Have a Comment?
E-Mail Me at rhasen-AT-law.uci.edu
Election Law Blogger
Rick Hasen (posts)
Guest Bloggers
Heather Gerken (posts)
Justin Levitt (posts)
Nate Persily (posts)
Rick Pildes (posts)
Dan Tokaji (posts)Generously Supported By
ELB Feeds and Email Subscriptions
RSS XML
Get ELB Delivered by E-Mail to Your In-box via Feedburner
Books by Rick
The Voting Wars Website
NOW AVAILABLE from
Amazon
Barnes and Noble

Election Law--Cases and Materials (5th edition 2012) (with Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Daniel P. Tokaji)
The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore (NYU Press 2003) NOW IN PAPER
Book introduction
Table of Contents
Order from Amazon.com
Order from BarnesandNoble.com
Journal of Legislation Symposium on book

The Glannon Guide to Torts: Learning Torts Through Multiple-Choice Questions and Analysis (Aspen Publishers 2d ed. 2011)
Remedies: Examples & Explanations (Aspen Publishers, 2d ed. 2010)Election Law Resources
Election Law--Cases and Materials (4th edition 2008) (with Daniel Hays Lowenstein and Daniel P. Tokaji)
Election Law Journal
Election Law Listserv homepage
Election Law Teacher Database
Repository of Election Law Teaching Materials (2011 update)
Blogroll/Political News Sites
All About Redistricting (Justin Levitt)
American Constitution Society
Balkinization
Ballot Access News
Brennan Center for Justice
The Brookings Institution's Campaign Finance Page
Buzzfeed Politics
California Election Law (Randy Riddle)
Caltech-MIT/Voting Technology Project (and link to voting technology listserv)
The Caucus (NY Times)
Campaign Legal Center (Blog)
Campaign Finance Institute
Center for Competitive Politics (Blog)
Center for Governmental Studies
Doug Chapin (HHH program)
Concurring Opinions
CQ Politics
Demos
Election Updates
Fairvote
Election Law@Moritz
Electionline.org
Equal Vote (Dan Tokaji)
Federal Election Commission
The Fix (WaPo)
The Hill
How Appealing
Initiative and Referendum Institute
Legal Theory (Larry Solum)
Political Activity Law
Political Wire
Politico
Prawfsblawg
Roll Call
SCOTUSblog
Summary Judgments (Loyola Law faculty blog)
Talking Points Memo
UC Irvine Center for the Study of Democracy
UC Irvine School of Law
USC-Caltech Center for the Study of Law and Politics
The Volokh Conspiracy
Votelaw blog (Ed Still)
Washington Post Politics
Why Tuesday?
Recent Newspapers and Magazine Commentaries
Big Money Lost, But Don't Be Relieved, CNN Opinion, Nov. 9, 2012
A Better Way to Vote: Nationalize Oversight and Control, NY Times, "Room for Debate" blog, Nov. 9, 2012
Election Day Dispatches Entry 5: Black Panthers, Navy Seals, and Mysterious Voting Machines, Slate, Nov. 6, 2012
Behind the Voting Wars, A Clash of Philosophies, Sacramento Bee, Nov. 4, 2012
How Many More Near-Election Disasters Before Congress Wakes Up?, The Daily Beast, Oct. 30, 2012
Will Bush v. Gore Save Barack Obama? If Obama Narrowly Wins Ohio, He Can Thank Scalia and the Court's Conservatives, Slate, Oct. 26, 2012
Will Voter Suppression and Dirty Tricks Swing the Election?, Salon, Oct. 22, 2012
Is the Supreme Court About to Swing Another Presidential Election? If the Court Cuts Early Voting in Ohio, It Could Be a Difference Maker in the Buckeye State, Slate, Oct. 15, 2012
Election Truthers: Will Republicans Accept an Obama Election Victory?, Slate, Oct. 9, 2012
Wrong Number: The Crucial Ohio Voting Battle You Haven't Heard About, Slate, Oct. 1, 2012
Litigating the Vote, National Law Journal, Aug. 27, 2012
Military Voters as Political Pawns, San Diego Union-Tribune, August 19, 2012
Tweeting the Next Election Meltdown: If the Next Presidential Election Goes into Overtime, Heaven Help Us. It’s Gonna Get Ugly, Slate, Aug. 14, 2012
A Detente Before the Election, New York Times, August 5, 2012
Worse Than Watergate: The New Campaign Finance Order Puts the Corruption of the 1970s to Shame, Slate, July 19, 2012
