Constitution Party of Idaho: “Copeland/Myers Certified by CP-Idaho for 2016”

Published on the Constitution Party of Idaho’s website on August 1st, 2016:

Copeland/Myers Certified by CP-Idaho for 2016At their 2016 state convention held in Orofino, Saturday, July 30, the Constitution Party of Idaho certified Scott Copeland of Weatherford , Texas and J.R. Myers of Soldotna, Alaska as the party’s candidates for President and Vice President, respectively, in Idaho.

Convention also certified the names of four Constitution Party of Idaho presidential electors to the Secretary of State—Ray Writz of Coeur d’Alene, Scott Hensler of Coeur d’Alene, Dave Hartigan of Boise and Floyd Whitley of Cottonwood.

With certification of Copeland/Myers now complete, it may bring to an end the internecine strife focused against the Constitution Party of Idaho.

Hartigan and Writz Orofino July 30, 2016 with the Idaho certifications

Hartigan and Writz Orofino July 30, 2016 with the Idaho certifications

“An orchestrated pressure over the last week prior to the Orofino Convention by national party operatives to bully Idaho has been something,” said former state chairman Floyd Whitley. “Idaho stood its ground against a nominee and a nomination process both of which we view as entirely illegitimate.”

“Idaho is not ‘chopped liver’ in the national Constitution Party tent,’’ said Whitley. “The disrespect of Idaho voters by the national party is inexplicable.”

Idaho is now the fourth or fifth largest state affiliate in the national Constitution Party, depending on how one counts IAP of Nevada and CP-Oregon. CP-Oregon did not place the 2012 national CP candidate on its state ballot, and it refused to list Mr. Castle on the 2008 national ticket as Vice President that year.

Whitley pointed out that CP-Idaho has grown in statewide voter registrations. Without the Idaho affiliate included in the national party’s tally, a net total loss of registrations has occurred for the national party over the past election cycle.

According to Whitley, “By not campaigning in Idaho, or meeting directly with our voters or our state party leaders, the national party’s nominee basically has said, “We don’t care about Idaho’s registered base.”

In 2014, Idaho forwarded concerns to the national party regarding the failure to incorporate rank and file voters directly in the nomination practices, Whitley noted. “Instead of candidates rising upon their own merit with the preference rightfully put to the members, the national party operates a secret selection committee at the executive level, one without apparent rules and one without evident oversight.”

“Indeed, the entire construction is improper according to the party’s own bylaws,” Whitley contends. “The national party is upside down.”

Orofino July 30, 2016; Chairman Whitley handing certification to e Chairman Hartigan for witness

Orofino July 30, 2016; Chairman Whitley handing certification to Vice Chairman Hartigan for witness

Idaho’s national delegation was the only state affiliate present at Salt Lake in possession of a verifiable preference ballot. Thus, contends Whitley, the national convention had non-equivalent  ballots.  “They were not like-to-like”.

In any case, Idaho state party rules require national candidates to stand at primary and compete for Idaho’s electorate ballot. Under those rules (which have been in place since September 2015) the state convention was bound to the decision of the primary results because the national nominee in Salt Lake did not file a declaration of candidacy in the mandatory primary.

Idaho Primary winner and runner up, Mr. Copeland and Mr. Myers respectively, will therefore now be on the November ballot in Idaho.

Chairman Whitley listening to Delegate Tomkins of Twin Falls read the electors list

Chairman Whitley listening to Delegate Tomkins of Twin Falls read the electors list

“CP-Idaho voters have been taken for granted for far too long,” says Whitley. “Perhaps next time, national candidates seeking to represent this party will take the nomination process a little more seriously, and a lot more honestly.”


16 thoughts on “Constitution Party of Idaho: “Copeland/Myers Certified by CP-Idaho for 2016”

  1. Deran

    These people remind me of the nutters in Oregon who claim to be the real Libertarians.

    On the otherhand it’s good to see a far right political party is an interesting thing.

