A few weeks ago a blog post here said that the New Mexico Secretary of State had permitted the Libertarian Party of New Mexico to change its name to the Liberal Party USA. And it said that the Free New Mexico Party had been permitted to change its name to the Libertarian Party.
This blog post was based on the fact that the November 2024 New Mexico ballot lists Laura Ebke as the presidential nominee of the Liberal Party, and it lists Chase Oliver as the nominee of the Libertarian Party. It seemed reasonable to assume that the name changes had been approved, because otherwise how could those labels be on the ballot?
But, it turns out, neither party has changed its name. Instead, the Secretary of State made an off-the-cuff decision that the presidential candidates’ party labels should not indicate which state party had nominated them. Instead, the party labels should reflect the national party names.
So, the original ballot-qualified Libertarian Party of New Mexico’s presidential nominee has the label “Liberal”, whereas its nominees for state legislature and county office have the label “Libertarian”. It seems very odd that any state would follow such a policy.
The old Libertarian Party, the one that nominated Laura Ebke, has not even asked to change its name, and is unlikely to do so in the future. And as long as it keeps its original name, then it won’t be possible for the Free New Mexico Party (which nominated Chase Oliver) to change its name to the Libertarian Party, because obviously the state won’t let two separate parties have the same name.
The Libertarian Party of New Mexico doesn’t not have the backing or support of the national Libertarian party that they split from. I’m not surprised that New Mexico would give the finger to a tertiary party in favor of a secondary party. Laura Ebke isn’t recognized as the Libertarian candidate by the national party so the New Mexican election board probably just wanted to eliminate any confusion on the matter.
Why would any party worth a crap want anything to do with a name like liberal or libertarian? Free might be ok? Except that makes it sound halfway like secession (good) and half like moochers wantung government free crap (bad?)
Original blog post: https://ballot-access.org/2024/09/24/new-mexico-lets-two-parties-change-their-names/
“the Secretary of State made an off-the-cuff decision that the presidential candidates’ party labels should not indicate which state party had nominated them. Instead, the party labels should reflect the national party names.”
While I would agree with the SoS that using the names of the national parties makes more sense, I’m not sure how I feel about that decision just getting laid down from on high like this. Were the parties consulted? Were they OK with it? More importantly, what about the candidates themselves?
I hope Ebke whoops Oliver every color of the rainbow at the polls.
Printing the names of parties and candidates on ballots is unnecessary and not a constitutional requirement. Voters had the ability to write-in names on their ballots until the states monopolized the ballots after 1888. There has been no constitutional amendment requiring states to print candidate or party names on the ballot.
The state as a monopoly on ballot publishing should print only content neutral write-in only ballots.
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=146142
OHIO – USA CT APP 6 CIR
NOOOO FORN CASH FOR BALLOT ISSUES / STATE CANDS
—
EACH STATE IS AN INDEPENDENT NATION-STATE —
1776 DOI LAST PARA
1777 ARTS CONFED
1783 USA-BRIT PEACE TREATY
1787 CONST ART VII – 9 STATES CREATING CURRENT USA REGIME
—-
SCOTUS SCREWUP OF 1 AMDT RE STATE INTERNAL POLITICS —
A-L-L OTHERS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS – IN OTHER STATES AND FOREIGN REGIMES.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/lottery/2024/10/07/mega-millions-ticket-price-increase/75562955007/
LOTTERY TICKET PRICE — INFLATION OR WHAT ???
Maybe parties SHOULD go back to printing their own ballots. The state could merely provide a blank template, and each party could print the names of any candidates they prefer on the ballot. Non-party organizations could provide non=partisan ballots with a wide range of candidates listed. Each candidate could file their candidacy with the state, and receive a unique code that could be printed or written on any ballot to facility machine readability.
WZ- ANY THING MORE THAN HAVING VOTERS MAKE AN X OR FILL AN OVAL WILL CAUSE MAJOR PROBLEMS.
SEE NOW INFAMOUS USA SENATE ELECTION IN AK LAND IN 2010- M WRITE-IN – ABOUT 500 SPELLINGS – *INTENT* GUESSING GAME
“LOTTERY TICKET PRICE — INFLATION OR WHAT ???”
A bit of topic, but here is something to ponder. Prices may go up, but tax rates don’t have to because they are RATES, not AMOUNTS, and go up automatically when prices (and wages) go up. If a pol tells you that taxes need to go up because prices have, the greedy bastards are SCAMMING you.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/08/politics/walz-electoral-college-needs-to-go/index.html
Walz says Electoral College ‘needs to go’ at California fundraiser
—
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
—-
GOVTS LOTTERIES- NOW WHAT PCT OF GOVTS INCOME/OUTGO ???
“Walz says Electoral College ‘needs to go’ at California fundraiser”
And, once again, I have to say, the Electoral College is part of the SOLUTION, NOT part of the problem. The great latitude that states are given in the choice of method of selecting electoral votes allows EACH OF THEM ON THEIR OWN to experiment with different voting methods. Maine and Nebraska have already attempted this. Other states should try as well.
The Electoral College, as well as the House of Representatives can be made more representative of the national population by expanding the size of the House by such methods as adopting the Wyoming Rule. NO constitutional amendment or fancy interstate “compact” needed.
“WZ- ANY THING MORE THAN HAVING VOTERS MAKE AN X OR FILL AN OVAL WILL CAUSE MAJOR PROBLEMS.”
Political parties are intermediaries between voters and government. A proper political party will instruct its supporters how to vote for their candidates. No need to worry about that.
In fact, sometimes parties are TOO instructive, especially in one party states. That’s why liberal (in the classical sense) ballot access laws are needed in all states to keep the political system as competitive as possible
Walz is a fucking commie retard.
Political eloquence is clearly lacking today. Most people now wouldn’t understand what Lincoln and Douglas were saying if they heard them debate.
Typical New Mexico politics. The Secretary of State cannot even get the proper names for what the actual parties are called. I’m sure the Libertarian Party of New Mexico will eventually get to changing to their new name since it Liberal Party is still in the formation stage.
Will there be a lawsuit over this, Against the state and/or with one of the parties suing the other?
Why would the real Libertarians nominate child abuse supporter Chase Oliver? I would expect the fakes to do that.
Anyway, the decision is a sloppy one, logically, and could force a higher court precedent or reversal in the future.
Just WHO owns the name of a political party is still open to question.
ALL STATES HAVE *ASSUMED NAME* LAWS FOR BIZ/ GROUP NAMES.
POLITICAL PARTY NAMES SAME ??? – JUST BY FILING FOR BALLOT STATUS ???
VS USA COPYRIGHT LAW ???
Death to homophobes! Check out my OnlyFans, friends.
If you were actually Cheryl and actually wanted people to do that you would have posted a direct link to your page, which you have not done here or any of the other times you referred to it.
Standing count evolution is the only solution