Texas republicans tried to get all libertarian candidates removed from the ballot

[JGalt]

The courts quickly shut them down.

Why did they do this? Obviously to corner the conservative vote. Still think republicans care about democracy? No. All they care about is winning.

Republican effort to remove Libertarians from November ballot rejected by Texas Supreme Court

On Aug. 8, a group of Republican candidates asked the Supreme Court to remove 23 Libertarian opponents from the ballot, saying they did not meet eligibility requirements. The Republicans included Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and others in congressional and state legislative races.

www.texastribune.org

“On Aug. 8, a group of Republican candidates asked the Supreme Court to remove 23 Libertarians from the ballot, saying they did not meet eligibility requirements. The Republicans included Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and others in congressional and state legislative races.

State law requires Libertarian candidates to pay filing fees or gather petition signatures, the amount of each depending on the office sought. The Libertarian Party has been challenging that law in federal court, arguing it is unfair because the fees do not go toward their nomination process like they do for Democrats and Republicans.

Republicans also tried and failed to kick a group of Libertarian candidates off the ballot in 2020. In that case, the state Supreme Court said the GOP waited until after the deadline to challenge candidate eligibility. This time, the Republicans filed their challenge before that deadline but apparently still did not satisfy the court’s preference to deal with election challenges as soon as the alleged issues arise.”

If those libertarians were smart, they would have held out for a big payoff like Bernie Sanders got when the DNC did the same thing to him in 2016.

Bernie Sanders Buys $600,000 Summer Home After Endorsing...

 

[pknopp]

“Instead of choosing just one candidate, why not allow voters to rank all the contestants in order of preference? Ranked choice voting would not only eliminate the spoiler effect, but it would reduce strategic voting and jumpstart America’s transition away from the two-party system….

“Less than two years after my introduction to RCV, I now find myself living and working in Washington, D.C., the epicenter of American politics. During my time here, I haven’t met a single person who doesn’t want to talk politics. My fellow Washingtonians reference ‘The Hill’ in casual conversation and follow every last congressperson on Twitter. And yet, many of them have either never heard of RCV or don’t quite understand how it works.

“So if some of the most politically-attuned Americans don’t know the basics of ranked choice voting, what does that mean for our movement?

“It means we have a lot of work ahead of us, and it starts with you!

“First, take two minutes to watch this ranked choice voting video and master your own summarization of the process. Ranked choice voting isn’t difficult, but explaining any new concept takes practice….”

What is ranked choice voting? - FairVote

FairVote is a nonpartisan organization seeking better elections for all. We research and advance voting reforms that make democracy more functional and representative for every American.

www.fairvote.org

That would be cool if you had the option of voting both candidates third in a two way race.

 

[Kondor3]

There are no real Libertarians anymore…they are all Libs… examples on this board are everywhere…. Look no further than Golfing Gator Kondor3 and dblack for proof.

Me? A Lib? Wrong, buffalo-breath... you missed that one by a mile-and-a-half... my loyalty is to the Republic, its Constitution and our People...

You confuse vigorous opposition to your Orange Baboon-God with Leftism, when nothing could be further from the Truth, or Reality for that matter...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There are no real Libertarians anymore…they are all Libs… examples on this board are everywhere…. Look no further than Golfing Gator Kondor3 and dblack for proof.

The problem with this statement is that your definition of a "lib" is anyone that does not kiss the ass of Trump 24/7/365.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Me? A Lib? Wrong, buffalo-breath... you missed that one by a mile-and-a-half... my loyalty is to the Republic, its Constitution and our People...

You confuse vigorous opposition to your Orange Baboon-God with Leftism, when nothing could be further from the Truth, or Reality for that matter...

I might have been wrong about BL, he might think we are libs not due to our lack of worship of Trump but due to our lack of hatred of non-whites and gay people.

 

[Dragonlady]

So?

Democrats had the Green Party candidate removed in Pennsylvania for the 2020 election.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court removes Green Party presidential candidate from ballot

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the presidential and vice presidential candidates for the Green Party cannot appear on the state’s ballots this cycle, handing Democrats a win as …

thehill.com

You really should read the links you post, before you post them. These two cases aren't even remotely similar.

