Minor Party and Independent General Election Discussion

[AltWorlder]

You're not wrong, but American politics- and perhaps the electorate itself- are socially further right than Europe. I don't see how the ASP is any more socially right than the GOP is, and in some ways are less so or at least have a less punitive tone about it.

[AltWorlder]

WELCOME TO THE FRINGE: A guide to write-in candidates for president from The Daily Sentinel, the newspaper of Nacogdoches, Texas.

Surprisingly extensive and wholesome coverage.

[GlobeSoc]

What's the deal with the psl lol. Hate cadre parties but curious nonetheless

[StateBoiler]

The American Solidarity Party has found a niche that was long coming. With religious morals apparently absent from both parties, religious voters too opposed to being in a party without all members being cisgendered heterosexuals or not fascists with mortal idols.

That's an uncharitable characterization of them, as any. If the ASP was simply an ultra-reactionary theocratic social conservative party then they could simply vote for Constitution, or for any of the many many minor far-right parties that exist across America.

Yes it's very important to note the ASP is fairly left-wing economically.  I won't deny people of faith are dominant, but it's not your mainstream prosperity gospel type of Christian.

Well it's explicitly rooted in Catholic social teaching and your mainstream Christian in the U.S. is Protestant.

[PSOL]

What's the deal with the psl lol. Hate cadre parties but curious nonetheless

Cadre parties are the only way these small leftist organizations survive and have a chance to grow on their own, but ok.

The Party of Socialism and Liberation is arguably the largest Marxist-Leninist organization in Yankeedom, with online estimates putting the organization at 4-5k members. Compared to the sea of other organizations, the PSL has had a steady and stable history in its short life since 2004-ish.

Founded not long after the death of Sam Marcy, the leading theorist and co-founder apart of the Workers World Party—the PSL originates from the Washington D.C. and Cali Bay branches of the party. This foundation is still present as the organization’s ticket represents this, as Gloria La Riva is from the bay and Sunil Freeman from the capital. The split arose mainly out of two things; the complete abject failure for the WWP to actually be relevant at doing anything and the egos of Gloria La Riva, Eugene Puryear, and others in smelling blood in the water. So the split happened, and the PSL has grown quite strong at the expense of the WWP and the old Socialist Workers Party. It’s organized, tightly controlled structure and quirks leads to how it got “here”.

The PSL, from all one will hear about on the internet about them, is at first glance a negative anomaly on the Left. Tightly controlled by its Central Committee, local chapters allegedly cannot even talk to one another. The PSL is apparently more noticeable in its protest tactics, hoping to stand out and walk closely among themselves, never “spreading out”. They have been criticized for not having any Left Unity™️ and for that fake statement that the PSL will take all your money (not even their leaked platform has it). The PSL is basically led by La Riva. That and their members are annoying on Twatter.

Like the DSA, the size and success of their real and imaginary deviations have rewarded them with great success. They have survived in an age where possible members just go get involved in the processes of the Democratic Party (kinda) and are a permanent fixture of the scene. Their policies ensure that while they grow more than other parties of their ideology, factionalism and sex pests aren’t exactly a thing like the Red Guards, ISO, CS Socialists, and the future probable collapse of PCUSA. While they’re activities are mainly holding up cardboard signs at protests they don’t start aside from ANSWER events, it’s rewarded them greatly.

Well while they should be critically examined as being the largest face of the Left, they don’t exactly fit into a nice box. Local chapters do engage with other groups, as is the most evident with Washington D.C. where Eugene Puryear ran as a candidate for the local Green Party. Also, y’know, the world they did during the primaries for Bernie Sanders. There does seem to be change coming though for the more serious stuff. After this article among other criticism, change and “clarification” occurred. They got a differentiated line and now have a sleek operation going on Twitter.

All this has led to the authorities from taking notice. From being attacked by Cointelpro’d Red Guards to recently having activists arrested on trumped up charges, it seems that they’re as “legit” in the eyes of the federal law enforcement to counteract. They still aren’t up their with the Green Party in being attacked electorally though.
Well, well; looky here. Now how is the response to this not the Left being united. Also apparently the fact that international organizations have taken notice
So Howie Hawkins got the endorsement of like three chapters of the DSA; Colorado Springs, Peoria, and I believe another on the east coast. This is quite interesting as it’s happening alongside the collaboration of the Green Party and DSA in getting Franca Muller Paz elected. This could be a sign of what’s to come in the future.

https://mobile.twitter.com/FrancaMullerPaz

Anyway, on something a little more analytical and irrelevant, not all Trotskyist organizations are down with Howie Hawkins. This article basically calling the Green Party useless, do nothing social democrats that one should not vote out of lesser evilism. Outside of the fact that I can probably expect a very real Gloria La Riva endorsement, it does show that not everyone is ok with the Vietnam peaceniks now fully in charge of the Green Party. One can also look at The Grayzone’s Ben Norton to see that kind of skepticism. Heck, even among “endorsements” such as SAlt, they still don’t like them. Contrasting with the electoral pole around Rocky De La Fuente/Darcy Richardson, yeah...
Well I might as well give my opinion and analysis on the third party debate hosted by the Free & Equal Foundation.

