February
25th 2008
Posted under Constitution Party & Election 2008
Here is an article on the potential candidates at Third Party Watch. The author, Trent Hill, doesn’t really go into the issues much. He just speculates on each candidate’s potential base of support. You can see my comments in the comment section.
I continue to be disturbed that pro-War, pro-intervention candidates like Alan Keyes, Bob Smith, and Jerome Corsi are even being considered. (If any of these three is not pro-War and pro-intervention then I would like proof. Alan Keyes clearly is. There is every reason to believe Smith and Corsi were and no real proof they have had a change of heart.)Â
Patroon on 25 Feb 2008 at 11:03 pm #
Red, where is this support for Keyes coming from in CP circles? One would have thought after his disasterous camapaign for the U.S. Senate that Keyes would be so radioactive no one would go a 1,000 miles of him and yet people keeping talking about him as serious candidate for the CP nomination even though as you say, the CP leadership does not want him at all.
RedPhillips on 25 Feb 2008 at 11:19 pm #
From Alan Keyes groupies I suspect. And from CP folks hungry for a “big name” who don’t get the issues with Keyes.
I don’t get the love for Smith either. If that is the best we have in the way of “big names” then we should go “home grown.”
Weaver on 25 Feb 2008 at 11:19 pm #
Patroon, must every party vote on its candidate? If such is the case, what is to prevent a larger outside faction from entering and taking over?
Similarly, are political parties allowed to discriminate? Not that I’d oppose a black candidate flat out, but if there’s any sort of exclusion from voting going on, e.g. only allowing those who are married with kids and have passed such and such a knowledge test to vote, it’ll inevitably be called discriminatory.
roho on 26 Feb 2008 at 12:29 am #
Keyes can never win!……Black liberals don’t like him and white conservatives don’t know him.
A third party contender needs to have some “Household Name Recognition”……..A dual mouthpiece with both not only recognizable but able to campaign independently, causing the MSM to follow both.
Lou Dobbs/Judge Napolitano……..My first choice would be Ron Paul/Napolitano.
I live in Alabama, and the ignorant voters have no idea who Judge Roy Moore or Chuck Baldwin are! (And I love both of them.) Our local news yesterday was all about the appeal process of convicted Governor Don Seigelman and Richard Scrushy!………..But keeping their name in the voter’s face means exposure after they get out of prison!
In the advertising world, it’s called “TOMA”. (Top of the mind awareness.) It’s why “Energizer batteries will never get rid of the BUNNY!”
It’s all Hillary has going for her! Until the liberal idiots of New York elected her to the Senate, she had NEVER held ANY public office! (But America knows her through her HUSBANDS political past.)……..Lurlene Wallace was Governor of Alabama twice, as a result of her husband’s past political success…..The ignorant American voter votes on familiarity, not issues!
dylanwaco on 26 Feb 2008 at 8:11 am #
I just blogged about many of the likely candidates the other day and to be honest, while I don’t think ANYONE can unite as broad a constiuency as Paul could have, the best choice overall would be Bob Barr running under the LP banner. If I remember correctly the LP is on the ballot in nearly every state, Barr has name value, many talk radio conservative talking heads respect him because of his anti-Clinton past (which means he is likely to get more reasonable coverage from them than Paul has, and is also more likely to get conservative protest votes than Paul who is most often associated with “isolationism”), and he has a record of service as a elected official at the federal level, with sadly is seen as an asbolutely neccesary requirement to many Americans.
That there may be attempts to seize the CP on behalf of interventionism should not be surprising. It would hardly be the first time a third party was hijacked by outsiders looking for an established vehicle to push their agenda.
levotb on 26 Feb 2008 at 9:43 am #
BOB BARR?? Now THAT’S a name I thought I’d never hear again! We loved Barr during the Impeachment hearings of Clinton, but like (now fat and bloated) Lindsey Graham who was also great on that Committee, Barr has gone to the left. A few years ago, he teamed up with–that’s right, the ACLU!! I couldn’t believe my eyes. So, I really don’t think that Barr (who was “the Tancredo of his time” in the House) would be a choice for conservatives, PARTICULARLY because he’s a Libertarian. Let’s keep the Libertarians in the LP!!
Speaking of names out of the past, over at FR, Haley Barbour (now Mississippi Governor) is being bandied about as McCain’s VP. What a Duo that was–Haley Barbour and Newt Gingrich, destroying the conservative movement/Contract with America and bringing in NAFTA to destroy American jobs!
Other than Chuck Baldwin and Roy Moore, I can’t think of a CP candidate I’d support.
The biggest problem with The CP now is, they put all their marbles in Ron Paul, which was a huge mistake. Now, they really don’t have anyone as a bona fide leader. But MOST IMPORTANTLY, they are only on the ballot in 15 out of 50 states!! That is NOT a good “selling point”. I want a party on ALL ballots, so they’re pleading for dough.
There are A LOT of conservatives “in limbo” right now, without a party. Forget FALCON and America First.
dylanwaco on 26 Feb 2008 at 9:52 am #
Teaming up with the ACLU is in and of itself not an evil act. Barr is about as much a leftist as Chuck Baldwin is. I am not a libertarian, in principle or in practice, but if the goal is to advocate for candidate who can push authentically conservative ideas, while drawing a solid amount of votes I can’t see any argument for Baldwin over Barr.
Now if the argument is purely about building a serious third party, and the Constitution Party is your preferred vehicle, obvioiusly Barr wouldn’t be ideal as an LPer.
Still Barr is no lefty
Patroon on 26 Feb 2008 at 4:18 pm #
Barr would be a very good choice as Lp candidate and Roy Moore I think would make the best CP candidate.
Gary Odom on 27 Feb 2008 at 12:28 am #
“The biggest problem with The CP now is, they put all their marbles in Ron Paul, which was a huge mistake. Now, they really don’t have anyone as a bona fide leader. But MOST IMPORTANTLY, they are only on the ballot in 15 out of 50 states!! That is NOT a good “selling pointâ€. I want a party on ALL ballots, so they’re pleading for dough.”
We most certainly did not “put all our marbles” in Ron Paul. Leadership knew months ago that he had no intention of running as a 3rd Party candidate. However, try telling that to all those excited people (in and out of the CP). The Ron Paul thing will help us in the long run, but it did hurt us in the short run by diverting resources and attention from what needed to be done
Also the “only being on 15 ballots” is very misleading and not precisely true, anyway. Most ballots are relativley easy to get on and we are making good progress. In Missouri for example we are waiting to turn in petitions until we have a full slate of candidates. It always comes down to 8 or 9 states that require a great deal of money to get on.
Give us a little slack as we are only half as old as the Libertarian Party. We are actually progressing nicely
Patroon on 27 Feb 2008 at 7:16 pm #
And the CP has more registered voters than the LP does right now (largely because of their affiliates in California and Nevada).
There’s plenty of time to find the right nominee for the CP.