BREAKING NEWS!! Obama and McCain miss ballot deadline in Texas, Barr only one on the ballot UPDATE!!
Submitted by bedr1 on Wed, 08/27/2008 - 17:46
Holy Longhorns Batman! McCain and Obama miss the deadline to be placed on the ballot in Texas - that means only Bob Barr is on the ballot.
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/08/27/democrats-republican...
UPDATE!!
Texas Secretary of State showing Only Barr on the ballot
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/general/2008...
»
oh no
it's bedr, the Barr Pa-troll. Who gives a crap about Bob Barr? When it's showing Ron Paul's name, be sure and come back here and tell us.
You may want to check out
Section 181.005. QUALIFYING FOR PLACEMENT ON BALLOT BY PARTY REQUIRED TO NOMINATE BY CONVENTION. (a) To be entitled to have the names of its nominees placed on the general election ballot, a political party required to make nominations by convention must
file with the secretary of state, not later than the 75th day after the date of the precinct conventions held under this chapter, lists of precinct convention participants indicating that the number of participants equals at least one percent of the total number of votes received by all candidates for governor in the most recent gubernatorial general election. The lists must include each participant's residence address and voter registration number.
(b) A political party is entitled to have the names of its
nominees placed on the ballot, without qualifying under Subsection
(a), in each subsequent general election following a general election in which the party had a nominee for a statewide office who received a number of votes equal to at least five percent of the total number of votes received by all candidates for that office.
Both the republican and democratic parties have achieved the 5 percent minimum required for ballot access. Both McCain and Obama will be on the ballot. I wish that the 70 day rule applied to all parties, but it's republicans and democrats who run the state government, so I'm afraid that you will indeed see their names on the ballot. One could always file a legal action I suppose and test the law but the judges are also republicans and democrats.
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
_________________________________________
"An economy built on fiat money is a society on its way to ashes."
Wrong cite
Believe this is the wrong cite. This statute allows the Ds and Rs to nominate a candidate without showing 1% of the vote total for governor did the nominating.
Statute in question is:
§ 192.031. PARTY CANDIDATE'S ENTITLEMENT TO PLACE ON
BALLOT. A political party is entitled to have the names of its
nominees for president and vice-president of the United States
placed on the ballot in a presidential general election if:
(1) the nominees possess the qualifications for those
offices prescribed by federal law;
(2) before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before presidential
election day, the party's state chair signs and delivers to the
secretary of state a written certification of:
(A) the names of the party's nominees for
president and vice-president; and
(B) the names and residence addresses of
presidential elector candidates nominated by the party, in a number
equal to the number of presidential electors that federal law
allocates to this state; and
(3) the party is:
(A) required or authorized by Subchapter A of
Chapter 172 to make its nominations by primary election; or
(B) entitled to have the names of its nominees
placed on the general election ballot under Chapter 181.
Part (3)(B) above refers to the statute cited in this post, but that's just a way of assuring the small parties have a modicum of support. Still, all parties have to comply with section 192, which the Ds and Rs seem to have gaffed.
Of course, McCain and Obama will be on the Texas ballot, it's just going to be fun to see the dancing. Not often that the Ds and Rs are on the wrong side of a ballot access issue.
Also, there's the remote possiblity that someone (probaby Obama) benefits if both sides have to run "write-in" campaigns. I suppose it is not impossible that something like that might be figured out and either the Ds or the Rs side with Barr.
Not that Barr is a wonderful candidate. But, it's fun to see the Ds and Rs squirm - even if it's only a little squirming.
J. Mills
Tacoma, WA
J. Mills
Tacoma, WA
You can always contact
the Texas Secretary of State office....Their contact info is listed on their website. Send an email, make a phone call, send that link with the story to your local news media and let them start asking questions.
Might stir up some $h1t when these candidates can least afford it....
This might matter if America ....
were a nation of laws.
Join PyraBang the patriot search engine.
Join PyraBang the peoples search engine.
Good point.
Bend 'em, break 'em, ignore 'em. As long as you have a flag pin on your lapel, it's all good.
What happened in Ron Paul's race?
Wasn't there some wacky local libertarian who was running against Paul, as of a few months ago? Did he see the light and drop out?
RP2012!
um not sure
never heard about this
Let's not get too excited...
In my state, Romney and our best Dr. Paul were the only 2 with the confirmed number of required signatures to be on the Primary ballot (someone at the courthouse printed the district numbers off from the entire state [each candidate] for me)....and yet by some stroke of a miracle...they were all there on the ballot. A couple of people tried to file lawsuits to no avail.
