Tag Archives: independents

New Data: Libertarian Party Registrations Rising

According to a recent Gallup poll and a report from Ballot Access News, the libertarian movement is not only gaining in popularity but is adding new members to the Libertarian Party. In fact, recent data shows that the it’s becoming the fastest growing party in the United States.

According to Cato‘s David Boaz, the number of people who identify as libertarian is increasing in the US according to the Gallup Poll’s 2015 survey. The results show that “27 percent of respondents can be characterized as libertarians, the highest number they have ever found,” as more people are identifying as libertarian than conservative, liberal or populist.

Graphic from Reason.com.

According to the March 1, 2016 Ballot Access News publication, Democrat Party registrations declined between Oct. 2014 and Feb. 2016. The same occurred among Republicans, Independents, The Green and Constitution Party.  The only party that gained registrations is the Libertarian Party (See chart below on page 3. The chart shows the states in which people register by party).

Ballot Access News’ Richard Winger told Truth In Media’s Joshua Cook, “Even though it’s still small, the Libertarian Party registration has increased percentage wise in the last year and a half more than the number of Independents and you will not find the media mentioning that.”

Carla Howell, political director of the national Libertarian Party, told Cook that she is seeing a spike in Libertarian Party registration.

“I can tell you what we have seen for several years now is consistent growth in the Libertarian Party registration in states where you can register to vote by party and a decline in other parties,” said Howell.

Sean Haugh, a North Carolina Libertarian candidate for the US Senate, told Cook his thoughts on the rise of the Libertarian Party.

Cook asked Haugh, “It seems ballot access was an issue in the past for Libertarians, but is the new issue now getting on the debate stage in general elections?”

“For Libertarians in North Carolina, yes,” said Haugh. “We’ve reached the point where we can easily attain the 2 percent we need to stay on the ballot. The next goal is 15 percent to ensure debate access. Still, other candidates have to agree to debate. The signs I’m seeing indicate my opponents this time may avoid debates under any circumstances. I have long felt that once we get to 15 percent, the next step is 51 percent.”

Haugh added, “It’s very gratifying, having been here all this time and seeing Libertarian ideas become mainstream. I’ve been saying the same things for over 30 years, and now I’m the sane, common sense candidate, no longer some fringe radical. It’s nice.”

In July 2015, the Truth in Media Project released a Consider This video, seen below, revealing that Independents and third party voters together are now outnumbering Democrats and Republicans.

Republicans and Democrats are no longer the majority.Learn more: http://bit.ly/1Kdbdqm

Posted by Ben Swann on Saturday, July 18, 2015

Ariz. Sec. of State Calls for End to Taxpayer-Funded Presidential Primaries

Republican Arizona Secretary of State Michelle Reagan is reportedly working with legislators on a bill that would end taxpayer funding of presidential primaries in the state.

According to The Associated Press, Sec. Reagan’s elections director Eric Spencer said that ending taxpayer-funded primaries would save the state $10 million. He also argued that the legislation is necessary because independent voters are required to fund the Democratic and Republican parties’ primary contests but are not allowed to participate in them.

[RELATED: DONEGAN: If GOP Debate Stage Can Fit 11, Let Third Parties In General Election Debates]

Spencer told The Arizona Capitol Times, “We want to return this to the political parties to run. And we believe that that’s a core function of a political party, to vet their nominees.

The Arizona State Legislature slashed the Sec. of State’s budget by $6 million in 2015 to apply it to the upcoming presidential primary election.

The Arizona Republic’s Laurie Roberts wrote, “Adding to reasons why the GOP and Democrats don’t need party welfare? Fully a third of Arizona’s voters can’t even participate in the presidential primaries. Independents now comprise the largest and fastest growing voting bloc in the state yet they can’t vote in a presidential primary. They are, however, expected to pick up a share of the tab.

[RELATED: Commission on Presidential Debates Preps for Possible Third-Party in 2016 Debates]

Inevitably, [ending taxpayer funding of primary elections] would mean there would be caucuses instead of presidential primaries in Arizona, because the parties could not afford to administer presidential primaries on their own,” said Ballot Access News’ Richard Winger, an election law expert.

In July of last year, the Truth in Media Project released a Consider This video highlighting the fact that independent voters now outnumber those who identify as Republicans and Democrats. Watch it in the below-embedded video player.


Gaming the Public: The Parties’ Dirty Secret About Corruption in Politics

By Steve Hunyar – Republican and Democratic politicians alike hold one dirty strategy close to the vest when it comes to the majority of the funds they receive throughout their political campaigns and their terms in office.