Has SCOTUS OK'd Campaign Dirty Tricks?, Politico, July 10, 2012
End the Voting Wars: Take our elections out of the hands of the partisan and the incompetent, Slate, June 13, 2012
Citizens: Speech, No Consequences, Politico, May 31, 2012
Is Campaign Disclosure Heading Back to the Supreme Court? Don’t expect to see Karl Rove’s Rolodex just yet, Slate, May 16, 2012
Unleash the Hounds Why Justice Souter should publish his secret dissent in Citizens United, Slate, May 16, 2012
Why Washington Can’t Be Fixed; And is about to get a lot worse, Slate, May 9, 2012
Let John Edwards Go! Edwards may be a liar and a philanderer, but his conviction will do more harm than good, Slate, April 23, 2012
The Real Loser of the Scott Walker Recall? The State of Wisconsin, The New Republic, April 13, 2012
A Court of Radicals: If the justices strike down Obamacare, it may have grave political implications for the court itself, Slate, March 30, 2012
Of Super PACs and Corruption, Politico, March 22, 2012
Texas Voter ID Law May Be Headed to the Supreme Court, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Mar. 13, 2012
“The Numbers Don’t Lie: If you aren’t sure Citizens United gave rise to the Super PACs, just follow the money, Slate, Mar. 9, 2012
Stephen Colbert: Presidential Kingmaker?, Politico, Mar. 5 2012
Occupy the Super PACs; Justice Ginsburg knows the Citizens United decision was a mistake. Now she appears to be ready to speak truth to power, Slate, Feb. 20, 2012
Kill the Caucuses! Maine, Nevada, and Iowa were embarrassing. It’s time to make primaries the rule, Slate, Feb. 15, 2012
The Biggest Danger of Super PACs, CNN Politics, Jan. 9, 2012
This Case is a Trojan Horse, New York Times "Room for Debate" blog, Jan. 6, 2012 (forum on Bluman v. FEC)
Holder's Voting Rights Gamble: The Supreme Court's Voter ID Showdown, Slate, Dec. 30, 2011
Will Foreigners Decide the 2012 Election? The Extreme Unintended Consequences of Citizens United, The New Republic (online), Dec. 6, 2011
Disenfranchise No More, New York Times, Nov. 17, 2011
A Democracy Deficit at Americans Elect?, Politico, Nov. 9, 2011
Super-Soft Money: How Justice Kennedy paved the way for ‘SuperPACS’ and the return of soft money, Slate, Oct. 25, 2012
The Arizona Campaign Finance Law: The Surprisingly Good News in the Supreme Court’s New Decision, The New Republic (online), June 27, 2011
New York City as a Model?, New York Times Room for Debate, June 27, 2011
A Cover-Up, Not a Crime. Why the Case Against John Edwards May Be Hard to Prove, Slate, Jun. 3, 2011
Wisconsin Court Election Courts Disaster, Politico, Apr. 11, 2011
Rich Candidate Expected to Win Again, Slate, Mar. 25, 2011
Health Care and the Voting Rights Act, Politico, Feb. 4, 2011
The FEC is as Good as Dead, Slate, Jan. 25, 2011
Let Rahm Run!, Slate, Jan. 24, 2011
Lobbypalooza,The American Interest, Jan-Feb. 2011(with Ellen P. Aprill)
Election Hangover: The Real Legacy of Bush v. Gore, Slate, Dec. 3, 2010
Alaska's Big Spelling Test: How strong is Joe Miller's argument against the Leeza Markovsky vote?, Slate, Nov. 11, 2010
Kirk Offers Hope vs. Secret Donors, Politico, November 5, 2010
Evil Men in Black Robes: Slate's Judicial Election Campaign Ad Spooktackular!, Slate, October 26, 2010 (with Dahlia Lithwick)
Show Me the Donors: What's the point of disclosing campaign donations? Let's review, Slate, October 14, 2010
Un-American Influence: Could Foreign Spending on Elections Really Be Legal?, Slate, October 11, 2010
Toppled Castle: The real loser in the Tea Party wins is election reform, Slate, Sept. 16, 2010
Citizens United: What the Court Did--and Why, American Interest, July/August 2010
The Big Ban Theory: Does Elena Kagan Want to Ban Books? No, and She Might Even Be a Free Speech Zealot", Slate, May 24, 2010
Crush Democracy But Save the Kittens: Justice Alito's Double Standard for the First Amendment, Slate, Apr. 30, 2010
