Wyoming law says parties that poll 2% for certain offices are ballot-qualified by nominate by convention. But if they poll 10%, they nominate by primary. Both the Constitution and Libertarian Parties polled over 10% for Secretary of State of Wyoming, so each will have a primary in 2016. No Democrat ran for Secretary of State. Here is a link to Wyoming Secretary of State election returns.
In the governor’s race in Wyoming, the “other” vote was 13.3%: independent candidate Don Wills got 5.81%; write-in candidate Taylor Hearns got 5.09%; and the Libertarian nominee got 2.39%.
If my calculations are correct, the CP has lost ballot access in Ohio, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Alaska while retaining ballot access in other states they are on.
…Am I correct in my assessment, Richard?
Well, the Constitution Party never had qualified status in Alaska, so it didn’t lose anything. Instead it hoped to gain Alaska, but it didn’t, although it did well there.
Although the Constitution Party didn’t poll 5% for Governor of Tennessee, it got over 2.5%, and I think there is a strong chance the 2015 Tennessee legislative session will ease the law. There is also hope that the Ohio law will again be held unconstitutional. It is very important that all minor party activists realize that now is the period when state legislators are deciding which bills to introduce in 2015. People tend to relax after an election is over, but the period immediately after a state election is exactly when the maximum effort is needed to find legislators to introduce ballot access reform bills.
The question is will they use the Primary method of nominating candidates?
Several years ago, the Libertarian Party accomplished a rare thing in Alabama – they obtained 20% of the vote and gained ballot access for the next two election cycles. This privilege allowed them to hold a Primary Election in the major off-year election when the governor is elected.
As I best recall, they refused the “open primary” which would have exposed their candidates to the public, and encouraged others to run for the Libertarian nomination, and instead decided to hold a closed convention so they could “control” those who participated and those who would not.
I write this to make this point. In elections when 3rd parties do not fair well – and lose ballot access – their leaders “fret and pout” and ask questions as to why more people will not vote for their candidates?
I don’t much blame the public. If you can’t trust the public to nominate the best nominee from a 3rd party, then why should the public trust the 3rd party to be on the ballot in the first place?
If a party wants to be a political party, then act like a political party.
If a group want to privately select its candidates, then act as a group and nominate by petition your candidates as Independents.
I think that you probably meant Taylor Haynes.