Barr Has Strategy to Win Texas

By TChris, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 01:19:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The only way for Bob Barr to win a state is to remove John McCain and Barack Obama from the ballot. Barr is giving that strategy a try in Texas.

Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party's nominee for president, has filed a lawsuit in Texas demanding Senators John McCain and Barack Obama be removed from the ballot after they missed the official filing deadline. "The seriousness of this issue is self-evident," the lawsuit states. "The hubris of the major parties has risen to such a level that they do not believe that the election laws of the State of Texas apply to them."

Barr thinks the two major party candidates missed state-imposed deadlines to be certified as their party's candidate and should therefore be removed from the Texas ballot. Neither candidate was nominated in time to be certified as the party's nominee. The likelihood that a court will allow Barr to tamper with a federal election because candidates failed to satisfy an impossible requirement of state law is not high.

< Preemption, Federalism And Legal Realism | Stupid Prosecution of the Week >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Barr Has Strategy to Win Texas | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Any truth to this rumor? (2.00 / 1) (#7)
by BrassTacks on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 12:15:41 AM EST

Several times today that Biden may step down.

Any truth here?

It would be exciting, and I agree that Biden brings little to the ticket, but would it be the best thing to do?

I'm sticking to my theory... (none / 0) (#8)
by EL seattle on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 12:28:48 AM EST

...that the American public have such a taste for media narrative that something... game changing... will happen every almost other week between now and late November. We want action, dammit! Entertain us!

And I think that there's a good chance that a car chase will be involved, somewhere, somehow, before election day. But that's just my opinion.


What rumor? (none / 0) (#10)
by flyerhawk on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 12:33:08 AM EST

The article you linked to was speculation. It didn't even reach the stage of rumor.


: Oh, sorry (none / 0) (#17)
by BrassTacks on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 03:21:50 PM EST

Maybe it's just a rumor where I live. Yesterday I heard in on the radio twice and then at a community meeting in the evening.
Sorry.

Not a legal expert, (none / 0) (#1)
by mg7505 on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:04:31 PM EST

but is Barr correct? Do the major parties miss this deadline every election?

Even if Barr got both major candidates (none / 0) (#2)
by andgarden on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:06:49 PM EST

removed, Barr would not be in the game.

McCain would likely win with write-ins, though Obama might consider whether his organization could win a write-in battle. I doubt it.

: Actually, no (none / 0) (#15)
by thefncrow on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 01:59:11 PM EST

In Texas, write-in candidates must register to have their votes counted. The registration deadline for a write-in candidate is the same deadline that Barr contends that both parties missed.
If they're not on the ballot, they're also not registered write-in candidates, and any write-in votes they receive would not be counted.
If Barr got his way, which I really, really don't see happening(even if he's right), the Presidential contest would not include either Obama or McCain.

Yikes! (none / 0) (#3)
by EL seattle on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:11:49 PM EST

I can understand having laws to regulate things, but how can individual states even try bothering to have laws like this? (And how many other states have them, I wonder?)

It's like there being a state law that says "All cherry trees will blossom between March 15th and March 30th".

both Major (none / 0) (#4)
by TruthMatters on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:33:25 PM EST

parties I think secure places for their candidates even before they have em.

yeah this keeps popping up from time to time, but no in the end they will be on the ballot

you can find the daily kos diary on it though if your curious

If I remember right (none / 0) (#5)
by s5 on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:44:37 PM EST

There's no merit to the argument. The candidates submit a filing with some kind of placeholder for the VP that they can fill in later. That and the obvious harm and confusion that would result from removing the candidates from the ballot.

But let's say Barr was successful and he won Texas. Do third parties really want the reputation of stealing elections? I can't imagine it would make him very popular with the voters of Texas.

: Stealing elections worked for Obama (none / 0) (#16)
by VicfromOregon on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 02:03:58 PM EST

in Chicago getting his competition disqualified for things like people printing their name in place of their signature on pre-election candidate petitions. This strategy made it possible for him run unopposed. So, maybe it will work for Barr.

Heh. Best of luck to you, Bob Barr. (none / 0) (#6)
by Pegasus on Thu Sep 18, 2008 at 11:45:16 PM EST

In this an all your other endeavors this year.

Funny thing is.... (none / 0) (#9)
by Key on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 12:29:07 AM EST

Obama won his seat (to the IL state legislature) by challenging the legality of the others on the ticket. He got them knocked off.

Now, as a person living in Texas, I most certainly want the right to vote for Obama in November. But it is ironic, no?

Oh, and here in TX, we have a pretty good chance of reclaiming the Texas house. We need to win 5 seats and it's looking like we might be able to do that - just in time for the next census and redistricting. You might remember what happened when the Republican's won control and played games with the district maps... Supreme court ended up having some problems with it, ordered a redraw of one area, and the end result was that Texas elected another Democrat to the U.S. House.

: Even if Dems pick up the State House, (none / 0) (#11)
by andgarden on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 12:36:56 AM EST

I expect them to make a trade: Make the current Democrats safe (especially Lampson if he wins and, to the degree possible, Chet Edwards), draw a new Latino district or two, and give the likely other two new seats to the Republicans. If the Republicans control the map, They will once again try to remove Edwards and Lampson, and draw 2-3 Hispanic districts plus 1-2 districts (depending on how many new seats are apportioned).

unfortunately, this is how our (none / 0) (#12)
by cpinva on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 04:54:52 AM EST

constitution mandates that national elections be run. congress decides the when, the individual states decide the how and where. that's also why each state has its own voting methods, machines, etc.

a constitutional amendment i could get behind would require uniformity of rules and physical voting methods, for all 50 states.

i doubt it would have much chance, since that flag burning amendment is so much more compelling.

i wonder if republicans will adhere to rule of law (none / 0) (#13)
by Jlvngstn on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 08:21:36 AM EST

and help Bob in his fight?

Too bad (none / 0) (#14)
by rdandrea on Fri Sep 19, 2008 at 11:08:07 AM EST

Take Texas' electoral votes away from McCain, and Obama wins big.