Some Skepticism About the "Separable Preferences" Approach to the Single Subject Rule: A Comment on Cooter & Gilbert, Columbia Law Review Sidebar, Apr. 19, 2010
Scalia's Retirement Party: Looking ahead to a conservative vacancy can help the Democrats at the polls, Slate, Apr. 12, 2010
Hushed Money: Could Karl Rove's New 527 Avoid Campaign-Finance Disclosure Requirements?, Slate, Apr. 6, 2010
Money Grubbers: The Supreme Court Kills Campaign Finance Reform, Slate, Jan. 21, 2010
Bad News for Judicial Elections, N.Y. Times "Room for Debate" Blog, Jan., 21, 2010
Read more opeds from 2006-2009
Forthcoming Publications, Recent Articles, and Working Papers
The 2012 Voting Wars, Judicial Backstops, and the Resurrection of Bush v. Gore, George Washington Law Review (forthcoming 2013) (draft available)
A Constitutional Right to Lie in Campaigns and Elections?, Montana Law Review (forthcoming 2013) (draft available)
End of the Dialogue? Political Polarization, the Supreme Court, and Congress, 86 Southern California Law Review (forthcoming 2013) (draft available)
Fixing Washington, 126 Harvard Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (draf available)
What to Expect When You’re Electing: Federal Courts and the Political Thicket in 2012, Federal Lawyer, (forthcoming 2012)( draft available)
Chill Out: A Qualified Defense of Campaign Finance Disclosure Laws in the Internet Age, Journal of Law and Politics (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Lobbying, Rent Seeking, and the Constitution, 64 Stanford Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Anticipatory Overrulings, Invitations, Time Bombs, and Inadvertence: How Supreme Court Justices Move the Law, Emory Law Journal (forthcoming 2012) (draft available)
Teaching Bush v. Gore as History, St. Louis University Law Review (forthcoming 2012) (symposium on teaching election law) (draft available)
The Supreme Court’s Shrinking Election Law Docket: A Legacy of Bush v. Gore or Fear of the Roberts Court?, Election Law Journal (forthcoming 2011) (draft available)
Citizens United and the Orphaned Antidistortion Rationale, 27 Georgia State Law Review 989 (2011) (symposium on Citizens United)
The Nine Lives of Buckley v. Valeo, in First Amendment Stories, Richard Garnett and Andrew Koppelman, eds., Foundation 2011)
The Transformation of the Campaign Financing Regime for U.S. Presidential Elections, in The Funding of Political Parties (Keith Ewing, Jacob Rowbottom, and Joo-Cheong Tham, eds., Routledge 2011)
Judges as Political Regulators: Evidence and Options for Institutional Change, in Race, Reform and Regulation of the Electoral Process, (Gerken, Charles, and Kang eds., Cambridge 2011)
Citizens United and the Illusion of Coherence, 109 Michigan Law Review 581 (2011)
Aggressive Enforcement of the Single Subject Rule, 9 Election Law Journal 399 (2010) (co-authored with John G. Matsusaka)
The Benefits of the Democracy Canon and the Virtues of Simplicity: A Reply to Professor Elmendorf, 95 Cornell Law Review 1173 (2010)
Constitutional Avoidance and Anti-Avoidance on the Roberts Court, 2009 Supreme Court Review 181 (2010)
Election Administration Reform and the New Institutionalism, California Law Review 1075 (2010) (reviewing Gerken, The Democracy Index)
You Don't Have to Be a Structuralist to Hate the Supreme Court's Dignitary Harm Election Law Cases, 64 University of Miami Law Review 465 (2010)
The Democracy Canon, 62 Stanford Law Review 69 (2009)
Review Essay: Assessing California's Hybrid Democracy, 97 California Law Review 1501 (2009)
Bush v. Gore and the Lawlessness Principle: A Comment on Professor Amar, 61 Florida Law Review 979 (2009)
Introduction: Developments in Election Law, 42 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 565 (2009)
Book Review (reviewing Christopher P. Manfredi and Mark Rush, Judging Democracy (2008)), 124 Political Science Quarterly 213 (2009).
