Will McVay, a former Delaware Libertarian Party activist who has left the Libertarian Party, earlier this year noticed that the Conservative Party of Delaware had become ballot-qualified, almost accidentally. The Delaware definition of a qualified party is one with registration of at least one-tenth of 1% of the total state registration. Without any organized effort, the number of people who spontaneously filled out a Delaware registration chard showing themselves as “Conservative” rose high enough last year to qualify that party.
McVay organized it, and this year, under his leadership, the party is running Vermin Supreme for President, Jonathan Realz for vice-president, and Jon Roe for State Senate, district 2. Roe is the only minor party legislative candidate for Delaware legislature this year.
Supreme is also a former member of the Libertarian Party. He had sought the party’s presidential nomination in 2020, placing third on the first ballot.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-already-threatening-sue-post-012146777.html
MORE TRUMP THREATS – ABS MAIL BALLOTS
—
ALL 2020-2021 TRUMP LOSER LAWYERS GET PAID OFF ???
It’s not a threat, it’s a promise. And Trump is being generous by saying “maybe” purposely.
We’re ready, willing and able to deliver the election!
USPS: UNION STRONG AND WE KNOW WHO OUR FRIENDS ARE!
You mean –
Deliver the election to Harris, Walz and the CCP? As in, engineer their victory through mail fraud?
There is no such thing as mail fraud.
Also, there’s no election fraud.
We’ve always been at war with Eurasia.
“Without any organized effort, the number of people who spontaneously filled out a Delaware registration chard showing themselves as “Conservative” rose high enough last year to qualify that party.”
According to several authoritative sources who asked to remain anonymous, a chard is a type of vegetable. Vegetables voting has much to do with how we have found ourselves in our present state.
Vegetables would quite naturally vote for Vermin. I guess that’s long been the problem with our elections – vegetables voting for vermin. Scum rises to the top. Idiocracy is already here.
Vermin Supreme is a communist. The party label is not even close to his beliefs.
Last spring, Justice Samuel Alito had drafted an opinion dropping federal charges against many of the January 6 insurrectionists who violently stormed the Capitol. The ruling in Fischer v. United States had not yet been released. Then the New York Times published a startling story: Alito himself had flown the flag of insurrection at his home. (He briefly blamed it on his wife: “She is fond of flying flags.”) Days later, it was reported that he had flown such flags at his vacation home as well.
Awkward! Grounds for recusal? Time to rethink the ruling? Nah. Instead, Chief Justice John Roberts quietly took Alito’s embarrassing name off the opinion and slipped his own name onto it instead.
That is just one of the gobsmacking revelations from a story by Jodi Kantor and Adam Liptak that appeared in the New York Times this weekend. The lurid news of the day quickly overwhelmed it — the gunman arrested outside Donald Trump’s golf course, the continued smear campaign by former President Trump and Sen. JD Vance against the Haitian immigrant community in a small city in Ohio, and more.
But we must not let these revelations fade from view. They paint a damning and indelible picture of how John Roberts, for all his vaunted “institutionalism” and piety about calling “balls and strikes,” steered the Court to shield Trump from accountability for his misdeeds.
Call me naïve. At the beginning of this year, I thought I had few illusions about the Court. I had just published a harshly critical book, The Supermajority. But I felt confident in asserting that the Court was a conservative Court, a Federalist Society Court, even a Republican Court — but not a MAGA Court. It had not yet shown an appetite for excusing Trump from the reach of the law.
So I, along with most legal observers, assumed that the justices would let Trump’s trial proceed. I thought there was a good chance it would be unanimous, that Roberts would work behind the scenes to ensure that the Court spoke with one voice on major issues of presidential power and constitutional law. That’s what other chief justices did, most notably Warren Burger in United States v. Nixon, the Watergate tapes case and the closest analogue to the Trump trial ruling.
After all, we all thought, Trump v. United States was legally easy. Indeed, the possibility of criminal charges was the stated reason why Republican senators did not vote to convict him of the January 6 charges in Trump’s second impeachment trial.
Many of us, too, sensed there was a deal afoot — a unanimous ruling that Trump could not be thrown off the ballot by one state under the 14th Amendment and a principled ruling on the criminal trial.
Behind the velvet curtain of the Court, though, there was no deal. Roberts wrote a memo in February — before the Court had even announced that it would hear Trump’s appeal — declaring that the Court would give the former president a huge win. “I think it likely that we will view the separation of powers analysis differently” from the appeals court, he wrote. As Kantor and Liptak summarized, “In other words: grant Mr. Trump greater protection from prosecution.”
