Libertarians Receive the Boot
Jul 15th, 2010 by David Anderson
As Angel first reported last night, there was a change in the Delaware Primary page. In today’s News Journal Ginger Gibson and Beth Miller reported that an updated AG opinion gave the basis for dumping them from the ballot. The two parties found something to agree upon this election year. Keep the Libertarians from playing in their primary. Oddly enough according to the ruling they could have filed in one of the major parties then accepted the nomination of their Libertarian Party but not the other way around.
Kent County Libertarian Chairman William McVay issued this statement to DelawarePolitics.net
The Democratic and Republican parties do not support an open political dialogue. They do not support a free exchange of ideas. They do not support offering the members of their party a choice in who they will nominate for political office.
While I was at work today, the State Department of Elections website was updated, removing Brent Wangen and myself from the primaries we had filed and paid for. Celia Cohen is indicating that the cause was a legal opinion issued by the attorney general in 1994 that a candidate not “involved” with the party they file with can be disqualified from the primary ballot. I have attended Republican meetings, been turned away from Democratic meetings due to my party registration, and been registered as both a Democrat and a Republican in the past. But none of that matters.
The opinion is not supported by the Delaware Code governing elections. Ms. Cohen even mentions a court decision allowing a candidate uninvolved in the party’s activities to compete for its nomination. I am not a lawyer, but I have read the law. I believe that I have followed the proper procedures and met the appropriate qualifications to be listed on the Democratic and Republican primary ballots. I believe that the Democratic and Republican voters of the 32nd District should have more choices than those presented to them by the entrenched political interests of a two party system.
I am exploring every option to ensure that the 32nd District is presented the choices it is entitled to under the duly enacted laws of the State of Delaware. I will appreciate any support you can offer and gladly answer any questions on this or any other subject.
302-670-1971.
The over/under betting line for the total number of votes cast for libertarians this year is 55. That is up from last election’s 35.
Libertarians ON THE MOVE!!!
Carry on patriots.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by DelawarePolitics.net, Delaware Tea Party. Delaware Tea Party said: Libertarians Receive the Boot from Delaware Primaries http://bit.ly/beuj55 Good ole boys win again. Take over the parties. #tpp #tcot #sgp [...]
All I can say here to McVay (and Wangen) is pick a party. Both the R’s and D’s are more than open to allowing folks to be their candidates; but, not surprisingly, they want their candidates to follow the principles of their party. It is ridiculous to suggest that someone could run as an R (generally considered a more conservative party, with an emphasis on fiscal conservatism, smaller government, self-reliance, etc.) and a D (generally considered a more liberal party, with an emphasis on government solutions to all problems, higher taxes, etc.). You can’t be both. Pick one.
Moreover, for better or worse, many voters in the general election rely on the party label as a rough guide to what a candidate stands for. So, party affiliation does matter.
Finally, the notion that someone who is registered in one party (libertarian) should be able to simply waltz in and cause other parties and the State to go through the time, effort and expense of conducting a primary when that someone isn’t even a party member is simply the height of chutzpah, arrogance and ego. Fortunately, state law requires that before a primary is held, the candidates must at least demonstrate that they are running for the nomination of the party with which they affiliate. In both McVay’s and Wangen’s case, they are libertarians, and they therefore aren’t entitled to try and become the candidates of other parties.
Some may whine that that is close-minded or unfair or something else, but the fact is that voters will have a choice in the general election. Both McVay and Wangen will be on the ballot and if voters want them, they can vote for them; but, neither McVay nor Wangen are going to be able to mislead voters by falsely claiming they are D’s or R’s when, in fact, they are L’s.
Well said Stossel, that being said the law simply does not allow it. The fact that a lazy incompetent Deputy AG can screw things up by simply not doing her job and actually researching the precedent should scare everyone. It turns out the Elections officials knew the advice from DOJ was wrong but did not want to challenge the attorney representing their agency. It’s a shame that lay people get it right when the attorney needs to get it wrong first before doing her job.
Libertarians are nothing other than Republicans who don’t mind gays.
Progressives are nothing more than do-nothing trust funders who’re feeling guilty about being handed everything to them in life.
There was going to be a primary election anyway. Maybe not for the 32nd District Representative seat, but the primary election is not going to be canceled if the court rules we are ineligible for the primaries.
The Democrats and Republicans have done a remarkable job of dividing the electorate into “liberals” and “conservatives”, but the Libertarian assertion is that these labels are inadequate to describe most voters. The challenge is encouraging voters to take the leap of faith in expressing a preference for a Libertarian when a Democrat or Republican would be the assumed beneficiary of any Libertarian vote. By offering a Libertarian to the primary voters of both parties, those parties have the distinct opportunity of declaring to the party’s leaders that they prefer libertarianism to cookie cutter conservatism or liberalism.
The libertarian message overlaps with both while excluding the big government impulses of both. I would like to allow the voters in each party to stand up and be counted, rather than force them to endorse the selections of the party committees or limit themselves to candidates who cannot understand the cross party appeal of the libertarian message.