California AIP to nominate Alan Keyes?

There are still ongoing rumors and speculation that California’s American Independent Party may not be united with the rest of the Constitution Party’s decision about their presidential nominee.

Ballot Access News just reported:

However, [American Independent Party of California State Chair Ed] Noonan told me on the telephone on May 7 that he still will work to nominate Alan Keyes as the presidential candidate of the American Independent Party. Noonan feels that Keyes would run a more vigorous campaign than Baldwin will. The AIP state convention will make the decision in Sacramento in June.

H/T to Glenn Brown.

36 Responses to “California AIP to nominate Alan Keyes?”

  1. Rob Says:

    Doesn’t the AIP make up about 90% of the CP’s supposed registered voters?

    I know no one takes the total CP registered voter numbers seriously, but still….

  2. Red Phillips Says:

    What is Noonan’s major malfunction? Keyes is out of sync with the CP Platform, period. Keyes now vigorously admits this post his Convention drubbing. He wears it as a badge of honor that he wouldn’t compromise his principles to make us happy. (I guess that would be the principle of bombing innocent people half way around the world for no apparent reason.)

    Is Noonan an interventionist? Is he still sore at Baldwin for his disaffiliation vote?

  3. Yank Says:

    Keyes’s wife has a great ass.

  4. Alicia Says:

    And that ass is Keyes himself.

    Keyes has only a few supporters who make cultish noises with an unfounded sense of optimism. He keeps claiming victories while he has never had one in his life.
    He’s a malignant narcissist who needs a payday and adoration to get through the week. Nothing more

  5. Timothy Yung Says:

    Yeah I think he is still bitter about the disaffliation he believes the issue was about the LDS not the pro-life issue.

  6. Trent Hill Says:

    Timothy,

    Ed is off his rocker. He’s been pushed around by leadership a few times,and so he’s going to rebel like a baby,by putting Alan Keyes on the ballot…which has NOTHING to do with why he was pushed around to begin with.

    Hell, my group (As Sean has called us, “The Young Guns” or “The Troublemakers”) made a TON of trouble for the Leadership when they tried to unilaterally control the proceedings…and when we lost, we did it graciously.

  7. Austin Cassidy Says:

    California generally represents about 18% of the Constitution Party candidate’s national vote total. If Keyes replaces Baldwin on that ballot, and then manages to win spots on even 12 additional states… I would bet that Keyes will beat Baldwin in total popular vote.

    And my guess is that is what Keyes wants to do, to stick it in their face for his humiliation at their convention.

  8. Hugh Jass Says:

    Austin, Keyes has only gotten 57,000 votes in the Republican primaries, whereas Peroutka, Baldwin’s running mate in 2004, got 117,000 votes (excluding California) in the general election. Baldwin will probably beat Keyes in the popular vote, especially considering that Baldwin can tap into conservative Ron Paul supporters for votes, plus he will probably benefit ffrom the internal battle for the LP.

  9. Trent Hill Says:

    Hugh Jass,

    A hotly contested primary with 11 contestants where Keyes was only on the ballot in 15 or so states, cant be compared to a General election (like Peroutka’s totals).

    With that said. Austin—I dont think Keyes will get on 12 state ballots. If he got on California, though, he’d fetch at least 50k.

  10. Catholic Trotskyist Says:

    As interesting as a Keyes serious candidacy would be, with his experience running against both Obama and McCain, I have come to the conclusion that Baldwin’s forces must take over from Noonan and keep Keyes off the ballot in California. This will give time for the anti-Obama Paulites to get behind Baldwin as a serious candidate, thus stealing Republican votes and making way for the Obama Revolution.

  11. Yank Says:

    LDS ass is hot.

  12. Kevin Riley O'Keeffe Says:

    This really irritates me. Assuming the LP doesn’t nominate Bob Barr (and they probably won’t, as they are apparently committed to irrelevance-as-principal), I had intended to vote for Chuck Baldwin (I reside in California), but now Noonan wants to place Keyes on the ballot instead? How geigh.

    Lots of Californians inadvertently belong to the CP because they thought they were registering as “independents” (which in California is actually called “decline to state a party preference”) when they ticked the box that reads “American Independent Party.” People that stupid should not be permitted to vote, but unfortunately there’s no way to identify them. It does ensure that the AIP will never lose ballot access status in California, however, so I guess even the gray cloud of profound ignorance still has a silver lining.

