The Montana Constitution Party has tentatively decided not to place Chuck Baldwin on the ballot. Although the state party did send a delegation to this year’s national convention, the state party continues to be displeased with the national party. The state party thinks the national party is too wishy-washy on abortion, since the national party consistently voted to keep the Nevada affiliate. The Montana Constitution Party thinks the Nevada Independent American Party is not firm enough about banning all abortions.
Ballot Access News
Edited By Richard Winger
What’s their reason?
Mike, thanks for asking. I expanded the post.
That’s odd. Why punish Baldwin for something that the Nevada party is doing?
So the Montana CP won’t list a candidate for President?
Baldwin voted for disaffiliation. To not list him after saying they would is odd. Are they going to list someone else? To say that they will not list Baldwin because the party is not as solid on abortion as they think it should be then not give voters a solid pro-life candidate to vote for is all most hypocritical.
We must wait until Friday to see if the Montana Constitution Party lists anyone else for president.
Wow,
This is an odd and unexpected mood. The CP of Montana and of Oregon both seemed to really like Chuck Baldwin.
Richard,
Is there any chance this might be an Alan Keyes sort of thing?
This is ridicious!! Baldiwn is the only pro-life cannidate runinng that can win.
I shure hope they dont put keyes on the ballot. Keyes has already destrouyed the consitutuion party in ca and he is trying his best to destroy the whole party.
I cant belive this….. I hope they change their mind and do put baldiwn on the ballot. Its the right thing to do. Either that or disafailate with the consituition party and let the party recorganize and leave the party alone.
This is what we get for putting trust in Montana.
Looks like we’ll have to do write-in.
We should sevier ties to the Montana CP, they are untrustworthy and obvioulsy prejudiced against the LDS leaders of the Nevada IAP.
Not everyone is thrilled with the way Baldwin developed amnesia toward all things national CP after he became a leading contender for president. The MT steering committee is probably controlled by people with that viewpoint.
Yet another reason for Ron Paul to endorse Bob Barr. The CP is all about imploding!
Cody, you and Mister Baldwin seem to have lots of problems of late. I assume that all of your woes are caused by others.
Keyes is not nearly a perfect person, much less even civil or nice —but he, and not Chuckie Poo, are in the running in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Collie Fornia! Is there a hidden message there, to a group of folks whom brag of being bigger and more principled and more stable than the Libs? Folks whom can not contain their Un Christ Like glee with the [mostly self inflicted] problems of the once 20% of P1992 reform movement?
Read a little Buddia, Mister Quirk, some thing bout ‘Karma’? [Told ya so………..]
I also think you will be horribly disturbed by the lack of support on California Gay Marriage ban and various Baldwin write ins. Hey, Uncle Ralph Nader, an illogical, unpleasant, baggage ladden old fart has more ballots than CP!
“Keyes is not nearly a perfect person, much less even civil or nice —but he, and not Chuckie Poo, are in the running in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Collie Fornia!”
Keyes is not on the ballot in Texas or Pennsylvania. He’s a write-in in Texas just like Baldwin is, and I haven’t heard of anything in Pennsylvania for him. Baldwin’s on in 31 states. Keyes is on in 2. No contest there.
Yeah, Keyes is definitely not on the ballot in PA or TX. In fact, I don’t think he’s even tried to petition anywhere.
This is very much like the California situation (ironically) where you have a chairman who is totally out of step with his party making all the decisions.
The purported state Chairman in Montana has refused to hold a meeting or election even though his term was up in December. You can expect that he is going to face an increasing rebellion within his own state party if he goes through with this decision. Most of the counties are aligned against him already.
As in California, the rank and file in Montana support the national Constitution Party and Chuck Baldwin.
And for heavans sakes, the Constitution Party is not imploding. Growing pains, yes.
I am told that the Baldwin booth was incredibly busy during the Rally for the Republic…far busier than the Libertarian/Barr booth.
I note that all of such comments come from people who only observe from the outside and who do not actually participate.
I don’t hear of any complaining for the Montana CP about this.
Not that Baldwin is a bad candidate, but I would love to see the reaction of certain people if the CP ran a Mormon and a Catholic in 2012.
On a related note, I wish the Florida Democratic party would have threatened to do the same thing if their delegation wasn’t seated at the convention.
Elector certifications had to be in or around on August 20th. It is my understanding that the Montana CP has not been an affiliate of the National party for some time.
