[MillerCreek]

Most voters would ask: is Jim Gilchrist a Republican or is he not, given his candidacy as a candidate representing the American Independent Party; if he wasn't before but is now (a Republican, inorder to make this proposed candidacy, if/when it should occur), what's different about Jim Gilchrist's politics now; and, why is the CA GOP not promoting candidates to run oppositionally to Dianne Feinstein?

And then the answers to those questions would probably determine the outcome to the proposed campaign.

[mhx]

I think he would be a good candidate, but I can't imagine the California Republican party nominating him. They will almost certainly go as far left as possible since they know that it's impossible for a conservative to win an election in California. (yes, sarcasm.)

[atomic_dog]

Too late for him to try. California law requires that a person seeking a party nomination to have been a registered member of that party for the 12 months preceding. I seem to recall a Libertarian candidate being disqualified a while because because his party registration was "decline to state".

[Columbine]

If he still has only one issue he might as well give up politics.

[nw_arizona_granny]

I have listened to Jim many times on the radio, and yes, he would have my vote, if I lived in California.

The progress of the Minutemen, in one year, is enough to show what he is capable of doing.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Worth a shot.

[Tim Long]

I know this is an old thread, but I really support Gilchrist. His site is has him running for Congress, but wikipedia lists him as running against Feinstein. Do you the current status?