Chuck Baldwin write-in status list
For some of you Constitutionalists and other Patriots who might not see Chuck Baldwin’s name on your ballot and confused on whether writing in his and Darrell Castle’s name would count as a vote- here is a list of states where Mr. Baldwin will have write-in status:
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Georgia
Indiana
Maine
Montana
New Hampshire
New York
Pennsylvania
Texas
The list of write-in states can be viewed here, or here.
I personally recommend writing in Chuck and Darrel’s name in capital letters so your choice for President/Vice-President can be easily recognized.
October 10th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
I think that it is absolutely ludicrous that Oklahoma and North Carolina have no legal procedure in place to even allow for a write in.
Ballot access, without a doubt, is the most unequal, strange, and archaic institution in the country. Ranging from as simple as just paying $700 in Colorado, to over 158k signatures required in California.
I fail to see why there is a compelling State need to have a signature requirement higher than 3000 in any given state. Even with the nominal requriements in Colorado, there are just 13 candidates for President this year.
The concept of limiting choice has no justification. Nor does the concept of “Top Two Runoffs” for elections either.
October 10th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
I’m writing in Ron Paul. They may not legally have to record my vote, but they’re sure going to see it.
October 10th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
So it has come down to this? After all they hype and build up to ‘08. And the CP are giving instructions on how to “write-in” Baldwin?
I want all my money back.
October 11th, 2008 at 12:40 am
We’re on the ballot in 37 states, Barr will have write-in status in some states as well, maybe he should send out info to alert LP’ers, wouldn’t that be smart?
October 11th, 2008 at 5:58 am
Surely if there was a fair and reasonable ballot acess law that was fairly easy for any candidate with support to meet then all write ins should be abolished a write in scheme is just a two tier ballot system in which most voters will have no idea if there vote will be counted? Or if the person they write in is a recognised write in candidate. Perhaps a provision for abstention could be added as that is what a person is doing if they vote for a non recognised write in.
October 11th, 2008 at 8:36 am
Code, you’re a protectionist fag. go fuck yourself, you and your homophobe party
October 11th, 2008 at 9:37 am
...follow the money…all the way back…to its issuance…you won’t wonder ‘why this hideousness?’ as much…
...methinks the institution of ‘the negative vote’ would be an eye-opener for all…
...i am sick of being coerced into affirming/voting for the lesser evil(s) of republicrat fucks…having my vote/affirmation registered in favor of one republicrat fuck because i find him/her somewhat less offensive than the other republicrat fuck(s)..
...’the negative vote’ would allow me to ‘take one vote away’ from the worst of the republicrat fucks and not ‘affirm’ the relatively ‘better,’ but still stinking, republicrat fuck(s)...(of course, you numb republicrats could still vote ‘positively’—like the way you always have..)
...then FINALLY these fucking republicrat politicians and the citizenry could REALLY see just how disgusted people are with these fucking republicrats..a much more honest way of political expression than the phony fuck-headedness to which we are all witness today…
..(that is, if they count the fucking things honestly/accurately)
...and have a fucking good day!.. ;o)
October 11th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Bill Lussenheide- you are only half correct. OK does NOT permit write-ins for president. NC does permit them but the candidate has to submit a petition with 500 signatures on it to have write-ins tallied. Why on Earth the state requires that (and by an early deadline no less) is beyond me.
October 11th, 2008 at 10:06 am
I’m just curious, but can’t anyone in any state write in any candidate they want for any office? I’ve always had that ability in Minnesota. If you can’t do that in some states, I wonder why not? It seems un-Democratic.
October 11th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Cody Quirke is trying so hard, lol
October 11th, 2008 at 10:38 am
“Code, you’re a protectionist fag. go fuck yourself, you and your homophobe party”
Wow. Now that was an intelligent comment. Called him a “fag” and denounced homophobia? Was that an intentional attempt to look like an idiot?
October 11th, 2008 at 11:58 am
“Code, you’re a protectionist fag. go fuck yourself, you and your homophobe party”
I second that motion. But for real, Cody is just mad because th Libertarian Party did not want him working for them. Everyone knows this, so stop pretending Cody
October 11th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
The choice is clear if you go with a Third Party:
Nader who is on 45 ballots + Distrrict of Columbia
or
Barr who is on 45 state ballots
October 11th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Joseph wrote-
“Code, you’re a protectionist fag. go fuck yourself, you and your homophobe party”
Yes and you’re a bastion of liberty and open mindedness….right.
October 11th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Im sorry but what a waste!Chuck is going,well, nowere. with all do respect your either on drugs OR tring to find a reason to be on them!
October 11th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Please urge 1 person to donate by Sunday night to www.bobbarr2008.com we have to air ads
October 11th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Code, you’re a protectionist fag. go fuck yourself, you and your homophobe party
= Can’t even spell my name right you dumbass marxist.
October 11th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I second that motion. But for real, Cody is just mad because th Libertarian Party did not want him working for them. Everyone knows this, so stop pretending Cody
= TPW can’t just be Pro-Barr & anti-Chuck all the time, so I’m creating diversity here.
I guess the Barristas don’t like me bashing Barr.
Too bad, I’m not stopping.
October 11th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Too bad Barr can’t be on in Louisiana & West Virginia, where Chuck will be.
October 12th, 2008 at 12:05 am
Too bad Barr can’t be on in Louisiana & West Virginia, where Chuck will be.
That is the worst logic I have ever seen. Barr is on in 45 states and Baldwin is on in 37.
Good luck campaigning with that protectionism and theocracy platforms. I’m sure that will go over well.
