On June 5, the New Hampshire House defeated SB 222 by 151-168. It would have moved the non-presidential primary from September to June.
House bills to move that primary also have failed to pass. Those bills are HB 481 and HB 408.
All three of these bills harm ballot access for minor party and independent candidates. They all automatically move the declaration of candidacy from June to earlier months. Forcing independent candidates and the nominees of unqualified parties to file declarations in the spring, before they have decided whom to run, would inhibit those candidacies.
It is somewhat surprising that these bills failed, because in 2021 the legislature had passed a bill moving the non-presidential primary to June. But then-Governor Chris Sununu had vetoed it. Sununu is no longer Governor.
My nutty relative banned all links to Ballot Access News at his sites Independent Political Report and Third Party Watch in both articles and comments.
He did this without any announcement, just started deleting comments, even though IPR and BAN were frequent news sources for each other from the time IPR first went up May 20, 2008 to as recently as May 20, 2005, and links to BAN were still allowed at IPR until at least as recently as the following day , May 21.
Your nutty relative is a gay communist.
At first, the nutty professor would delete even so much as any comments as to why he was deleting various comments. Then he put up a post saying some comments were being rejected – either not approved or retroactively removed – for being impolite and fact free.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2025/06/polite-note/
All questions about what was impolite or fact free about them have remained unanswered or have been deleted.
For example, one of the removed comments was a short, neutrally phrased comment from a person who has spent many years traveling around the country building minor parties, including in the state in question, that a new minor party effort in that state will not succeed. All questions about why that was removed have been erased or gone unanswered.
Another one was very simply a question as to what exactly their discussion policies are. The answer has not been erased (at least yet) but the question was.
Someone else posted that his or her comment that had not been approved was not in any way impolite or fact free, but that was erased too. Obviously there is no way to tell if it was or wasn’t since it was never approved, but I saw the follow-up comment that was erased retroactively and there was nothing impolite or fact free about it.
@ Truth I don’t know what his sexual orientation is, or if he even has one. I’ve known him all my life and have yet to see him in a relationship, dating, or even “hooking up” as the kids call it with anyone, male or female.
He has never said anything to me like “so and so person is really attractive, I’d love to get together with him or her” or anything having anything to do with that in any way shape or form. The issue has simply never come up in any way.
As for his politics I can’t really say either. He has claimed to be a libertarian for decades but has never explained what drew him to that party any time I or anyone else asks. He also hasn’t explained why he had remained involved with them, especially so heavily. Whenever he gets into specifics it’s usually to say bad things about the party, how it’s run, particular people in it, etc.
I’ve met some other libertarians and they are usually really eager to tell you why and how they became libertarians and try to convince you to be one too. George refuses to answer any such questions and I’ve never seen him try to convince anyone to be a libertarian.
Honestly, he does seem a lot more like an authoritarian than a libertarian to me, especially with his extreme control freak tendencies. I don’t know about communist.
Phil, is it true that George is friends with a convicted pedophile named Anthony Coretti who used to post on his sites regularly as “Tony from Long Island”?
@Q I don’t know if they are friends other than online.
I do remember seeing a bunch of comments from Tony from Long Island and I remember when it came out that he did 12 years in prison for raping multiple underage girls and I saw his name posted at that time but I don’t remember what it actually was.
I’m pretty sure George took Tony’s side and erased all negative comments about him and or posted rude comments of his own towards those who posted the information that it doesn’t matter or what’s it to them etc, and that Tony was more than welcome to keep commenting even though he had been unjustly imprisoned for something that shouldn’t even be a crime at all or something like that.
I think he may have said “nobody cares, go away.”
Tony claimed to be a former Libertarian turned Democrat and frequently advocated for libertarians to abandon their party and philosophy and become Democrats like him.
Which would be really strange if that’s true because George’s new policy seems to be that outside criticism of minor parties is not allowed at his sites, although he hasn’t answered any questions about that yet.
If that’s not his policy he hasn’t given any other explanation of why he erased Andy’s comment that the new Voluntaryist Party of Alabama does not look likely to succeed, and at least the first few questions about why he erased that comment, etc.
Are you saying George Phillies supports pedophilia?
@Question I’m not making any claims about it beyond what I said. He usually says something to change the subject whenever it comes up or says something like “big deal, who cares” etc. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t think it should be illegal, but it’s not like he’s an activist on that issue.
If you’re asking whether he goes around advocating for it, I’ve never seen or heard him do that. I’ve also never saw him associate with or defend known pedophiles in real life and the Tony thing is the only time I can remember him doing it online. He has never discussed with me what kind of pornography he likes, if any.
