Personally, I don’t like defending Peroutka, that wacko manipulated a lot of people in the CP and I regret voting for that bastard.

For like the forth time, Peroutka got about 1000 votes in NV, which translates to a number roughly 2.5% of the number of registered voters for IAP. Do you finally understand where that number came from? Divide 1000 by 40,000. Yep, not too difficult, right?

Calculate what the cooresponding number is in NJ and you’ll begin to understand (!) the argument here. If you can actually accomplish this amazing mathmatical feat, you just might be on your way to understanding all of this. (I’ll give you a hint – it’s way more than 100%)

Look, Richard Winger of Ballot Access News comes to the same conclusion (that the CP’s support is exaggrated because of the IAP designation), and he’s got a lot more clout around here than some mathmatically-challenged internet troll. Sorry to burst your bubble.

(Seriously, tho, calculate the NJ number on your own, and then listen to the lightbulb burning brightly over you head. Write back with the answer, and we’ll take it from there)

=In 2004 Peroutka got more votes in NJ then Nevada, but only added up to .98% of the vote, while in Nevada it was vice versa- he got .14% of the votes. See David Leip’s website.

And you’re actually bringing up Goldwater/Mondale campaigns? Are you suggesting they got close to 2.5% of their respective party’s votes?

=Did they even get a majority of their party’s reg. voters nationwide?

You know Rob, being the fact that you don’t have a clue about voting behavior in general, your arguments are the equivelant of shooting blanks.

This should be good.

And you’re actually bringing up Goldwater/Mondale campaigns? Are you suggesting they got close to 2.5% of their respective party’s votes?

Look at Barry Goldwater running in 64’, or Mondale in 84’.

And I told you again and again=

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

DER!

Don’t you get it, or are you honestly retarded as you say you are.

How do you explain the IAP statewide and local candidates getting a larger % of the vote the the Prez. candidate?

I said nowhere else but in NV did a presidential candidate do so poorly as too equal only 2.5% of the number of the registered voters of his own party.

The number of CP registered voters in NM is only 60; in DE it’s 275; in NJ it’s 141; etc, etc. (Again, almost the entire CP registered voter base is located in the two states where it’s listed as IAP)

Peroutka got WAY more votes than 2.5% of those numbers where he was on the ballot; often much more then 100%. Take a look at NJ, for example, where he got almost 3000 votes.

I shouldn’t be surprised that you’re not grasping this; but hey, math isn’t for everyone.

=Peroutka got less of a percentage in Minnesota, New Mexico, Delaware, Maine, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Tennessee, then in Nevada, which has a a smaller number of registered voters (and general population), then the named states. Don’t believe me? The numbers don’t lie here…

http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/

Oh, and your childish little rant there doesn’t hold water, at least in explaining away the point of this whole thread.

=Neither does your smear attempts on the IAP, plus your explanation of the presidential race.

Why did the LP candidate get triple the number of votes than the CP candidate, even though the LP has far fewer registered voters?

=Badnarik was actually more active then Peroutka and also better funded.
Oh yes, did I mention that Badnarik was on the ballot in more states then Peroutka?!

If the same percentage of people of each party voted for their respected candidates, than Peroutka should have blown Badnarik out of the water.

=Not necessarly. I personally think Badnarik had a wider appeal then Peroutka, and LP funding, plus he was on the ballot on most states duh! Badnarik tried to reach out to everybody while Peroutka was selective on who he reached out to and where he campaigned.

Badnarik was a crappy candidate who barely got any press whatsoever.

=No, he did get more publicity then Peroutka, and more funding, and he campaigned more.

I know you hate the real answer, but I’ll admit its been kinda funny watching you dance around the elephant in the room.

=It’s really funny how you try to come up with dumb questions and even more stupid answers.

Why did the LP candidate get triple the number of votes than the CP candidate, even though the LP has far fewer registered voters? If the same percentage of people of each party voted for their respected candidates, than Peroutka should have blown Badnarik out of the water. Badnarik was a crappy candidate who barely got any press whatsoever.

I know you hate the real answer, but I’ll admit its been kinda funny watching you dance around the elephant in the room.

=Yet being a 3-way race, she still won with a majority of votes, and the IAP elected somebody to office running for the Elko School Board.

Don’t get me wrong, it’s great to see newbies get involved in third party politics and all, but you’ve got a seriously thick pair of rose-colored glasses on.

=I’ve been in politics for many years, I think you need to take your glasses off and read Trents comments….

Better yet, I’ll say it for you.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

Now repeat after me….

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

*People are the most politically passionate about who will be president, so adherence to the two-party system is the strongest in presidential races.

Alright.

And let’s remember the 8 other states where Peroutka got less votes then in Nevada too.

In 2004 the Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik didn’t recieve much TV coverage either, even by Libertarian standards.

The only candidate outside of Bush & Kerry to get much TV coverage in 2004 was Nader.

Michael Peroutka was on TV?? I must have missed that. I remember seeing Howard Philips on TV a small handful of times during his runs, but I never saw Peroutka on TV.

I’d say there are are a number of reasons why the Presidential race garners only 1152 votes in Nevada. The smallest of which is confusion with the “Independant” word in the party name.

A.)People are MUCH less likely to vote for Third-party presidential race. Period.
B.)Because the STATE party name is different than the NATIONAL party name, people don’t put together 1 and 1. They see Michael Peroutka from the CP on TV, and then think “Well,there is no CP in our state. Only an IAP.”

You’re talking about Jackie Berg, who won this massive race with a whopping 389 votes??? Most local school board races are larger than that.

And this leads to you to believe “Nevada is a fertile ground for a major IAP victory”?

Don’t get me wrong, it’s great to see newbies get involved in third party politics and all, but you’ve got a seriously thick pair of rose-colored glasses on.

Again, Peroutka got 1152 votes in a party that supposedly has 45,000 members. Put down your bullhorn for a second and tell me the obvious, number one reason for that huge discrepancy.

(And this comes from someone who would actually vote for CP candidates if they could ever get on the ballot in my state)