On August 11, Elliot Ackerman, Chief Operating Officer for Americans Elect, appeared on the Stephen Colbert show. The most significant news from the interview is that Ackerman did not imply, suggest, or say, that Americans Elect has a centrist or a moderate agenda. Last week he had suggested that it did. But, on the show, when asked, “What does Americans Elect stand for?” he said that it stands for whatever its delegates want it to stand for. A delegate is any registered voter in the U.S. who chooses to participate in the Americans Elect presidential process. At no point did he even mouth the words, “centrist” or “moderate”, or any other word that suggests any political agenda.
Ackerman strongly implied that the process by which the two major parties choose their presidential nominees, in which the voters of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, have more influence than the voters of other states, is a flawed process.
The interview will leave viewers believing that it requires 2,900,000 valid signatures to get a presidential candidate on the ballot of all 50 states. Actually the number is approximately 850,000, and that will drop to approximately 740,000 if the new Florida ballot access law is overturned. Ackerman made a statement that Americans Elect will provide the first opportunity by which a presidential candidate can be directly nominated by the American people. Actually, however, the Reform Party in 1996 provided the same opportunity for all U.S. voters to nominate a presidential candidate. The Reform Party chose its presidential nominee by a mail-ballot (any registered voter could obtain a ballot). Then the Reform Party obtained ballot access for that nominee in all 50 states. Ackerman’s statement would have been accurate if it had specified that this is the first time using the internet to choose the nominee.
“Actually the number is approximately 850,000”
Which number are you using for California?
The easiest method, the independent candidate petition requirement of 172,859 signatures.
Thanks.
Hopefully they won’t have to gather those signatures outside of Safeway stores.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/top-stories/ci_18655647
“Safeway’s “time, place and manner” policy, which requires solicitors of any kind to check with store managers in advance and fill out a form with contacts and other information”
Other information? Let me see your papers…
Eliot seems to be changing his story here: first he said that AE is centrist, and now he’s saying that it’s up to the delegates to decide AE’s ideology? I guess Ackerman gave old Bloomberg a call and is changing strategy to make it appear like AE isn’t going to rigg the nomination for him. Oops, I just suggested a conspiracy theory. Somebody call Cass Sunstein and ban me from the Internet.
What is the number of valid signatures required if the full party status petition (which is generally the more difficult requirement) is done in each state? It’s got to be a lot more than going for the easier requirement in each state (where there is an easier requirement to get a Presidential ticket on the ballot).
I’ve gathered petition signatures at numerous Safeway stores. I never asked for permission or checked in at any Safeway in California, Washington, or Colorado. I did ask for permission at Safeway in Maryland. Why? Because the laws protecting petition circulators are not as strong or “established” in Maryland as they are in California, Washington, and Colorado.
double-check that 2012 election date.
The “interview” by Colbert had a pretty friendly flavor to it. Colbert for President?! And the applause to Ackerman’s comments was pretty robust throughout the interview.
A very good foot forward for AE with a pretty active, educated political audience (the Colbert Nation).
Despite the comments above about uncommented on aspects of AE (ie no moderate, no centrist). I thought Ackerman did a pretty good job reaching out to Americans on this one.
Way to go AE. Slam Dunk.
Pingback: Americans Elect Spokesman Elliot Ackerman on Colbert TV Show | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
#7, thank you!!! This is one reason why comments are so great. You are right and I just now fixed the post.
KUDOS FOR ANDY—-HE’S NOT JUST MOUTHING IT; HE’S DOING SOMETHING WE ALL SHOULD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I didn’t catch the appearance by Ackerman, but he appears to be promoting – whether deliberate or inadvertantly – what many American voters really want, and that is a “non-partisan” or “independent” primary where the average rank and file voter can choose the nominee(s) without regard to philosophy, ideology, or a party label. I’ve advocated for such for years, but then again I don’t have the millions AE has to promote it.
Of course we all know the major party bosses will never allow such. For that would eventually result in real democracy in action for this republic. Can’t have that – as the people just might get control of the government again.
But we can always hope. Who knows, AE just might nominate an electable presidential nominee in 2012, and if that should happen, it will be just a matter of time for the domino effect to take place across America. It can’t come soon enough for me.
The system they’ve set up does in fact put all the power in the hands of the delegates as far as candidate selection goes. I should have a piece up on AE in a day or two at WNYC.org, and more at my blog on specific issues I got into with Ackerman when I interview him the other day over the next couple weeks.
I think this effort will prove to be somewhat unsuccessful. If they survive all impediments, and actually present their ticket on all 51 ballots (and if it’s the same ticket in every state), they still will be presenting a ticket derived from a nominating process that a large number of people will not have accepted as genuine, and will not have participated in. Many people – believe it or not – do not use the internet, or do not use it as a vehicle for making finite acts of emotional investment. Because this organization does not have a tactile presence at this early stage, and because they seem reluctant to allow participation through more traditional communication methods like the mail, or even a phone call, their ticket will ultimately be derived from the wishes of a delegate body which will not have included representative voices from a vocal and active segment of the American voting population. Their candidates will probably be seen as fringe candidates because of this. I think they must immediately begin reaching out to voters via the mail, telephone, and through door to door contact methods if they wish to present candidates that will ultimately be viewed as individuals who have earned through more immediate human means whatever attention they will have gotten, and who votes will feel confident in voting for based on the experience of more immediate social connections and ideological empathy.
I was extremely disappointed when I visited the website, because the designers didn’t see fit to include as an issue how to deal with the corporations that own the government and screw the people, and also because the tiny list of topics were too general. “Immigration” to one person means supporting police brutality, while to another, it means punishing rogue employers, and “Healthcare” can be anything from socialized medicine to putting band-aids on the existing market-based racket.
I like to visit your blog a couple times a week for new readings. I was wondering if you have any other topics you write about?