Campaign Updates — Meanwhile McCain’s campaigners are trying to get Barr off the PA ballot although he followed the rules.
Bob Barr. Troublemaker or last honest man? Last night, our campaign manager, Russell Verney, submitted a very clear letter to the Texas Secretary of State.
In the letter, Russ stated:
The Democratic Party, and Mr. Obama and the Republican Party and Mr. McCain blatantly ignored the Texas statutory deadline.
Therefore, the Libertarian candidate for president, Bob Barr, as represented by his principal campaign committee, Bob Barr 2008, demands that your office keep the names of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain and Sarah Palin off the Texas general election ballot.
Failure of the Secretary of State to comply with Texas law will result in serious legal consequences.
In the event that the Secretary of State’s office in Texas does not comply with its own law, we are prepared to file suit, however this battle will just be the beginning.
On top of the additional and large legal expenses that we are likely to incur, we are going to have to divert campaign resources to deal with the media that is just starting to carry this story . . . but not in a positive manner.
Any bets both McCain and Obama will be on the ballot anyway?
John, you should make odds on this. Could be a money maker for DU! 😉
Unenforceable law – Texas claims the certification papers with the names of the President and Vice President were due to the state on August 26th at 5 pm.
Neither convention had finished by August 26.
Bob Barr sounds like more of a whiner than Obama.
jbenson2, sounds to me like Barr knows how to negotiate.
OK–how did Texas handle this in the previous Presidential election? Or did they only allow Dubya on the ballot?
Barr is a waffle master.
On one side one time and the switches when the wind blows in a direction not favourable to him.
Another hypocrite plutocrat.
Cursor_
Barr sounds like the sort of punctilious prig they need in charge of homeland security. His natural talents would be wasted in the white house.
I find it hard to see Bob Barr as a libertarian. And I have little doubt that both parties will have their candidates on the ballot in November.
#2-
Wait a minute. Unenforceable? Why?
August 26 is August 26. It’s not Texas’ problem that Obama and McCain can’t read.
#2,
It has nothing to DO with conventions, NOR 2 parties.
#7,
When there are 2 sides to a coin, WHICH do you stand on? BOTH??
I find it very funny, that of ALL the nations that allow elections(there arent many) for office, that WE are the ONLY 2 party system. And if you want to VOTE outside of those parties it means very little.
Even Canada has a parliament that is SHARED with the OTHER parties, as a percentage of those signed UP with each party.
What would be funny, is if the congress and reps, were SORTED by the number of REGISTERED demo/repubs…
you would only have 1/2 the seats FILLED.
#11 “I find it very funny, that of ALL the nations that allow elections(there arent many) for office, that WE are the ONLY 2 party system.”
And I find it very funny that during this time (of the two party system) we are the country that has been the most successful and has originated most of the inventions in the last 200 hundred years.
Looking at one datum in a vacuum doesn’t show much of anything…
>> jbenson2 said,
>> Bob Barr sounds like more of a whiner than Obama.
Goodness, you conservatives project all your core behaviors on us.
As for Bob Barr, I just loath the fellow.
#11: The USA has lots of political parties other than the Repubs and Demos, but most of them are ignored, including the Libertarians. The Libertarians (and the other minor parties) advocate a lot of ideas that most people don’t like, so people don’t vote for them.
I guess the Democrats are real happy they set a precedent when they replaced Torricelli on the ballot, right?
Sounds like they should both be off the ballot. Let them run write-in campaigns. Texas said Aug 26, and that should be the end of it. Campaigns never used to hold conventions this late.
Considering that Texas hasn’t voted for a Democratic president in 30 years, I should be happy for them to be disenfranchised.
Afterall, that’s the way Republicans win — by disenfranchising as many Democrats as possible.
But, unlike Republicans, we Democrats believe in an honest vote.
Is he related to Roseanne? Seriously…they look a lot alike.
#6
Accroding to this site (http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/08/27/democrats-republicans-miss-texas-deadline-to-certify-presidential-nominees/) the deadline had been 60 days until TX lesiglature changed it to 70 days in 2005.
It seems odd to me. Maybe the change was because TX has started to promote voting early, and tehrefore needed extra time to get all the materials printed?
An honest vote is one that follows the rules.
#18 “Afterall, that’s the way Republicans win — by disenfranchising as many Democrats as possible.”
Really? How’s that?
#15, That’s because they haven’t bothered to investigate it any further than listening to sound bites and whatever they are told by the msm.
I challenge anybody to read the platform and disagree with any part of it as detrimental to the wellbeing of this country. I am not talking about “feelings,” I am talking about logical facts.
http://www.lp.org/platform
AFA the ballots – I think Barr is using this as a means to keep his name on the ballots in states where he is being challenged by the two Luddite parties. Mutual Back scratching.
#15,
you dont know your political history do you?
This is stupid and this guy will be laughed out of court. They will correct the law. The conventions weren’t even done by that date. Just a SNAFU that will fixed.
Is Joad Cressbeckler on the Texas bollot? This guy is something else –
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/old_grizzled_third_party
nunyac
“23
I will start here.
“We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.”
This is philosophically incoherent. Obviously, we do not have sole dominion over our own lives if we cannot choose to interfere with others (Keep in mind that I am not just referencing obvious interference such as a “punch in the nose”. What about playing music too loud? Wearing clothing that offends us? Holding ideas that offend us? When are these interfering with our lives?). All we can do in society is negotiate of what we want to be free and what we are willing to restrict. This is OK. I know that I want certain freedoms, but have to accept some restrictions. Different people will have different notions of what we should and should not restrict. This is part of society and our democratic processes. But Libertarians (somewhat like religious folks) tend to believe that their list of freedoms and restrictions is based on objective principles of ethics and therefore everyone who disagrees is objectively wrong. They assert this with no good justification. This makes Libertarians too arrogant.
I strongly desire a clean environment, people not starving in the streets, a right of workers to negotiate as a group for their wages. Therefore, I support a welfare state and business regulations. I too want to have freedom to do what I want for the most part, but know that I do need some police and laws. I believe that capital does not necessarily end up with those who “earned” it; that because our capitalism is not a “free market” and is designed to protect those who have the capital (or at least control the capital) and tends to coerce those who do not control said capital that I am OK with a progressive tax code.
Why McCain/Palin and Obama/Biden will appear on the Texas ballot regardless of legalities:
No one wants to manually count 5 million write in ballots!
#27, Your first paragraph is understandable. Yes, it is impossible to live exactly how you want without interfering with someone else. That’s what the government is supposed to — protect the rights of all, not those who “need” something.
However, your second paragraph is not a logical argument. It is a want and need list. It is all based on the fact that because you “feel” a certain way, it should therefore be right.
#28, I don’t think they can even be write-ins. You had to have that registered by a certain date as well.
I am not sure, though.
#6 – Probably so!
We are a little crazy here in Texas and we fight a hell of a lot on “principal”.