Chris Bennett announces he will no longer seek the Libertarian Party’s nomination for Vice President

From Chris Bennett:

It has been quite an experience over the last six months since I had announced my intentions to seek the VP Nomination. I was able to attend the St. Louis Libertarian Caucus, the Heartland Libertarian Conference and the Illinois , Wisconsin and Minnesota Libertarian Conventions.

I had the pleasure to meet many Libertarians in the region and many share the same concerns I do. The reason I ended my bid to secure the VP Nomination was that it was no longer financial feasible for me to continue.

I want to thank those who did contribute and keep contributing to Libertarian candidates all over the country. My campaign was solely focusing on the growth of the LP. Even though I am no longer a candidate, the LP needs to reach out to younger voters, minorities and women.

We need to elect more principled Libertarians at all levels and I promise to continue to lend any support I can to our candidates. We need to strengthen our state and local organizations and increase college campus libertarian groups across the country. The LP is not just about our principled ideas it’s also about growth and without growth we can’t assure that our party will exist for future generations.

Thank you for your support and please keep supporting the Libertarian Party!

44 Responses to “Chris Bennett announces he will no longer seek the Libertarian Party’s nomination for Vice President”

  1. Mike Theodore Says:

    Holy hot shit! Does anyone know every person that is running for it now? Because since the current candidates were not as big as Bennett, the LP might need to stick with a candidate that didn’t win. That would be a powerful ticket.

  2. Andy Says:

    Chris Bennett seems like a great guy but it was probably too early in his political “career” and life to run for Vice President. I hope that he stays around the movement for a long time and maybe he can run a more serious campaign for a high level office in the future. Perhaps he should consider running for a local office this year.

  3. Hugh Jass Says:

    Daniel Williams is running for vice-president.

  4. Mike Theodore Says:

    There are others, I believe.

  5. paulie Says:

    Sorry to see Chris have to drop out. Andy is right.

  6. Robert Milnes Says:

    It looks like the lack of support for presidential candidates applies to vp candidates also.

  7. Robert Milnes Says:

    Daniel Williams, care to tell us how your campaign is going? Daniel? Daniel?...

  8. Robert Milnes Says:

    dehnbase.org is no longer up to date.

  9. swift kick in the ass Says:

    who gives a shit. probably just another ruwart child porn supporter anyway.

  10. Robert Milnes Says:

    I asked Karen Kwiatkowski to run for vp & endorse the progressive alliance strategy & my candidacy. No reply yet.

  11. Stefan Says:

    The NH LP has drafted Karen Kwiatkowski for VP nominee. She might be a very good choice with cross-over appeal. She will be again speaking at the FFF this year, just like last year.

  12. Stefan Says:

    Robert: what you actually need in terms of practical politics to get most third parties united, not divided is a fusion candidacy for the CP, LP and GP and IMHO Paul is the best person. He mentioned he has backers from the Green party and I know for a fact reading posts by a Green Party Hispanic voter who said she hold her nose and registered Republican for the first time in her life to vote for Paul.
    I think Paul has the right strategy to campaign till the RNC in September and see what happens, there is still a theoretical possibility he can get the GOP nomination. SHould the GOP handle him and his supporters very badly and reject him, it could be feasible that he could run as a fusion candidate, especially if Clinton gets the D nomination, with a winning chance if he can get 100 m in funding.

    LP: if the LP does not nominate a woman as nominee, they would not be politically smart if they not consider getting a woman as VP nominee, especially with 60% of the electorate women and they have a choice of three very good candidates, well especially two (Ruwart and Kwiatkoski).

  13. The Dylan Says:

    Sadly, I have been following the contest for LP veep. I am sorry to see Chris Bennett drop out as he brings a particular energy and insight to the hurdles that keep this party small. I am sure that we have not heard the last of him. I am surprised however, that Chris feels that so much money is needed to claim the VP nod. As I understand it, the real contest takes place on the floor of the convention when the nominating speeches occur and the candidates get a chance to work the room. Few delegates go to convention knowing who they support for our second highest office.