"Regulation of Campaign Finance," in Vikram Amar and Mark Tushnet, Global Perspectives on Constitutional Law (Oxford University Press (2009)
More Supply, More Demand: The Changing Nature of Campaign Financing for Presidential Primary Candidates (working paper, Sept. 2008)
When 'Legislature' May Mean More than''Legislature': Initiated Electoral College Reform and the Ghost of Bush v. Gore, 35 Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly 599 (2008) (draft available)
"Too Plain for Argument?" The Uncertain Congressional Power to Require Parties to Choose Presidential Nominees Through Direct and Equal Primaries, 102 Northwestern University Law Review 2009 (2008)
Political Equality, the Internet, and Campaign Finance Regulation, The Forum, Vol. 6, Issue 1, Art. 7 (2008)
Justice Souter: Campaign Finance Law's Emerging Egalitarian, 1 Albany Government Law Review 169 (2008)
Beyond Incoherence: The Roberts Court's Deregulatory Turn in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, 92 Minnesota Law Review 1064 (2008) (draft available)
The Untimely Death of Bush v. Gore, 60 Stanford Law Review 1 (2007)
Articles 2004-2007
Category Archives: third parties
“Colorado Independent Candidate Files Opening Brief in 10th Circuit, in Case Challenging Discriminatory Contribution Limits”
Fascinating case, and from my quick glance, one that challengers to the contribution limits should win (something you don’t see me saying all that often).
“U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear Case on Whether Jurisdictions Must Count Write-in Votes for Declared Write-in Presidential Candidates”
Ballot Access News reports. It also reports that the Court took no action in an aggregate campaign contributions case, James v. FEC. The Court could hold that case for argument in McCutcheon or agree to hear the case potentially consolidating it with McCutcheon. (With McCutcheon pending, a summary affirmance seems unlikely.)
Steve Peace Accuses Richard Winger of “Intentionally or Naively” Supporting the Two-Party Duopoly
Check out the comments to Richard’s piece on California’s top two primary.
“Revealed: How cult-like band exploits voter deception to wield political power in N.Y.C.; Thousands of voters have been duped into enrolling in Independence Party”
Quite a NY Daily News editorial.
“The GOP’s Growing Libertarian Problem”
“Libertarian acted as spoiler in Senate race, GOP says”
Billings Gazette: “U.S. Senate Libertarian candidate Dan Cox will tell you that it was never his intention to be a spoiler in one of the most closely watched races in the nation. He equally disliked both of his opponents’ records. But the nearly 30,000 votes Cox garnered in Tuesday’s general election were 10,000 more than the difference between Democratic incumbent Sen. Jon Tester and his Republican challenger, Rep. Denny Rehberg.”
“Obama’s Virginia Wild Card in Hands of Ex-Congressman”
“Little-known candidates could harm Romney, Obama bids”
“Third Party Candidates and the Great B.S. Ballot Game”
Weigel: “It happened earlier this month, but it’s worth noting: Gary Johnson won a nine-week legal war for the right to appear on Pennsylvania’s ballot.”
“Gary Johnson’s third-party presidential bid: A real factor or just a footnote?”
John Anderson Doesn’t Like Third Party Candidates Referred to as “Spoilers”
“California Procedure for Getting a New Party on the Ballot Held Unconstitutional “
Ballot Access News: “On October 18, U.S. District Court Judge Percy Anderson struck down California’s procedure for a newly-qualifying party to get on the ballot. The 16-page decision is California Justice Committee & Constitution Party v Bowen, cv 12-3956, central district. The basis for the decision is that the deadline is so early. In 2012, it was January 2.”
“The Libertarian/Marijuana Conspiracy That Could Swing the Election; A perfect storm is brewing in Colorado.”
