The engaging website Politics 1 has links to these campaigns' websites, etc.:
DEMOCRATIC PARTY:
President Barack Obama (Illinois)
Presidential Nominee
Vice President Joe Biden (Delaware)
Vice Presidential Nominee
REPUBLICAN PARTY:
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney (California)
Presidential Nominee
Congressman Paul Ryan (Wisconsin)
Vice Presidential Nominee
THIRD PARTY and
INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES:
(Note: Parties with ballot status in at least one state -- based on either 2008 status or preliminary 2012 status -- listed first, then all others under the INDEPENDENT & WRITE-IN CANDIDATES header)
AMERICA'S PARTY:
Tom Hoefling (Iowa)
Presidential Nominee
J.D. Ellis (Tennessee)
Vice Presidential Nominee
AMERICAN THIRD POSITION PARTY:
Merlin Miller (California)
Presidential Nominee
Harry Bertram (West Virginia)
Vice Presidential Nominee
CONSTITUTION PARTY:
Former Congressman Virgil Goode (Virginia)
Presidential Nominee
Jim Clymer (Pennsylvania)
Vice Presidential Nominee
GRASSROOTS PARTY:
Jim Carlson (Minnesota)
Presidential Nominee
George McMahon (Iowa)
Vice Presidential Nominee
GREEN PARTY:
Dr. Jill Stein (Massachusetts)
Presidential Nominee
Cheri Honkala (Pennsylvania)
Vice Presidential Nominee
JUSTICE PARTY:
Former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson (Utah)
Presidential Nominee
Luiz Rodriguez (Illinois)
Vice Presidential Nominee
LIBERTARIAN PARTY:
Former Governor Gary Johnson (New Mexico)
Presidential Nominee
Former Superior Court Judge Jim Gray (California)
Vice Presidential Nominee
OBJECTIVIST PARTY:
Tom Stevens (New York)
Presidential Nominee
Alden Link (Florida)
Vice Presidential Nominee
PARTY OF SOCIALISM AND LIBERATION (PSL):
Peta Lindsay (California)
Presidential Nominee
Yari Osorio (New York)
Vice Presidential Nominee
NOTE: THE PSL MAY ALSO USE SURROGATE PSL NOMINEES IN SOME STATES, WHERE NEEDED FOR BALLOT ACCESS PURPOSES, AS LINDSAY (AGE 27) AND OSORIO (AGE 26 & FOREIGN BORN) ARE NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY QUALIFIED TO SERVE IF ELECTED.
PEACE & FREEDOM PARTY:
Rosanne Barr (Hawaii)
Presidential Nominee
Cindy Sheehan (California)
Vice Presidential Nominee
PROHIBITION PARTY:
Lowell "Jack" Fellure (West Virginia)
Presidential Nominee
Toby Davis (Mississippi)
Vice Presidential Nominee
REFORM PARTY USA:
Andre Barnett (New York)
Presidential Nominee
Ken Cross (Arkansas)
Vice Presidential Nominee
REFORM PARTY OF KANSAS:
Chuck Baldwin (Montana)
Presidential Nominee
Joseph Martin (North Carolina)
Vice Presidential Nominee
NOTE: THE REFORM PARTY OF KANSAS IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE REFORM PARTY USA.
SOCIALIST PARTY USA (SP-USA):
Stewart Alexander (California)
Presidential Nominee
Alejandro "Alex" Mendoza (Texas)
Vice Presidential Nominee
SOCIALIST EQUALITY PARTY:
Jerome "Jerry" White (Michigan)
Presidential Nominee
Phyllis Scherrer (Pennsylvania)
Vice Presidential Nominee
SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY (SWP):
James Harris (New York)
Presidential Nominee
Maura DeLuca (Nebraska)
Vice Presidential Nominee
NOTE: THE SWP MAY ALSO USE A SURROGATE VP NOMINEE IN SOME STATES, WHERE NEEDED FOR BALLOT ACCESS PURPOSES, AS MAURA DeLUCA (AGE 33) IS NOT CONSTITUTIONALLY QUALIFIED TO SERVE IF ELECTED.
***INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES WITH BALLOT STATUS IN AT LEAST ONE STATE:
Jeff Boss (Independent-New Jersey)
Richard Duncan (Independent-Ohio) - No Campaign Website
Nelson Keyton (Independent-Virginia)
Jerry Litzel (Independent-Iowa) - No Campaign Website
Jill Reed (Twelve Visions-Wyoming)
Randall Terry (Independent-West Virginia)
Sheila "Samm" Tittle (We The People-Virginia)
Mike Vargo (Independent-Ohio)
The Peace and Freedom ticket, 2012:
Thinking of starting the Party On Party. Anyone want to join me?
ReplyDeleteAs long as there's no "Bohemian Rhapsody" involved. Inflexible on this.