Is there still time to qualify Baldwin as a write-in in Montana?
The Montana Secretary of State is not enforcing the law about when qualified parties must certify the names of their presidential and vice-presidential candidates, because otherwise the Dems & Reps would also be off. The Secretary of State says everything must be turned in by Friday this week.
The deadline for filing as a write-in is not until October.
What?! Is there a NOONAN CLONE in Montana? I hope not! Hey Montana! Get your act together quick! We don’t need another “buffoon” at the helm like Ed Noonan in California. It is like a freaking virus.
What on earth do THEY think they are going to gain by this ridiculas stupid move? All they are doing is shooting themselves in the foot. This is really felony stupid folks.The CP Montans loyalists need to get their heads together on this real quick! Like yesterday!
-Larry Breazeale, Msgt.(ret.) USAF
National Veterans Coalition,
Constitution party..www.nvets.org
No, just a anti-Mormon a**hole.
Cody, why are you heaping so much blame on the Montana CP? At least they didn’t nominate a rival candidate like the AIP did. Moreover, your argument makes no sense given the fact that Baldwin voted for disaffiliating the Nevada IAP. If it’s really some kind of anti-Mormon conspiracy as you say, then why wouldn’t they rally behind him especially in light of the fact that Ed Noonan isn’t backing him?
Were you at Kansas City, Cody? Did you see for yourself what took place? There were Keyes supporters in *both* the California and Montana delegations. This has nothing to do with hatred of Mormons or anything like that. Before throwing stones at other state affiliates, you should first clean up your own rebellious state party in California. I personally think the AIP should be disaffiliated–not for anyone being a Mormon–but because they’ve seriously damaged the national party with this little stunt.
Cody, why are you heaping so much blame on the Montana CP? At least they didn’t nominate a rival candidate like the AIP did.
= Are you sure? I heard they’ll be putting somebody else on the ballot that can be considered a rival to Chuck.
Moreover, your argument makes no sense given the fact that Baldwin voted for disaffiliating the Nevada IAP.
= And yet he’s still in the CP and his state affiliate voted against disaffiliation from the CP. He’s also going to be speaking in Vegas, with a IAP crowd present.
If it’s really some kind of anti-Mormon conspiracy as you say, then why wouldn’t they rally behind him especially in light of the fact that Ed Noonan isn’t backing him?
= Chuck Baldwin has been saying positive things about Mormons lately, funny how all of a sudden the Montana CP does a 180 on having him on their ballot.
I smell a rat.
Were you at Kansas City, Cody? Did you see for yourself what took place?
= A realible source that was there told me what happened.
There were Keyes supporters in *both* the California and Montana delegations. This has nothing to do with hatred of Mormons or anything like that.
= The Tampa matter was a anti-Mormon conspiracy, period; I’ve read all the stuff on TAV, AND the bigoted postings of the people that pushed to kick out Nevada.
And suddenly the Montana CP chair wants to keep Baldwin of the ballot and bringing up the Tampa matter as a excuse- right after Baldwin came out with his “What would a Baldwin Administration look like?” speech.
= No need to connect the dots.
Before throwing stones at other state affiliates, you should first clean up your own rebellious state party in California.
= I live in Nevada, what are you talking about?
I personally think the AIP should be disaffiliated–not for anyone being a Mormon–but because they’ve seriously damaged the national party with this little stunt.
= Better to disaffiliate Ed Noonan from the AIP, then kick out a party that makes up 75% of CP registered voters.
= BTW, Ed and a small group of people are doing this, the majority of the AIP state committee is opposed to Ed and his actions.
Once again, Cody, hearing second-hand stuff from Kansas City isn’t reliable information. I was there, you weren’t. And I can tell you first hand that there were no anti-Mormon sentiments being publicly articulated. In fact, as I said, there were far more divisions within the party over whether to nominate Alan Keyes than anything else. Squabbles over religion didn’t take place, especially since virtually all of the theonomists have left the party.
Tampa is history, pal. Get over it. The only ones bringing up religion at this point are insecure Mormons like yourself who have nothing else to harp about. The real threats to our party are closet-neocons like Noonan, not these phantam anti-Mormons you keep bringing up.
Plus, you’re making two huge and incorrect assumptions about those who voted for disaffiliation. First, not everyone who supported disaffiliation left the party (that includes yours truly). Second, not everyone who supported disaffiliation is anti-Mormon. Nobody was proposing, for example, that the Utah CP be disaffiliated. I think it’s grossly unfair to assume that anyone who wanted Nevada out is an anti-Mormon fanatic.