“Spoiler Alert! G.O.P. Fighting Libertarian’s Spot on the Ballot”
Front-page NYT report well worth reading.
Arizona Presidential Poll Has Two Minor Party Presidential Candidates Totaling 5% Support, More than Double the Difference Between Obama and Romney
We will see if this will hold.
“Judge: Independence Party Voters In Brooklyn Primary Got Wrong Ballots, But Election Rolls On”
The NY Daily News reports. “A big battle over a tiny election in southern Brooklyn has wrapped up without no change in the outcome — even though a judge found the city Board of Elections bungled the vote.”
“In Va., Ex-Rep. Goode May Pose Risk for Romney”
“Group running King ads in Maine includes Bloomberg”
WSJ: “A nonpartisan group that’s planning to spend $1.75 million on TV ads supporting independent Angus King in Maine’s U.S. Senate race includes New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The first of two ads sponsored by Americans Elect went into rotation on Friday.”
“Lawsuit highlights difficulty of third-party involvement in debates”
LA Times: “The participants if this year’s presidential debates are set – Republican nominee Mitt Romney will face off against President Obama in a matchup that’s been obvious for months. But there are still other presidential candidates, and one in particular is keen on elbowing his way into the debates. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson earlier this month filed a lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates, claiming that the organization’s practices violate antitrust laws and alleging collusion between the commission and the country’s two dominant political parties.”
“Maine Superior Court Rules that Nader Case Against Democratic Party Must Proceed to Trial”
The following press release arrived via email:
Decision Paves Way for Jury to Hear Claims That Democratic Party and Its Allies Unlawfully Targeted Nader-Camejo 2004 Independent Presidential Campaign in Concerted Nationwide Effort to Suppress Voter ChoiceMACHIAS, ME – Maine Superior Court Justice Kevin M. Cuddy ruled on September 20, 2012 that a lawsuit filed by consumer advocate and 2004 independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his Maine electors Christopher Droznick, Nancy Oden and Rosemary Whittaker against the Democratic Party and several of its allies must proceed to trial.Justice Cuddy’s decision follows a unanimous ruling by the Maine Supreme Judicial Court(the “Law Court”) in April, which reversed Justice Cuddy’s prior dismissal of the case pursuant to Maine’s anti-SLAPP statute, 14 M.R.S. §556. The anti-SLAPP statute allows defendants to dismiss a lawsuit if they can show the claims against them are based on constitutionally protected petitioning conduct. The Law Court’s April decision established a new standard for determining whether the anti-SLAPP statute applies.Under the new standard, Justice Cuddy ruled that the anti-SLAPP statute does not protect the defendants’ conduct in this case. “The Court is satisfied…that Plaintiffs have made a prima facie showing of both a civil conspiracy, including an ulterior motive, and the improper use of discovery and subpoenas to establish an abuse of process claim,” Justice Cuddy concluded.“Now that the initial procedural obstructions have finally been cleared, we are looking forward to having our day in court,” Nader said. “One goal of our campaign was to expose and challenge the stifling anti-democratic and anti-competitive barriers the two major parties erect against legitimate challengers in order to deny voters a free and broader choice of candidates,” Nader continued. “The evidence supporting our case is prodigious, and we look forward to proving our claims to a jury.”Originally filed in 2009, the lawsuit alleges tort claims under Maine law for civil conspiracy, abuse of process and malicious prosecution. The plaintiffs allege that Democrats orchestrated a concerted, nationwide effort to interfere with the campaign of Nader and his running mate, the late Peter Miguel Camejo, by filing 29 complaints in 19 states, including Maine, and that many of the complaints included groundless and demonstrably false allegations of fraud.According to defendant Toby Moffett, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbyist who helped recruit an estimated 95 lawyers from 53 law firms to join the effort, the purpose of the Democrats’ complaints was to “drain,” “distract” and “neutralize” the Nader-Camejo campaign, by “forcing [them] to spend money and resources defending these things.”In addition to Moffett, the lawsuit names as defendants the Maine Democratic Party, its former Chair Dorothy Melanson, the Democratic National Committee, its former Chair Terry McAuliffe, the Kerry-Edwards 2004 campaign and a Section 527 political organization Moffett headed called The Ballot Project.Justice Cuddy also rejected the defendants’ efforts to dismiss the case on jurisdictional grounds. “This Court will allow discovery to take place and make a determination as to jurisdiction over the defendants, corporate and individual, when the issue is raised again at trial,” Justice Cuddy ruled, but granted dismissal for The Ballot Project because its corporate charter had been revoked and it no longer exists.“Justice Cuddy’s decision and the Law Court’s decision before that are important steps on the road to more free and equal elections and robust democracy in the United States,” Nader said. “This case is about the right of the people – not private political parties and partisan, exclusionary elections officials – to decide who serves in public office.”“Former Governor Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and former Congressman Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party are now facing what the Nader-Camejo campaign confronted in 2004,” Nader added. “Both the Democratic and the Republican parties treat the electoral process and the voters as if they own them, and they will continue to do so until Americans of all political persuasions put a stop to it by demanding a broader choice of candidates on the ballot in each election cycle.”
