Posted on 09/16/2008 4:43:54 PM PDT by pissant
Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr’s campaign filed suit Tuesday seeking to remove Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama from the ballot in Texas, alleging that the two major candidates missed the deadline for officially filing to be on the ballot.
The lawsuit by the former Republican congressman from Georgia claims that neither McCain nor Obama met the requirement of Texas law that all candidates provide “written certification” of their nomination “before 5 p.m. on the 70th day before election day” because neither had been formally nominated by their respective parties in time.
That would have been Aug. 25. Obama did not accept his party’s nomination until Aug. 28, McCain his on Sept. 4.
The lawsuit states: “The hubris of the major parties has risen to such a level that they do not believe that the election laws of the State of Texas apply to them.”
Pat Dixon, chairman of the Texas Libertarian Party, issued a statement saying, “Libertarian principles require personal responsibility for your acts and failures. Obama and McCain failed to meet the deadlines. They must follow the law like everyone else.”
(Excerpt) Read more at statesman.com ...
Oh brother.
I suppose you missed all the hatred spewed forth by republicans towards libertarians right here on this thread.
Of course the same people calling Barr insane and worse were singing his praises when he was leading impeachment proceedings against Clinton.
The nastiness you see in the political process isn't entirely just the democrat nutroots.
See post # 80 this thread.
Oh really. How come they apply to my candidate and not yours?
(For the record, Bob Barr is NOT my candidate.)
Would you be saying that if only Barack Obama were affected by this? Be honest.
You’re right. You don’t need a majority to win, but if you don’t have that majority in the Electoral College, it is decided by the House.
Texas Secretary of State Spokeswoman Ashley Burton verified this earlier this month. Widely reported in the press, but I’ll try to find an official link for you.
Alaskans Go To Court To End Partisan Witch Hunt Of Palin - Updated
Strata Sphere | Sep 16 2008 | AJStrata at 7:35 pm
Posted on 09/16/2008 6:09:54 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2083943/posts
“These rules abound all across America, in a million forms, and they are enforced rigidly against everyone but the Republicans and the Democrats, believe me. Not only that, but the rules for everybody else are overwhelmingly much tougher for those who are not the parties in power.”
Exactly.
Here is the status of Constitution Party (Baldwin) ballot access across the country.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/ba_stats.php
Notice that we missed the deadline in North Carolina & Oklahoma. Not sure why, but maybe it was lack of signatures. So if the “technicality” of deadlines isn’t important, can we continue collecting signatures and get on the ballot after all?
(...)
The silence is deafening.
FINE, us Texans will WRITE in Palin/McCain
They missed that deadline too.
If the law was enforced equally, no write-in votes for McCain or Obama could be counted.
On to your original thought.. yes, they should be able to submit signatures after the deadline if the State law allows such extensions. So far, what I've seen however, is lawsuits in States that don't allow such extensions for required signatures or challenging the validity of the minimum signature rule.. ie, they are blaming the system for the fact not enough people support them.. They don't see that stuff like this is what turns folks off to them..
The law allows for extensions to be filed, that is just as much a part of the law as the deadline.
Care to provide a link?
You where already pinged on post #80, a copy of the law showing that the deadline can be extended until 20 days after the convention date.
Hmmm...I’m not sure that what you claim is what it actually says.
But of course, those in power can interpret the law any old way they want, so what I think is irrelevant anyway.
Maybe I should have written: “The silence WILL BE deafening”?
“ie, they are blaming the system for the fact not enough people support them.”
Here’s how I see it: the same obstacles (including the party establishment, the major media, which candidates get funding and support from large donors etc.) which prevent conservatives and constitutionalists within the R party from winning the R nomination, also prevent conservatives outside of the R & D parties from getting on the ballot.
“those in power can interpret the law any old way they want”
Isn’t that the truth.
Someone else already pointed out that you missed that deadline too. So your write-in vote would be ignored IF the Texas SOS were to follow the law.
So, instead of wasting your ballot, please consider the conservative pro-Constitution alternative of Chuck Baldwin, who can be written in AND counted in Texas.
I don’t know who I’d vote for if the ballot only had Bob Barr, Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney on it.
I do think it is unfair to require thousands of door-to-door petition signatures by third parties to get on a ballot when the major parties are not required to do the same.
The names are usually only counted to verify that the requirement is fulfilled, yet are often rejected for minor technicalities in order to obstruct third party participation.
From one election cycle to another the minor parties are pawns used by the major party in power in each district to leverage the vote in their favor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.