The story of the New York State Senate vote on same-sex marriage on the evening of June 24 has been well-reported. Many news stories, including this one, mention that the Conservative Party of New York says it will not cross-endorse any Republican State Senator who voted in favor of the bill.
Two of the four Republican State Senators who voted in favor of the bill are in close districts, and in 2010 they needed the Conservative Party vote. In the 55th district in Rochester, James Alesi’s margin over his Democratic opponent was 6,862 votes, and Alesi enjoyed the support of the Conservative and Independence Parties. He received 7,970 votes on the Conservative line and 3,914 on the Independence line.
In the 60th district near Buffalo, Mark Grisanti’s margin over his Democratic opponent was 519 votes. Grisanti received 4,368 votes on the Conservative line. The Independence Party did not contest this district.
Of course, in 2012, the district boundaries will have been redrawn, so what happened in 2010 doesn’t necessarily mean a great deal for the next election.
So the Conservative Party will throw away their support for the only people other than the Libertarians who are at least half-rational in the least free state in the nation. Brilliant move.
Pingback: New York Conservative Party in Position to Injure Two of the Four Republican State Senators who Voted For Same-Sex Marriage | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
Losing the line doesn’t necessarily mean losing the votes. The Conservative Party line voters might just vote on the Republican line next time around, absent another choice (and maybe even with one).
Libertarian Voter,
Why do you think the Conservative Party is throwing away
votes? It just shows that the party believes that that
marriage should be between one man and one woman.
The issue is not what happens in the bedroom of consenting adults. It is what the state reguards as
marriage.
One of the officers of the American Independent Party
told me the time he arrested a man who had sex with a
chicken. At court the defendent claimed the chicken was “his wife” and demanded the judge return “his wife” to him. I also, recall that the father of the present
Governor of California (when he was an attorney prosecuted a party that claimed its dog was its marriage partner.
It is a crime in the United States to have poligamy marriages. This is what Barack Obama I had, viz.,
a wife in Kenya and a Honolulu wife.
Do you think a person should be allowed to marry a non-human or have a poligamist marriage?
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
Mark,
So homosexuals are non-human in your view?
4 –
Thank you for putting a face to American bigotry.
Do you and your party also “happen to believe”, as some did in the past, that:
1) Women should not own property?
2) That they should not be able to vote?
3) That blacks are worth 2/3 of a person when counting the census?
4) That interracial marriages should be outlawed?
5) That child labor is hunky dory?
All these positions were once time-honored, just as branding homosexuals as second class citizens has been.
Would you endorse a change in our laws to empower the state to confer ONLY civil unions? If now, why not? Why do you think the state should be in the business of blessing marital unions in the first place?
Be honest, for crissakes. OF COURSE your position has something…everything…to do with what happens in the bedroom.
Wear your bigotry. Own it, baby.
the NYS constitution section regarding redistricting is still at SCOTUS — reconsideration phase of cert denial — the next conference is not until September. NYC is far too unconstitutionally larger and must be split up (e.g. Kings County split from NY County etc. — state senators need one third of the vote to be elected in say Brooklyn than in an upstate region. districting must not include non-citizens and others.
# 6 slave = 3/5 free person – Art. I, Sec. 2 para 3 – part of the ANTI-Democracy EVIL compromise stuff by the small and slave States in the top secret 1787 Federal Convention.
The 1787 Democracy States were a bit afraid that such small and slave States might go back to the Brit Empire without the EVIL compromise stuff.
See the about 620,000 DEAD in 1861-1865 to get rid of slavery.
See 14th Amdt, Sec. 2 — the 1864-1865 party hack Elephants MORONS did not detect that the 13th Amdt would INCREASE the percentage of U.S.A. Reps and Electoral College votes in the ex-slave States) — until AFTER the 13th Amdt took effect in Dec. 1865.
———
The Congress and ALL 50 State legislatures are ANTI-Democracy legislative bodies due to gerrymanders — i.e. passing all sorts of party hack robot laws.
—-
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
>>> Abolish the ANTI-Democracy U.S.A. Senate.
>>> More REAL Democracy States for the various leftwing and rightwing regimes to do whatever in the social-economic area — with survival of the fittest regimes in the longer term ???
http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/electionInfo/index.aspx
The ANTI-Democracy gerrymander stats in the Congress – 1920-2010.
Like watching a slow motion worse and worse collapse of Western Civilization every 2 years.
Before 1964 the gerrymander stats were really EVIL bad — rural areas vastly over-represented and urban area vastly under-represented in the gerrymander U.S.A. House of Reps.
Tony S.