October 12th, 2008 at 12:41 am
Jonathan, this was not a BobBarr08 cite and what few Barr references were few and far between. Quit spamming Baldwin, Quirk, CP and pretty much any thing that types. It taint good manners and is ultimately counter productive.
October 12th, 2008 at 8:27 am
“Good luck campaigning with that protectionism and theocracy platforms. I’m sure that will go over well.”
Dr. Gonzo, I’m not a protectionist per se. I am against sovereignty sacrificing trade agreements. But opposition to free trade consistently polls well. When NAFTA was being debated, it was opposed by a large majority and was opposed more by self-identified Republicans than Democrats. Some of the people on here REALLY need to get out more.
October 12th, 2008 at 8:43 am
I am against sovereignty sacrificing trade agreements. But opposition to free trade consistently polls well.
Then you appear to be out of touch with how the world currently operates. Whether we like it or not, globalism is the only way to currently operate the economy. Free trade agreements should be a normal part of the economic discussions. There is a difference between what we want, and what would actually work.
October 12th, 2008 at 9:58 am
DR GONZERO PARROTS: “whether we like it or not, globalism is the only way to currently operate the economy.”
...this republicrat dummy squawks as if “the economy” must be ‘operated’...like some fucking gigantic, smoking lawnmower!..(hint for dr. blowzo: methinks a MUCH better economy will happen without ‘operation’ by a bunch of republicrat gonzos who don’t even know what a fucking ‘dollar’ is!)
...and as to ‘taxation’/republicrat ‘economics’..it all sucks..but a slight nod to the CP dummies who want to directly tax foreigners compared to the goddamned republicrat fools who want to continue directly taxing americans!
...(and all you goddamned republicrat ‘economics’ blowholes need to learn even just a little reality as to the origin, nature, etc. of ‘the money..’ you surely are worse than ignorant here..)
...but have a good day!. ;o)
October 12th, 2008 at 11:51 am
“I am against sovereignty sacrificing trade agreements.”
That was simply an aside comment. My point was that opposition to free trade polls well with the masses. You indicated it would be a drag on the CP. It may well be among a small set of ideological free-traders who might otherwise consider the CP, but it would likely help them with the public at large. Hence my recommendation for you to get out more.
October 12th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Whether on the ballot or write-in, both Baldwin and Barr will have people in 48 states voting for them.
(Depending on Maine and Conn. for Barr).
October 12th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
In other news, Ron Paul will be on the ballot in LA:
http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20081012/NEWS01/810120333
October 12th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
What Ron Paul Saw in Baldwin
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance151.html
October 13th, 2008 at 3:44 am
Montana is one of those state where the political party needs somewhere around 11,500 or so votes to retain ballot status. Baldwin would have gotten around 1,500, while Ron Paul who visited the state both as a Libertarian and Republican will certainly get close to the 5% needed to keep the CP on the Montana ballot. Voters may still vote against Paul by voting for Barr or McCain by trying to defeat Obama. Baldwin may have good intentions, but nobody knows who he is.
October 13th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
You definitely have more choice this year in Ohio, usually not third party-friendly.
My NE Ohio ballot will include, in this order:
Baldwin/Castle (CP)
Barr/Root (LP of Ohio)
Duncan/Johnson
McCain/Palin®
McKinney/Clemente (GP of USA)
Moore/Alexander (Socialist Party USA)
Nader/Gonzalez
Obama/Biden (D)
Plus, a section for write ins:
D. Allen/Borcik
J. Allen/Stath
Germalic/Wishnatsky
Alan Keyes/Rohrbough
Robertson/Falls
Schriner/Way
October 13th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Many Pennsylvania counties don’t count write-in votes even though they are legally required to. Just something people might want to keep in mind.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Ron Paul Supporters:
Chuck Baldwin was the only candidate that actively campaigned for Ron Paul during the Republican Primaries. As president, Chuck will do what Ron Paul would have done. Now, Ron Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin, with good reason.
Chuck Baldwin has gone on record saying that he would like to make Ron Paul Secretary of the Treasury, and we all know what that would do for America.
If all Ron Paul supporters would rally together and actively campaign for and support Chuck Baldwin, we just might win. Otherwise, we might have to settle for Obama or McCain, and I think we can agree that would not be tolerable.
If you have already committed to vote for Chuck Baldwin, or if you would vote for him if you thought he had a chance, go to http://www.TheWhatIfList.org and sign up. Send as many people as you can. You will be notified when there are enough people for Chuck to have a real chance to win, and you can walk into the voting booth with confidence.
October 13th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
I do know by law in Pennsylvania, at least for the President position, you need to write in all 21 electors for a write-in Candidate. But the funny thing is there is not enough room on the ballot for all 21 names.
But many election personals will count the write ins without the 21 electors. So if your in PA, call your local election place to see how they count the write-ins
October 14th, 2008 at 7:00 am
Cody, you truly are a dick. Using an objective website as a platform to attack a third party candidate while you promote another. Where are your morals, you biblethumping protectionist.
Am I a bastion of liberty, John? I’m a sovereign individual, do you respect free speech? You seem to always attack my right to say thins rather than what it is that I’m saying.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
“Bill Lussenheide Says:
October 10th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
I think that it is absolutely ludicrous that Oklahoma and North Carolina have no legal procedure in place to even allow for a write in.”
Write-in’s are allowed, the Baldwin campaign missed the deadline.
http://www.ballot-access.org/ballot-chart.html
You can see the candidates that didn’t make the states ballot are write-in candidates. You’ll have your choices.