I’m firstly angered at the fact that the American Solidarity Party was rejected to the debates ahead of Kanye West, whose campaign team probably doesn’t even check their emails. The ASP is at least a movement that fills a niche in the American political scene, while Kanye West ain’t exactly it and probably won’t even make it to the debates. They should change the debates to prioritize political parties over write-in candidates or lower the standards to 8 states to get them in. The ASP nominee is an actually good debater, which sucks this upcoming race

The debate stage will realistically resemble the former debate, but one can dream. With there being quite more official criticism of the strategies of both the Green Party and PSL, along with a very tight field this year, I’m hoping for a clash instead of stump speeches to the crowd. The Green Party and PSL both are very flawed parties running very flawed candidates that the leftist, uneducated-voter bases of both don’t fully know about. The stance with the DSA/Democratic party, factional grips, ideological quirks, party strategy—the list goes on and on.

I think that with the stakes being so high, if there’s no clash, there will be no collaboration. There were moments of positive recognition between Mark Charles and Gloria La Riva, along with Zoltan Istvan defending progress spoken of coming from the Green and La Riva side from that Constitution Party fail!nominee Krauthammer.

I would be surprised if there’s any attacks by the other parties on the Left debaters, or among each other. Brock Pierce is a wildcard among this. More importantly, exactly how would they attack each other? Will Rocky call the plans of Jojo unrealistic? I don’t particularly know, but I’m guessing what is good won’t come to be true.
I’m calling all of you shy folks out there to contribute if you have any information outside of BAN and IPR. I know that y’all—Sparkey, VPH, AltWorlder, StateBoiler, Mr. Reactionary, Mikado, beaver 2.0, etc.—either have been doing this longer than I was or you actually are members of these parties. This thread is the only niche place where the usual partisan dolts won’t invade our space that badly. We’ve lost a lot of conversation by apparently the people deciding for us that Kanye’s campaign didn’t belong here, and it is crucial that this thread gets semi active with more posts not originating from updates on IPR or BAN.

Specifically; there has been little information on what the ASP or electoral pole among Rocky/Darcy is doing.

[GlobeSoc]

how likely is the psl to actually achieve 100,000 votes? I take it most of those would be from California again, or would the increase be more disparate geographically?

[PSOL]

how likely is the psl to actually achieve 100,000 votes? I take it most of those would be from California again, or would the increase be more disparate geographically?

It will be mostly from California, but who knows what is going to happen. Anecdotally they’re continuing to grow rapidly and have efficient ground game. There hasn’t been any splits as a result of aiding Bernie Sanders’s campaign nor do they have any competition for electoral politics from M-L parties or even Trots.

However, given that the pandemic theoretically leaves them and their membership restricted in their normal campaigning, there is a chance that they could not make it to 100k. It’s all up in the air till election time.

[GlobeSoc]

how likely is the psl to actually achieve 100,000 votes? I take it most of those would be from California again, or would the increase be more disparate geographically?

It will be mostly from California, but who knows what is going to happen. Anecdotally they’re continuing to grow rapidly and have efficient ground game. There hasn’t been any splits as a result of aiding Bernie Sanders’s campaign nor do they have any competition for electoral politics from M-L parties or even Trots.

However, given that the pandemic theoretically leaves them and their membership restricted in their normal campaigning, there is a chance that they could not make it to 100k. It’s all up in the air till election time.

Interesting just because it would be funny for a leninist party to improve in a year where the 3rd party vote crashes.

[PSOL]

how likely is the psl to actually achieve 100,000 votes? I take it most of those would be from California again, or would the increase be more disparate geographically?

It will be mostly from California, but who knows what is going to happen. Anecdotally they’re continuing to grow rapidly and have efficient ground game. There hasn’t been any splits as a result of aiding Bernie Sanders’s campaign nor do they have any competition for electoral politics from M-L parties or even Trots.

However, given that the pandemic theoretically leaves them and their membership restricted in their normal campaigning, there is a chance that they could not make it to 100k. It’s all up in the air till election time.

