Angus King, One of the Three Independents in the U.S. Senate, Will Run for Re-Election

Posted on by May 29, 2024

On May 29, independent U.S. Senator Angus King announced that he is running for re-election, again as an independent.  The Senate has three independents, all of them up for re-election this year.  Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is also running for re-election.  Senator Kyrsten Sinema is not running for re-election.

Comments

Angus King, One of the Three Independents in the U.S. Senate, Will Run for Re-Election — 48 Comments

  2. Why do so many communists run for office? Chase Oliver is another example.

  3. Calling everyone you don’t like a communist is about as tired as neoliberals calling every Republican they don’t like fascists. It’s become banal.

    Not really a fan of Angus King, but Maine seems to like him a lot for some reason

  4. Manchin and Sinema went against the Democrats and lost their jobs. King stayed within the party lines. In 2022, King voted against the majority of Senate Democrats only 3 times, Sinema only 12 times, and Manchin 25 times. For the 3 votes where King dissented, Sinema and Manchin also dissented. King missed or declared present for 1 vote which the majority of Democrats supported, Sinema for 5 votes, and Manchin for 21 votes.

    King voted against Dems 0.85% of the time, 1.13% with missed or “present” votes. Sinema voted against Dems 3.44% of the time, 4.79% with missed or “present” votes. Manchin voted against Dems 7.51% of the time, 12.96% with missed or “present” votes. For reference the majority of both parties supported 67 bills together in 2022. There were 421 votes that year.

    I wonder if King will start dissenting more if he wins because now he doesn’t have to worry about the Democrats running a challenger for the next 6 years?

  5. Angus King is for UNCLOS III (LOST).

    He is odds with the sovereignty of Maine over Machias Seal Island of the Western Seal Islands in Washington County. He is backing the exchange of Machias Seal Island for the Plover Group of Islands that were annexed by the British on 1 August 1850 for the deal proposed by S. W. Boggs to the British Foreign Office at The Hague between 13 March – 12 April 1930 ad an Imperial Question on screw both the Sovereignty of Maine and Alaska.

  7. ANY MACHINATIONS IN 2024 RE USA REP GERRYMANDER DISTS RE 12 AMDT ELECTORS ???

    IE THE 2 G DISTS IN ME AND 4 G DISTS IN NE

  10. JUNE 1 2024 BALLOT ACCESS NEWS, PAGE 4 HAS A MERE 735,936 LP REGISTRATIONS IN 31 STATES+DC

    GEE – HOW UN-REPRESENTATIVE WAS THE 2024 LP CONVENTION ???

    WITH A FEW HUNDRED LP OLIGARCHS CHOOSING LP LNC OFFICERS AND A LP PREZ/VP CANDIDATE ???
    —
    ALL MAIL BALLOTS OF ALL LP FOLKS FOR NOMINATING CANDIDATES. / ELECTING LP PARTY OFFICERS

  11. AZ,

    Thank you for that number of LP registered voters. That total is way less than the number of registered electors of the American Independent Party in just California alone. Bobby Kennedy Jr. is the nominated by AIP for POTUS in 2024.

  12. Back to Angus King and his plans to assist Joe Biden with UNCLOS III ratification against the sovereignty of the States of Alaska and Maine. On 19 December 2023 NOAA & US Department of State made a flawed claim to the Extended Outercontinentsl Shelf to the North of Alaska with a baseline
    running in an easterly direction from
    PLOVER POINT to Monument # 1 that was
    based on a proposal offered by S.
    W. Boggs, Geographer of the State Department to William Eric Beckett, Second Legal Advisor of the British Foreign Office at The Hague, Netherlands between 13 March – 12 April 1930.

    It was on 1 August 1850 that the British Royal Navy took formal possession of the Plover Islands to the north of Alaska in the name of Queen Victoria. This was acknowledge by William Hunter, Secretary of State.
    Then on 29 March 1867, William Hunter,
    as the 2nd Assistant Secretary of State informed the other drafters of the Alaska Treaty that the Plover Islands were British Territory.

    So we have Angus King giving up the soverignty of Machias Seal Island in Washington Couty Maine to Canada for a Canadian non-Imperial claim to the Plover Group which is to the north of Alaska to cause the baseline to be extended from Point Plover to Monument # 1 of the agreement of 12 December 1912.

  13. It was between 1836 and 1884 that Imperial Russia and the United States had a territorial dispute over Forrester Island of the San Carlos Islands in the North Pacific Ocean.
    That dispute ended on 17 May 1884, by a resolution of the Alaska Board of the United States Department of the Treasury under the authority of Section 1 of the Harrison Alaska Organic Act.

    This resolution added six islands to Alaska, viz., Bennett, Forrester, Henrietta, Herald, Jeannette, and Wrangell (alternatively known between 12 August 1881 to 29 July 1901 as New Columbia Land).

  16. There were about 500k registered aip in ca in 2018, seems unlikely there are many more than 735 k now. 99% of the 500k or whatever it is now don’t even realize they registered with a party at all, or realize it after the fact but didn’t care enough to fix it. It’s not a national party anymore.

  17. AIP is organized in the District of Columbia and Indiana in addition to California.

    There is a national party in addition to State Parties.

  18. Define organized. Are they on the ballot there?Running candidates? Option on voter reg form?

  20. Dc and Indiana aip are not on the ballot or running candidates. Someone made a page or something – they call that a party

  24. REAL world 24: Back to No,

    The request came in to organize in DC and Indiana and the National Committee
    approved. That was years ago.

  27. MAINE November 6th 2018

    (I) King, Angus S., Jr. IND 344,575 54.31%
    Brakey, Eric L. R 223,502 35.23%
    Ringelstein, Zak D 66,268 10.45%
    Riley, James N., Jr. W 64 0.01%
    Total State Votes: 634,409

    P.22 FEC FEDERAL ELECTIONS 2018

    RILEY RELATIVE IN ME ???

  31. Libertarians have more of a following, but much less of a party than the AIP.

  32. The big deal with UNCLOS now is that its ratification would help repudiate China’s maritime claims.

  33. Less of a party? LOL

    AIP can get a thousand people to a convention?

  39. @Banana Republican
    Exactly. As I said, more of a following but less of a party.
    The AIP rallies behind their candidates, the LP can never agree on anything much less rally behind a candidate.
    It doesn’t matter that the LP has a higher number of registered members or brings in more money, they lack structure and organization, and most importantly shared values and principle. The AIP is more of a party than the LP has ever been.

  40. There’s no AIP structure or organization beyond what can fit in the back of one single Denny’s at a time with plenty of room left over

  41. 615 AM SUPP

    JUNE 1 2024 BALLOT ACCESS NEWS, PAGE 2 HAS CA AIP REG 834,730

    —
    ANY EFFORTS IN CA TO HAVE VOTER PETS FOR CA CONST AMDTS —
    NOOO PRIMARIES
    PR
    APPV
    TOTSOP

  43. This just in: LOLbertarian banana republicans very jealous of the AIP for having actual party despite smaller membership
    More at whine.

  44. You apparently mistook me for a libertarian. My views are much closer to the AIP back when it was founded, Pat Buchanan, and the right flank of MAGA GOP. I’ve had experience with the LP during the Ron Paul and Bob Barr nominations.

    If you consider 3 or 4 corrupt individuals and a dozen or so filler folks from a senior center or nursing home recruited with a complimentary luncheon buffet to be more of an actual party than the libertarians, you’re delusional. That’s the sad reality of the AIP today, much unlike back when I was active with them decades ago when they had candidates like Wallace and Schmitz.

    The fact that the libertarians have a many orders of magnitude more robust organization does not require agreeing with them on any issues, although I do agree on some and not others.

    Whether the AIP has any sort of ideology at all anymore is an interesting question, in light of their last several presidential nominations and general lack of other candidates or active state organizations. It seems more likely that currently they have devolved into a presidential line selling scheme and/or a tiny handful of people with the keys to that ballot line , maintained almost entirely by virtue of voters checking a box other than the one they intended on their voter registration applications, stroking their egos by having candidates come beg them for it.

    For your next assignment, go get some cheese.

    Any differences are handled very simply by running folks off. With so few left actually involved, there’s really not anyone left to fight or anything left to fight over Any longer there.

    As for the famous fractiousness of libertarians, they tend to be famously contrarian. As are minor party activists of any ideology. The libertarian party happens to be at the intersection of both. It’s at the very least a minor miracle that they didn’t shatter into dozens of parties decades ago, although it does seem to be at last happening now.

  45. On the contrary, I think it would be delusional to consider the Libertarian Party more of an actual party than “3 or 4 corrupt individuals and a dozen or so filler folks from a senior center or nursing home recruited with a complimentary luncheon buffet”, which obviously is hyperbole about the state of the AIP.

    I guess what I’m saying isn’t so much that the AIP is more of a party than the LP, but rather that the LP is even less of a party than the AIP. The AIP hasn’t run decent ticket since Alan Keyes/Wiley Drake 2008, but the LP hasn’t run a decent presidential candidate since Ron Paul 1988 and even then they paired him up with that evil clown Andre Marrou.

