Phil Sawyer replies:

Well, it seems only fair to me that the people of Colorado should get to hear debates that include all 18 candidates, and so forth. The debates could be divided into sections and feature a few of the people at a time – in alphabetical order of the names of the candidates.

Hi Trent … I can tell you that I expect to support Alan Keyes’ candidacy through November and beyond b/c he is the candidate that will best represent me in the White House. I am hopeful that Alan will be on the ballot in states totaling 270 electors or more. It’s certainly mathematically possible … but depends upon whether people get to hear what Alan has to say … and whether those who hear and agree will respond.

In 2008, Real Clear Politics avgs Obama + McCain at
48.3% + 42.8% = 91.1% during the period from 06/19 to 07/07. Shouldn’t we compile the best arguments for rejecting two-party politics and politicians, rather than disparaging one another?

With all due respect, I’m afraid I do not agree with your conclusion since I’m not persuaded Keyes will be on the ballot in only a few state”

So you expect Keyes to get on in more than 10-15 states? If so, I think you’re delusional.

I want the Green Party of the United States to suck-up their pride and tell Cynthia McKinney that 2012 is her year, the Green Party needs to nominate the Nader/Gonzalez ’08 ticket for this election. That would guarantee the Nader/Gonzalez ’08 ticket to get on 40 to 45 state ballots.

Vote 3rd Party this election cycle whether it be Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin or Ralph Nader. It’s time to show the establishment that the two-party system is broken. Get our candidates the Ballot Access they need! Thank you.

Phil Sawyer responds:

As long as we have the Electoral College to deal with, it should be based only upon a presidential candidate being officially on the ballot in any one state or territory.

savvyconsumer Says:
July 7th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
I consider unfounded name calling unworthy of the discussion. IMO it diminishes the credibility of the one using that kind of tactic, and reflects poorly on your candidate, B. Barr, that his supporters resort to that sort of argument.

Phil Sawyer replies:

You are correct. When a person stoops to calling names it just shows that that person is losing the debate on the issues. Thank you for making your point. Even though we are stating the obvious here, a lot of people just don’t “get it” – as the popular saying goes.

The easiest states for ballot access besides CO and FL via the candidate mechanism are:

TN: 275 signatures
NJ: 800 signatures
AR, MS, RI, UT, VT, and WA: 1,000 signatures each

As for FL, Keyes needs to hold a national nominating convention of his new party by September 2 to get on by the party mechanism. If he goes the independent route, he is staring at 104,334 signatures by next Tuesday.

BTW, there is video of the Keyes-Dershowitz debate … I think it’s posted at Alan’s website.

Here’s anecdotal evidence: I was phonebanking for Alan Keyes last weekend. I spoke with someone with a Ph.D. in Engineering who had turned away from God, rejected Alan Keyes based upon Keyes unashamed expression of his personal faith, who now supports Ron Paul. The gentleman said he had seen Alan Keyes debate twice, and even spoke with him after the events. The contact was intelligent, yet resistant on the many points we discussed … but he said with pride that Alan Keyes was the most outstanding debater he had ever heard.