Interesting just because it would be funny for a leninist party to improve in a year where the 3rd party vote crashes.

I mean, when the Democratic Party is on an immense warpath during the biggest pandemic the country has faced in a while and the fact that the media won’t cover celebrities, yeah...

Also obligatory lmao, this is the benefit of a cadre organization

[GlobeSoc]

Also they seem to even be on the ballot in a couple states where the Greens *aren't* on the ballot, namely Louisiana and Rhode Island. Could that have an effect on their strength in those two states vs the nation?

wrt the cadre party thing, I meant that I disapprove of cadre parties ideologically, as in I dislike leninists and authcoms generally, and I'm saying that as someone who would vote for non-auth communists if possible

[PSOL]

Also they seem to even be on the ballot in a couple states where the Greens *aren't* on the ballot, namely Louisiana and Rhode Island. Could that have an effect on their strength in those two states vs the nation?

wrt the cadre party thing, I meant that I disapprove of cadre parties ideologically, as in I dislike leninists and authcoms generally, and I'm saying that as someone who would vote for non-auth communists if possible

Probably and probably not. I don’t think anyone really knows this other than party insiders and close members of each respective party that have interacted with the wider left. There’s also the fact that the answer probably only applies to a select few voters, mainly actual leftists among the Green Party and not the new agers or conspiracy loons. On the PSL, I doubt they’re members deviate, but their marginal supporters might now. Hopefully we get someone with more anecdotal knowledge to figure this out, like Donerrail.

Ultimately the second portion is out of scope for this thread, I highly suggest you ask bunkerchan about the benefits of a cadre organization along with the fact that Authcoms only exist in the minds of Vaush and his ilk.

[AltWorlder]

Well I might as well give my opinion and analysis on the third party debate hosted by the Free & Equal Foundation.

I’m firstly angered at the fact that the American Solidarity Party was rejected to the debates ahead of Kanye West, whose campaign team probably doesn’t even check their emails. The ASP is at least a movement that fills a niche in the American political scene, while Kanye West ain’t exactly it and probably won’t even make it to the debates. They should change the debates to prioritize political parties over write-in candidates or lower the standards to 8 states to get them in. The ASP nominee is an actually good debater, which sucks this upcoming race

No worries, it seems like they've already gotten it changed as of yesterday or so:

https://freeandequal.org/2020/09/three-candidates-confirmed-for-october-8-open-presidential-debate-in-denver/

Funny how they changed it specifically so the threshold means the ASP candidate can get in. But it's not bad- it means there's ten candidates, which is a nice round number (they should probably bump it up by a couple if not everyone accepts).

With there being quite more official criticism of the strategies of both the Green Party and PSL, along with a very tight field this year, I’m hoping for a clash instead of stump speeches to the crowd. The Green Party and PSL both are very flawed parties running very flawed candidates that the leftist, uneducated-voter bases of both don’t fully know about. The stance with the DSA/Democratic party, factional grips, ideological quirks, party strategy—the list goes on and on.

The thing I've seen about past F&EF debates is that they easily become an indirect lovefest that's a hatefest against the established political system, with leftist, libertarian, and paleocon candidates alike calling for the end the drug war and to get gov't-as-is and big business alike outta the lives of regular people. The candidates, despite their ideological particulars, usually spend their time agreeing with each other. It's boring. Hope this one has more energy.

There were moments of positive recognition between Mark Charles and Gloria La Riva, along with Zoltan Istvan defending progress spoken of coming from the Green and La Riva side from that Constitution Party fail!nominee Krauthammer.

It's lame that the U.S. Transhumanist Party is so lame, they could have an interesting role.

I don’t particularly know, but I’m guessing what is good won’t come to be true.

Sadly, yeah.

[PSOL]

Zoltan Istvan left the party because it got taken over by the majority faction of trans humanists, major Beta lolberts who fetishize the master race while wanting to become one themselves.

They were smart in letting ASP in. Ultimately it boils down to in likelihood to participate

1 Vanguard wannabe party
1 Green Party
1 liberal party
1 christian democrat party
1 Bitcoin magnate
1 propertarian party
And 1 geriatric party

Given how I doubt Kanye West‘s handlers allows him to come to this, it’s going to be a full debate. I can’t stress enough how idiotic it would look in their context to bar the ASP. 7 candidates is enough for a full debate. Now let’s hope this debate differs from the norm.

[AltWorlder]

As fun as it would be to see him in a debate, I have no idea if Blankenship will show, since he ignored the previous one this year.

[StateBoiler]

how likely is the psl to actually achieve 100,000 votes? I take it most of those would be from California again, or would the increase be more disparate geographically?

