Baldwin to remain on Kansas ballot

Ballot Access News

Today, Kansas held an administrative hearing to determine the presidential nominee of the Reform Party of Kansas. The committee holding the hearing consisted of the Secretary of State, the Lieutenant Governor, and the Attorney General. After taking testimony, the group voted to place Chuck Baldwin on the ballot as the presidential nominee of the Reform Party of Kansas. The state party had unambiguously desired this outcome, but a doubt had been raised because a national Reform Party convention had chosen Ted Weill.

5 Responses to “Baldwin to remain on Kansas ballot”

  1. Jason Says:

    I can’t remember what topic I was on earlier so I’ll just use this one. But I was of course discussing Baldwin’s horid inadaquacies to be President.

    But in anway, I mentioned that my neighbor is far more qualified than Baldwin and raised far more money in his lifetime as a politician. Therefore, if someone like Baldwin who has accomplished zilch, nadda, in public life and run for President, then someone like my neighbor could run for President. Well I talked with him the other day about his career and fundraising.

    My neighbor (not exactly he lives just aways from me but we met at our local GOP HQ) is an ex-Mayor and State Rep. He retired from politics a couple of years ago.

    As Mayor from 2000-2004 he raised over $500,000 for his campaign.
    As a two term State Rep in the 90’s he raised over $300,000

    That’s $800,000. How much as Baldwin raised thus far? About $50,000? Does anyone know?

    Not to mention, he has a long list of accomplishments especially as Mayor. How can anyone seriously consider Baldwin and the CP?

  2. Red Phillips Says:

    Jason are you a GOP plant? Baldwin is very well qualified to do what a constitutional president should do, veto unconstitutional legislation. He has been an activist and a writer for many, many years. He has a very extensive archive of articles. If you want to know what he thinks and how he will govern it is all there for everyone to see.

    OTOH, Palin, for example, has served as City Counsel member, Mayor, and Gov. and no one knew where she stood on a lot of issues. Now she seems to be putty in the hands of the neocons despite some initial paleo optimism. So who is more trustworthy to govern? Someone whose views are relatively unknown and fluid, or someone whose views are clear and well defined?

  3. Jason Says:

    Or someone who as actually taken those views and tested them in practical terms by actually WINNING an election and governing. You folks are so consumed with your puritan ideology that you really don’t make any sense. Are you actually comparing Baldwin to a Governor…any governor. You can’t even compare Baldwin with a President of a PTA or beer and bowling league.

    I know all about Baldwin and his writings. I know his views and what he believes. However, what we don’t know is how he would govern or represent when he is met with real world problems. Things that require manuevering and flexibility. And yes, Stone Wall Red, in the real world you have to do those things.

    But, really, what does this matter. Baldwin won’t receive 100,000 votes and won’t run seriously for any other office.

  4. Jason Says:

    Yes, Red by the way. I’m a GOP plant. I’ve been assigned to monitor the CP and other third parties’ mind boggling success. We are worried that Baldwin is going to swing this election towards the CP any day now.

  5. Red Phillips Says:

    “Or someone who as actually taken those views and tested them in practical terms by actually WINNING an election and governing.”

    Jason, if we were all about winning at all costs then I don’t guess we would be posting at Third Party Watch now would we? You do realize this is Third Party Watch and not Free Republic or Little Green Footballs don’t you?

    My point is that Baldwin’s positions have depth. He has come to them over time and through much thought. His positions have even evolved over time. He has become more solid over time on non-intervention, for example. We know that as President when some hostilities erupt between Russia and Moldova or wherever he will correctly know that it is none of our business and not plunge us into war. When the Senate sends him some North American Union treaty he will veto it. Etc. etc. etc. Will Palin? Which Palin? The Palin who might have supported Buchanan in ‘96 or the post Gibson interview Palin.

    Experience is not insignificant, but it is overrated. Experience in the American political system almost invariable taints people with a very few honorable exceptions such as Ron Paul. But years of activism and years immersed in the battle of ideas is experience. Is there any doubt that Baldwin would have handled the Charlie Gibson interview better than Palin? Would Baldwin have cancelled a pro-life event to go kiss AIPAC’s rear end? Does anyone believe Baldwin would prove to be such a blank slate for the neocons?

    Third Party candidates are almost invariably inexperienced by your standards, unless they are defectors from the Republicrats such as Barr and McKinney. By your standards, one could almost never vote third party.

Leave a Reply