Duke University columnist slams third party candidates

In his column for the Duke University Chronicle, Drew Everson takes a caustic look at some third party presidential and vice presidential candidates:

  • Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin “believes no non-American citizens should be able to own any property or asset in America. Only Americans are allowed to own America. He also thinks anyone should be allowed to shoot illegal immigrants.”
  • Libertarian Bob Barr “has a pretty sweet alliteration in his name and believes in limited government. He also has a sweet moustache and emo glasses.”
  • Charles Jay “is running for president for the second time on the Personal Choice Party ticket, but picking up the Boston Tea Party (no joke) nomination this time around. His VP choice in 2004, porn star Marilyn Chambers, is way cooler than this year’s VP nominee Thomas L. Knapp (who is simultaneously running for Congress in Missouri).”
  • Alan Keyes “failed to get the Republican and Constitution Party nominations before settling for America’s Independent Party, which he created. While some say, ‘Try, try again,’ Alan Keyes says, ‘Fail, fail again.'”
  • Party for Socialism and Liberation vice presidential candidate Eugene Puryear “is one of the dweebiest looking fellows ever.”
  • Cynthia McKinney “has won the Green Party nomination, which means she’s a Ralph Nader wannabe.”
  • Socialist Brian Moore “is a former member of the Peace Corps which is so cooler than a community organizer (although Giuliani would still probably laugh).”
  • Ralph Nader “is another consistently losing candidate who refuses to give up. The former consumer advocate is a fervent environmentalist, which is probably to protect his gnome brethren.”
  • Tom Stevens “founded the Objectivist Party Feb. 2, a party devoted to Ayn Rand. Now he is running for president on that party’s ticket. Their Facebook group has 335 members now!”
  • Ted Weill “is running for the Reform Party. No. 1 on the agenda is the Balanced Budget Amendment. No. 2 is a paper ballot because the butterfly ballots made Palm Beach County a Pat Buchanan (the 2000 Reform Nominee) stronghold.”
  • 21 thoughts on “Duke University columnist slams third party candidates

    1. Ross Levin

      At least once a month I’ll run into a snarky college newspaper writer who thinks they’re so much better than anyone who belongs to a third party. We really shouldn’t give them space here. Just makes us look bad in a few ways.

    2. Mike Gillis

      Yes, plus we’re more than quadrupling their readership and validating their ego.

      Normally they’d just be another article in a paper than fewer than 100 students read.

      It’s pointless. Unless we want to respond on here to every idiot with a YouTube video that says bad things about us too.

    3. Vin

      Some of the larger college newspapers have readership that is larger than some small-town community papers. Don’t know about Duke though.

      You need to take it all in stride. What’s worse, be criticized or wrongly lambasted by an uninformed writer and therefore noticed, or be completely ignored?

      For example, take this snarky snippet from a mainstream community newspaper article about college football. You can’t respond, but instead must keep doing whatever you think is best for your political affiliation. My opinion, anyway.

      “My man Rusty Kent is like that goofy fourth-party candidate no one has heard of before, but somehow finds his name on the ballot. How did Kent earn his spot on this ticket anyway?

      If Kent is Modern Whig Party or Marijuana Party then Chris Shaheen is that wacky morning DJ who decides to run for office as a publicity stunt. He’s not a serious candidate.”

    4. kalipay

      Why is there no news about Baldwin’s fundraising today, buckforchuck.com ? It’s great that local candidates can get their news out (specifically talking about John Murphy posts lately), and ask for money here… You guys also posted a few times at least about Nader’s money bomb on the 17th. Is there at least an upcoming post sometime today for Chuck’s??

    5. G.E.

      If the Baldwin campaign would have sent the press release to IPR, it would have gotten posted. If you’re looking to blame someone for their inadequate coverage, blame them. Sending it to just one person can’t always work because people have responsibilities outside of IPR.

    6. kalipay

      I am asking Trent for you all’s email addresses or IPR’s address: something to keep you all informed. I’m sorry that the Baldwin campaign has been lax in this area.

    7. G.E.

      inDglass – Or they could have just sent us the press release. What you’re asking us to do is respond to comments with actions, rather than going to the root of the problem and having the Baldwin campaign fix it.

    8. inDglass

      So you suggest that convincing the Baldwin campaign to start sending you press releases is a better solution than taking the five minutes to write up a post?

      Keep waiting for news to come to you, and you can just report on the fundraising day a week later when it’s old news.

    9. Ross Levin

      I’m sorry to say it, but it doesn’t really hurt us if doesn’t get reported on. It’s nice when we can promote as many candidates as possible, but if we miss something due to another person’s error, there’s nothing we can do about it.

    10. G.E.

      inDglass – If you’re not satisfied with the coverage at IPR, go somewhere else. It’s not our duty to hunt down news stories for dysfunctional campaigns who can’t even send us a fucking press release. We all have REAL jobs, school, etc.

      If you want to start paying us salaries, then you can tell us how hard we need to work. Until then, you’re free to enjoy IPR or find another site that serves you better.

      Ross is right.

    11. inDglass

      I simply stated that the time spent making excuses for why it is not covered could have been spent covering it. You then suggested that it would be better to wait for a press release that will be too than cover the story after a reader suggested to. When I point out the flaw in this argument, you tell me to “go somewhere else.”

      As a reader here the last few months, I have enjoyed getting daily news about third party campaigns. I have also offered comments that are usually constructive and informative. When I and another reader made suggestions about this particular issue today, you responded with excuses and finally an invitation to leave.

      When I write to a local news agency about their coverage, I get a friendly response thanking me for my suggestion (if they respond, at least). When I do it here, I am told to get out. Did I miss the report about Rupert Murdoch buying IPR?

    12. G.E.

      No one told you to get out.

      I only pointed out that you don’t own me or the other writers. If we don’t do a good enough job, we will lose market share to competitors.

      These are facts.

      The Baldwin campaign is not interested enough in being covered by IPR to send us press releases. We’re not going to go out of our way to hunt down news about him. Sorry. That just isn’t going to happen.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *