We are not happy that the California splinter group of the Constitution Party calls itself by a different name and fields a competing candidate for President. As a result, many conservative "independents" in California simply remain registered Republicans and vote for an independent candidate. The American Independent Party, in our opinion, hurts the Constitution Party by acting in this manner. We would like to see them end their isolation and join the Constitution Party properly.

(11-10-2008 12:34 PM)The Paleo Conservatist Wrote:  We are not happy that the California splinter group of the Constitution Party calls itself by a different name and fields a competing candidate for President. As a result, many conservative "independents" in California simply remain registered Republicans and vote for an independent candidate. The American Independent Party, in our opinion, hurts the Constitution Party by acting in this manner. We would like to see them end their isolation and join the Constitution Party properly.

I agree, I would register with the Constitution Party in the state if I could register as CONSTITUTION PARTY not american independent party.

I do not want to be an "independent" because of the associations made by the media and others that say "your an independent so you're a liberal" I wrote in Chuck Baldwin, but I will stay a registered Republican until a change is made in California alowing me to make the switch.

I will join as a paying member. I'll just wait and see what happens when it comes to how I register to vote.

Quote:I agree, I would register with the Constitution Party in the state if I could register as CONSTITUTION PARTY not american independent party.

Actually, you can register Constitution Party in California... you just have to mark the box for "Other" and write it in.

Yeah I know it is confusing I am really thinking that maybe we should let Alan Keyes keep the AIP. I don't think we can advance in that state because people get confused about the name. Being linked to George Wallace is not a good thing. People agrue that we must keep the name for ballot access purposes if that is true we should form a CA Constitution Party and once that receives ballot access leave the AIP. But if we still need to use the AIP ballot line Alan Keyes actually did us a favor because now the party can state that hey you know we did nominate a black guy so we ain't racist.

(11-13-2008 06:10 AM)constitutionwarrior Wrote:  Yeah I know it is confusing I am really thinking that maybe we should let Alan Keyes keep the AIP. I don't think we can advance in that state because people get confused about the name. Being linked to George Wallace is not a good thing. People agrue that we must keep the name for ballot access purposes if that is true we should form a CA Constitution Party and once that receives ballot access leave the AIP. But if we still need to use the AIP ballot line Alan Keyes actually did us a favor because now the party can state that hey you know we did nominate a black guy so we ain't racist.

Is there enough registered members with the AIP that would be willing to switch over to the CP of Ca? If so present that idea to the members and have them vote for the switch. Give the AIP name to Keys I"m fine with that. Ballot access should be attainable with enough people in a new Cp of Ca.

All:

Ballot access for California is one of the toughest in the Country.

It takes over 88,000 REGISTERED voters, not just petitions.

It takes over 158,000 petitions, and in a fairly short period of time.

It would cost us upwards of 1 Million Dollars to get ballot access there.

Thus, winning the AIP back to our party, is the only real way to get this accomplished and why we bother with the AIP in California.

Bill Lussenheide- Candidate US Congress CA-49
http://www.FaithFamilyFreedoms.blogspot.com

If more people only realized how difficult ballot access really is... *sigh*

What's the word on the court battle?

That's true. http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_t.htm

It would definitely require many many volunteers and some time to get the signatures necessary.

"Political parties are currently qualified to participate in the party nominating process called the Presidential Primary and Statewide Direct Primary elections. They are, in alphabetical order: American Independent, Democratic, Green, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, and Republican.

Political bodies can qualify by registration or by petition for the two 2008 primary elections. The number of registrants or petition signers is based on a percentage of the number of persons (8,899,059) who voted at the November 7, 2006 General Election.

To qualify a new political party by registration requires that 88,991 persons (one percent) complete an affidavit of registration, on which they have written in the proposed party name as the party they affiliate with. These affidavits of registration must be completed and mailed in by the 154th day before the February 5, 2008 or June 3, 2008 primary election dates.

To qualify a new political party by petition requires that 889,906 persons (ten percent) sign a petition seeking the inclusion of the proposed party in the party nominating process at either the February 5, 2008 or June 3, 2008 primary elections. These petitions must be filed with the several counties by the proponent in such time that the counties verify the signatures and certify the counts to the Secretary of State who certifies the proposed party's qualification not later than the 135th day before the February 5, 2008 or June 3, 2008 primary election dates.

A process, allowing political bodies to become political parties, is contained in Division 5 of the Elections Code (included below). To begin the process of qualifying, a political body should follow the procedure spelled out in Sections 5001 through 5003."

After the stimulus fails to turn the economy around and stagflation hits hard, we will probably be able to form a nucleus to get the ball rolling.

I wish you Californians all the best of luck.