On August 16, the Georgia Secretary of State said that the Green Party presidential petition doesn’t have enough valid signatures. The state says only 5,925 signatures are valid. The requirement is 7,500. See this story.
This is the second time Georgia has rejected a presidential petition this year. Georgia rejected Rocky De La Fuente’s petition because he didn’t submit the names of his presidential elector candidates by July 1. De La Fuente has a lawsuit pending over whether the separate earlier deadline for presidential electors is constitutional or not.
I’m a relatively young man. The first year I ever voted was 2004. I voted for Ralph Nader that year and again in 2008 (I thought of him as the authentic Green Party candidate both times). I voted for Jill Stein in 2012. I’m a civil servant. By attacking unions a Libertarian President would directly threaten my career. But I’m getting so sick of how the Greens have this tendency to squander every break they’re given. You would think that the Georgia party would have prepared for changes in signature requirements and taken the time to become familiar with what the Secretary of State looks for. Unless something dramatic happens between now and November I might have to vote for Gary Johnson.
What makes you think the Green Party is to blame in this case? The linked article doesn’t say why the signatures were rejected and it is not at all clear that the party could have done anything better. The system is rigged against minor parties; voting against your preferred party isn’t going to change that.
The article says that they turned in about 10,000 signatures, and the requirement was 7500. This is a good lesson learned for the Greens. You should turn in about double the number of signatures required. The Illinois Green Party seemed to understand this. Same with Pennsylvania. I’m not sure what the problem in Georgia was.
TomP and others. Keep in mind the Georgia Green Party has virtually no experience petitioning for partisan office given the oppressive laws that have existed since they began. I don’t doubt it was difficult to organize and coordinate a volunteer base in way to monitor progress over time.
The other states mentioned have considerable experience coordinating state wide petition drives with ongoing progress monitoring and the ability to deploy people in ways to maximize time with quality signatures.
First off Libertarians have no beef with unions unless they have rules that force people to join them against their will. Unions as a voluntary organization can and do have a useful role to play in society but, like anything else, given too much power they tend towards corruption.
In my experience the difference between the Libertarian Party and the Green Party is that the national party usually commits to 50 state access and raises the money to make that happen. They then help the states that need help to the point, in some cases, of taking over the entire petitioning process. Even this approach is subject to problems given the fact that each of the 50 states have slightly different rules and procedures and so sometimes the ball gets dropped. Still in all they have acquired enough institutional experience to become highly successful over time.
The Greens rely primarily on volunteer action which is always going to be tougher. Trained petitioners get much higher rates of valid petitions per hour worked. Also individual volunteers may or may not pass on vital institutional knowledge and so petition drives are more subject to failure. Having said that, the Greens have done a good job of attracting and incorporating a lot of ex-Sanders supporters into their petitioning process this year and it has made them more effective on the whole.
Rock Howard there are many enormous differences between the Libertarians and the Greens. I have no desire to get into an extended argument here. But please don’t deceive people.
Sounds like the Greens are starting to lose steam. They have done an impressive job getting ballot access for most of the cycle, but recent loses in Nevada, South Dakota, and now Georgia don’t look good.
People got paid and didn’t care if it qualifies.
For Clay, Ralph Nader ran as an INDEPENDENT in 2004 and 2008. He did not run on the Green Party ticket, therefore, he was not the “authentic Green Party candidate.” He also did not achieve ballot access in Georgia those years because Georgia’s ballot access was notoriously restrictive. The “authentic Green Party candidates” in 2004 and 2008 were David Cobb and Cynthia McKinney, which you, by your own admission, did not vote for.
Lee, I voted for the candidate the Green Party would have endorsed under more democratic circumstances and who was supported by most Greens.
Greens, Schmeens.
Who challenged the ballot? It is important to know who is interested in keeping the Green Party out of Georgia.