This South Dakota newspaper story focuses on the fact that U.S. Senator John Thune, a Republican, has no opponents on the November ballot. No Democrat filed to run for U.S. Senate this year.
The Constitution Party is on the ballot in South Dakota, but it did not run anyone for U.S. Senate either. Whether the party’s candidate for Governor will be on the ballot depends on the outcome of the party’s ballot access case that is being heard in federal court on July 15.
No independent candidate qualified in South Dakota for U.S. Senate this year, and the petition deadline was June 8. Thanks to Political Wire for the link. South Dakota does not permit write-ins.
I think this underscores the importance of running even if it looks like there is a small chance for victory. When the Democratic-Republicans only run one candiate, at least 12% should vote the other way….and that’s pretty much a worst-case scenario….
I agree totally… even if there is no chance instead of a small chance for victory. Just how will John Thune really know how popular he is without any opposition?
How many gerrymander areas are de facto ONE party regimes ???
The U.S.A. gerrymander Senate is among THE most ANTI-Democracy legislative bodies in Western Civilization (what barely remains of it).
P.R. and App.V.
Anything less than 95 percent is considered to be an insult by the incumbant.
Jim Riley: how would top-two have improved this situation?
What were the Constitution Party leaders doing the last several months/weeks during the candidate qualifying process? How could they have missed a golden opportunity to have the role of “main” opposition candidate on the ballot in November?
I guess they were too distracted telling the people of South Dakota what the founding fathers meant or did not mean when they penned the U.S. Constitution!
I have little sympathy for 3rd parties when they fail to take advantage of golden opportunities. This is one of them.
# 3 Demo Rep Says: July 12th, 2010:
“U.S.A. gerrymander Senate is among THE most ANTI-Democracy legislative bodies “……
Yes we need a British style parliament (and the metric system and graphic signage and losing the global empire), but a state is a state is a state.
This STATE ment is absolutely stupid. You surely meant, as you came out of that drugged haze, to say House district.
(And in more lightly populated STATES, the single house district is the entire STATE!)
How many gerrymander areas are de facto ONE party regimes ??? Well, locally the 60% Democratic voters elect the five GOP (100%) County Supervisors decade after decade.
We finally got a County TERM LIMITATION enacted. Let’s see if that will change the mix. When air ace Randall ‘Puke’ Cunningham was shipped off to federal stir the 50th Congressional district elected ANOTHER Republican! (Previously ‘mapped out’ [to do nothing Susan Davis] Bill Bilbry ——- just as kkkreepy as the extortionist ………)
P.R. and App.V. and Lordie you are soooooooo stupid on a regular, consistent basis.
And the misnamed, so called, Constitution Party USA: soooooooo stupid on a regular, consistent basis! They have soooooooooo little to do with the Constitution, just as their antecedent had sooooooooo little to with tax payers.
As far as SD [South Dakota? San Diego?] —– let’s give it back to the ‘Injuns’ and let them run with it, er, ah, um run it!
1) Why don’t people who want to comment use their real name rather than hiding behind some silly “handle?” I see three people who have done this on this thread. No insult is intended, but I just can’t help wondering why people feel compelled to do this. Seems a little paranoid to me. What is the harm in just saying who you are? Am I missing something? The internet is seemingly breeding a rather cowardly, annonymous world.
2) You make a very good point, but you may not know all of the circumstances. I do know that the South Dakota CP is fairly small and I believe they have a priority for running a candidate for Governor, and they are even emeshed in a lawsuit over that. So these things may be a factor as well.
3) Your sarcastic comment in your second paragraph actually does illustrate a real problem that I have observed over 40 years in 3rd Party politics. A lot of people get involved because they want a place where they can voice their opinion, but they are not particularly interested in politics itself. That IS a problem, though hopefully a diminishing one as the Constitution Party grows and matures.
#5 There would 2 candidates on the general election ballot.
Thx for asking.
