August 28 was the deadline for New Mexico candidates to withdraw from the November election. Mick Rich, Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, did not withdraw, so the New Mexico U.S. Senate race will be a three-candidate election. On August 28, U.S. Senator Rand Paul had endorsed Gary Johnson, the Libertarian nominee, but that had no effect on Rich.
I’m wondering if there was a specific announcement to that effect, or whether he just let the deadline pass without taking action, which would mean, by default, he remains on the ballot.
I had noticed his twitter feed had been quiet for the past 3 days or so, but there were two new tweets today.
Maybe Trump asked him to stay in because Trump would rather have the Democrat in the Senate than some “looney” Libertarian.
WZ,
We can’t know for sure whether that happened, but something like that wouldn’t surprise me. With the Libertarian (Johnson) in position to be the main opponent to Heinrich, there is a real question about what’s in the Republican’s best interest. Short term, they would benefit from having one less Democrat in the Senate, especially where the Democrat otherwise figured to be safe. Long term, I think it would hurt the Republicans, as more voters would see Libertarians as the more viable alternative to the Democrats.
It’s also possible that Trump was too busy tweeting to give this any thought.
It could be that he was running a “fly the party flag” campaign anyway, looking at the race as a long shot to unseat the incumbent.
If so, his reason for being in the race would remain, and he’d stay in the race, just like most other third party candidates.
No huge surprise. He cannot win but that’s probably beside the point. Ego!
Abolish the super-minority rule ANTI-Democracy USA Senate.
Major miracle that the small-medium-large States have some sort of Donkey/Elephants splits —
and that large States are NOT next to each other.
@TomP
The two (busy tweeting and not giving much thought) are no mutually exclusive.
If New Mexico used Top 2, Johnson might have advanced to a runoff.
Jim Riley, the November election is not a “runoff.” Federal law and case law says that states can hold runoffs for congress in the general election if they wish, but the runoff must be after November. Furthermore, if New Mexico used top-two, Gary Johnson would not have been able to enter the race. One of the worst characteristics of top-two is the lack of flexibility in the spring and summer of election years. Witness the California US House 50th district race this year, in which Duncan Hunter, Jr. is one of the two choices in November even though he has been indicted.
@Richard Winger,
Congress may change statutes. Congressional elections were not uniformly held on the November date until nearly a century after the “uniform” date was first established. If the House or Senate had been concerned about the Open Primary in Louisiana, they could have refused to seat Representatives and Senators elected by illegitimate procedures.
We don’t know if Johnson would have run under Top 2.
If California held segregated partisan primaries Duncan Hunter, Jr. would likely have been nominated. California only permitted replacement in the case of death, and Hunter is unlikely to get the death penalty.
Michael Benoit a Libertarian candidate in Hunter’s district in 2010 and 2012 received a larger share of the vote in 2012 because voters were free to vote for him.
US Code Title 2
§7. Time of election
The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.
(R.S. §25; Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 130, §6, 18 Stat. 400; June 5, 1934, ch. 390, §2, 48 Stat. 879.)
—-
THE DAY — THE ELECTION
See ALL/MOST State constitutions for *ELECTION* days/dates
— to NOT have the gerrymander HACKS rig such election days/dates.
ZERO mention of any runoff election day/date.
—-
Codification
R.S. §25 derived from act Feb. 2, 1872, ch. 11, §3, 17 Stat. 28.
The second sentence of this section, which was based on section 6 of the act Mar. 3, 1875 and made this section inapplicable to any State that had not yet changed its day of election and whose constitution required an amendment to change the day of election of its State officers, was omitted.
Amendments
1934—Act June 5, 1934, substituted “3d day of January” for “fourth day of March”.
Constitutional Provisions
The first section of Amendment XX to the Constitution provides: “The terms of Senators and Representatives [shall end] at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.”
Time for election of Representatives, see Const. Art. I, §4, cl. 1.
I thought it would be September 3rd. The law says 63 days before the election… when I do a count back from November 6th I get the third, not the 28th.