  2. Michigan Voter

    Apparently they do not understand the concept of being affiliated with a national party. You put that party’s nominee on the ballot. The state party is free to choose whatever method it would like to select delegates to the national convention. They could have sent all of their delegates to the CP national convention to support Copeland, since he won the primary.

    I get that he won the primary in the state. Bernie Sanders won the Democratic Primary in Michigan. Yet, the Michigan Democratic Party is not putting him on the ballot because he did not win the nomination. The same is true on the Republican side for the states Cruz won. Primaries are about choosing delegates to the national convention. The state parties then put the nominees on the ballot.

    If the CP-Idaho does not wish to be affiliated with the national CP then they should disaffiliate. If they are not putting the party’s Presidential and VP nominees on their state ballots, they have basically disaffiliated themselves anyways.

  3. Floyd Whitley

    Mr. Castle forfeited consideration for the ballot line by failing or refusing (or believing himself above the rules) to stand in a mandatory primary.

    The Constitution Party’s corrupted brokers continue to imply that Mr. Castle not being on the ballot in Idaho is somehow the result of actions by this state affiliate. The truth is that Mr. Castle is not on Idaho’s ballot due to his own actions.

    CP-Idaho merely held him accountable to the “rule of law” that is being trumpeted so loudly of late by the national party junta…and so hypocritically.

  4. Michigan Voter

    It doesn’t matter if if he wasn’t on your primary ballot line. All that means is that he would not be eligible to receive any delegates from Idaho to the National Convention if you bind your delegates to the primary results. I have never heard the logic that if a candidate does not appear on a primary ballot of a state, he is ineligible to receive the national party’s nomination. That is insane.

    I am not even a member of the CP, I just couldn’t sit quietly anymore. What you are doing makes no sense.

  5. Floyd Whitley

    ” I have never heard the logic…” Have you ever heard the logic (under Robert’s Rules which this so-called party claims binds them) that statewide and national organization MUST provide a means for EVERY member to vote?

    All you have to do is show respective comparable statewide ballots, whether by primary or by caucus, or by mail-in or by proxy (with stipulations). Put those in evidence. Stand them up to scrutiny, side-by-side with Idaho. That, or your ongoing insults are merely impotent (or impudent, take your pick) indecorum.

    If you cannot do that, cannot produce representative ballots from each statewide affiliate PRIOR to the national convention (which was presumably called for the purposes of collecting representative statewide and certified preference ballots), then your example of Bernie Sanders (or Ted Cruz) lacks standing.

    True, because it’s not even the same process, even if we do ignore the grossly corrupt use of super-delegates by the Democrats. (By any other name, the Constitution Party exclusively uses super-delegates…except in Idaho.)

    At least the process used by the Democrats and Republicans CAN produce some evidence that respective statewide preference ballots were asked and and (we presume) faithfully received. Thus, they had state delegations go into their conventions ACTUALLY representing voters…versus pretending to represent.

    The Constitution Party had individuals (alleged to be delegates) go into Salt Lake to cast what were in effect their own personal preferences, personal preferences entirely disassociated from their statewide electorate. Again, show the association by producing the ballots. Show us some form of legitimate process. If you cannot, then the process is illegitimate. And failing to do so, I would think the entire proceedings are open to class action.

    We know for a fact that the Constitution Party (excepting CP-Idaho) did not ask for, nor did they faithfully produce, representative ballots. That is a fact. Again, to counter that, all you have to do is PRODUCE those ballots you allege to be in existence so that they may be properly counted and the people in each respective state finally included in this dark secret society known as the “executive clique” which styles itself the national Constitution Party.

    (We’ll ignore a request to produce the affiliate rules governing the behavior of the respective state delegations at national convention…simply because if you cannot deliver those representative ballots, you did not in fact have a representative delegation of any kind.)

    But not even that matters.