The reason I don’t buy your pet theory about the Montana CP is because Baldwin was already friendly toward Mormons during his convention speeches, long before the Montana CP decided to go down this route. If they choose to nominate Keyes, then they’ll only be emulating CA and CO. Oregon also disaffilated, yet Mary Staret is still supporting the national party as well as the Baldwin campaign. In fact, as I recall from what I saw at Kansas City, there were plenty of people who supported disaffiliation who overwhelmingly supported Baldwin. Sorry, but your theory doesn’t add up.
My apologies for saying that you live in CA. I must have confused you with someone else. Nevertheless, the AIP shares far more of the blame because they do in fact claim to be an official affiliate of the CP in contrast to Montana. Moreover, the 300,000+ registered members of the AIP are a farce. People mistakenly assume that “American Independent” means “Independent” when they register to vote, thus inflating the actual numbers.
Once again, Cody, hearing second-hand stuff from Kansas City isn’t reliable information.
= Too bad because my source is a leader in the CP.
I was there, you weren’t. And I can tell you first hand that there were no anti-Mormon sentiments being publicly articulated.
= I can tell you the Michigan affiliate threated to leave if Howard brought up the matter of Tampa and abortion one more time.
In fact, as I said, there were far more divisions within the party over whether to nominate Alan Keyes than anything else. Squabbles over religion didn’t take place, especially since virtually all of the theonomists have left the party.
= I wasn’t talking about anti-Mormonism at the last nat. convention, but within the Montana CP itself, and at during the 2006 Tampa matter. Weren’t you listening- not you were not.
Thank God those morons left!
Tampa is history, pal. Get over it.
= Tell that to the Montana CP!
The only ones bringing up religion at this point are insecure Mormons like yourself who have nothing else to harp about.
= Then why is Johnathan Martin bringing it up? My you are a poor listener.
The real threats to our party are closet-neocons like Noonan, not these phantam anti-Mormons you keep bringing up.
= And the dogmatic morons that brown-nosed the anti-Mormons insisting we trust the Montana CP for ballot access.
Plus, you’re making two huge and incorrect assumptions about those who voted for disaffiliation. First, not everyone who supported disaffiliation left the party (that includes yours truly).
= And Baldwin is speaking in Vegas on the 20th with the IAP in attendence; whats your point?
Second, not everyone who supported disaffiliation is anti-Mormon.
= But the majorty was.
Nobody was proposing, for example, that the Utah CP be disaffiliated.
= Nevada was step 1, after all, there was Chris Hansen that was telling off the nutjobs.
Utah would’ve been next.
I think it’s grossly unfair to assume that anyone who wanted Nevada out is an anti-Mormon fanatic.
= Why is the Montana CP doing a 180? All of a sudden. Perhaps it could be because of all those Pro-Mormon speeches given recently by Baldwin?
The reason I don’t buy your pet theory about the Montana CP is because Baldwin was already friendly toward Mormons during his convention speeches, long before the Montana CP decided to go down this route.
= Apparently he got more friendlier with them recently. Then we hear that Johnathan Martin wants to revisit the Tampa matter all of a sudden.
If they choose to nominate Keyes, then they’ll only be emulating CA and CO. Oregon also disaffilated, yet Mary Staret is still supporting the national party as well as the Baldwin campaign.
= And Oregon VOTED to put Baldwin on the ballot at their state convention. Keyes is way too moderate for the Montana people.
In fact, as I recall from what I saw at Kansas City, there were plenty of people who supported disaffiliation who overwhelmingly supported Baldwin. Sorry, but your theory doesn’t add up.
= And yet the Montana people do a 180 after voting for Baldwin there.
My apologies for saying that you live in CA. I must have confused you with someone else.
= You certainly have.
Nevertheless, the AIP shares far more of the blame because they do in fact claim to be an official affiliate of the CP in contrast to Montana.
= The Jim King faction does.
Moreover, the 300,000+ registered members of the AIP are a farce. People mistakenly assume that “American Independent†means “Independent†when they register to vote, thus inflating the actual numbers.
= Maybe so in Cali, but not in the Silver state.
Cody–you are wrong, sorry. Its obvious this isnt an anti-mormon move, or even really an anti-Baldwin move, but a Pro-Ron Paul move.