Not the same thing at all. The Green Party hadn't properly submitted the paperwork to run any candidate, and then they tried swap out the original candidate and replace him. The court ruled that the candidate was never properly entered in the first place.

 

[dblack]

I might have been wrong about BL, he might think ...

I doubt it.

 

[BluesLegend]

Texas republicans tried to get all libertarian candidates removed from the ballot​

New York governor tried to get all Republicans removed from the state. Told Republicans to get out and move to Florida where they belong.

 

[flacaltenn]

First, the voting occurs only ONCE. In a computerized system, the ranked choices tabulation can be done at lightning speed. Of course if there is human counting of paper ballots the rounds of counting take a bit longer, but the vote is cast only once, so it is an efficient as well as more democratic system.

"Lightning speed" was a BOGUS feature claim when this method was being sold. In the recent Alaska primary conducted on August 16th, the state REFUSED to RUN RCV results until after the 31st when the mail-in ballot deadline ends. Electing instead to just make the RAW vote available for 2 weeks and not call anything officially. That House seat election has OVER 40 CANDIDATES!!!! MOSTLY independents who SHOULDN'T BE in primaries. Which is another problem that comes bundled with this GIMMICK.

This is a silly criticism. All votes are counted, at least once. If a voter “bullet votes” for only one candidate, and provides no second or third choices, then of course if his first choice doesn‘t make it through to a progressive run off he/she is out of luck (paper ballots are not “thrown away”). That voter is simply choosing to say “this is the only candidate I will accept and I have no second choice” … as we all are forced to do in our present “first past the post” system.

As the LOWEST candidates are flushed out in a round -- THOSE VOTES ARE TOSSED. Dont count even as "votes cast" towards the TOTAL vote which DECIDES a majority mark. In races with 10 or more candidates, probably doesn't matter. But if the rules are the TOP 3 go to the general and there are 6 total total candidates -- you CAN SEE more than 25% of votes TOSSED OUT COMPLETELY by the final round. So the "percent they "win" by -- is NOWHERE NEAR the percent of TOTAL VOTES cast.

It's the bundling of this GIMMICK with OTHER "primary rules" that will KILL democracy in this country. Cali doesn't ALLOW ANYONE on the General Election Ballot that didn't place in the top 4 in the JUNGLE primary. A Jungle is where you toss ALL Dems, Repubs, and Indies onto the SAME BALLOT. So "parties" even if they DONT HAVE primaries - like Libertarians and Greens who select in State and National conventions -- with 2 or 6 candidates each -- would be lost completely in the noise. THAT's the evil plan. And it works to suppress competition to the EXISTING 2 aging, corrupt, inept "brand name parties".

Independents DONT NEED primaries. The govt entities that FORCE them into "primaries" alongside the "brand name" candidates are BURYING chances of GETTING ON a final ballot. That's the BEST FEATURE of Independent candidates. And tossing them into a poor quality sausage vote packing factory is KILLING OFF competition to the prevailing parties.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are no real Libertarians anymore…they are all Libs… examples on this board are everywhere…. Look no further than Golfing Gator Kondor3 and dblack for proof.

Libertarians are NOT 'libs". They are CLASSIC Liberals. Big diff. Just like the folks who founded and DESIGNED this nation for a LIMITED FEDERAL GOVT with very little power over people's lives.

IF you really want to END "tax and spend" -- you WANT Libertarians. Not the "brand name" parties.
If you really want to END "crony Capitalism" and preserve free markets -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you really want to SAFEGUARD or end "Domestic Spying" -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you really want to downsize the massive bureaucracy and waste -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you want respect for the CONSTITUTION and justice -- you cant trust the Demoplicans.
If you want national energy systems MANDATED and DESIGNED by Congress -- keep voting Dem/Rep.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

I’ve always been a supporter of closed primary party voting, as we have in Florida. Registered members of a party imo should have the exclusive right to decide their own party’s program and candidates.