It will be mostly from California, but who knows what is going to happen. Anecdotally they’re continuing to grow rapidly and have efficient ground game. There hasn’t been any splits as a result of aiding Bernie Sanders’s campaign nor do they have any competition for electoral politics from M-L parties or even Trots.

However, given that the pandemic theoretically leaves them and their membership restricted in their normal campaigning, there is a chance that they could not make it to 100k. It’s all up in the air till election time.

Do we consider Peace & Freedom Party votes in California to be PSL votes or not? This was La Riva's vote count in 2016:

66,101 Peace & Freedom ballot line (Calif.)
7,689 Socialism & Liberation ballot line (6 states)
327 Liberty Union (Vt.)
275 Write-in

Remove the P&F ballot line, and the PSL's 2016 performance matched that of the Socialist Workers Party candidate. Hawkins ran for the P&F nomination this year and lost the primary to La Riva. If he won, I don't think that necessarily means he'd've automatically become their candidate. Not sure how much of the California Peace & Freedom Party structure has been compromised to PSL sympathizers. It's a very important thing to control from as far as looking at vote count, being on the California ballot can singlehandedly get you to 7th place and takes you from the Veterans/SWP/Prohibition Party level to a level above. The Constitution Party hasn't had California ballot access since the AIP split from them and if they did their vote count would go up at least 25%. (Castle didn't have ballot access in Texas last time either.)

[StateBoiler]

https://freeandequal.org/2020/09/three-candidates-confirmed-for-october-8-open-presidential-debate-in-denver/

Funny how they changed it specifically so the threshold means the ASP candidate can get in. But it's not bad- it means there's ten candidates, which is a nice round number (they should probably bump it up by a couple if not everyone accepts).

With there being quite more official criticism of the strategies of both the Green Party and PSL, along with a very tight field this year, I’m hoping for a clash instead of stump speeches to the crowd. The Green Party and PSL both are very flawed parties running very flawed candidates that the leftist, uneducated-voter bases of both don’t fully know about. The stance with the DSA/Democratic party, factional grips, ideological quirks, party strategy—the list goes on and on.

The thing I've seen about past F&EF debates is that they easily become an indirect lovefest that's a hatefest against the established political system, with leftist, libertarian, and paleocon candidates alike calling for the end the drug war and to get gov't-as-is and big business alike outta the lives of regular people. The candidates, despite their ideological particulars, usually spend their time agreeing with each other. It's boring. Hope this one has more energy.

I caught one third party debate in 2004 at an Ivy League university that had Badnarik, Peroutka of the Constitution Party, Cobb I think, and the Socialist Party candidate. The Socialist who was up there in years went up right after Peroutka who of course shared a very conservative Christian message. The Socialist nominee was not fit for primetime at all and spent his whole opening message reacting to Peroutka's message instead of actually stating what he stood for. He drug down the quality of the whole debate.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

ASP ballot access:

[AltWorlder]

https://freeandequal.org/2020/09/three-candidates-confirmed-for-october-8-open-presidential-debate-in-denver/

Funny how they changed it specifically so the threshold means the ASP candidate can get in. But it's not bad- it means there's ten candidates, which is a nice round number (they should probably bump it up by a couple if not everyone accepts).

With there being quite more official criticism of the strategies of both the Green Party and PSL, along with a very tight field this year, I’m hoping for a clash instead of stump speeches to the crowd. The Green Party and PSL both are very flawed parties running very flawed candidates that the leftist, uneducated-voter bases of both don’t fully know about. The stance with the DSA/Democratic party, factional grips, ideological quirks, party strategy—the list goes on and on.

The thing I've seen about past F&EF debates is that they easily become an indirect lovefest that's a hatefest against the established political system, with leftist, libertarian, and paleocon candidates alike calling for the end the drug war and to get gov't-as-is and big business alike outta the lives of regular people. The candidates, despite their ideological particulars, usually spend their time agreeing with each other. It's boring. Hope this one has more energy.

I caught one third party debate in 2004 at an Ivy League university that had Badnarik, Peroutka of the Constitution Party, Cobb I think, and the Socialist Party candidate. The Socialist who was up there in years went up right after Peroutka who of course shared a very conservative Christian message. The Socialist nominee was not fit for primetime at all and spent his whole opening message reacting to Peroutka's message instead of actually stating what he stood for. He drug down the quality of the whole debate.

Oh hell yes it's on YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFtOSYysUJA

The 2008 Third Party Alternative Debate at Vanderbilt also popped up. I remember seeing it before in all of its low-production glory, and it's hilarious how humiliating it must be to force six candidates to squeeze into one table. The U.S. Pacifist guy was particularly doddering and rambling as I remember.

