Bob Barr wants McCain, Obama off Texas ballot

By Jason

Oct 5, 2008 10:23 PM | Link to this

I have copies of the Democrat and Republican correspondence stored in several places. Both were late and both should not be on the ballot. People could still write them in, but I wouldn't. They both trash talked Nader in '04 for missing his deadline in Texas, which was much earlier as a Third Party Candidate. Phil, if you vote for someone else's candidate, you've effectively stripped yourself of your own rights. I'm voting for Chuck Baldwin because he takes an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States seriously.

By Larry Baggett

Sep 20, 2008 11:32 AM | Link to this

I have rad a few of these comments and I agree with a few then there are those that you can see that they are very much for one of the main parties. I wish some of the third party we have in this country would really stand up and be heard but many of the support are in closets. I truely beleive americans rather hear a lie. I do believe there are a few on this site who are hoping to get one or the other party off the Texas ballot because they are in hiding trying to ensure victory for one of the main political parties. One thing the third parties are going to have to accomplish is to find people who has money and influence, that can buy the elections like the two main political parties.I only hope to that will happen one day if not we will continue in the same direction no matter who is in the White House.

By Fred Mitchell

Sep 19, 2008 11:35 PM | Link to this

9-21-08
Note to Bob Barr:
If you plan to use this leverage to get something into the Republican platform, I just hope it won't be legalizing pot. Not that it's a bad idea. But liberating our country from Fedzilla and the fat cats is much more important.

Fred Mitchell

By C.Fred

Sep 19, 2008 1:33 PM | Link to this

Mind you, this is a presidential election. Nobody in Texas will actually vote for Obama or McCain in November; they'll vote for a slate of electors. Accordingly, wouldn't the filing be the names of the 34 electors actually being voted for, with a fill-in-the-blank later of who those nominated electors are pledged to?

By Zagros

Sep 18, 2008 9:47 PM | Link to this

Actually, Eric, you are wrong in the case of the Republican Party. They DID miss the deadline under any and all circumstances when it comes to their Vice-Presidential candidate. You see, Sarah Palin wasn't even NAMED to the McCain ticket until September 29th. Therefore, her name COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN FILED IN A TIMELY FASHION. Thus, under Texas Law, whether your argument works, or not, Sarah Palin CANNOT be included on the ballot even if McCain is.

By Zagros

Sep 18, 2008 9:46 PM | Link to this

Actually, Eric, you are wrong in the case of the Republican Party. They DID miss the deadline under any and all circumstances when it comes to their Vice-Presidential candidate. You see, Sarah Palin wasn't even NAMED to the McCain ticket until September 29th. Therefore, her name COULD NEVER HAVE BEEN FILED IN A TIMELY FASHION. Thus, under Texas Law, whether your argument works, or not, Sarah Palin CANNOT be included on the ballot even if McCain's is.

By Carol

Sep 18, 2008 6:26 PM | Link to this

Phil,

You must be having quite the election experience.. I don't know why a conservative would ever consider voting for Barr, who is a libertarian, which is not the same thing at all.
You may be interested to note that Palin, whom you are so excited about, also has libertarian leanings. She is admittedly a rather watered-down libertarian, but she is definitely not as conservative as you are evidently hoping.

Palin is running as the VP, not the president. This means that her role is to support the president, not implement her own policies. I think it very odd that large numbers of voters are rallying behind McCain with the hope that he will DIE in office! That is pretty dang creepy....

By Eric

Sep 18, 2008 6:04 PM | Link to this

Well here's that funny little difference between assuming and knowing.....both did in fact file in Texas before the deadline - they both however had to file with the provision that they would be their respective partys' nominee. Once they each secured their nomination, they simply supplemented their initial filings by declaring that they were indeed their party's nominee......so actually, neither of them broke the law, or "missed the deadline, period".

By Brad

Sep 18, 2008 3:57 PM | Link to this

So it is fine with you for Reps and Dems to break the law? This is not a technicality, they missed the deadline, period.

By Brad

Sep 18, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

So it is fine with you for Reps and Dems to break the law? This is not a technicality, they missed the deadline, period.