for president, in a stack of hundreds of other ballots?
It this were a big deal, we could make improvments, but it hasn’t been yet.
@16
We need someone like her to still run for president to help nurture the parliament. Not to win, but to help promote the concept and the organization.
So, if she switched to Green Tea Party or Independent, she’d also still actually have a chance if she could reach 16.6% under this scenario:
Rs 16.6%
Ds 16.6%
Ls 16.6%
Gs 16.6%
Others 16.6%
Roseanne (and the Parliament) 16.6% plus one vote
I’m working with 24 US presidential candidates, and we welcome additional team players in case anyone else wants to join the fun. We have an email list of these 24, although many aren’t actually running quite full speed of course.
Here’s the list of the 24 who were elected with links to their web sites:
http://usparliament.org/pdc.php
To all parliament organizers: Show me your ballot access in a few states and then I will listen to what you have to say.
@19 My name won the only state primary allowing Libertarian presidential candidates (Missouri) that fell before the national Libertarian Party convention with 52.7%.
Does that qualify as ballot access?
@19 My name also won the county of Butte California, in the recent state California Libertarian Party primary, even though another candidate was nominated at the L convention (I was denied any recognition by them, they didn’t have room in their newsletter and “de-linked” my web site from the site lp.org but I did get more votes than the other “top two” recognized choice – Lee Wrights).
Additionally, several of our members were also on the ballot and received high percentages of votes; Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] – 39%, Prime Minister Miss Joy Waymire came in second with about 16%. Many others were of the ballot too; Scott Keller [Libertarian] came in third, etc.
Is that addressing your question?
@20, No it doesn’t. I am not talking about Libertarian Party ballot access, I am talking about Parliament party ballot access. Your organization doesn’t have any ballot access. Your group is just a website.
Also, It is dishonest to change your user name on a website like this. You use to call yourself “Go Barr/Ogle”. Now you are calling yourself “Peaceful Revolution”. You are purposefully trying to confuse people on this website by changing how you post.
@19 That’s two states; Missouri and California.
@23 My posts are continually being blocked and deleted, so I try to change my IP address and log in name to avoid that, since I never know when my posts will be blocked or deleted.
@22 Our organization gives people the liberty to self-categorize as they wish without penalty.
That appears to be unacceptable to you, so I guess you’d never be happy with us.
@25, Have you ever thought about why it is your IP address keeps getting blocked? IT IS BECAUSE YOU ARE ANNOYING.
@27 Yes, I am annoying. Good, I love to annoy people who are against free speech and the freedom to self categorize.
I’m so happy to have annoyed you. 😉
@28, Why do you think Ballot Access News and Independent Political Report were created? They were made to help foster free speech and to provide information to people who want to see the two-party system end. That is not what you are doing. What you are doing is posting the same, irrelevant post on every message board you can get find. Then when people call you out on it, you change your username and begin your annoying process all over again.
@29 Obviously, you didn’t read my earlier reply. My posts are regularly deleted and blocked form BAN and IPR. I changed my user name because my posts were being blocked.
You settle for calling people names. Fine. I’m for free speech. Say what you wish. But just realize, your posts are not being blocked and deleted, so enjoy it while you can. Mine are, so I will change my posting name whenever I wish. So you don’t like that, you must be opposed to change.
I remember a saying on my mentor, Alberto’s of Carmel California (RIP)’s, wall; “When you’re through changing, you’re through.”
Everyone else on BAN, feel free to comment on this “debate” between me and Ogle.
# 31 Lots of New Age folks with zero relevant to say.
Keeps the internet biz in business. Servers – nodes – etc.
This is the Ballot Access News blog – nothing more – BUT nothing less.