This is a separate question from RCV. You should reserve your criticism to “open primaries” if you feel strongly about this, and not attack RCV. They are two separate things, even if they can be combined.

A system where parties have no control over their own programs or candidates seems to me dangerously counter-productive. It would make effective collective political organization almost impossible. It would probably end up strengthening the already much too powerful direct influence of money in controlling candidates and the whole political system.

As for the rest, I really don’t see any serious objection. Without RCV we can get results in multi-candidate elections where the winner is actually hated by the great majority of voters, and wins only a minority of votes. This type of result, frequent when two candidates appeal strongly to, but split the votes of, one (Democratic or Republican) voting base … is one of the things Ranked Choice Voting makes almost impossible.

 

[flacaltenn]

This is a separate question from RCV. You should reserve your criticism to “open primaries” if you feel strongly about this, and not attack RCV. They are two separate things, even if they can be combined.

It's really NOT a separate issue, since RCV is USED most notably in primaries. There's NO need for RCV on "closed primaries" really. or county/local races with just 1 or 2 people running. But states who want only 2 or 3 or 4 candidates on the Gen election ballot out of maybe 10 or 20 running STATEWIDE are really making "sausage" out of the democratic process. And RCV is a GIMMICK in those cases where the State can whittle down LARGE FIELDS of candidates -- some of which DONT NEED A PRIMARY (like the 3rd parties and Indies that I mentioned) -- into a convenient FEW on the final General Election ballot.

 

[pknopp]

I’ve always been a supporter of closed primary party voting, as we have in Florida. Registered members of a party imo should have the exclusive right to decide their own party’s program and candidates.

Why? They don't own the voting system. Here in WV I can register (I) and vote for whoever I believe is the best candidate. How is that not how it should be?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Libertarians are NOT 'libs". They are CLASSIC Liberals. Big diff. Just like the folks who founded and DESIGNED this nation for a LIMITED FEDERAL GOVT with very little power over people's lives.

IF you really want to END "tax and spend" -- you WANT Libertarians. Not the "brand name" parties.
If you really want to END "crony Capitalism" and preserve it -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you really want to SAFEGUARD or end "Domestic Spying" -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you really want to downsize the massive bureaucracy and waste -- You WANT Libertarians.
If you want respect for the CONSTITUTION and justice -- you cant trust the Demoplicans.
If you want national energy systems MANDATED and DESIGNED by Congress -- keep voting Dem/Rep.

What about their disdain for our Declaration Of Independence?

Immigration | Libertarian Party

Libertarians believe that if someone is peaceful, they should be welcome to immigrate to the United States. Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are...

www.lp.org

 

[pknopp]

What about their disdain for our Declaration Of Independence?

Immigration | Libertarian Party

Libertarians believe that if someone is peaceful, they should be welcome to immigrate to the United States. Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are...

www.lp.org

There is nothing in there about not accepting immigrants.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

flacaltenn : I think closed party primaries are one of the most important places where RCV is being used today successfully, and will with equal success be more widely used in future. Indeed, the idea is spreading for the first time among Republicans … as this article and excerpt point out:

When Parties Can’t Control Primaries

***

The Virginia Republican Party used RCV at its convention last year to pick its gubernatorial nominee. It was a divided field, but the party ended up plenty happy with its nominee for governor, Glenn Youngkin, who now holds the office. "Using ranked-choice voting in party-run nomination contests in Virginia has dramatically improved the precision and quality of Republican campaigns,” says Rich Anderson, who chairs the state GOP. “Early on, Republicans noted a decidedly positive change in the tenor and tone of our statewide campaigns, culminating in Glenn Youngkin's astonishing success last November.”

***

Note: Rank & File Democratic voters have generally been more sympathetic to using RCV in their closed primaries than Republicans, but hopefully that will change.

Of course if there are only 2 (or fewer) candidates running in a closed party primary for a particular post, RCV works like a regular “first pass the post” system does..

 

[flacaltenn]

As for the rest, I really don’t see any serious objection. Without RCV we can get results to multi-candidate elections where the winner is hated by the great majority of voters, and won only a very small minority of votes. This type of result, frequent when two candidates split the vote of one voting base, is precisely what RCV prevents.