People in our family and those we know don’t allow him to be around kids, especially without another adult present, mostly because he’s weird and creepy, but he has never shown any particular interest in being around kids that I know of, either.
My previous comment that he has never expressed any sexual interest that I know of in either men or women extends to kids as well. And before you ask, that also applies to other species, corpses, inanimate objects, and anything else you might ask about.
He’s either very secretive about whatever he’s into sexually or just plain asexual period.
His biggest fetish is killing young children aka “abortion.” He’s not shy about talking about it at all, but does ruthlessly censor anyone who’s against it.
He’s also into White women getting raped by gangs of blacks, and considers anything that’s done to stop it or prevent it to be “racist,” and therefore not allowed to be discussed either.
He frequently says Lincoln and reconstruction didn’t go far enough, and has the same opinion about unconstitutional federal intervention into States rights and private business or personal matters, particularly as it pertains to anything having to do with negroes.
I should have said, White women and underage girls. Maybe the underage girls even more than the women?
I heard he’s big into young trannys.
@ Charlie and Joseph I’m not aware of his interest in any of that having a sexual fetish aspect but I wouldn’t rule it out either.
He does seem to get very excited about obscure parliamentary points and whatever he considers to be libertarian party inside dirt, mismanagement, corruption etc , but I can’t say for sure that this excitement is actually sexual or not.
He may have a board game and sci fi fetish. Again, I can’t say for sure if it is or isn’t sexual in any way.
I know that his IPR underling is transsexual, and I’m pretty sure they know each other pretty well offline, but if there’s any sexual activities or relationship between them I don’t know about it.
I think some of you are jumping to premature conclusions. Phillies statement was that the actual problem was not linking to Ballot Access News. That probably means links to Ballot Access News are still allowed there.
What hasn’t been answered is, if that’s the case, why a comment by my friend X was removed when it was literally just a link back to the same exact topic being discussed here at BAN and something to the effect of , readers there might find some of the comments interesting and that in x’s opinion some people made good points in the BAN discussion. That was literally it.
What else could have been the problem with that comment?
Or with the follow-up by X asking in the same thread where the initial link was removed whether copy and paste from BAN discussions would be allowed instead. That was taken down too. The same question does remain posted, at least for now, in the “polite” thread, but hasn’t been answered.
And, all the remaining question about why Andy’s comment, the other person’s initial and follow up comments, Rick’s question about site policies, and a number of follow up questions about why those comments were removed were all removed.
If there was anything impolite or fact free about any of those, I missed what it was, and the questions all remain unanswered for now, some having been removed and others still posted, at least for the time being.
George Phillies should join the Retard Party.
Phillies never admits mistakes or provides much of a logical explanation for anything. Whenever he goes on a censorship binge, the best thing to remember is that it’s probably his period and wait for it to pass. He usually relaxes after a little while.
Or better yet just boycott his sites because there’s no such thing as free speech on any of them. At least not for very long. Just highly inconsistent, unpredictable and illogical censorship.
Phillies would totally ruin the Retard Party. I hope he never joins. I don’t care what party he’s in or at as long as it ain’t my Retard Party!
@ Average Confused Retard and Helpful Guy I hope you mean George and not me. I’m happy being an independent, will not be joining any political parties, and don’t run any political websites.
I agree with Average Confused Retard. George Phillies would take all the sex and fun out of the Retard Party, completely ruin it, and put me out of a job.
I hope he stays in the Lemon Party, or like ACR said I don’t care where he goes or what he does just as long as he stays away from the Retard Party!
Indeed, what George Phillies does and doesn’t allow to be published at his site comments remains a constant mystery and guessing game.
The latest example is at
https://thirdpartywatch.com/2025/06/06/mcardle-becomes-mises-chair/comment-page-1/
Here is my most recent comment submission there. I expect it probably will be rejected there. However, I’ve been repeatedly surprised about my expectations on that there. In both directions.
——
MAHA is part of your article and I have not said my piece. I did in fact comment elsewhere in this discussion about other aspects of your article, but I’d like to correct the errors which remain published in comments which mentioned me.
I’ve tried to answer the comments from both Mr. Scott and Joseph in shorter form, including reemphasizing the most important point from my initial comment on that matter for those who found it to be too long (that maha people are not all the same) and explaining that that comment contains a variety of other points directly related to his first comment that I unfortunately don’t know how to make any more concisely.
You didn’t publish my response to Mr. Scott, but did publish a concurring opinion from Joseph which
1) answered a variety of claims I never made,
2) framed everything in terms of who or what is or isn’t ideologically libertarian – something I’ve repeatedly said, including in this discussion, is not interesting to me and a question I gave up trying to answer after many years of trying about 15 years ago,
3) erroneously claims we are friends (as far as I know we never even met), and
4) furthermore gets into an issue which I never mentioned in this discussion, is not mentioned in your article , and which you’ve previously said repeatedly can’t be brought up at this site at all outside of a discussion dedicated to it.