    So, with Chris out, that leaves Leonard Schwartz, Daniel Williams, and- we’ll see if he turns up in Denver- 2004 World Poker Champion Greg Raymer. He said in an interview that he was running for VP. Although he has endorsed Root, I think he would be an interesting running mate to someone like Mary Ruwart. There is also a very strong following for LewRockwell.com contributor, Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski. I hope that she will accept a nomination if she is present. Karen would certainly be our best choice in ‘08.

    Anything can happen at convention so I will be watching closely.

    By the way, has the CP named a running mate for Baldwin?

  14. The Dylan Says:

    I never understood why, after the presidential candidate is declared, remaining presidential candidates cannot easily be nominated for the #2 slot. Shouldn’t our aim be to produce the strongest possible ticket?

    Barr/Ruwart ‘08!

  15. Eric Dondero Says:

    This was a non-starter from the start.

    Glad he finally realized that.

    The LP shouldn’t be running guys whose resume include: “recent College Graduate” for anything higher than city council.

  16. Eric Dondero Says:

    Stefan Kwiatkowski is an ex-Lyndon Larouchie. Coming off of Ron Paul’s dissastrous Presidential race which was linked to “Larouchie-type madness” do you honestly believe nominating an ex-Larouchie for VP would be helpful for Libertarians?

  17. Eric Dondero Says:

    This is turning out to be an utterly horrible year for our friend Thomas Knapp. Everthing he touches turns to the proverbial “shit.” He became Kubby’s campaign manager/communications director. Kubby is now an also-ran Prez candidate at best, at worst a hanger on just so he can have a little influence. at the convention.

    Now, Knapp’s best budy Chris Bennett drops his race, after receiving little if any support.

    Knapp has the anti-Midas touch.

  18. Jason Gatties Says:

    Eric, you are an idiot. Chris had to drop out due to lack of funding. However, had he stuck it out, I’m positive he would have had plenty of “support” and would have got the votes needed to secure the VP spot.

  19. Teddy Fleck Says:

    I interviewed Daniel Williams on my blog talk show.I like what he has to say. http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ShowMeLibertarians/2008/04/12/Daniel-Williams-Libertarian-Vice-President-Candidate

  20. Roscoe Says:

    Stefan: Ron Paul isn’t campaigning. If he was, he could have picked up 25% in Penna. plus more than 6 delegates. (One of them lost by 50 votes, another by 400). He and his supporters have been rudely treated by the GOP: sheriff deputies confiscated Ron Paul delegates’ literature at polls in Delaware County, before a court order stopped them. John McCain could suffer a heart attack and Ron Paul wouldn’t be given the nod at St. Paul.
    But Ron Paul is not going to seek the Libertarian Party nomination that he could have in an instant.

  21. Chris Bennett Says:

    The reason I don’t comment on Eric Dondildo half the time because he is a drunk, woman beater and a neo-con to boot. Just ignore Eric, he’ll pass like a virus. Besides he can talk plenty of shit over the computer and he couldn’t back it up face to face.

  22. Daniel N. Adams Says:

    The Dylan says:
    I never understood why, after the presidential candidate is declared, remaining presidential candidates cannot easily be nominated for the #2 slot. Shouldn’t our aim be to produce the strongest possible ticket?

    Barr/Ruwart ‘08!

    I found nothing in the bylaws to keep this from happening. It has more to do with the time line schedule of the convention. If they hold Presidential nominations then Vote ,then have the VP nominations then VP vote. I believe it would be legal as far as the bylaws go. Anyone, is this correct?

  23. paulie Says:

    I believe it is P first then VP

  24. paulie Says:

    BTW is Barr still the keynote speaker?

  25. Susan Hogarth Says:

    we’ll see if he turns up in Denver- 2004 World Poker Champion Greg Raymer. He said in an interview that he was running for VP.

    Why should he turn up in Denver? He apparently can’t even be bothered to attend one of his weekly county party meetings, or his county or state party’s convention.

