Daniel Wiener: What if Republicans Hijack California’s Libertarian Convention?

 

Libertarian Party e-mail masthead with eagle-flame torch logo, slogan "Shrinking Big Government - Advancing Liberty," and address & phone number.
Will you please attend the Libertarian Party of California’s state convention on April 1st through the 3rd in Los Angeles to make sure Republicans don’t take it over?

Here’s the ugly, worst-case scenario:  Donald Trump is close to locking up the Republican nomination.  Establishment Republicans turn to Plan B, which is to run a 3rd-party candidate against Trump.  But ballot access at this late date is incredibly difficult and expensive, unless they hijack the only existing 3rd party which is already headed towards 50-state ballot status – the Libertarian Party.  So they flood LP state conventions and then the national convention with Republicans who will overwhelm the true libertarians and vote for Mitt Romney as the Libertarian Party’s Presidential candidate.

I’ll pause a moment for you to gag.

For the past month I’ve been trying to convince others (and myself) that this is just a paranoid fantasy.  That we have rules and defenses in place which would be hard for Republicans to circumvent.  That we should ignore wild rumors and conspiracy theories.

But here’s the thing.  The best way to make sure it can’t happen is for you to show up.

We need plenty of real libertarians to come to our state convention, and vote for real libertarians who will be our delegates to the national convention (May 27th through May 30th in Orlando, Florida).  California is by far the largest Libertarian state party with by far the most national delegates, so we would be Ground Zero for any takeover attempt.  By the same token, if there really is going to be a Republican hijacking effort, then California can stop it in its tracks.

If you can also make it to the national convention as a California delegate, that’s even better.  But even if you can’t personally go to Florida, you can make sure that the delegates who do go aren’t Republican moles.

And here’s the good news.  Both the California convention and the national convention are looking to be great!  There will be excellent speakers and events.  You can strike a blow for liberty and enjoy it at the same time.

(IMPORTANT NOTE: Early Bird Pricing for California’s convention ends on this Thursday, March 17th, while Early Bird Pricing for the national convention ends Tuesday, March 15th.)

The Libertarian Party has a huge opportunity in 2016, if we are the only nation-wide opposition to Hillary or Bernie on the Democrat side, and Ted or The Donald on the Republican side.  Let’s not blow this chance.

Please register NOW for the California Libertarian Party convention.CLICK HERE FOR CALIFORNIA.

And if you’re going to the national convention, register for that as well.  CLICK HERE FOR ORLANDO.

I look forward to seeing you there.

Yours in liberty,

Daniel Wiener

Libertarian National Committee Representative from California

P.S.  During the 44 years I’ve been a member of the Libertarian Party I’ve never seen both major political parties simultaneously offering up such divisive Presidential candidates.  This could be the Libertarian Party’s breakthrough election.  Come to the California convention to meet the candidates who are running for the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination and help choose which one will challenge Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in November.

 

Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee
1444 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.

36 thoughts on “Daniel Wiener: What if Republicans Hijack California’s Libertarian Convention?

  1. Thomas L. Knapp

    In order to be a delegate to the California Libertarian Convention, you have to have been a member of the California LP’s state committee for a minimum of 90 days.

    In order to be a member of the California LP’s state committee, you must be a Libertarian elected to public office, or have paid dues, and you may not be registered as a voter of another party.

    So unless a bunch of Republicans changed their registrations and paid California LP dues no later than last December, no, they are not going to show up in San Diego and hijack the California LP’s delegation.

  2. jstryder

    If California sends a small delegation to Orlando, that will reduce the delegate pool and increase the chances of outside influences succeeding in May. Not that I think the risk is that high, but it is a factor.

  3. Daniel Wiener

    Tom correctly notes that the Libertarian Party of California’s Bylaws make it very difficult (but not impossible) for outsiders to invade our convention at the last minute and take it over. That’s what I stated in my above letter: “That we have rules and defenses in place which would be hard for Republicans to circumvent.” But nothing is foolproof, and the risk increases if only a small number of libertarians attend the state convention.