    Mr. Castle knew the rules in Idaho. The Idaho primary was mandatory, effective immediately upon entering it as a participating party. The gentleman refused to stand. In Idaho, votes are not “entitled”. They are earned.

    The gentleman did not earn them….unless, of course, the Constitution Party is finally admitting its obvious pretense. Is it now breaching its own national platform and admitting that the Constitution party does in fact endorse the philosophy of entitlements? Is it in agreement that getting something for nothing is now a political “right”? Is it advocating handouts known as “welfare votes”?…though oddly granted not to the disaffected downtrodden common citizens, but rather granted to an institutionalized well-connected clique of country club insiders.

    If so, then say so. It would refreshingly be an honest introspection for the first time in this national organization (so-called).


  6. Michigan Voter

    I think you need to understand how political parties work. Parties are private associations. The only reason voters get to vote in a primary is that the party chooses to allow them to. Parties are not required to have primaries. In fact, Republicans in Colorado did not have one. If a state chooses to have a primary, that is their business. Ironically, I support open primaries that are binding, as we have in Michigan. However, I acknowledge that it is not my right as a voter to vote in a primary.

    The purpose of a primary is to choose delegates to a national convention. Parties also use caucuses and county and state conventions to do this. All are valid methods. You seem to be saying that primaries are all that should matter. How many states even have Constitution Party primaries? It has to be less than a handful. So should the winner of the Idaho primary be the nominee?

    There is a method for voters interested in participating in the CP nominating process to participate. They attend their local or state party convention and get elected as delegates to the national convention. That is the method. You seem to be an advocate of direct democracy, which is strange for someone in a party called the “Constitution Party”. In a Republic, we do not have direct democracy. We choose the people who choose the people who stand as candidates, just as our presidential elections are not direct elections.

  7. Catherine Petro

    Yikes. I’m a progressive who never votes for conservatives, but even I think the Constitution Party of Idaho is shooting itself in the foot and the national Constitution Party in the head. This is just moronic and self-sabotaging. Jesus.

  8. Catherine Petro

    Floyd, what do you hope to gain from listing Scott Copeland on your ballot? You can win an election with just one state (and certainly not a state like Idaho). By ignoring the Darrell Castle campaign and the national party and listing your own candidate, you just seem spiteful and petty. Scott Copeland isn’t running a national campaign. Your, and his, purpose seems to be to just keep Darrell Castle off the ballot in your state, not to further the party, and certainly not to win. Like, it just reeks of immaturity.

  9. Catherine Petro

    (meant to say “can’t win an election with just one state” in my last comment)

  10. Nvg

    I just knew this was going to be posted here.In brighter news,I heard the Constitution Party of West Virginia got ballot access.

  11. Bob Haran

    Now therefore, if an Idaho citizen wants to vote for the Constitution Party nominee, Darrell Castle, they will have to move to a different state and vote there. I have no words to describe how selfish and stupid this move by the Idaho CP leadership is. There primary was to determine the Idaho vote at the Constitution Party National Convention, not for who will be on the Idaho ballot in the general election. This is nothing more then political sabotage and treason.

    For God and Country,
    Bob Haran,

  12. Joe

    I agree, the Idaho CP should have Darrell Castle on the ballot. I’m not even sure why they would want a candidate in only one state…Scott Copeland seems like a great guy, but he didnt win the nomination at the others here have said, the convention decides the candidate, not your state primary. Otherwise Trump would be on some ballots, Cruz on others and Rubio and Kasich on in Ohio. The Idaho board of elections must be laughing at this, how a small party shots itself in the foot…Oh well, have a good day everyone

  13. Nvg

    Yeah, I don’t know what’s going on in Idaho.It doesn’t make sense to have a person only on the ballot in one state.Lets say that the same thing happened in another party.The candidate winning the vote at the convention did not appear in a certain state’s primary.What would happen?Certainty not what is happening in Idaho in the state Constitution Party. Anyway, regardless of this problem I think the CP will do better this election than the last one.

Leave a Reply

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