They detailed myriad other ways that Roberts steered rulings Trump’s way. He froze out Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The ruling was sloppy and immunized vast areas of potential presidential wrongdoing. The Times noted that NYU Law professor Trevor Morrison had discovered that Roberts selectively edited a quote from a key earlier ruling to help Trump.
The resulting ruling tells future presidents that they can break the law, plainly and flagrantly. As long as they conspire with other government officials, it will be effectively immunized. (Order your White House counsel to pay hush money, as Richard Nixon did, not your campaign manager, and you’ll be off the hook.)
The opinion has widely and correctly been scorned as one of the worst in American history — a rip in the constitutional fabric. The Times’s tick-tock makes clear that this was not a baffling anomaly. Rather, it is the biggest, most visible, and perhaps most consequential in a series of actions taken by a corrupted Court. It follows Citizens United, Shelby County, and other rulings that systematically undid key democratic protections.
Throughout American history, overreach by the Supreme Court has provoked a response. Dred Scott did in the 1850s — it helped lead to a civil war. Reactionary rulings such as Lochner did in the early 20th century. Trump v. United States should join with the Dobbs abortion rights ruling to spur a similar backlash today.
We’ve argued for an 18-year term limit for Supreme Court justices, because nobody should have too much public power for too long. And we’ve urged a binding code of ethics, which would have forced Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas to step out of these key cases. These reforms are widely popular. Most recently, a Fox News poll this summer found that 78 percent support term limits.
The Court is a broken institution. It’s time to fix it. The latest revelations remind us that otherwise, the fix is in.
Donald Trump doesn’t so much run for something as he runs against somebody. His latest attacks are aimed at Haitian immigrants, but what we’re seeing is a playbook previously used to target other ethnic or religious groups, and with a similar goal: to make the MAGA base feel like they’re under attack.
“The followers must feel besieged,” as the late Italian writer Umberto Eco, who grew up in fascist Italy, wrote nearly three decades ago in The New York Review of Books. “The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.” Indeed, in order to enact much of his radical right-wing agenda, Trump needs his people to think America is on the brink of collapse—and to associate that collapse with an “other.” The goal is to panic the base, and since there isn’t a scary enough truth, lies will do.
“They’re eating the dogs,” Trump bellowed to Kamala Harris last Tuesday night, alluding to the utterly baseless claim that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio are stealing and feasting on people’s pets. It was immediately clear what Trump was doing. After all, scapegoating is one of Trump’s favorite ploys. He demonized Mexicans and Muslims in 2016, and long insisted that immigrants are “destroying the blood” and the “fabric” of America.” He even used his closing remarks at the debate to stoke fears of “criminals” entering the United States and “destroying our country.”
But the irony of Trump’s fascist rhetoric was particularly rich in Springfield, where the Haitian influx has revitalized the city’s workforce—as with so many places in America, where there just weren’t enough people living in the area to keep the economy going.
It bears repeating that there is no pet-eating of any kind going on. In fact, Trump running mate JD Vance basically admitted as much in a CNN interview over the weekend. “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people,” he told Dana Bash, “then that’s what I’m going to do, Dana, because you guys are completely letting Kamala Harris coast. You had one interview with her. You talk about pushing back against me, Dana. You didn’t push back against the fact that she cast the deciding vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, which is why a lot of Americans can’t afford food and housing. We ought to be talking about public policy.”
“You just said that you’re creating a story,” Bash rightly responded. “So the eating dogs and cats thing is not accurate.”
“We are creating, we are…,” Vance caught himself. “Dana, it comes from first-hand accounts from my constituents.”
Trump’s lie about Springfield might be particularly grotesque. But it’s in the same tradition of racist rhetoric that he has been testing out since the beginning of his campaign.
A campaign that started in June 2015 when he came down that bronze escalator and announced he was running for president. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you,” he said, while unveiling his bid. “They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
The othering continued, as the former president has kept scapegoating ethnic and religious minorities going through his first, second, and third presidential campaigns, including Muslims (by blaming them for domestic terrorism, culminating in his notorious Muslim travel ban); Chinese people (by blaming them for the COVID crisis); Mexican people (by blaming them for the fentanyl crisis); Venezuelans (whose gangs he’s accused of taking over the town of Aurora, Colorado); and most recently, of course, Haitians.
Almost all of these attacks are bits of unreality spliced together, based on events that are wildly exaggerated or ones that simply did not happen. Springfield, Ohio just had the misfortune of getting caught up in those lies. Now, two of their hospitals have been sent into lockdown after bomb threats. Public schools and municipal buildings have been shut down for consecutive days because of similar concerns. Trump reportedly plans to soon visit Springfield, a trip that could further inflame a nation already gripped by fears of political violence. Trump, himself, faced an apparent assassination attempt on Sunday, just two months since he was nearly killed in Butler, Pennsylvania.