    As an example of a potential loophole, our Bylaws say “Delegates to the convention shall be current State Central Committee members, and shall either hold public office or shall have been State Central Committee members for any ninety days prior to the convention.” What if a bunch of elected Republican officials (members of Park Boards, Sanitation Districts, School Boards, etc.) throughout California paid their dues and temporarily changed their registrations in order to become “State Central Committee members”? They would then qualify to be delegates to the state convention even though they hadn’t been members for ninety days.

    A second potential loophole is that State Central Committee members can be nominated to be national convention delegates even if they haven’t been members for ninety days and even if they don’t attend the convention. California has 130 slots for national convention delegates, and is very unlikely to fill all of them for a convention being held in Florida. What if a lot of individuals who were secretly Republicans got nominated and ended up being elected to fill out California’s delegation?

    A third risk is what happens at the national convention itself. If California has a lot of vacant slots, the delegation itself can choose to add delegates or alternates. Again, what if some of those people turn out to be Republican plants?

    There may be further risks which I’m either unaware of or don’t wish to openly discuss. Admittedly these are all low-probability scenarios, and they can be prevented if enough real libertarians attend the state convention and then become delegates to the national convention.

  4. Austin Cassidy

    “For the past month I’ve been trying to convince others (and myself) that this is just a paranoid fantasy.”

    It is.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    Nick and Daniel,

    Fair points — yes, California Libertarians should attend their convention and yes, there are always potential tricks. But I do think that worries about Republicans trying to take over the LP for the purpose of affecting one election cycle are way overblown, and here’s why:

    Suppose I am Reince Priebus and I just HATE HATE HATE the idea of Donald Trump as GOP nominee soooooooo much that I’m willing to have the my party kind of … well, bolt itself … to run an alternative.

    That far I can go with the worriers.

    But the assumption here is also that that alternative candidate is going to poll at least 20% or so.

    Am I going to hand 20% of a presidential election vote to an existing party that competes with my own? Hell, no. Because if I do that, chances are that some of the people I point in that direction are going to go over there and STAY and that that other party is going to become a much more major thorn in my own party’s side for years to come.

    If Trump is the GOP nominee and the Republican establishment backs someone else, they’ll run that someone as an independent. They have the money to do the ballot access, and they have cooperative state officials who will be happy to look the other way on any difficult deadlines (not just Republicans, but Democrats, too — both because the Democrats would love to see the GOP vote split, and because they’ll want reciprocity if they ever find themselves in a similar position).

    As far as takeovers at the national convention are concerned, we certainly do need to watch the credentialing processes, votes, etc., if for no other reason than that we KNOW it can happen there — it’s happened twice in the last two conventions that a GOP impostor organization has displaced the real Oregon LP’s delegates. Here’s hoping that the delegates in Orlando are more conscientious this year about stopping that from happening both with respect to the Oregon LP (which will not be sending delegates and for which therefore no delegates should be seated) and for other possibly vulnerable states.

  6. Kyle Markley

    Mr. Wiener,

    “A third risk is what happens at the national convention itself. If California has a lot of vacant slots, the delegation itself can choose to add delegates or alternates.”

    Not the delegation itself. Not even the body of the national convention. Only the state affiliate party may change the delegation . Oregon explained this at some length back in 2014:
    http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/08/libertarian-party-of-oregon-passes-resolution-regarding-convention-actions/

    If you genuinely believe that our reasoning is wrong, and that national bylaws permit some body other than the state affiliate party to modify their own delegation, and this worries you, then you should personally champion a national bylaws amendment that clarifies the rules (and ensures that such shenanigans as affected Oregon will never happen again).

  7. George Phillies

    Only the state party can add delegates…but the state chooses the mechanisms. For example, the state can have as a mechanism that, at the convention, the state delegates can add to their delegation.