  26. Geofrey the Liberator Says:

    Based on the trend in your USLP, should the first question to ask of anyone seeking your VP Nomination be:

    A 5 year old & a 50 year old man are alone in a room, and the man asked the 5 year old if they would “like to suck on my candy cane,” and the 5 year old replied “yes sir, I would love to suck on your candy cane” and the 50 year old offers the 5 year old his candy cane to suck on, and then asks the 5 year old “would it be OK if I take a photo of you sucking on my candy cane” and the 5 year old says “I like people to take my photo” so thus the 50 year old proceeds to take photo of 5 year old sucking on aforementioned candy cane - would you consider this:

    a) A consented action, thus perfectly valid in the eyes of a purist Libertarian, thus making you a very qualified LP Party Candidate for VP or other USLP Office even though the chances of you enlarging the Party or even getting elected are next to nil since you’ll be rotting in jail thanks to the FBI - or -
    b) Disgusting, and about as close in reality as those that believe 9/11 was a Bush-Cheney-Jewish-Israeli conspiracy and thus you are not qualified for any USLP Office, Staff or Board position, should resign any membership in any Libertarian organization, and should change your party membership and voter registration to something more sane like perhaps the Green Party

    Just curious.

    Good day!

  27. Aaron Starr Says:

    The Dylan says:
    I never understood why, after the presidential candidate is declared, remaining presidential candidates cannot easily be nominated for the #2 slot. Shouldn’t our aim be to produce the strongest possible ticket?
    Barr/Ruwart ‘08!

    In accordance with Rule 9, the bylaws allow delegates to nominate anyone for Vice President who is qualified per Article 12 (ie eligible under the Constitution, member of the party and seeking the nomination). No signature tokens are required for that.

    That person would need 30 signature tokens in order to have eleven minutes worth of nominating speeches given on his or her behalf. Of course, if that person had first been a nominated candidate for President, he or she would have already had fifteen minutes worth of nominating speeches on his or her behalf, so I’m not sure what could be said in those eleven minutes that hadn’t already been said in the previous fifteen.

    I hope that answers the question.

  28. paulie Says:

    Thanks Aaron!

    Now, does anyone know whether Barr is still keynote speaker?

  29. Peter Orvetti Says:

    Here’s a question, just as a fun what-if:

    Suppose the LP nominated a presidential candidate, then nominated a VP candidate whom the presidential nominee detested. The prez candidate says, “No way am I running with that one,” and resigns the nomination. Does the VP candidate become the prez nominee?

    I don’t think this would happen, I’m just curious.

  30. Daniel N. Adams Says:

    My point was that if they hold nominations for both P and VP before voting, the nomination period for vp would then be closed, precluding a candidate for President from then becoming a VP candidate. You can’t run for both at the same time (I think this is right). The order of nomination and vote matters. If we want to allow those that don’t win the Presidential nomination to have the option of becoming a VP candidate, we must complete the Presidential nomination process before starting the VP process. If I’m not mistaken this happened in Atlanta keeping Russo and Nolan from being nominated for VP and having a chance to be on the ticket after loosing to Badnarik. My memory may be off here, but that is how I remember it (I was watching on C-Span and working, I remember there being a point of order on this but didn’t see the outcome). Those that were there probably should be able to verify this.

  31. Paulie Says:

    I was there and I remember it differently - I think Russo and Nolan were not interested in the VP nomination, which I think was nominated after P. I could be wrong.

  32. Paulie Says:

    Suppose the LP nominated a presidential candidate, then nominated a VP candidate whom the presidential nominee detested. The prez candidate says, “No way am I running with that one,” and resigns the nomination. Does the VP candidate become the prez nominee?

    I don’t think this would happen, I’m just curious.

    I think the LNC would then be charged with selecting a presidential candidate, unless a motion was made and passed at the convention before it closed.

  33. ABW Says:

    If Barr does happen to actually announce that he is going to seek the nomination for president, they don’t still allow him to be the keynote speaker at the national convention, do they?

  34. The Dylan Says:

    Well, Ed Clark had to put in a request to suspend the rules in 2000 to submit Don Gorman’s name. I saw that on C-SPAN. Gorman went up and withdrew his name when the time came, but had he not, he would likely have been on the ticket with his rival, Harry Browne. I think that the rules should encourage presidential candidates to compete for the VP slot, in the interest of producing the best possible ticket for the general election.