It's just the way it is. But hey, I have hope...If they aren't on the ballot in TEXAS...It's a poetic justice worth toasting. Unworthy A-whos.
I think this happened in Texas before to the Green Party
and they were kept off. But thats the Green Party
Placeholders
They almost assuredly have filed placeholder candidates' names. Such as "Al Gore, President; Howard Dean, V.P." People who are not even running. And then, when the real candidates are picked, they can substitute them by writing to the Sec'y of State and telling them that the candidate has been changed. Most states allow the candidate to be changed no later than x days before the election (usually 30 or so).
RP2012!
alaskaron that would be 74 days before the general
which means they need to be in by this Friday. However, from all the SOS info they are not showing placeholders for the Obama or McCain as they usually would.
thanks for the clarification, bedr1
This is all very strange, no matter how you look at it.
RP2012!
I read on "Ballot Access News"
that the GOP has already submitted "John McCain and Running Mate" as their candidates. I do wonder why they are not shown on the SoS site, though.
One thing we can count on is that the parties, and their elected officials such as the SoS, will always do everything in their power to keep the two major parties in the drivers' seat.
RP2012!
Here's what will happen
Most likely the D's and R's have already filed some "placeholder" candidates, in order to meet the 70-day deadline (they may have in fact done this weeks or months ago).
After the coronation ceremonies (er, I mean conventions), they will replace the placeholders' names with the nominated candidates' names as soon as possible. Numerous parties have done this in numerous states, as there is another law in most states that allows the parties to substitute a candidate 'no later than x days of the election' or some such language.
Don't get too excited folks.
RP2012!
There were no placeholders filed in Texas
In 2005 Texas changed the law from 60 days before an election to 74 days before an election to file, but you have to read it carefully because the 74 is only in certain situations that does not apply to this, like death of a candidate, disqualified (EX: not a citizen) etc. It then says 70 days for everything else. Its kinda weird, but I bet both camps read it wrong because they both failed to present the paperwork.
The 3rd parties always have to pay attention to these rules because they always get the axe, so I hope the Republicrats missed the actual time period.
Do you know for sure there were no placeholders filed?
Or just a guess?
I'd LOVE IT if the Ds and Rs lost their chance to be on the ballot in Texas as a result of this. I just don't think we should get our hopes up.
RP2012!
McCain and Obama
are not on the ballot yet because the Republican and Democrat Parties have not yet OFFICALLY made their nominations. Obama was only in the last few hours nominated, McCain is not yet been nominated. The Ballot will be updated as the PARTIES declare their OFFICAL nominations.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence
That's the point, Red
is that their conventions are too late to meet the deadline, which was yesterday.
But it's fine, because I am 100% certain that the parties have either: a) filed "placeholder" candidates, or b) have some other loop hole already worked out.
Bob Barr is not going to get 100% of the Texas vote by some weird technicality and neither will either the Ds or Rs be left of the ballot.
RP2012!
yes, or possibly
they seek to damage the Libertarian Party, which does seem to be gaining some traction. Going by the info written in the article, if the Dems and Reps do seek to put their candidates on the ballot, and the SOS does accept them, and it is done in a way that violates the rules,Bob Barr is the only another candidate that could file a suit to TRY to stop the violation. This would create an election scandal in which the Libertarian Party would be seen as the bad guy, through the use of effective propaganda. So the Libertarian Party would have to make the decision of filling a suit to stop them, which as said would likely be overturned by the courts, and being seen as a cry baby trying to use a technicality to their advantage. Or they would chose to just allow the late filling, save face, and move on with the election. I'm not sure, but it seems it would be left entirely up to Bob Barr to make this call, as he, not the party, is the Candidate.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence
(Snort!) LOL. If it's true,
(Snort!) LOL.
If it's true, it's hilarious.
If it's B.S., I'll never let you live it down.
True or not, I still won't vote for Barr.
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States
no shit right?
screw barr.
Echo
funny as hell, Barr is still a Tool
Just added the link to the Texas Secretary of State
The Dems and Repubs are not on
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/general/2008...
Just think about this
If they make an exception for the Repubs and Dems, then they would have to make exceptions for the CP and the Greens and Nader. It will be lawsuit heaven and this will be stuck in court for sometime, too late for them to be put on.
This is silly. Is anyone
This is silly.
Is anyone here deluded enough to think they wont be on the ballot?
This is crackpot stuff.
Laughable.
Yea your right
But its not as funny as Barr the Libertarian
For sure, Barr the Libertarian
is a Saturday morning cartoon. Chuckles for the whole family.
any better?
any better?
ya, too bad they'll get on
ya, too bad they'll get on the ballot anyways.