Your are wrong there is no bigoty in the American Independent Party platform. The Marage plank of AIP is the
following:
MARAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN
“We insist that marriage is between a man and a woman and assert the role of the law is establishing and reinforcing the mutual rights and obligations of that G*d-ordained contract.”
The other issues you raised are not in the platform.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
All
I am sorry. I made the typo because I was typing to fast.
The word is “marriage” and not “marage”. I did get the
spelling correct once.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
TonyS
You asked my view about if woman should not be able to own [real] property. I see the question of join ownership
as to restrictive in California as a community property state. I have no problem with title as TENANCY BY THE ENTIRITY in California as an alternative to Community
Property laws, Therefore, I would like to see an amendment in California Family Code sections 2580 – 2581 & 2650.
What is your view.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
Richard,
I take it this is some sort of fusion ticket in New York? Please help me understand the statements: “Alesi… 7,970 votes on the Conservative line and 3,914 on the Independence line…Grisanti received 4,368 votes on the Conservative line.” Thanks. – J
@Jeff, I’m a New Yorker so I’ll try to answer your question about “fusion”. Yes, New York is one of those states that allows cross-endorsements of candidates, sometimes by several other parties. It’s typical to find a Republican with the Conservative Party endorsement and a Democrat with the “Working Family” Party endorsement. The Independence Party goes both ways, as they say. It’s often difficult to understand why the Independence Party will endorse one or the other major party candidate, and usually ideology isn’t even one of the important considerations.
Pingback: New York Conservative Party in Position to Injure Two of the Four Republican State Senators who Voted For Same-Sex Marriage | Independent Political Report
Mark Seidenburg @ 4:
“Do you think a person should be allowed to marry a non-human…?”
What an asinine comment. Only an insecure idiot tries to say homosexuals are anywhere near the sane category as non-humans.
A pox on all you haters.
@Pete – thanks, but my question really is what does the ballot look like? Is a fusion candidate’s name listed more than once on the ballot? Conservative Party-Alesi, Independence Party-Alesi and then the voter gets to pick one?
Pingback: New York Conservative Party in Position to Injure Two of the Four Republican State Senators who Voted For Same-Sex Marriage | Daily Libertarian
This is why all 3rd parties should work for “fusion” legislation in their respective states. This incidence in New York State shows how a 3rd party can hold the “balance of power” in an election. The Liberal Party of NYS was very successful with it for decades. Too sad they have practically fallen by the wayside, but even sadder, that most 3rd parties don’t appreciate the leverage “fusion” has.
the easy way to tell how IP fusion endorsement will be made in New York is if there is a primary election with opportunity to ballot option or not. i.e. weather the dem or gop party committee picks the IP candidate directly via an IP party committee or whether there is really selection by the general enrolled party members.
@Jeff, Each ballot access party has its own line on the ballot. There are currently six in New York, the Dems, Reps, Independents, Cons, Working Families, and Greens. Then there are some (three?) additional lines available for parties to petition their way onto the ballot (and if there are more parties than lines, the non-ballot access groups have to share). Alesi’s name showed up at least three times as the candidate of the Reps, Indys, and Cons. Yup, that’s how it works.
#17, yes the candidiate’s name is list separately under each party’s label. Then all votes are added for the candidate.
Mayor Bloomberg won his three terms with the votes of the IP. For his second term he received 47% of the African American vote on the IP line.
A candidate gets our vote in NYC when they support our local issues. For our vote for Mayor Bloomberg’s first run, he promised to put Non-Partisan Municipal Elections on the next ballot and put our legal council on the Charter Revision Commision. We lost that vote but will get trying.
I carried his petition for all three campaigns in the 73AD, Eastside of Manhattan. I personally collected all of his required signatures in this AD for his first campaign as the State Rep. for this AD on the IP State Committee and a member of the Executive Committee in Manhattan.
Pete & Mike,
Thanks. Well, if that’s what “fusion” is in the electoral sense, then I’m all for it. Speaking of which, check out the book “Sun in a Bottle” by Charles Seife. Excellent!
10 –
If marriage is a “God ordained” contract, why is it necessary for the state to sanction the union?
Should we require that God countersign applications for marriage, just to be doubly sure?
If marriages are “God-ordained” how about divorces? Does you party recognize the state’s right to recognize divorces? Does the state need to check with God first?
Does your party endorse the separation of church and state? If it does, why is God’s will a plank of your party?
And…while we’re on the subject…which God are you talking about? Apparently there are more than one of them stalking about.
Finally, whatever God you’re talking about, why does he/she create homosexuals in the first place? And why does he/she create bigots such as yourself to hate homosexuals?