  8. George Phillies

    However, the National convention cannot create false delegation members, as it did in 2012 and 2014.

  9. Marc Montoni

    In Virginia we adopted a poison pill that would be difficult to overcome.

    Our delegates from Virginia must be dues-paid members of *both* Virginia and National parties from at least the closing gavel of our state convention through the closing gavel of the national convention.

    To be added to the delegation, they would still have to qualify as members between those dates, plus the existing delegates have to vote them onto the island.

    I think more could be done.

    A few years ago, a Virginia delegate cast a ballot for George Bush during the presidential nomination process. Would most of us have voted for that person if we’d known he was going to do that? I have been trying to encourage people to openly state their first-round ballot picks for at least national chair and president, but this year Bill Redpath suppressed the effort by saying — in an inappropriate venue — that 1) I had no right to ask delegate candidates at all; and 2) by demanding that all responses to the request not be circulated or publicized in any way.

    I think Libertarians have the right to expect some accountability from our delegates — or we should stop calling them “delegates” at all.

    Unfortunately, others think it’s OK to leave us open to opportunists trying to steal what many of us have spent part of our lifetimes building and supporting.

  10. Richard Winger

    Tom Knapp is 100% correct when he says the Republican national bigwigs who don’t like Trump would never, ever try to use the Libertarian Party. If they succeeded, and their big name got over 5% of the vote in November 2016, that would entitle the Libertarian Party to tens of millions of dollars for our 2020 presidential campaign. Also a vote of 10% would give us qualified status in certain states for 2018 in which we have not enjoyed it for 20 years or never, such as Connecticut (for president anyway), Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia.

  11. Rebel Alliance

    Agreed with Mr. Knapp that there is no real GOP threat to the LP. Cries of “the Republicans are coming!” have happened every convention for years, and it’s become amusing. Let’s get real. Not only will the GOP not try to use the LP, they will not run an alternate candidate either. They will suck it up and stand behind Trump “to stop Hillary”. It doesn’t matter who their candidate is, Republicans will fall in line. It’s what they do.

  12. Thomas L. Knapp

    I agree with Marc. In any kind of reasonably open delegate selection process — for example, at a state convention, saying “all who want to be delegates to the national convention, please stand so that the convention can consider and approve its delegation” — it is ENTIRELY appropriate for any prospective delegate to be asked anything that anyone wants to know.

    You want to be selected as a delegate — are you actually going to be there, or are we going to have to either put an alternate in your place or be one delegate short when we get there?

    In the straw poll, the convention heavily supported Candidate X. Have YOU decided which candidate you support? Because if we have ten slots and twenty applicants, maybe we’d rather send the ten who support our state convention’s choice than the ten who don’t.

    Our state convention passed a resolution calling on the LNC to start holding its conventions in odd-numbered years. Will you vote for a bylaws amendment to do that?

    And so on, and so forth. Keeping in mind, of course, that the delegates can’t be bound to vote in any particular way — they can always change their minds — and that there may be reasons why a delegate who disagrees with his or her state party on this or that might still be a good delegate and get chosen.

    In a CLOSED/mechanistic process — for example, when the state convention votes “we have 20 delegate slots, the first 20 eligible members who communicate their desire to the chair will be delegates and the next 20 will be alternates, take care of it, chair,” I’d oppose any questions other than those relating to eligibility.

    I’ve seen both processes used.

    It’s my experience that MOST state parties authorize their delegations to add members under this or that condition. Some may say “hey, if you have empty slots and there are out of state LP members who want them, feel free.” Others might be more constrained, e.g. “only fill empty slots with members FROM OUR STATE who unexpectedly are able to make the trip.” And I think that’s fine too. If you don’t trust your delegates to regulate the composition of their own body, why the hell would you trust them to nominate a presidential ticket and ratify new bylaws and platform measures?

  13. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    I expect many Republican voters will choose Clinton over Trump.