    What “robust organization” does the LP have left to speak of? As you say they are shattering, if not disintegrating. Surely, the structure of the AIP remains more sound, even if the membership is lower and how well they are currently promoting their ideology is questionable.

    I don’t buy into that whole cliche about Californians accidentally registering with the AIP when they wanted to register as independent voters ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_Party#California_membership_issues ). Sure Californians are dumb: dumb enough to turn their state into a hell hole unfit for human habitation and dumb enough not to leave it. But you can’t tell me that millions of them are so dumb that they can’t understand the difference between “independent” and “American Independent Party”. The “Party” is kind of a give-away.

    I’m all out of cheese, will cheesy crackers do?

  46. You are completely delusional. The L.P. just turned out a thousand people to a convention, has a million dollar plus national budget and dozens of active and balloted state affiliates, hundreds of candidates for office of all levels from coast to coast, hundreds of members in various elected and appointed local office around the country.

    The AIP has not had anything remotely approaching that since the 1970s, much less now. Far from hyperbole, my description was 100% the literal accurate organization of the current AIP. They have nothing else except a ballot access shell game in one and only one state.

    I don’t know how you measure AIP membership. If by those who show up for meetings, run for office, and contribute money, I’ve completely accurately described based on direct personal observations the current conditions of the AIP. If people who were paying insufficient attention and got bamboozled by the word independent in the party’s name are membership, what is their current ideology? It’s all over the map, much like their nominated tickets in the last several rounds.

    What structure of the AIP? There is no structure..It’s an outhouse with a leaky roof and collapsed floor in an abandoned old west town at present.

    The LP is disintegrating because there’s something to fight over – money, assets, ballot lines, donor lists, etc – and enough active members to have faction fights. The AIP passed that stage quite a few decades ago. You might say that the L.P. in 2024 is roughly at the disintegration stage of the AIP in 1976.

    You’ve convinced yourself that a structure which hasn’t existed in a generation must still exist in the AIP. I have observed directly that it does not.

    It isn’t millions, and yes, they are that dumb. Or, more accurately, that distracted while filling out government paperwork and or that confused about government and politics. Try surveying the alleged AIP members, if by members you mean registrants, how they thought they were registering or what the ideology of the AIP is. I actually have, so I’m not just talking out of my ass based on wishful thinking and little if anything else. Unlike you.

    If you mean anything else by AIP structure or membership in the current decade, please explain your measures and information sources.

    You keep insisting that there must be a there there. I actually looked, and conclusively determined based on detailed on the ground assessment that what remains is exactly as described.

    If you don’t have contradicting evidence, you’ve passed the point where you should get the benefit of the doubt regarding sanity and/or connection to real world and/or arguing in good faith several rounds back. Either come up with real numbers for measures of membership and structure, or keep insisting that there must be an oasis in the Sahara because you see it off in the distance.

  47. Aaaaaaaaaaand you’ve reverted to mudslinging for lack of substance. I was right about you at 6:56 after all. A pity.

  48. I have not doing any mud. I provided measurables and facts. You’ve provided wishful thinking and insinuations. If you’re sane and arguing in good faith, you can answer the questions asked or implied in the prior round as opposed to criticizing my tone, which is actually if anything less acerbic than yours.

    I don’t know what you think you were right about at 6:56 when you incorrectly asserts I’m a Libertarian and jealous of the AIP. Actually, I’m of basically the views of the AIP during its founding era in the 1960s and 70s, when I was among their supporters and (not particularly prominent) activists. I’ve ventured into LP internals twice, in 1987-89 and 2008. If you don’t believe me, I don’t care. I’ve supported Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, George Wallace, Lester Maddox – my views haven’t changed much over the years.

    One of us has provided lack of substance, and it isn’t me. You can still provide current measures of AIP membership and success whenever you wish, if you think they exist. Number of registered voters in One state is insufficient, since there is an alternative explanation. Your misplaced faith in voters ability to correctly read, interpret and fill out paperwork does not prove structure.

    Number of people at meetings at conventions? Number of Ballot lines? Number of candidates in recent elections? Number of votes they received? How many donors of what aggregate amounts? Annual budget? How many elected? How recently were the answers substantially different ? What other measures?

    You keep trying to run away from such questions. I think there’s a reason for that. Prove me wrong if you’re willing and able. A ghost town has more remaining structures than 2024 AIP. Tumbleweeds are about all that’s left. I don’t care if you take me at my word. Prove me wrong. If you won’t, it’s because you can’t, unless and until you demonstrate otherwise.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.