[StateBoiler]

Has there ever been an attempt to get a "major third party" debate on cable? I know the networks would never do it, ditto cable news due to the Democrats and Republicans in those organizations not wanting it. (John Stossel moderating the Libertarian Party debate is still a little crazy to me as far as his respectability choosing to talk to Vermin Supreme.) Thinking the USA's, TNT's, FX's of the world. I imagine there's been some on C-SPAN.

Re PSL, any more news get out regarding the replacement of Peltier with Freeman other than the official story?

[The Mikado]

C-SPAN would make sense. It's usually open to the wilder side of politics.

So out of the 10 candidates invited, obviously Trump and Biden won't show, and I'd be surprised if Blankenship (who seems to not actually be seriously running) or West (who may have forgotten he's running for President?) show up. 6 candidates would be a very reasonable number.

[AltWorlder]

I'm watching the 2004 debate and Walt Brown (the elderly Socialist candidate) is actually better composed than I thought, though still susceptible to rambling. The Constitution, Green, and Libertarian candidates are all very polished speakers and come off as very knowledgeable. Even though there's a slight bland middle-aged suited white men feel to them compared to say, the F&EF debate from earlier this year, they at least sound and act professional instead of as ideological amateurs. It makes me wonder if third party politics has suffered from clownish degeneration similar to what's happening in establishment politics.

The Q&A format with the Cornell students is interesting. This kid who asks about the Iraq War went on to grow up to be conservative pundit Jamie Weinstein!



This frat bro-y looking dude in the cap and polo asks the candidates what they think about instant runoff voting and even brings up the notion of moving to a parliamentary system- and is now an ACLU lawyer.



Also in the debate Peroutka the Constitution Party candidate rejects the Fourteenth Amendment of the corporate personhood interpretation which goes to show how all these third parties end up being just anti-establishment parties no matter which side of their spectrum they're on.

[StateBoiler]

I'm watching the 2004 debate and Walt Brown (the elderly Socialist candidate) is actually better composed than I thought, though still susceptible to rambling. The Constitution, Green, and Libertarian candidates are all very polished speakers and come off as very knowledgeable. Even though there's a slight bland middle-aged suited white men feel to them compared to say, the F&EF debate from earlier this year, they at least sound and act professional instead of as ideological amateurs. It makes me wonder if third party politics has suffered from clownish degeneration similar to what's happening in establishment politics.

Why was Brown even invited to that debate? He was way behind the other 3 when it comes to ballot presence, support, eventual votes.

[AltWorlder]

I honestly don't know how the fill the roster for a lot of these smaller debates. Guess they wanted to have more than 2-3 candidates. The 2012 F&EF debate included the Justice Party, but Rocky Anderson was at least the mayor of SLC.

[PSOL]

I honestly expect the crowds for these debates on F&E to be smaller as parties start backing one another or not even seriously making it now that the duopoly is on a warpath. Unless we see some major fracturing we could be looking at a world where only the upper crust of third parties makes it in any debate

C-SPAN would make sense. It's usually open to the wilder side of politics.

So out of the 10 candidates invited, obviously Trump and Biden won't show, and I'd be surprised if Blankenship (who seems to not actually be seriously running) or West (who may have forgotten he's running for President?) show up. 6 candidates would be a very reasonable number.

While not as major as the big networks, getting such a thing on air in C-SPAN or PBS would be a watershed moment for third parties. Finally some recognition to a wider audience.

I'm watching the 2004 debate and Walt Brown (the elderly Socialist candidate) is actually better composed than I thought, though still susceptible to rambling. The Constitution, Green, and Libertarian candidates are all very polished speakers and come off as very knowledgeable. Even though there's a slight bland middle-aged suited white men feel to them compared to say, the F&EF debate from earlier this year, they at least sound and act professional instead of as ideological amateurs. It makes me wonder if third party politics has suffered from clownish degeneration similar to what's happening in establishment politics.

Why was Brown even invited to that debate? He was way behind the other 3 when it comes to ballot presence, support, eventual votes.

Because it’s the Socialist Party, a relic of time, that would be embarrassing for anyone to notify them of their non-life

I honestly don't know how the fill the roster for a lot of these smaller debates. Guess they wanted to have more than 2-3 candidates. The 2012 F&EF debate included the Justice Party, but Rocky Anderson was at least the mayor of SLC.

It should prioritize parties before independents unless they have an electoral alliance around them, that’s for sure.

So parties backed by numerous parties > Singular party > indy with backup > regular indy > Indy celebrity

[StateBoiler]

What happened to the Justice Party?