Both comments also erroneously claim that my comments are essays, which they are a long way from being.
My response to Joseph wasn’t published either.
Please publish this one, because the one sidedness of what did get published and what didn’t is beyond egregious. I’ll be happy to stop talking about MAHA after that, and hope that others will as well, in accordance with your comment.
That issue, by the way , is abortion.
Joseph initially claimed, I think some months ago now, that “abortion is healthcare” and should be legal, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is not a libertarian. And furthermore that those of us who disagree with any part of that are “pushing our religion into government” etc.
My initial response, that abortion is murder of innocent children and not “health care” was not published. I furthermore explained that I don’t know or care what is or isn’t ideologically or philosophically libertarian.
Phillies then put up repeated comments and an article saying any and all discussion of abortion would henceforth be banned at TPW, but kept publishing Joseph’s pro abortion comments at the same time.
Around that same time he published an article asking for article submissions. He had in fact published a couple of my article submissions, one before then, one in response to the request.
I’ve made a few since then, but they were either not published at all or published as comments, not articles, despite my express request.
One of those was my submitted article about the abortion issue which I wrote to answer the points from Joseph and others which continued to advocate for abortion “rights” despite the supposed ban. I had intentionally left out any arguments based on religious faith.
Phillies did not publish that article, but did put up his own article saying that this would be the one and only place on TPW to discuss abortion and published my article submission as a comment on that article.
Joseph continued to post comments on that discussion which reiterated his claims that abortion is “healthcare” and a “personal choice” and that all libertarians must agree with him and that anyone arguing otherwise was arguing based on religious faith. It was very obvious he hadn’t read what I originally submitted to be an article or my follow up comments.
He did, at some point, address some of his comments to me, reiterating all those same points I had already answered. He then actually managed to read my other article and discovered to his shock that I am neither a “big l” or “small l” libertarian, and said therefore he doesn’t need to debate me, while reiterating yet again all his already answered claims.
I replied that I was not trying to debate him, that “libertarian” is nowhere in that site’s name or stated mission, that none of my arguments there were based on religious faith and that in fact he has no idea what my religious faith is, if any.
Since that article discussion petered out, he and others who support abortion being legal continue to be allowed to bring up their support for legal abortion in unrelated discussions, but of course I’m not allowed to reply.
So here we are months later, and see my last comment in light of this one.
Pat Jones would be her name if Thomas W Jones ever caught his obsession.
I think it was libertarian candidate Harry Browne who said if abortion was made illegal men would start having abortions. I think nutty professor George would be the first guy in the abortion line if that was true. He really does love abortion.
I’m closely related to Thomas Jones by blood, but my name hasn’t been Pat Jones in decades and won’t be again. I don’t know who this other Pat Jones is. I think I saw him or her say he or she is from the deep South. I live in the South now, but I’m from Michigan. I don’t think we are related.
As for George Phillies, I wouldn’t touch him with a ten foot pole, or let him touch me even if he had a ten inch pole. He seems super weird, creepy, and controlling. Big time ick vibes.
Phil Phillies mentioned Harry Browne. George Phillies may be as obsessed with Harry Browne as he is with abortion. Maybe even more.
25 years ago George wrote a whole book trying to undermine Browne and anyone allied with him in the libertarian party, plus probably the equivalent of a dozen more books in his newsletters and on email groups and blogs all for that purpose.
Over all the years since then he has done the same thing to anyone who is starting to get any success at the national l.p., except not the book part, but everything else.
Now having failed to sell his book he’s republishing is an endless series of articles at TPW, but everyone there is basically ignoring all those other than wondering why he’s still bitching about Harry Browne nearly 20 years after he died.
They pretty much all think he really needs to focus on bitching about Angela McArdle and the Mises Caucus. Not that he doesn’t do that too.
Turd Potty Watch was better as a dead site and archive of old comments from years ago, which was the first thing Phillies wiped out when he bought it. The reasons he buys and operates these sites are
1) collecting and compiling information on site users
2) spreading his distorted propaganda where some people actually read it, and maintaining some partial illusion of free and open discussions while actually censoring anything that goes too far off his chosen narrative
3) giving him tabs to collect information about lnc, campaigns, and anyone threatening to make the libertarians successful in any way, then weaponizing it against them to sow discord and keep the LP small and irrelevant
4) a chance to let him play tinpot dictator
That’s it. Nothing else. Ever.
The comment reproduced here above at 2:45 got posted there.