It seems if keeping ballot access is a priority then maybe running someone for the US Senate would have been better then getting 2 percent for governor. 3rd parties have a hard time staying on ballots. Then again you never know how things shake out until the filing ends.
[a] Mister Odom is first last and always a Constitution Party operative!
[b] What does Gary have against the truth ? Keeping on picking at me, especially after your slate did not make the ONCE AND NO LONGER AFFILIATED WITH THE CONSTITUTION PARTY USA California American Independent Party!
[c] I admire Odom, Nightmare Nightingale, Doctor Grundmann, Visitor From Another Planet Cody Banks Quirk, and others under fifty whom use their real name, phone, address. But, in the 21st Century, I also think that they are fool hardy!
Teens, twenties, and every one looking for love or income under 50 then you need to know that potential employers, clients, and dates are checking you out! And checking you out, and checking you out!
[d] Gary Odom: “I have observed over 40 years in 3rd Party politics. A lot of people get involved because they want a place where they can voice their opinion, but they are not particularly interested in politics itself ….” OR KNOWLEDGEABLE!
[e] Odom does not let the facts mess up a ‘good’ story. CP is a loooooooooong way from third most populous 21st Century American political party! Growing, as in the increasingly shrinking organization? Maturing, with allies like Odom, Nightingale, Grundmann, [Jim} King, and Cody Banks Quirk?
[f] Open mouth, out comes lies, kinda like the Democans and the Republicrats …….
Gary Odom is probably including me in the group he cites for not using their real name rather than a “user name” or handle. While Gary has a point, he apparently is (as I understand) a self-employed attorney who doesn’t have a boss to face. He has no job to lose.
I do. If I used my real name, it wouldn’t take long for someone desperate enough to find out just who I am and track me down. With my current employment, it could threaten my job security with my somewhat “unorthodox” views being known among my co-workers. I work among diehard Republicans and Democrats. Common sense tells me to not use my name.
I hope to retire in 2 to 3 years. Then I can use my name and not feel threatened – at least from an employer.
Gary,
There are now thirteen comments on this thread and only three of them are from the usual crazies. 77% sanity is not too shabby for B.A.N.
If the Libertarian Party hadn’t screwed up their petition drive in South Dakota in 2008 for full party status they could still have full party status for 2010 and therefore they could run somebody for US Senate.
The Libertarian Party did have ballot status for 2010 in South Dakota but it was for the Presidential ticket only to be on the ballot as independents, not as Libertarians.
The fact that the Libertarian Party does not have ballot status right now in South Dakota is a direct result of how the full party status petition in 2008 (which is good for 4 years) was mismanaged.
Don Lake, …….and Gary Odom Alert Says:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
[a] Mister Odom is first last and always a Constitution Party operative!
[b] and apparently a disbarred lawyer ………
Gary Odom- As with Alabama Independent… I fear for my security clearance. To agencies of the US goverment ALL minor party activity is subversive.
#9 – There would still be only 1 candidate on the November ballot if nobody filed as a candidate of any other party. The situation in SD is that only one candidate filed.
demo rep — with all due respect you don’t seem to understand that the US is a federal republic, not a unitarian republic. We are a federation of states, so there’s no gerrymandering in the Senate. Each state has 2 senators as part of the compromise that was reached when the constitution was written.
With all the back stabbing as shown above, no wonder a lot of third parties can’t get anywhere.
Getting back to the story, what does it mean that the Democrats did not run a candidate, and, on a more macro level, there are other states in which the Democratic-Republican party is running without another Democratic-Republican running against him/her? Maybe I have been following more closely the past 4 to 6 years, but it seems as if the “unopposed” races are increasing rather than decreasing. Statistics could easily dismiss that argument and that is why I use the word “seems”. I do know that the Constitution Party coud be THE opposition party in a state like Massachusetts, for instance, where a majority of candidates run unopposed (mostly at the local or regional level). CP candidates might get blown out, but over time voters in that state might realize that the CP is the only alternative (at least at the local level and thus building up from there…).