ReplyDeleteWow. Thanks for that. You never hear of the independents on the news--not that they're going anywhere, but it would be nice to hear the different platforms, different slants.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to join in your forgotten flick panel next time and continuing.
OK, Richard, I'll be looking out for your reviews.
ReplyDeleteYou do have to go beyond the usual coverage, either scouring the "mainstream" press for the occasional coverage, or looking closely at the more specialized or small-audience news sources, usually, for coverage of the small parties and the independents...some of whom manage to out-goof the major-party candidates (either in vagueness or crotchets or both), and some of whom are making entirely too much sense to be taken "seriously" in the course of human events...
And some of the small parties make some inroads, at times, though it's rare these years at the national level (where they often serve instead as the targets of major-party whining). The Greens, the Libertarians and the Constitutionalists are among those most likely to get above a percentage point in various contests and occasionally win a position at some level...
ReplyDeleteThe only independent presidential candidate who, I think, was ever well known in India was Ross Perot of Reform Party in the 1990s. What is he doing these days?
ReplyDeleteAnd what difference do these third-party and independent candidates make by standing for elections? I can think of only one thing: cutting into the votebanks of the two main parties, as they do here.
Well, Prashant, that's an argument that is often made here, as well, but what they do is draw attention to issues and positions that the larger parties prefer to ignore or to offer little hope for change about. Small parties are, at least most of the time, less captive to big-money interests than the larger parties, almost by definition. So, if a small party manages to gain some attention for one or another of the things it advocates, often the larger parties will attempt to co-opt, or sometime even make actual contribution toward attempting to deal with, the issue at hand. Also, the small parties give those who disagree with the policies of the larger parties and their candidates someone to vote for. Barack Obama doesn't represent my interests nor aspirations, being as he is (in the words of former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, in the current issue of The Progressive magazine) a Rockefeller Republican. Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is also a Rockefeller Republican, with even less social conscience and more plutocratic instincts, who throws sops to the far right in hopes of keeping those voters with him. As a libertarian socialist, neither of these men, nor their goofy running mates, remotely stands for what I believe in. Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala, moreso than any of the other ballot candidates for the executive positions, do.
ReplyDeleteAnd Perot is essentially retired, and has essentially rejoined the Republican Party, now that the Bush family he hates so much no longer is taking a presidential role...Perot endorsed Romney.
ReplyDeleteThe Liberty Party and the Free-Soil Party in US history were great advocates of the cessation, or at least the limitation, of slavery, when the Democratic and the Whig parties did not dare come out forthrightly against that institution; the Socialist Party agitated for recognition of worker's rights (including freedom to unionize) and women's rights, among other improvements to US society, in the face of vicious suppression by, for example, Woodrow Wilson's Democratic administration, and before and after...the second national Progressive campaign, in 1924, united liberal and leftist Republicans with the Socialists to gain representation in the Senate and House, and to come in a strong third in the presidential race. The Prohibition Party, as flawed a cure for the ills of society that outlawing alcohol was, was also a party pushing for women's suffrage. The People's Party, the Populists, had performed similar service in the late 1800s, and Perot's Reform Party campaigns, much like Wallace's American Independent Party run in 1968, John Anderson's National Unity run in 1980, or the State's Rights Democrats ("Dixiecrats") and Democratic New Dealers/Communist Party fusion Progressives of 1948 have all been useful reminders to the large parties that they don't "own" or "deserve" the votes of the electorate that they don't reasonably serve nor represent. There is a long tradition in the US of roughly only half the eligible voters actually coming out to vote in our elections, and it seems likely that a large number of the non-voters don't see enough reason to give any support to the options they've been made aware of.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteTodd, thanks for all the information. India has dozens of regional parties that are today in a position to make or break federal governments. This has led to a new era of coalition politics and coalition governments since the mid-1990s. The last two central (federal) governments in New Delhi, including the current dispensation led by the Congress, have been made up of as many as 18 to 20 political parties which often hold the government in power to ransom. Never mind if their support means fewer than five elected Members of Parliament, so long as it adds to the magic figure of 272 majority (vis-a-vis the 270 electoral college at your end) in the 545-member Lok Sabha (Upper House).
Regarding your last comment on Jerry's blog, I find the "electoral college" rather complicated, though fairly easy to understand. What I like about US elections is that you can actually vote for the President you wish to see in the White House. Here, on the other hand, you vote one party or another into power which, on winning, will then decide whom to annoint as the prime minister. The citizens have no say there. There has been half-hearted debate over changing this British system and I don't see it happening in this century.
By the way, thanks for mentioning THE PROGRESSIVE: I haven't visited the site for a while now. i regularly read online editions of The New Republic, Counterpunch, Boston Review, Foreign Affairs, The Saturday Evening Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Atlantic among some others.