    And many Democratic voters will choose Trump over Clinton.

    BTW, last Monday radio’s Dennis Prager said “This will be the most important election in our lifetime.” Yet I specifically remember Prager saying the same thing in 2012.

  14. steve m

    RTAA said

    “I expect many Republican voters will choose Clinton over Trump.

    And many Democratic voters will choose Trump over Clinton.

    BTW, last Monday radio’s Dennis Prager said “This will be the most important election in our lifetime.” Yet I specifically remember Prager saying the same thing in 2012.”

    ah think always dangerous…. that….

    the problem that this country has is that the lesser evil keeps getting….

    more evil

    by the way…. has anyone seen Paulie around?

  15. Rebel Alliance

    RTAA: “radio’s Dennis Prager said “This will be the most important election in our lifetime.” Yet I specifically remember Prager saying the same thing in 2012.”

    Yep, the pundits say that *every* presidential election. And that it’ll be a “historic” election. It’s just hype that keeps people turning out for the Ds and Rs again and again.

  16. Andy

    “Rebel Alliance
    March 16, 2016 at 14:20
    RTAA: ‘radio’s Dennis Prager said ‘This will be the most important election in our lifetime.’ Yet I specifically remember Prager saying the same thing in 2012.’

    Yep, the pundits say that *every* presidential election. And that it’ll be a ‘historic’ election. It’s just hype that keeps people turning out for the Ds and Rs again and again.”

    BINGO!

  17. Seebeck

    Weiner is being paranoid again.

    When I rewrote that Bylaw, the SCC specs were discussed in depth. 7 years later and no amendments, so obviously plenty of people in LPCA aren’t worried about it.

  18. Anastasia Beaverhausen

    I’m seeing it the other way around. I suspect some registered Libertarians will jump ship and re-register as Rs and Ds before the California primary because the state is now in play.

  19. Ken Moellman

    RTAA: “BTW, last Monday radio’s Dennis Prager said “This will be the most important election in our lifetime.” Yet I specifically remember Prager saying the same thing in 2012.”

    I know that the talking heads, especially the talk radio talking heads, have been saying it since 1996, at least. That’s when I first heard it.

    So I have to ask — if the current election is always more important than the previous one, then why does the quality of the candidates that they nominate keep getting worse every year? Is this some sort of inverse-proportional equation? The more important, the crappier the choices?

  20. Mark Axinn

    In New York, we have had a bylaw to prevent this outside take-over since our own debacle in 1994 with the odious Howard Stern. Delegates must be members in good standing for both the current year and as of December 31 in the prior year in order to vote at the LPNY Convention. A proposed by-law amendment would move the December 31 of prior year back to August 31.

  21. Paranoia Will Destroya

    Republicans AND Democrats are welcome to the Libertarian Party of California Convention.

    The only credible threat our party has faced in over 10 years is ourselves. The Los Angeles Convention is the first one in over a decade where a multiple county parties participated in the planning of activities. It is looking like Libertarians are coalescing after a decade of deceit and separation. Though it took him forever to get it through the ExCom*, once a budget was approved and the hotel was OK’d, Mark Hinkle assembled a real team to make things happen.

    At the head of that team Nancy Neale got a group of volunteers that got word out while she wrangled schedules and the hotel. Jonathan Jaech the Southern Vice Chair, tireless worker, and a great unifier reached out to counties to get involved. Ted Brown got the engine going with great email appeals. Nancy and Marc hit the phones and got a great heaping gob of speakers on the plate. There is so much to do at this convention you may not know how to spend your time.

    The real question is not if the Republicans come are not. The real question is: Are YOU coming or not, because this convention is going to be a PARTY. If republicans come, we need to show them how politics on the street – politics without the power of graft and corruption to guide – are really done.

    BTW Convention Floor Fees are a totally reasonable $25. A Speakers pass is only $99. Bring a friend especially if they are Democrat or Republican, they’ll likely be a Libertarian by Monday. With cheap tix available online or at the door, with great speakers by day and killer parties by night, you should probably bring a car load of ’em!