    As I recall, Gorman set a precedent in 2000 by stating that it would be un-principled and akin to Republicrat artifice to “run over” the efforts of the declared VP candidates. I watched the whole thing and I’m pretty sure he just didn’t like Harry Browne (and the fact that Harry took a majority on the first ballot didn’t help).

    Aren’t Libertarians supposed to stand for choice? There is nothing wrong with offering yourself as a candidate, so long as the delegation is free to reject you in favor of a better candidate. It’s called the free market.

  35. Keynote Says:

    Paulie

    Richard Viguerie is now listed as the keynote speaker at the Convention website

    http://denverlpcon.com/schedule.html

  36. Tom Blanton Says:

    Dondero is a liar. Kwiatkowski is NOT an ex-Lyndon Larouchie.

  37. Eric Dondero Says:

    Blanton is a liar. Ms. Kwiatkowski IS MOST CERTAINLY AN EX-LYNDON LAROUCHIE. This is common knowledge. She wrote for the Larouchie publication a few years back called the “New Federalist” or something to that effect.

    She backs away from her Larouchie connection these days. But that doesn’t change the fact that she used to have an affiliation with them.

  38. Eric Dondero Says:

    Bennett accuses me of being a “wife beater, drunk, NeoCon.”

    “Wife beater”? Some proof Mr. Bennett? That’s quite an accusation you’re making there.

    “Drunk”? Only if you consider drinking one or two beers on Weekend nights with an occasional Margarita or two at a Party to be the definition of a “drunk.” I recently shared some beers with Jeff Wartman of this very board, at Sam’s Boat when he was visiting Houston. Ask Wartman how many beers I had, and if I’m a “drunk.”

    “NeoCon”? Really. That’s odd. Cause I’m very Pro-Choice, unlike real NeoCon Religious Rightists Howard Phillips and Ron Paul who are both Anti-Choice. The definition of “NeoCon” is a “big government Conservative.” What could be more “big government” than trying to regulate people’s sexual lives and reproductive health?

  39. Chris Bennett Says:

    I guess that was Jeff Wartman’s downfall for associating with scum like you, Eric. Get a life Eric and stop trolling TPW like a child molester. BTW, I called you a woman beater, I wouldn’t have thought any woman on this God-forsaken planet would marry a wretch like you. Since you believe in abortion, thank your mother she didn’t abort YOU! Once again you talk tough over a computer…how pathetic…no wonder no one likes you.

  40. swift kick in the nuts Says:

    Once again you talk tough over a computer…how pathetic…no wonder no one likes you.

    what a bunch of cheese dicks! like your loser ass is not “talking through a computer” also! you are correct, damn pathetic.

  41. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Mr. Dondero,

    You’ve been corrected on the Karen Kwiatkowski LaRouche “mistake” enough times now—at least five, probably closer to ten by me alone—that your continued repetition of it can’t reasonably be construed as anything other than intentional falsehood.

    Kwiatkowski was once interviewed by a LaRouche publication. If that makes her a LaRouchie, then the Reagan administration was a LaRouche administration, as several of his cabinet secretaries were also interviewed by that publication (Executive Intelligence Review).

  42. Libertarian Joseph Says:

    Chris Bennett? The musician?

  43. Galileo Says:

    Chris gave an outsatnding speech at the Wisconsin Libertarian convention.

  44. Andy Says:

    “Eric Dondero Says:

    April 28th, 2008 at 6:26 am
    This is turning out to be an utterly horrible year for our friend Thomas Knapp. Everthing he touches turns to the proverbial “shit.” He became Kubby’s campaign manager/communications director. Kubby is now an also-ran Prez candidate at best, at worst a hanger on just so he can have a little influence. at the convention.

    Now, Knapp’s best budy Chris Bennett drops his race, after receiving little if any support.

    Knapp has the anti-Midas touch.”

    Your endorsements of Rudy Giuliani and Chris Peden didn’t exactly work out either.

Leave a Reply