“Virgil Goode campaigns for president against the odds”
“Minor candidates are main focus of federal election funding program”
Supreme Court Won’t Intervene to Put Gary Johnson on the Presidential Ballot in Michigan
Here is the order. (h/t Richard Winger)
“Jolivette out of 51st District race”
News from Ohio: “It looks like former Butler County Commissioner Greg Jolivette won’t be on the November ballot for Ohio’s 51st House District. The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati on Friday affirmed a recent district court decision that barred Jolivette from running as an independent candidate.”
“Presidential Race May Hinge on Third Party Candidates”
Bloomberg reports: “Virgil Goode, an anti-immigration southerner, and Gary Johnson, a pro-marijuana southwesterner, have little in common, save one thing: They both are seeking to shake up the American presidential race as third-party candidates. While they have no chance to win the Nov. 6 election, the tight race between President Barack Obama and Republican Mitt Romney may create the right circumstances for one of them — or both — to pull just enough votes in a key state to sway the contest.”
“Are Top Two Backers Seeking to Crush Dissent in California?”
This item appears at FairVote. See also this related amicus brief.
Libertarian Gary Johnson Polls 7% in New Mexico Poll
It will be interesting to see if this number shrinks or grows.
Will Gary Johnson’s Placement on the Ballot Help Obama or Romney?
Mr. Johnson shares some of the cross-party appeal of Representative Ron Paul of Texas, who complimented him publicly last week. Advisers said Mr. Johnson’s potential for cutting into Mr. Romney’s support was greatest in Florida, where Mr. Romney is basically tied with Mr. Obama, but could also have an impact in Arizona, Nevada, New Hampshire and North Carolina.
They said Mr. Johnson’s potential to eat into Mr. Obama’s support was greatest in Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, Oregon and Wisconsin.
Republican officials have already tried to challenge Mr. Johnson’s place on the ballot or are trying to in states including Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Many of the challenges have failed — courts recently rejected efforts to throw him off the ballot in Virginia — and Roger Stone, a Republican Party veteran who is advising Mr. Johnson, said he was optimistic that Mr. Johnson would qualify in all 50 states.
“This implies that Michigan must honor the Libertarian Party’s request to print the name of Gary E. Johnson of Austin, Texas, on the November ballot, if indeed Gary Johnson of New Mexico is not permitted to run.”
“U.S. District Court Judge Rules Against Libertarian Party Presidential Ballot Access in Michigan”
Ballot Access News reports. Johnson was three minutes too late in trying to withdraw his name from the Republican ballot.
“Virgil Goode Makes the Virginia Ballot”
Virgil Goode Makes Va. Ballot, Potentially Hurting Romney
Ben Pershing reports that further challenges may be coming. [Here is Ben's updated report. "But the Virginia GOP filed a challenge last week arguing that too many of Goode’s signatures are invalid. Republicans in Pennsylvania knocked Goode off the ballot in that state last month."]
Here’s an earlier AP report on the decision which was facing the Va. Board of Elections. And here’s Ben’s July story on whether Goode will be a spoiler.