    By the way, Mary Ruwart looks absolutely insane in that picture in her ad at this site. Maybe if she gets the LP nomination, NAMBLA will issue a press release that reads “Children: All Your Orifices Are Belong To Us.”

    Ok, Ok, cheap shot, I know, but it made me laugh when I thought of it earlier today.

  13. Nexus Says:

    This is what happens when a party becomes a cult of personality instead of a party of ideas and ideals.

  14. Brandon H. Says:

    In the unusual situation that Baldwin wins a few states, and the AIP / CP candidate wins California, would the electors still vote Keyes, or would they vote Baldwin?

    My recommendation to the Democratic Parties of Florida and Michigan is to do this same thing if their delegates are not seated at the convention. The key difference here though is the AIP’s delegates were seated at the CP National Convention.

  15. Eric Dondero Says:

    And people accuse the Libertarian Party of being a “mess.” Any internal problems the LP may have are diminished 10 times over when you look at the splits within the CP.

  16. NewFederalist Says:

    Eric Dondero- perhaps having all state affiliates with the same name actually creates a sense of community which is somewhat lacking within the CP it would appear.

  17. Red Phillips Says:

    I don’t think so Eric. I hadn’t realized that the “If you don’t support the abolition of child porn laws you are not a real libertarian” wing was so large and vocal.

  18. Gary Odom Says:

    Actually there is no split in California. There is unanimous support for the CP and Chuck Baldwin except for a couple of loose screws who managed to find themseleves in leadership after the 2006 State Convention and decided to go power mad. Once in 40 years isn’t a bad record, but it is always egregious when it is “now.”

    This IS what happens when an organization becomes very lax in its rules and becomes lazy and ceases to be pro-active and vigilant. Here is an example where a handful (or less) of people who found themselves in a position of leaderhip and are completly abusing their authority are creating havoc for everyone else and giving a totally misleading impression of the attitude of the state organization in general.

  19. Hugh Jass Says:

    “Hugh Jass,

    A hotly contested primary with 11 contestants where Keyes was only on the ballot in 15 or so states, cant be compared to a General election (like Peroutka’s totals).

    With that said. Austin—I dont think Keyes will get on 12 state ballots. If he got on California, though, he’d fetch at least 50k.”

    How would Keyes, who’s fairly unknown to non-politically savvy people, fetch 50K in California when the AIP nominee in 2004 only got 26K? Are we assuming that Keyes has 24K additional supporters who would vote for him? He only got 11K votes in the California primary, so even if Keyes gets the combined total of AIP’s 2004 votes and Keyes’s 2008 votes, he would still only get 37K.

  20. Red Phillips Says:

    Notice that Keyes’ new party is America’s Independent Party giving it the initials AIP? That is just outright theft.

  21. Michael Says:

    Keyes vote in GOP 2008 + 1/2 of 2004 CP vote = November 2008 total. All of this is beginning to sound like the American Party/American Independent Party breakup in the mid 1970’s.

  22. Ben Says:

    “All of this is beginning to sound like the American Party/American Independent Party breakup in the mid 1970’s.”

    How interesting that it is all precipitated from the same group of people, the AIPCA. Some one once asked me if the Bill Shearer that was chairing the national USTP was the same Bill Shearer from California that killed the American Party. I wasn’t in the USTP at the time so I couldn’t answer his question.

  23. citizen1 Says:

    Keyes will have the advantage of running in only a couple of states so he may spend all his time in CA in the unlikely event that he gets on the ballot.

  24. Red Phillips Says:

    Does anyone have any intel on the AP/AIP split? What were the stated issues? What were the real issues? I’m just curious.

  25. CT Says:

    Red Phillips- Here is some info from wikipedia:

    “The American Independent Party is a California political party. The party was established in 1967 by Bill Shearer and his wife Eileen. In 1968, the American Independent Party nominated former Alabama Governor George C. Wallace as its presidential candidate and retired Air Force General Curtis E. LeMay (who replaced former Georgia Governor Marvin Griffin on the ticket) as the vice presidential candidate. Wallace ran on every state ballot in the 1968 U.S. Presidential Election, although in some states it was too late to replace Griffin’s name with LeMay, and, consequently, in some places the former Georgia governor remained on the ballot in the second spot. Wallace did not represent the American Independent Party in all fifty states. In Connecticut, for instance, he was listed on the ballot as representing the “George Wallace Party.” The 1968 presidential ticket received 13.5 percent of the popular vote and 46 electoral votes. The party opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and welfare programs.

