parties in this country have been formed at the local level and have worked there way up. why waist time on a national candidate that will not win. shouldnt our time be spent organising at the local level and worry alot less about the national.

(11-19-2008 11:36 AM)FORTWAYNERIGHT Wrote:  parties in this country have been formed at the local level and have worked there way up. why waist time on a national candidate that will not win. shouldnt our time be spent organising at the local level and worry alot less about the national.

I tend to agree. I think it is possible to have both (a) national party identity and (b) exposure to press and the public without having to necessarily run in national elections. And, most important of all, the already scarce resources can be used in a more effective and significant manner.

Remember, the GOP's Southern strategy dominated politics for 20 years. A bottom-up approach can and has worked in the past!

Well for instance if we ran no president canndiate then for example: Baldwin would not have got some good media for our party. The Lou Dobbs show exposed many americans to the consitution party and with ron pauls endorsement it gave the party a big boost even on the local level. I can see it both ways but heres another point: In nc Barr got 2% and that kept the libertians on the ballot. If the libitriains hadnt run a canndiate for president they wouldnt have ballot access in nc for 2010 and 2012. So even if its just for ballot access I think we need to run someone every year.

im sorry i didnt see any baldwin press and you have to know what your looking for to even find the constitution party. national pres means very little check bob barrs campaign. however local press reaches alot more people for less cost. when you voted did you see that alot of positions were one candidate votes only? if you want real power and you want to get it cheaply local elections are where you start. when you gain local strength you work up the ladder gaining more and more strength. it amases me a party named the constituion party hasnt realised the constitution gave states far more power than the federal govenment. and that in the end it is going to have to be individual states that reign in the feds not individuals. that is where the party should focus not on a pie in the sky idea that they will even matter in a national presidential campaign. third parties on a presidential scale scare the average voter but if you start in a state and grow that fear subsides. the libertarians have started to do this here they managed candidates in every off year election cylce slot and they did alot better than people thought, they didnt win but the party was in every slot that needed votes and it made the local press.

im probably stepping on toes but pie in the sky hopes just dont work in large elections

(11-19-2008 05:04 PM)FORTWAYNERIGHT Wrote:  im sorry i didnt see any baldwin press and you have to know what your looking for to even find the constitution party. national pres means very little check bob barrs campaign. however local press reaches alot more people for less cost. when you voted did you see that alot of positions were one candidate votes only? if you want real power and you want to get it cheaply local elections are where you start. when you gain local strength you work up the ladder gaining more and more strength. it amases me a party named the constituion party hasnt realised the constitution gave states far more power than the federal govenment. and that in the end it is going to have to be individual states that reign in the feds not individuals. that is where the party should focus not on a pie in the sky idea that they will even matter in a national presidential campaign. third parties on a presidential scale scare the average voter but if you start in a state and grow that fear subsides. the libertarians have started to do this here they managed candidates in every off year election cylce slot and they did alot better than people thought, they didnt win but the party was in every slot that needed votes and it made the local press.

im probably stepping on toes but pie in the sky hopes just dont work in large elections

I understand what you are saying, but you must realize that a presidenital canndiate with any coverage can be good for the party.
The only national coverage baldwin got was 2:24 seconds on lou dobbs, and then the 30 mins on c-span, and the radio interview on pbr.
However, baldwin got countless radio interview (local) and appeard on many local tv programs. So I have a question: if we dont run a canndate for president then who should contituion party members vote for in the presiential race? The evil of two lessers? I mean I could never voted for Barr because he is weak on abortion issue and many other things. I agree we must build the party at the local level, but I think both things can be done. If Roy Moore runs for presidnet in 2012 then we have a real shot at major media coverage.

Because of Baldwin's candidacy, many people were introduced to the Constitution Party.

Its not hard to see the benefit of running a national candidate.

I agree with FortWayneRight

Here in Alabama we will be focusing most of our efforts on the local level.

Running a national candidate is a good idea. Even if you don't win, the campaigning itself will help spread the word about your party and in turn, help to increase membership. Do this enough times and the CP will be a force to reckon with.

We must do both... run for the top and the bottom... always.

We must organize like a machine... and dig dig dig...

We must organize under a platform that makes sense, provides real long term solutions, and goals by which to bring benefit to the people.. and most importantly ... restore real freedom and real rights again.

And also, do so in a way that does not rob the government of the very specific powers we want it to have to work FOR US.

in 1933... they gave us a new deal.

it robbed us all of the common law freedom, in exchange for benefits from an unconstitutional fed....

WE GOT RIPPED OFF.

The fed.. is supposed to work for us... it is meant to provide the benefits.. and we the people... are not 'supposed' to be 'able' to 'give' our constitutional freedom away in exchange for something the government should provide anyway.. benefits.. for the people.

But.. the constitution limits the fed. (if it was in force)

So.. we must end ALL the declared states of emergecy...
restore the constitution as law..
And then QUICKLY... ADD AMMENDMENTS.. to give the fed the power to continue to provide the benefits... while.. GIVING BACK THE FREEDOM.

WE.. THE PEOPLE.. DEMAND BOTH... and by God.. we are going to get it.

I.. Will run for president... if people will support it.

I am not worthy... but damm it.. I dont see anyone who is more capable.

-MEMAT

Placing the focus on winning local elections is the right thing to do. Running a national ticket is also imperitive for reasons of national party identity and outreach. I totally agree that resources would be better spent on winnable local races but in many cases the resources overlap. For example, the party petitions for ballot status to place the national ticket on the ballot which makes it possible for somebody to run a serious campaign for state legislature BECAUSE the party now has ballot status. Also remember that many local races are non-partisan (city council, school board, water or conservation district etc.) so those positions don't even require CP ballot status to become a serious candidate. It would be an incumbent city council member who would be looking to move up to the state legislature that would make an attractive candidate for the CP. At that point ballot status becomes very important.