Doesn't do anything of that kind if it's used to whittle down packed primaries. You're STILL gonna see that splitting occur IN SPADES. Because Dems dont RUN 3 or 5 for a Senate seat like Repubs do. They run ONE -- maybe 2. So under the BEST conditions where you DONT JUMBLE OR JUNGLE all the candidates in ONE WIDE OPEN Primary -- there's still hanky panky in states that ALLOW "cross-over" voting to MUDDLE in the other party's primary. Having ONE DEM on the primary ballot is like OPEN SEASON on Dems going to polls to VOTE the WEAKEST Repub. THESE ARE LARGER ISSUES than RCV or NOT RCV.

And in the GENERAL if RCV has chosen 3 Repubs and 1 Democrat on the final ballot -- RCV does not really FIX anything. Because in EACH ROUND of iteration -- the Dem almost certainly survives and Repubs fall off one by one. Repubs are NOT gonna be happy with 3rd choice candidates and MAY NOT EVEN STATE a third choice -- so if it goes past 2 iterations, The DEM WINS!!!!!!

That's why EVERY LEFT WING ORG on the PLANET (yes Europe also) is pushing RCV. Because THEY tightly control WHO (and how many) get to run in state and fed race and Repubs -- not so much.

 

[flacaltenn]

Why? They don't own the voting system. Here in WV I can register (I) and vote for whoever I believe is the best candidate. How is that not how it should be?

In W.Virg primaries -- do you have to request a Dem or Rep ballot? Or are the candidates all on one? Indies SHOULD get a choice in primaries. Which is why TOTALLY CLOSED (votes by only party registed) primaries are a bad idea. But asking an Indie to CHOOSE A PARTY for a primary is NOT a big sacrifice. Indies are a LARGER voting bloc now than the 2 brand name parties added together. OF COURSE they should a have a choice in primaries if the STATE is running them. But in the long view -- Indies just need to run their OWN candidates WITHOUT organizing "as a party". We NEED independents in State and Federal offices to SURVIVE !!!!!

We're complicating the FUCK out of the election process by NOT requiring the PARTIES to do their OWN primaries. They insist on organizing politics by parties -- LET THEM NOMINATE their own damn candidates with state conventions or Mail balloting or whatever.

As an Indie and sometime Libertarian voter -- I get to VOTE TWICE in most states. I can "meddle" in the Rep or Dem PRIMARIES that the states create and vote at Libertarian convention. I'm helping to NOMINATE 2 candidates! And I'd STILL PREFER a quality Indie candidate over ANY PARTY candidates.

 

[pknopp]

In W.Virg primaries -- do you have to request a Dem or Rep ballot? Or are the candidates all on one? Indies SHOULD get a choice in primaries. Which is why TOTALLY CLOSED (votes by only party registed) primaries are a bad idea. But asking an Indie to CHOOSE A PARTY for a primary is NOT a big sacrifice. Indies are a LARGER voting bloc now than the 2 brand name parties added together. OF COURSE they should a have a choice in primaries if the STATE is running them. But in the long view -- Indies just need to run their OWN candidates WITHOUT organizing "as a party". We NEED independents in State and Federal offices to SURVIVE !!!!!

We're complicating the FUCK out of the election process by NOT requiring the PARTIES to do their OWN primaries. They insist on organizing politics by parties -- LET THEM NOMINATE their own damn candidates with state conventions or Mail balloting or whatever.

As an Indie and sometime Libertarian voter -- I get to VOTE TWICE in most states. I can "meddle" in the Rep or Dem PRIMARIES that the states create and vote at Libertarian convention. I'm helping to NOMINATE 2 candidates! And I'd STILL PREFER a quality Indie candidate over ANY PARTY candidates.

You have to ask for the parties ballot which I think should change also. If I want to vote for a (R) governor but a (D) senator in the primaries as an (I), I should be able to.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Still think republicans care about democracy? No. All they care about is winning.

Says the "ends-justify-the-means" socialist.