    *The ghost of former regimes lives in a few ridiculous members of the ExCom. One that no one knew was so tightly interwoven into the worst of what that administration stood for, and one that people wanted to give a second chance to. Can you believe that they tried to get the ExCom to Dissolve the party under the guise of “restructuring”? It’s like Sesame Street with some of these guys.

  22. Daniel Wiener

    Today’s Washington Post article (http://tinyurl.com/gvqmzo4) reports on a meeting that just took place of Republican operatives and conservatives who were desperately looking for a way to stop Donald Trump. They discussed third-party and independent options, but eventually realized that the schedule and logistics make that too impractical. That means that the risk of a Libertarian Party takeover attempt, never high to start with, has further diminished. Instead they’re focussed on boosting Cruz and/or having a brokered convention. Both of those strategies are only marginally more likely to succeed at this point. Trump is on a glide path to the Republican nomination.

    When John Anderson ran as an independent in 1980 after losing early on to Reagan in the primaries, he soaked up all the media attention and killed the Libertarian Party’s chances of becoming the significant alternative. This year it’s looking more and more likely that there will be no John Anderson to steal our thunder, and that the LP’s Presidential candidate can be the significant alternative to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

    That’s just another good reason for lots of libertarians to attend the California LP convention and meet the LP candidates and hear them debate and decide which one will be our best representative in November.

  23. Andy

    Daniel Wiener said: “When John Anderson ran as an independent in 1980 after losing early on to Reagan in the primaries, he soaked up all the media attention and killed the Libertarian Party’s chances of becoming the significant alternative.”

    The Libertarian Party presidential ticket of Ed Clark / David Koch still did relatively well in that election, garnering 1.1% of the vote, which is still the highest percent of the vote a Libertarian Party presidential ticket has received, but yeah, they likely would have done better if John Anderson had not been in the race.

    “This year it’s looking more and more likely that there will be no John Anderson to steal our thunder, and that the LP’s Presidential candidate can be the significant alternative to Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.”

    The Libertarian Party will likely do worse if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee. Why? Because Donald Trump has the image of being “anti-establishment,” so he will soak up a lot of the “anti-establishment” vote.

  24. Gene Berkman

    Actually, in some ways John Anderson’s independent campaign helped The Libertarian Party, because the liberal media, which disliked Ronald Reagan, gave publicity to Anderson and undermined the sacrosanct two party system.

    John Anderson took votes that Ed Clark might have gotten, but this is mostly the fault of the Clark campaign, for failing to speak out on specific issues. Specifically, pro-choice Republicans were alienated by Ronald Reagan’s opposition to abortion (a view acquired after he signed a liberal abortion law) and by the Christian Right support for Reagan. John Anderson appealed to pro-choice Republicans, and the Clark campaign failed to make such an appeal.

    Indeed the biggest problem of the Clark campaign was a failure to campaign on the big issues out there, including opposition to bipartisan militarism and interventionism, which were particularly important that election. That, not John Anderson, kept his vote down.

  25. George Phillies

    If the Republicans steal our nomination, we should campaign vigorously for their candidate, on important issues:
    Unrestricted abortion access and repeal of the partial birth abortion law
    legalize all drugs
    extend gay marriage to include polyamory
    end selective service registration
    bring the troops home from overseas
    war crimes trials for the people who brought the war of aggression against Iraq
    pardon all drug criminals

  26. Daniel Wiener

    The fundamental dynamic of the 1980 campaign was that liberals and the mainstream media (but I repeat myself) were terrified of a Ronald Reagan Presidency in much the same way that they are terrified today of a Donald Trump Presidency. That was why we thought Ed Clark had such a good shot at dramatically improving the LP’s stature and impact, and why David Koch was willing to run as our VP candidate and pour millions of dollars into the race. We were hoping that the media would turn its spotlight on Ed and effectively promote the Libertarian Party as a way of draining votes from Reagan to prevent him from winning. (I’ll note that I was deeply involved in Ed Clark’s campaign, both as his Treasurer while he sought the Libertarian Party’s Presidential nomination, and also as the Chair of the Libertarian Party of California when we obtained over 80,000 new LP registrations to qualify our party and our Presidential candidate for ballot status.)

