Slashdot Mirror
Colbert Ballot Bid Shot Down
wizzard2k writes "Some of you may have seen Stephen Colbert's bid for the South Carolina Presidential Primary, however it seems his hopes to appear on the ballot as a candidate for the Democratic Party have been shot down. From the report: 'Stephen Colbert's bid to get on the ballot for the upcoming Democratic primary in his home state was shot down on Thursday (November 1) by the executive committee of the South Carolina Democratic Party. Colbert's bid was voted down 13-3 ... Using criteria such as whether the candidate was recognized in the national news media as a legitimate candidate and whether they'd actively campaigned in the state, the committee put the kibosh on the Colbert bid.'"
I Go Pogo in '08
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
They will, according to this story
I'm reminded or comedian Pat Paulson, a regular fixture on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour back in the late 60's (yes, I'm showing my age). He was a perennial (fake) presidential candidate back then. He managed to get on the ballot a few times, and came in second to George H.W. Bush in the North Dakota Republican primary, and second to Bill Clinton in the 1996 New Hampshire primary.
But what I remember best was his bid to get on the California primary in '96. He had twice the number of required signatures on his petition, paid the fees, filed well in advance of the deadline, but was still denied. March Fong Yu, California Secretary of State, explained the denial as "he's not serious about the campaign."
Paulson's response: "You mean those other guys are?"
310 of us wrote him in anyway....
It's fairly simple, digitaldc. The Democrats have requirements for candidates. One of those requirements is that the candidate's campaign be "viable". Since Colbert was only running in one state, his campaign was deemed to not be viable.
I stole this sig from a more creative user.
He's also quite the racist, but let's not let that get in the way.
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Drink deeply or not at all."
I don't see it that way. Voting for Ron Paul in the primaries would actually be a sharp rebuke of the policies of the current administration.
Xenon, where's my money? -Borno
South Carolina requires a filing fee of $ 20,000 for each candidate, so the Republican party of South Carolina makes $10,000 off each candidate they put on the primary ballot, and the Democratic party of South Carolina loses $17,5000 for each one of theirs.
:)
That tells you which party knows anything about financial matters
"Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal," Paul said.
Paul also wrote that although "we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."
Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, "By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government" and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism. A publication endorsed by Ron Paul put forth those opinions. Those are the facts. Spin it any way you like, in my book he's a racist.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
In Canada (sorry, not Soviet Russia), we have the Rhinoceros Party for political humour. They have had some fun policies, like bulldozing the Rocky Mountains as a makework project to reduce unemployment, and paying off Canada's national debt by putting it on Visa.
In one election some years back I was so disgusted with the mainstream candidates (I had 4 to choose from) that I voted Rhinoceros. Lots of other people did too, and they came very close to electing an MP.
...laura
The Democratic party gets to decide who runs as a Democrat. If you want Colbert on the ballot, write him in yourself or get him to run as an Independent.
Making fun of dumb people since 2009
I think they are. When I registered with my party, and when I attended the caucus meeting and county meeting, no one ever asked me anything about race or anything else like that. I think the closest they came was reading the official party policy and informing me that I should not plan on getting any support if I didn't support the party platform.
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
Heck, I would vote for him because I genuinely believe he'd be more competent than any other candidate.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Have you ever looked at the voting record for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, or the Voting Rights Act of 1965? Both of these bills did a lot to advance civil rights in America. For the CRA, 80% of Republicans voted yes, and 60-something percent of Democrats voted yes. VRA: R 84%, D 77%. Oh, and check out the region breakdown for the Civil Rights Act. Maybe you won't be so quick to call yourself a Southern Democrat after seeing that, unless you're proud to identify with racists.
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act#Vote_count
Disclaimer:
I'm not trying to say the Republicans are champions of Civil Rights. Far from it, just look at the Patriot Act. But the Democrats aren't any better. If you want truly equal treatment for all, vote Libertarian.
Although it didn't come up in this story with Stephen Colbert, I believe I can address why the Democrats and Republicans are part of the problem when it comes to American electoral politics: Ralph Nader is currently suing the Democrats for the stunts they pulled to keep him off the ballot when he ran in 2004 as an independent. It's worth your while to learn why Nader is suing and ask yourself if you are better served by having a few corporate candidates to choose from or more candidates spanning the political spectrum of ideas on the ballot. Voters aren't sufficiently outraged to support non-Democrat/non-Republican candidates, choosing to not vote at all most times. But their anger at the process is rising while the two major parties put up what Lawrence O'Donnell calls "virtually indistinguishable candidates" (and, let me assure you, after canvassing for signatures to get someone on the ballot in a local Congressional race, I know there's plenty of anger out there on this issue).
If you want to have a more informed view of the power which the Democrats and Republicans hold and how they use that power to keep candidates off the ballot, I suggest looking into
The real rub in Colbert's rejection is that he was polling higher than some Democrats (according to one brief clip Colbert played on his show last night). Perhaps the Democratic Party wanted to be the group that shut those Democratic Party candidates out, not let some citizen show them up and point out how managed American elections really are.
Digital Citizen
Not to argue, but to provide a thought... I remember Andy Kaufman's performances well. Some of them were as good as just about anything Steven has ever done. IMHO however, Steven wins in the consistency department. Kaufman's characters had some gaps, while (still IMHO) Steven manages to carry off one of the most flawless narcissistic characters I've ever seen presented. It takes some major creativity cojones to deliver essentially every day as Steven does. And he does it with such panache, he's been able to "get" guests of essentially all stripes to join him in his performance. (Henry Kissinger? Introducing a guitar battle? With the Decemberists? Simply amazing...)
(A side note: I was a young worker at Warner Qube during a time when Mr. Kaufman was performing semi-regularly there. He was a genuinely interesting man, his talent was significant and worthy of our respect.)
The Democrat Primary is for the purpose of decising the Democrat Candidate. He can still run for office under a few other parties, or as an independent. Believe it or not, the Democrat Party is a private organization. They could choose their candidates by lottery if they wanted, or by caucus (as some states do), or simply executive decision.
Bitching that the Democrat Party of South Carolina won't let him run is like bitching that the Moose Lodge won't let him run for Grand Poobah.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
I was thinking within the respect of the population of the state of South Carolina (4.3 million by 2007 estimate). The population sampling requirements for a state would/should be a lot lower then for the entire country's population. But you should be able to poll for each stater and then have a sample representing the entire country by combining the results. With the electoral vote system in the US, you really need to keep the states separate when considering presidential bids and state matters.
I read something a while back where they were claiming that some of the major polling companies can do this with such a low representation or the populace. This is when I started giving incorrect results (well the exit poll thing was a joke Rush Limbaugh started by I haven't stopped yet.)