“Third-party candidates may hurt Romney in key states”
Center for Public Integrity: “Dark-horse presidential candidates Gary Johnson and Virgil Goode may not be household names, but with a little help from super PACs, they could peel away precious support from Republican Mitt Romney and possibly even President Barack Obama in some key state races.”
“Two Iowa Voters Challenge Gary Johnson Placement on Iowa Ballot”
Ballot Access News reports.
“Virginia’s Virgil Goode: Could this Man Cost Mitt Romney the Presidency?”
TIME: “Goode is running for president on the Constitution Party ticket, and his candidacy has Republicans sweating: Goode is pulling fully 9% of Virginia’s vote, according to a mid-July Public Policy Polling survey, leaving Obama ahead of Romney 49% to 35%. In a tight election where Virginia’s 13 electoral college votes could make or break the Romney’s candidacy, even 2% for Goode could pull enough Republicans away to hand the historically red state to Obama in November.”
“Don’t believe the polls on third-party contenders”
This item appears at WaPo’s Wonkblog.
“Party Strains to Be Heard Now That Its Voice Isn’t Nader’s”
NYT on the Green Party.
Opp. Cert. Briefs in Washington State Grange II
Richard Winger has links to the briefs and commentary here.
Americans Elect Candidate: Process Flawed and Biased
Worth a read (via Richard Winger).
Will Romney Fight to Keep Gary Johnson Off the Ballot in Michigan?
“U.S. Court of Appeals Says Government Never Needs to Count Write-in Votes”
Richard Winger blogs about what he terms a “a short, thoughtless opinion in Libertarian Party v District of Columbia Board of Elections” from Judge Tatel for a unanimous D.C. Circuit panel.
“Obama and the New Party”
Remember the New Party (as in the Timmons case)? Apparently someone is trying to make the defunct group a campaign issue now.
“California’s minor parties facing extinction under new voting system”
Mercury News: “They’ve been a colorful part of California’s political landscape for decades — Greens, Libertarians, American Independents and members of the Peace and Freedom Party. But after Tuesday’s election, most of them will be all but invisible — and perhaps on their way to extinction.”
“Buddy Roemer quits 2012 race”
Politico reports.
The underreported story so far of the presidential campaign: (Where) might Gary Johnson make a difference?
“Americans Elect, promoting third-party candidates, faces internal rebellion”
Who was it who said that the people are revolting? Mel Brooks?
“Federal Judge Rules in Favor of Minor Political Parties Seeking the Opportunity to Place Their Candidates on the November Presidential Ballot”
ACLU of Southern California: “Today, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in the case of California Justice Committee, v. Bowen, prohibiting the California secretary of state from enforcing a January deadline by which new political parties must meet onerous qualification requirements in order to place their candidates on California’s November presidential ballot.”
The last part of the order gives SOS Bowen a chance to establish a new deadline—rather than the Court doing so itself.
MORE from Richard Winger.
“Why Americans Elect Crashed And Burned”
TPM reports.
“Six vying for third party run against indicted Rep. Smith”
The Chicago Sun-Times reports.
“‘Americans Elect’ Ends Online Primary After No Candidates Qualify To Run”
ABC News reports. WaPo has the group’s statement, which at least some opponents of AE thinks leaves wiggle room for something. After all, as Ken Vogel noted on Twitter, the group has a nice package of ballot access in a number of states. Richard Winger too notes the potential for the group’s ballot access use in the future.
Meanwhile Lessig responds to Lumea on neutrality and AE, something which seems pretty moot.
I expect Buddy Roemer will continue to try for the Reform Party nomination and he will continue to be a non-factor. I’d keep an eye instead on Gary Johnson.
Why did AE fail? First it is hard to build a movement around ballot access rather than a candidate. Second, despite what partisans say on both sides, Obama and Romney are close enough to the center that there is not really room for a radically different candidate in the middle.
And then there was the bad press from the group’s democracy deficit, which was a self-inflicted wound.
Ballot access for third party candidates in this country is way too hard, and AE had a good idea to get around it. But its execution did not work, especially how it tried to present itself as a publicly-driven force but a core group kept tight control of its rules and expected substantive outcomes.
Waiting Dept.
When is Tom Friedman’s column running when he explains why Americans Elect was not the next big thing?
Weigel explains what went wrong.