Unfortunately, it is the casual view of politics by most of the citizenry that is leading our nation to a citizen defaulted communistic (ie single party rule) government. Also, we have a government that continues to limit those who can run for office. (ie Hatch Act keeps federal employees from running for office unless they live in DC). Thus eliminating another large group of the populace that understands the waste or running of the government. While some parts of the Hatch Act may be good, like not allowing the use of government property for elections, the other parts only prevent those who would challenge the current politicians.
#17 If ballot access was as easy as in Washington, or as it will be in California beginning in January 2011, there would have been an independent, Republican, Libertarian, Democrat, someone who would have filed. Or if Thune had been the only one who filed, then someone would have qualified as a write-in candidate.
In Washington, a write-in candidate only needs 1% of the vote to qualify for the general election, and they don’t even need to declare their candidacy. In California a write-in candidate only needs one vote after declaring their candidacy.
#21, it is absurd to say ballot access is easy in Washington state. No minor party or independent candidates qualified in November 2008 in Washington state for statewide state office, or congress. It doesn’t help the discussion for Jim Riley to say ballot access is “easy” when it requires, on the average, 30% support in the primary, unless one defines “ballot access” to mean ballot access in a primary instead of the congressionally-mandated federal election day.
Jeff Becker. Do you consider me among the 3 of “only three of them are from the usual crazies.?” I hope not. But was just checking.
I said three because between #1 and #13, one of the crazies had posted twice… and no, it’s not you. I’ll let you do the math. :))
– Jeff
and you, or whom, would care ………
# 7 The creation of each State was an ANTI-Democracy gerrymander action — going back to the early British colonies in the 1600s and then the later States.
See the creation of ME in the 1820 EVIL MO Compromise and the 1863 creation of WV by military force out of VA.
#17 The 2 Senators per State was part of the EVIL conspiracy of the small States with the Slave State MONSTERS in the top secret 1787 Federal Convention — with the added infamous slave = 3/5 of a free person in Art. I, Sec. 2.
See the 620,000 DEAD Americans in the horrific Civil War I in 1861-1865 — due to the structure of the U.S.A. gerrymander Senate and slavery and the 3/5 math.
i.e. especially the EVIL Free State/ Slave State pairings up to 1859 — math from HELL.
Sorry — CA (most 2008 Prez voters) is NOT equal to WY (least 2008 Prez voters) in any way, shape or form — except in the gerrymander U.S.A. Senate — with its circa 10 percent indirct MINORITY RULE — due to the many below average States.
ONLY M-O-R-O-N-S have an area FIXATION (from the DARK AGE in the 1200s) for representating the VOTERS in legislative bodies.
P.R. and App.V. — sorry — political *science* has moved on since the 1200s — just like science in general — chemistry, physics, etc.
#22 I said that under a Top 2 Open Primary system that there would have been two candidates on the general election ballot in South Dakota. You don’t deny this do you?
In the 2008 general election, there were more candidates per race for the Washington legislature than for the legislature in Oregon. Is this information not correct?
None of the political parties in Washington made a claim related to the so-called federal election date before the trial court. That is why the 9th Circuit ordered that the claim be dropped. About all you have to support your argument is Foster v Love a case where the AG of Louisiana argued that it would be OK to have the primary in July and the general election in August. That was so clear cut that the Supreme Court let David Souter write the opinion.
I do deny there would have been 2 candidates on in South Dakota for US Senate this year if South Dakota had a top-two system. Who do you think the 2nd person would have been?
If South Dakota had an Top 2 Open Primary with a nomination process similar to that in Washington or California someone would have qualified.
In California, a write-in candidate only needs 1 vote, so long as they finish in 2nd place. In Washington, a write-in candidate only needs 1% of the vote, and Washington does not even require a write-in candidate to declare his candidacy.
i consider the media —
radio-locator showed 128 radio stations in SD —
some from colleges —
some npr —
some talk/news —
there must be FSTV from DISH? —
where i learn so much —
i don’t know SD media —
anybody from SD?