    Unfortunately, when John Anderson decided to run as an Independent, he immediately sucked up all the media oxygen. They saw him as their best hope for siphoning off disaffected Republicans, and ignored Ed Clark. Even when Ed ran extended ads on major television networks we couldn’t get much attention or traction. You can argue about whether Ed focussed or failed to focus on this issue or that, or on other details of how he campaigned, but my strong opinion is that the overwhelming obstacle was John Anderson and all the free publicity that he garnered from anti-Reagan pundits and news outlets. Yes, Ed and David got 1.1% of the vote in 1980, but I think they could have gotten 5% to 10% in the absence of Anderson.

    This year there will be a similar effort to drain votes from Trump so that Hillary can win the election. That’s especially true if we get to September and a Trump victory appears increasingly possible (which it very well might, considering how horrible a candidate Hillary is). If the Libertarian Party’s Presidential candidate is the only alternative on 50 (or close to 50) state ballots, with no equivalent of a John Anderson to interfere, there’s an excellent chance that the media will shower us with free publicity to try to divert enough conservatives and Republicans to tip the election. And if Hillary falls behind Trump in the polls as it gets closer to the election, she might even demand that the LP candidate be included in the Presidential debates for that same reason (and/or as an excuse to avoid one-on-one debates against Trump).

    This is shaping up to be one of the most interesting elections in my lifetime.

  27. Anastasia Beaverhausen

    “BTW Convention Floor Fees are a totally reasonable $25.”

    California charges people to be a delegate?

  28. Paranoia Will Destroya

    Charging delegates… Right? It has been far worse in California. The delegate floor fee has been well over $100 just about every year for the last 10 or so. There are people on the ExCom even today that tried to make it that high again. They keep dreaming of having convention venues that they can impress people with. They ignored that the ONLY stock a party has to work with is people. You impress donors with masses not fancy hotels.

    Making it harder, these same “leaders” decided that high floor fees were a good idea because we don’t want “povertarians” running the party. They even made arguments like “a dollar a vote” because it tied value to the process. They also make a lot of references about the party should be like a corporation. They think that a chair of a party should act like a CEO.

    All of these ideas are ridiculous of course. A political party is made up of people voluntarily associating for the purpose of moving society in a particular way. The party acts as infrastructure for a wide variety of other groups to hang onto, network with each other and to enjoy an economy of scale. Those groups should include candidates and their supporters; activists groups; social education groups; groups pushing initiatives; lobbying groups etc.

    Instead we have a lot of people coming over with “political experience” garnered from the Dems and GoP where politics involves controlling the party in order to control the graft opportunities the seats of power offer. The “politics as usual” path is destructive to the core of what a political party is supposed to be. It denies power to the constituent and ties them up in in-fighting for internal control instead of empowering them to go out and do what they do best, and effect change in the real world.

    A political party itself should avoid concentrating any activities in its central structure. Any resources a party draws from constituents are naturally resources that do not get spent on external actions. Then there is the exclusion factor. When resources are put into a central authority for disbursement, then the whole of the party suffers. By nature, those central resources will get concentrated in a few hands, and all the hands that were not served feel like they are being excluded, and they leave.

    The party itself, the Executive Committee etc… should only be doing those few functions that keep the coalition working. Everything else should be an economy among the constituents with as little interference from the executives as possible… and there should be NO barriers to participation.

  29. Thomas L. Knapp

    I don’t care much for floor fees, but it’s better than it used to be. One year there was no floor fee. Anyone could attend. As long as they could afford a ticket on the ocean cruise ship that the convention was held on, that is.