Pingback: Internal Affairs: Roseanne Barr forms…
Pingback: Internal Affairs: Roseanne Barr forms…
Nominated for 25 Emmys and 14 Golden Globes, including three for Best TV Series – Comedy/Musical, Roseanne forever transformed the television landscape when it premiered in the Fall of 1988. Following on the heels of the upstart Fox network’s 1987 sitcom Married With Children (which Fox created with Roseanne and Sam Kinneson in mind), Roseanne took the traditional TV portrayal of a functional and happy American family and literally turned it on its head. The brainchild of Matt Williams, creator of Home Improvement (1991) and writer for such hit series as The Cosby Show (1984) and A Different World (1987), Roseanne broke the mold of the traditional sitcom family and replaced it with the quintessential ideal of dysfunction. Attempting to portray a more realistic version of the American nuclear family, Roseanne instantly struck a chord with television audiences, and the series skyrocketed up the ratings – remaining a regular in the Nielsen Top 10 for the first seven of its ten seasons…
People if you don’t like a comment then just don’t reply or read it. I for one am a candidate for office and I don’t like it when people consider my website as spam. I will say this much the idea of a Parliament in the US will not work. What is needed is to increase the congressional seats. The idea will never take off. Too many people want their way which is why there are so many third parties. If all the third parties came together into one party or someone could convince the Green’s, Libertarians and Constitution Parties came together then that party would have ballot access in all 50 states plus they would have funds to fight the two other parties. If we could create a group that could convince the parties to join forces then there would be change. Until then all third parties will be ignored as crazy people and nut jobs.
Catch up on the 8th USA Parliament’s latest day to day bulletin here, hope you like it:
http://usparliament.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=554&sid=06f779500bd08df51d7749244e3857d4
Remember MP Lani Guinier [Republican], nominated by NAACP for pure proportional representation (PR), our member, friend & leader!
http://www.usparliament.org
Pingback: Roseanne Barr Hints She Might Run in November Even if she Doesn’t Get Green Party Presidential Nomination | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
Here’s a quick analogy to the current Green Party system;
The Green Party bosses’ (and Stein) internal elections are placing a stamp on the Green Party elections to make sure that NO other people; from the Green Tea, Roseannearchist, Environmentalist, Independent, Democratic, Progressive, Republican, Labor, Socialist, union, Libertarian…A.K.A. “outsiders”, can have a vote to elect the Green Party’s presidential candidate unless they pay them $125., travel to Baltimore, and be confirmed (i.e. have their blood drawn and tested) make sure they’re “Green”.
Then at the end of the Green Party convention there will be one person elected under this system (who will pick a VP) and everyone goes home with no more input for four more years.
Their voting system, will elect the “head-honcho”, i.e. Jill or Roseanne.
Roseanne has an ever so thin margin of understanding for the parliament and she’s probably our best team player/coach. So everyone can see how much trouble we’re in because we’re not building the team stronger by opening the doors for the outsiders. We’re wasting that opportunity hour by hour, month to month, year after year.
The Green Party’s voting system is dysfunctional and designed to get smaller and self-destruct.
The parliament’s voting system is not, because every tic elects an MP (up to the first 1000) who retains a vote for the five main basketball players (three prime ministers and two secretaries). But at current pace, the parliament may not see much success for about 10,000 years in the future.
Everyone’s psychology is set on keeping the Green Party’s plurality elections under IRV and single winner districts the way they are because that’s all they know, and they’re just riding down the river towards the giant waterfall while all us outsiders are here on the river’s banks observing the small craft head to its demise.
We’re trying to throw a rope, but those in the craft don’t see us nor do they know what’s ahead.
The solution is to open your eyes and start working to grab the rope so the Green Party can join those on solid land. Not to continue with the mindset of all the Green Party’s state convention election systems, but to use the election system which unites everyone.
http://www.usparliament.org
Everyone else on BAN, feel free to comment on this “debate” between me and Ogle.
No new ground is being covered that was not covered in a previous thread. Ogle will keep saying more of the same no matter what you say; any responses you provide just go to encourage him to post more. He is an attention whore and that is all there is to it.
There are only two things you can do about Ogle that make any sense.
1 – Delete his comments if they are on a site you have access to do so
2 – Ignore him
Acting like there is a rational human being there to debate is itself irrational. He is a diagnosed mental case and does not take his meds. That is really all you need to know.
“Ogle will keep saying more of the same no matter what you say…”
Me; You can count on that, I will keep doing what I which is to try to unite ALL people, all parties, all independents, all colors, all languages and all voters and non voters.
I can do this without degrading people, I do this by uplifting every voter as one equal of many.
I seek like-minded people who want to see a new higher level in politics, a level where we have consensus, teamwork and unity.
I have innovated ranked choice consensus voting and we have achieved many of these goals in a microscopic way.
I’ll come back when the discussion isn’t being hijacked and monopolized by someone who obsesses about a self-appointed make-believe parliament while spreading disinformation about the Green Party.