    In 1969, representatives from 40 states established the American Party as the successor to the American Independent Party. (In some places, such as Connecticut, the American Party was officially constituted as the American Conservative Party.) The official party flag adoption took place on August 30, 1970. The flag depicts an eagle holding a group of arrows in its left talons, over a compass rose, with a banner which reads “The American Independent Party” at the eagle’s base. In 1972, the party nominated former Congressman John G. Schmitz of California for president and Tennessee author Thomas Jefferson Anderson for vice president. In 1976, the American Party split into the more moderate American Party, which included more northern conservatives and Schmitz supporters, and the more extreme American Independent Party, which focused on the deep South. Both of the parties have nominated candidates for the presidency and other offices. Neither the American Party nor the American Independent Party has had much national success.”

  26. CT Says:

    I read an old interview with Percy Greaves, the American Party nominee for president in 1980. He was an economist by trade. It was rather interesting, because a lot of the stands he took in the interview sounds like Ron Paul. This was especially true in terms of economic policy. I don’t imagine the group is much of anything now, since they haven’t achieved ballot access in a single state since 1996.

  27. Richard Winger Says:

    The split between the American and the American Independent Party came right after the November 1972 election. William Shearer and Thomas J. Anderson fought for national leadership in the party. When Anderson won, in what the other side claimed was an unfair meeting, Shearer’s faction walked out and started the American Independent Party. I believe that national meeting was in December 1972. Wiki is wrong to say the split was in 1976.

    Shearer was more of a populist, pro-labor, anti-war person. Anderson was a leader in the John Birch Society. I don’t agree that the AIP was “more extremist” than the American Party. That word is far too subjective; it all depends on the issue. Shearer’s technique for recruiting a presidential candidate was always to go after someone with credentials. So he 1976 the AIP recruited former Georgia Governor Lester Maddox; in 1980 they recruited former Louisiana Congressman John Rarick. The American Party was far more interested in purity of doctrine, and always nominated someone who wasn’t famous but who swore allegience to the platform, which they practically worshiped.

  28. CT Says:

    Richard- Thanks for the clarification.

  29. Alicia Says:

    Either way, Keyes is just a vindictive troublemaker who needs to be clearly confronted with his Christian hypocrisy.
    He is the FURTHEST thing from a true Christian.
    I will make sure to make this highly public in the Houston media soon.

  30. Red Phillips Says:

    Thanks Richard. I had always detected a note of populism in the AIP.

  31. Cody Quirk Says:

    You hit the nail right on the head Richard. The AP was the extremist faction, not the national AIP.

  32. beer cans for ruwart Says:

    sorry all, a bit off topic. but i feel i need to let everyone know something. i’ve been picking aluminum cans out of peoples trash for three weeks just so i can donate the money i earn to mary’s campaign, god bless you mary, and god bless kiddie porn.

  33. Pervy Says:

    beer cans, how dare you ask g… go… (Oh, I can’t even bring myself to say it.) to bless Mary? Satan bless you Mary. Satan bless you. Please don’t hold beer cans blasphemy against her.

  34. Alicia Says:

    Aside from the ridiculous posts… Keyes site is nearly dead. Has less than 10 posters there.
    Most of the time they are suggesting absurd running mates for Keyes (Ann Coulter, Ron Paul, retired Generals) who will heartily laugh if asked to be Keyes lesser partner (is there room under Keyes who is firmly entrenched at the very bottom?).
    Where does he get one ounce of optimism? Isn’t it proof enough that he is running just to suck attention from the few followers he has?
    Are there any Keyes supporters here to disagree?

  35. Larry Breazeale,Msgt.(ret.)USAFR Says:

    I completely agree with Gary Odom 100% , on his above comments, regarding some “loose screws” , at the state AIP leadership level, at this time. Their actions and remarks are only awakening true AIP loyalists all over the state to this latest lunacy. True AIP loyalists will converge on Sacramento June 6,7,8, to set the record straight that the state AIP is NOT going to to break away from anything. The state AIP supports the national Constitution party period. The Keyes “sour grapes” seceders have not a clue what they are up against.

    -Larry Breazeale, Msgt. (ret.) USAF
    National Veterans Coalition
    Constitution party…www.nvets.org,
    Orange County Central Committee,
    American Independent Party

  36. Alicia Says:

    Well - they remain humorously optimistic with their statement about Texas anyway (only 74000 signatures needed before the end of the day!)

    They are quite the funny crew!

Leave a Reply