  30. Paranoia Will Destroya

    The floating convention was a spectacularly good idea for so many reasons, but the barrier to entry was attrocious thsy iy completely abrogated the purpose of a convention of the Central Committee. So onerous was the skulduggery, that one faction had lined up people they wanted to purge. They tried to eliminate opposition to their purges with a massive $1000/person cost to attendance. Then, they even moved to eject people from the convention that were being purged, almost eliminating their ability to defend themselves.

    Talk about a TOTAL GoP move. In comparison, turning the mic off on Ron Paul vote counts is minor in the level of breached trust and corruption demonstrated. I think it is a good way to illustrate how vulnerable we Libertarians are to the same evils of power despite our love for the ideal. The offenders then, as now, are mostly good people with passion misdirected and perceptions skewed by more base human instincts than the ideal social aesthetic we are trying to promote.

    Thank goodness Ted Brown was willing to step in as chair. His personality is perfect for empowering a strong and growing party. He operates to empower and has a many decade history among the party for doing so. That engenders a LOT of trust which is valuable to everyone in the party.

  31. Mark Seidenberg

    To Daniel Wiener 1st comment.

    There are over 4.3 million electors in California that can vote in three of the qualified political party primaries on June 7, 2016, viz., A.I.P., Democratic, & L.P. These three parties are conducting open
    primaries.

    However, two former Republicans have formed the “Independent Party” and are suing the California
    Secretary of State in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California for Political
    Body status. The lawsuit was filed on February 16, 2016. The first named party in the lawsuit was
    William “Bill” Lussenheide of Riverside County who claims in the case cover sheet he is a resident of
    Los Angeles County with no L. A. County voter registration. Mr. Lussenheide was a Republican until
    October 24, 2008.

    There are over 100,000 persons in California that stated they were for party status “Independent”.

    I see that as a far cheaper way these so called “independent” recovering Republican types will make
    ballot status in November, 2016.

    The Republican Party is having a closed primary in California, unlike the Libertarian Party which will
    be open to about 4.3 million electors that do not claim either Libertarian or Republican party preference.

    I see the “independent Party” as the choice the Anti-Trump persons are using for ballot access and not
    the L.P. Unlike the L.P. the A.L.P. submission list was not limited to its. party members.

    A.I.P. at the request of the Trump campaign submitted Donald J. Trump, Sr. to its list of POTUS to the
    California Secretary of State. The Democratic SOS of CA rejected Donald J. Trump, Sr. name from that
    list. The L.P. of CA would not submit the name of the former State Party Chairman of Hawai’i to the
    CA SOS for POTUS also. Therefore, to be open the A.I.P. placed George Peabody of HI on it’s submitted
    list. The SOS of CA rejected George Peabody of Hawai’i also. Therefore, A.I.P. party rules let both
    Peabody and Trump on as write-in’s.

    Can any one tell me if the L.P. allows Donald Trump and/or George Peabody on its open primary ballot
    also, at the June 7, 2016 primary?

    As I currently see it, the L.P. open primary will not have an any effect on the results, because the L.P.
    Convention in Florida will have taken place, well before the June 7, 2016 California Primary. On the
    other hand “libertarians” and others that are registered NPP or “other” can vote in the A.I.P. primary for
    one of the seven listed POTUS candidates or Donald J. Trump, Sr. or Libertarian Party member George
    Peabody of Hawai’i as a write-in.

    What is the California L. P. practice of write-ins at the June 7, 2016 primary. Does L. P. party rules allow
    persons not registered as L.P. to be write-in candidates that are counted? Please have someone that knows California Libertarian Party rules reply to this question. Second question, does Walter Block,
    plan to run Donald Trump in the L.P. open primary on June 7, 2016 in California as a write-in?

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Chairman, American Independent Party of California.

Leave a Reply

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