(excerpt from) Connecticut Post
Independent Party launched in Milford
By Frank Juliano / 04/22/2009
…[Peter] Spalthoff, owner of Shoreline Mortgage Co. and a former Republican town chairman here, announced his candidacy [for Mayor of Milford, CT] as head of the new Independent Party during a rally Wednesday evening on the Green…
…but members of the two main political parties were unfazed. “Connecticut is full of cities lurching from one financial crisis to another, but thanks to Mayor Richetelli’s leadership, Milford’s avoided these problems,” said current GOP chairman Tom Jagodzinski. “Frankly, I’m tired of hearing politicians bad-mouthing my town. Milford’s a great place to live and we should be celebrating that.”…
The local Democratic Party chairman, Richard Smith, welcomed the opposition. “I applaud Peter and the other members of the new Independent Party. I welcome the idea of having more voices, more ideas and more choices in this year’s election. It takes commitment and a certain amount of courage to step up and put yourself out there for elective office, so I commend each of candidates on their willingness to participate in the process.”
“I also hope that the candidates of the new party will share in our outrage over the year-over-year spending increases inflicted on the people of Milford by the current administration and that they will support Democratic efforts to turn back this reckless trend,” Smith said.
If they are not affiliate with the Waterbury group they could be thrown off the ballot. The Waterbury group in ’06 wanted to petition for a state wide office (US Senate) but were told after petition forms were issued that they could not because there was a group in Danbury using the Independent Party name. This was despite the Danbury group saying that they had no problem with it. The Waterbury group is now the state party with statewide recognition due to running Nader on their line for president.
It seems like there’s a network of loosely affiliated Independent Parties in Connecticut, although I might have that wrong.
So is this really a new political party or is it just a title for the guy’s campaign?
I have not had a chance to check, are they affiliated with the IP in Waterbury?
The paragraph covered over by the elipsis here supplies the sense to the phrase that the major parties were “unfazed” by the independent. The Republican mayor “dismissed the notion that the third-party candidate is more likely to draw votes from the Republicans than the Democrats.” Obviously the Democrats disagree.
Question for everyone…Robocall…
I did not have enough information to make this a story. But, I would love to hear if anyone here had this experience.
Yesterday or the day before, I got a strange robo-call at my home.
It did not say who it came from. It did not give a web-site or address. And, the only action it gave was to pay attention.
This was the approximate text:
“Americans…are you aware of the Tea Parties as a sign of what Americans are thinking about government. Americans, please…take notice today.”
And, then it hung up.
Hey, Paulie,
You are so respectful of everyone’s work all the time, a little nit-pick is no bother.
Peace,
Kimberly
In either case, they are still a party, which could mean IPR would normally classify them as “Third parties, general” or – if we know their ideological bent – either “socialist/left parties,” “non-left/right parties” or “minor right wing parties.” In no case would any party of any type be classified under “independents,” which is for non-party candidates.
Sorry to belabor what was already a technicality nitpick…
Depends on the State.
In MA, the major party “Massachusetts High-Tech Party” renamed itself the “Independent Voter’s Party” and still has some registered voters.
Minor nitpick on categorization – independents are candidates without parties, not parties calling themselves “Independent.”