That visit to Springfield—which could happen imminently, or perhaps never—is unlikely to cool the national temperature. But in the meantime, the town’s residents will continue to live in fear, including the Haitian immigrants, who are there legally but who Trump has promised to deport “back to Venezuela.” This is the post-truth Republican Party: fake stories, real consequences. If Trump wins, we’ll see a whole lot more of this—more othering, more scapegoating, more racism, more of anything to panic the base so that he can enact the kind of laws that turn a democracy into an autocracy.
“I think our people hate the right people,” a relaxed JD Vance confided to an interviewer three years ago.
By “our people,” Vance meant the followers of Donald Trump, whose support he intended to win in the Ohio Republican senate primary.
By “the right people,” Vance meant liberal elites.
And yet, it was also clear that Vance knew one couldn’t foster hatred for liberal elites without the collateral damage of hatred for immigrants, racial and ethnic minorities, cultural nonconformists, and any of the groups whom those elites were supposedly elevating at the expense of “our people.”
But these past few weeks suggest that it wasn’t merely collateral damage at all. The assault on these groups really was the point. The alleged failures of liberal elites (to, say, close the border or protect manufacturing jobs) are the excuse for the assaults on immigrants and minorities that we’ve seen throughout the Trump years. That’s where the real political payoff is.
Let’s return, for a moment, to Vance’s telling sentence. By “hate” Vance means . . . hate. Not disagreement or even dislike. Hate.
Vance’s politics are the politics of hate. Perhaps he once read The Education of Henry Adams and learned that, “Politics, as a practice, whatever its professions, has always been the systematic organization of hatreds.” Or perhaps he just watched Trump’s success and internalized its lessons. But in any case, for Vance it’s all about hate.
And the assault on the Haitians of Springfield, Ohio, is a kind of culmination of Vance’s—and of course Trump’s—politics of hate.
It also represents a culmination of Vance’s and Trump’s politics of lying. Vance acknowledged yesterday on CNN that he had been trying to manufacture coverage of Springfield based on nothing more than a few unsubstantiated constituent phone calls. “If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, then that’s what I’m going to do.”
The creation of stories. One could call that fiction. Or lies. Lies in the service of justifying and encouraging hatred for a minority group. That seems familiar. It’s familiar from the last century in Europe. It’s also familiar from periods of American history, especially with respect to race and immigrants.
Donald Trump is of course the master of deploying lies in the service of hatred. But in Trump’s case, the hatred is so mixed with his distinctive showmanship and conmanship that it’s sometimes hard to see the heart of the enterprise. With Vance, who’s not as much of a showman or con man, it’s all much clearer.
Republican political operatives profess to be unhappy that Trump and Vance have veered away from what had seemed to be a winning version of the immigration issue: the border. Vice President Harris was given the task of managing migration to it. But the border’s been a mess, and there are people who’ve come across the border illegally and committed crimes. So there’s plenty of grist for the mill here for a more conventional (if still mean-spirited and demagogic) anti-immigration candidate.
But instead, Vance and Trump have gotten “distracted” into a debate about legal Haitian migrants who’ve come to Springfield to work legally. Or is it a distraction? Might Vance and Trump know what they’re doing? Perhaps a pure play on racism and nativism is more effective politically than a somewhat complicated debate about the border—especially after Trump killed the border bill, and especially in non-border states in the Midwest?
In any case, it’s striking that Trump and Vance are willing to make this campaign so clearly a referendum on nativism and racism.
Such efforts have worked at other times in American history. And such efforts have been aided by sophisticated allies who don’t quite join in the campaign, but certainly don’t go out of their way to denounce it or repudiate it. Think of the Southern Bourbons who tolerated and benefited from the uninhibited racism of Southern populists and demagogues.
We have the equivalent of Southern Bourbons today in the ranks of the Republican establishment and conservative elites. The sounds you hear from that establishment and those elites, from corporate boardrooms and editorial offices, in the face of disgusting bigotry and dangerous incitement from the presidential ticket they support? Those are the sounds of silence.
If it’s strength they need, there’s strength in numbers.
I’m referring to former officials who worked for Donald Trump, especially the national security stewards, who have declined to come forward and directly warn voters that he’s unfit to be president — even though, as insiders know well, that’s how they feel.
