On August 14, two factions of the South Dakota Constitution Party held nominating conventions. Each convention nominated candidates for public office. Each faction has rival claimants to the title of state chair. See this story. The Republican Party has filed a lawsuit in state court, saying that neither convention’s nominees should be put on the ballot. The hearing is Thursday, August 16.
So now the Constitution Party has its own LP Oregon saga?…. jeez…. third-parties are a damn joke. This, more than anything, is why they can’t find electoral success. Ballot Access is difficult, sure, but the fucking clown show is what does them in.
It happens to major parties also. In 1968 and 1964, the Democratic Party of Alabama wouldn’t list Hubert Humphrey or Lyndon Johnson. In 1948 the Democratic Parties of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina wouldn’t list Harry Truman. In 1912 the Republican Parties of California and South Dakota wouldn’t list William Howard Taft. In 1836, the Virginia Democratic Party presidential electors wouldn’t vote for the party’s vice-presidential nominee, Richard Johnson. In 1860 the Democratic Party held two rival presidential conventions, and each one chose a different ticket.
It’s a real shame to see the Constitution Party is such a divided state as it is.
So are these people trying to use the Reform Party model? These parties need to be able to put differences aside and argue their hearts out if they want, but if they don’t get their way, stay in the tent and stick with the party. The nature of third parties seems to be “If I don’t get my way, I am leaving.”
The EVIL top Donkeys and Elephants love the New Age divide and conquer math —
how many minority rule Prezs, Guvs, USA Reps/Sens, etc. in POWER ???
—
PR and Appv — pending Condorcet
Under Top 2 rival factions are free to back their own candidates.
How many faction splits in the communist/socialist universe ???
@Jim Riley and guarantee neither one has a shot of winning anything.
One of the factions should try hooking up with the now independent Idaho party and the Conservative Party of New York and work on a national Conservative Party that actually does something.
Andrew- As long as the “lesser of two evils” argument cannot be overcome there will always be the appeal to right wing voters to vote GOP because the Democrats are worse. A conservative alternative party is doomed from the outset.
@Andrew,
Why should the state be involved in resolving disputes among factions of a private political organization?
JR–
due to the PUBLIC aspect of nominating PUBLIC candidates for PUBLIC offices by PUBLIC Electors-Voters
— the 1989 EU SCOTUS op
ALL nominate (as in top 2 primary States) or SOME nominate (all other States).
Which faction is the *legal* SOME ???
—
Akin to the faction stuff in religion groups
— to control the assets of the group
— when there is no *internal* judicial body in the religion group
— the public courts intervene.
@Jim Riley When did I make such a statement? You’re fucking clueless in pretty every fucking post you make.. right along with Ogle and Demo Rep.
@Casual Observer… Disagree… there’s an easy marketing ploy to get around it. All you need to do is ask Dems and Repubs to name more than 10 differences between the two parties and they won’t be able to. They’ll get maybe 8 or 9, but they won’t hit or surpass 10. Follow that up with, “I guess they’re not that different, now are they? So it really doesn’t matter which one wins.”
Correction in Post at #Riley … should read “pretty much every”.
Andrew- I don’t disagree with you that the two dominant parties are very similar. Convincing a largely non-intellectual electorate is quite another matter.
Basic PR –
Total Votes / Total Members = Votes to elect 1 Member >>>
Max Factions = Total Members
eg — 101 Total Members = 101 possible Factions
>>> something will happen in the Factions on each bill – esp. number amounts — govt income / outgo amounts, number of cops, etc.
Difficult only for the current top 2 gangster oligarchs and the several pre-skool math juveniles on this list.
@Andrew,
There are two factions who are fighting for control of the South Dakota Constitution Party. The state of South Dakota should not have to decide which is the legitimate faction. But because the Constitution Party has nomination rights, the courts are involved in deciding which faction is recognized.
Under Top 2 political parties do not have nomination rights (or privilege). If each faction of the Constitution Party wants to back different candidates they can, assuming they can show some modicum of support. I have suggested 1/10 of 1%, which in South Dakota is about 280 persons.
It really does not matter if this is unwise politically, or whether it will “guarantee that neither has any chance of winning anything.” At least in my opinion.
I inferred that it is your position that the government of South Dakota should be involved in resolving factional disputes. If that is not the case I apologize for misunderstanding.