Imagine the pre-election power of a news conference in which a phalanx of senior Trump advisers delivered that message, each providing first-hand examples of his derelictions of duty. What could better tip the few undecided voters against Trump than former military leaders giving witness to his disregard for the Constitution, the rule of law and America’s national interests?
On Monday, 10 retired military officers, including six former generals and two admirals, released a letter in which they not only condemned Trump but also endorsed Kamala Harris as “the best — and only — presidential candidate in this race who is fit to serve as our commander-in-chief.” Trump, they wrote, “is a danger to our national security and our democracy. His own former National Security Advisors, Defense Secretaries, and Chiefs of Staff have said so.”
The Harris campaign is exploiting earlier, unprecedented pans from Trump’s former aides. It trolled Trump pre-debate with a new ad on Fox News, featuring condemnatory clips from Vice President Mike Pence, former national security adviser John Bolton, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley.
At the debate, Harris’ guests included two outspoken Trump veterans, White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci and national security official and Pence aide Olivia Troye. And in the debate, she cracked, “If you want to really know the inside track on who the former president is … just ask people who have worked with him.”
The letter, the ad, Harris’ trolling — all of that is well and good, but we need to hear unambiguously from those White House, Cabinet and military notables who actually saw and conversed with Trump regularly. As I’ve noted before, no president in U.S. history has been so damned by so many once part of the inner circle.
Some, including retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, a former White House national security adviser, have written critical books but otherwise declined to come right out to say, “Voters, beware!” Others, including Milley and former White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, have been sources for damning books and articles but mostly remain mute. Still more, including former director of national intelligence and former Sen. Dan Coats, who privately fretted that Trump was somehow beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin, have been altogether silent.
Trump’s actions in encouraging the Jan. 6 attack on Congress and upsetting the peaceful transition of power were “an abandonment of his responsibilities to the Constitution,” McMaster said. But when asked if Trump is fit to hold the office again, he demurred: “That’s the judgment that the American people have to make.”
In fairness, military veterans are steeped in a culture of deference to civilian government and the commander in chief. That weighs heavily against any action smacking of politics. Yet they served in civilian roles and saw Trump as most Americans could not. It’s their patriotic duty to speak up.
There is another disturbing factor. Former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, Never Trump Republican, has talked to some of the “boneless wonders” who remain offstage. “I’m just going to spill the beans,” he said on a recent “Bulwark” podcast: “A lot of these folks, they’re making money now, OK?” — consulting for private equity firms and defense contractors, for example.
But, Kinzinger added, as if addressing the fainthearted: “You saw this stuff and you actually care about the future of the country? I mean, you’ve got to speak out! This is like the most important moment.”
Kinzinger held out hope for 11th hour surprises. So should we all.
Jeez $tock, give it up. We know all of these copy and paste are from you.
I love how this was an accident and the party is running a gay activist as part of the Conservative Party. Just goes to show that the Democrats don’t represent the people anymore.
Not a bad idea. If only someone had taken charge who nominated a more socially conservative and politically libertarian presidential candidate than Vermin Supreme. How did McVeigh manage to become the one organizing and leading the party anyway?
ANY VE-GET-ABLE PARTY YET ???
WITH TOM-ATO AND LET-TUCE CANDIDATES ???
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2024/09/16/secretive-group-recruited-far-right-candidates-key-us-house-races-it-could-help-democrats/75249894007/
DONKEYS GETTING CONS ON BALLOTS – MORE DIVIDE AND CONQUER STUFF
HOW MANY CONGRESS HACKS ELECTED WITH A MINORITY OF VOTES ???
HOW MUCH OF THE EX-LP FOLKS DOING OTHER PARTY STUFF IS DUE TO THE NATL LP MISES FACTION MACHINATIONS ???
—
ALSO FOR ALL PARTIES–
MAIL BALLOTS FOR ALL PARTY MEMBERS — NO RIGGED/LIMITED. CAUCUSES/ PRIMARIES/ CONVENTIONS
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Trolling, I have no idea whether the culprit is the subject of your obsession, and neither do you, unless you’re him. The plagiarized propaganda pablum is clearly by the same intermediate source that was posting as “Rick” and has now gone on to using a variety of names to post the same kind of plagiarized propaganda pablum. Beyond that, who knows and who cares?
Jeff, Vermin is straight (maybe bi, maybe not, Idk).
Nuna, McVay managed to be the one organizing and leading the party because he noticed that it qualified (because enough people wrote in conservative on registrations) and filed whatever paperwork/fees/notice the state requires to lead and organize it before anyone else did.
Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah
I think Delaware used to provide a list of parties to voters as part of the registration process. At one time they had 25 parties Plus Unaffiliated and Others. In 2013 they purged Federalist, Citizens, New Frontier, A Delaware, New Alliance, US Taxpayers, Statesman, National Unity, and “ROL”. They may not have purged the voters, but simply stopped itemizing these parties – “Others” had a bump. These must have been organized at some time or other, and then registrations gradually died off as people died, moved, or decided to vote in a primary.
American, Liberal, Nonpartisan, Green, Working Families, Reform, Constitution, Conservative, Natural Law, Blue Enigma, and Socialist Workers were still tabulated. Those that represented an actual party have tended to decay over time. Those that have represented a philosophy (e.g. I’m a conservative, not a Republican) have grown.
Nonpartisan, Conservative, Liberal, and Libertarian have grown, while Working Families, Reform, Constitution, Natural Law, Blue Enigma, and Socialist Workers have declined. “Independent Party of Delaware” has grown and represents about 1.5% of voters.
Anerican Delta was added in 2017, and “American” increased at the same time, so there may have been some voters who did not write in the full name of the party. More recently Mandalorian, No Labels, and We The People have been added. No Labels has enough to be qualified.
Currently qualified parties are Democratic, Republican, Independent Party of Delaware, Libertarian, No Labels, Nonpartisan, and Conservative. Green and Liberal are just short of qualification, so if someone organized an effort to get voters to change their affiliation they could easily qualify. No Labels peaked at almost 1800 so there must have been an active effort to have voters change their affiliation.
Conservative has been qualified since December 2020, so it is likely that ordinary registration to be able to vote in the presidential election caused a surge in registration. Delaware elects its governor in presidential election years so ordinary people would see little point in registering at other times. There must have been a list of parties since most parties had an increase.
Since June 2023, Delaware has had automatic voter registration (AVR) where anyone who gets a license or ID and appears to be qualified to be registered is automatically registered. They are then sent notice, with an option to opt out or choose a party. Since that time, 93% of registrations have been AVR. That might not indicate new registrations were because of AVR. In the past when someone was asked if they wanted to register, they might have declined because they had already spent hours waiting in line. 2.5% of AVR have chosen to cancel the voter registration (the return card was postage paid, but they would still have to mail it).
20.3% chose a new party. Those who did not most likely did not bother to return the card since the notice said you didn’t have to do anything and you could change party online. 0.14% of those who chose a party, chose Conservative. Ordinarily this would mean that the party would remain qualified, but the large number who did not choose a party, only 0.03% of the new registrants were Conservative.
In addition to meeting the threshold, the party officers must file a Certificate of Party Title, which is a sheet of paper with the party name and officers. This will allow the party to make nominations.
In 2010, McVay ran as a Libertarian and Independent Party of Delaware candidate (and was denied access to the Republican and Democratic primary). He has also ran as the candidate of the Nonpartisan Party, and apparently registered the Mandalorian Party. I think it is clear that he is a Party Activist.
@AZ,
How about for church congregations mail ballots to all members to choose clerics, deacons, elders, etc.? How about for civic clubs: Moose, Elks, Lions, Rotarian, etc., mail ballots to choose officers and delegates to conventions? How do mail something in Devil’s Knight City?
JR–
VARIOUS *PROFESSIONAL* NATL GROUPS HAVE MAIL BALLOTS FOR CHOOSING NATL GROUP OFFICERS.
JR posted:
“In 2010, McVay ran as a Libertarian and Independent Party of Delaware candidate (and was denied access to the Republican and Democratic primary). He has also ran as the candidate of the Nonpartisan Party, and apparently registered the Mandalorian Party. I think it is clear that he is a Party Activist.”
There is a Party Party in Rhode Island. Maybe McVay would interested in promoting that in Delaware. He is definitely a party animal.
Mandalorian Party? Like a raiding party? The Death Watch? The Neo Crusaders?
Canderous Ordo for Mandalore 3954! Make Dxun Canon Again!
@Nuña,
https://nerdbot.com/2021/06/07/mandalorian-registered-political-party-in-delaware/
“[McVay] decided he would just create a new political party, one that anyone could relate to”
And he went for a fantasy ethnic group that until recently only Star Wars fans even knew about and the majority of them despise? Great logic.
“He is hopeful that the Mandalorian party will form an alliance with progressives […] to stand up for things like supporting the criminal justice system and social equality.”
So the exact opposite of the Mandalorians in (pre-Disney) Star Wars. How much do you want to bet that McVay had never even heard about them before that shitty, woke Disney+ show? I hope they sue the beskar’gam off him.
@Nuña,
This is the way
https://www.delaware-mandalorians.org/