Many Republicans are fond of pointing fingers at political corruption in the Democratic ranks when public and private unions contribute lobbying dollars in overwhelming numbers to Democrats. We hear the usual litany of comments trying to convince Americans that Democratic politicians are in the pockets of the unions and their leaders.

Many Democrats are equally fond of pointing fingers at political corruption in the GOP ranks which stems from corporate lobbying dollars. We get their incessant comments trying to convince Americans that Republican politicians are in the pockets of the corporations and their boards.

Lots of postured finger points — even more money changing hands.

And many partisan Americans on both sides, left and right, lap it up and play right into the strategy. Incessant claims of corruption. Ad nauseam assertions of influence peddling. Right versus left. Democrats hating Republicans and vice versa. Chest puffery; fist slamming bravado.

Erstwhile, the politicians laugh all the way to the bank as their ‘divide and conquer’ strategy works to near perfection and it’s continued business as usual. For continued favors to their lobbying benefactors, the money pours voluminously into their campaign coffers.

In occasional grand schemes of contrition, policymakers pass laws to make it seem like they are equally angered by the financial manipulation — claiming that most of their colleagues are accepting these legal bribes, but never them. And these laws, such as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold), are eventually found to be unconstitutional and are overturned. Back to business as usual. Ah, but they look good trying to make it seem like they are fighting the corruption.

[pull_quote_right]Without the politicians standing there with their palms extended outward and upward, there would be no lobbying.[/pull_quote_right]

For all of the grandstanding and posturing, there is one simple truth. It is the politicians that are creating the demand for the supply.

We can blame anything and everything. However, without the politicians standing there with their palms extended outward and upward, there would be no lobbying, no lobbying dollars, and no influence peddling. Unions and corporations would not allocate lobbying dollars, if not for the greed and corruption of the politicians themselves.

Lobbyists and the entire lobbying industry would be sunsetted if politicians simply agreed to not fund their campaigns with monies other than directly from the public. The problem is no politician, nor candidate with political aspirations, wants to risk losing for a lack of funding, so it’s business-as-usual.

At a time when America has become inestimably divided, this is a rallying cry most would support.

We need a new breed of independent candidates who are willing to lead the charge and disregard any group that is eager to finance their run for office; candidates and politicians who do not rely on any special interest group other than the individual constituents they serve.

In today’s technological era, candidates use social media to easily reach out beyond the confines of their voting precincts and collect from anyone in the U.S. that wishes to contribute. They could also easily limit the amounts they receive from individuals – regardless of laws – putting purity back into their campaigns.

If they owe no one, they can vote their conscience and truly represent their voters. Politics would be radically overhauled on every level.

Alas, this will never happen as long as We the People do not demand it. As long as We the People do not recognize this divide and conquer strategy, we will never collectively see through the fog of division and derision, and demand real change.

If you take anything from my thesis, please understand the current quid pro quo politics would not exist if not for the contemptible corruption and greed of the politicians themselves. Blaming the unions and the corporations for attempting to influence politicians is a waste of time and a fabricated distraction.

We are being played.



Republished with permission from IVN.

DONEGAN: If GOP Debate Stage Can Fit 11, Let Third Parties In General Election Debates

Wednesday’s prime-time CNN Republican presidential debate featuring 11 candidates was the “most watched” program in the news network’s history. According to CNN, an average of 22.9 million viewers tuned in and heard Republican presidential candidates debating the issues.

Meanwhile, based on claims that doing otherwise would overload the general election stage with too many candidates, the Commission on Presidential Debates’ rule requiring third-party candidates to garner a minimum of 15 percent support in five major nationwide polls prior to being included in a general election presidential debate effectively and pointlessly excludes the one or two third-party candidates each cycle who manage to achieve ballot access in enough states to have the possibility of winning the presidency. Obtaining ballot access is a Herculean challenge for independents as is, but only a candidate with extreme wealth like Ross Perot or Donald Trump could afford to purchase the amount of advertising necessary to achieve 15 percent in nationwide opinion polls without having the initial exposure of appearing in televised presidential debates.

Ballot Access News’ Richard Winger, an election law expert, wrote after Wednesday’s debate, “It is now as clear as anything that a debate with a large number of candidates can be successful. After tonight, there simply is no coherent argument for general election debates that only include the two major party nominees.

For those who fear that including all ballot-qualified presidential candidates in general election debates will result in a chaotic melee, Winger points out, “In all U.S. history, there has never been a presidential election in which more than seven candidates had enough presidential elector candidates to theoretically win the election.

[RELATED: Commission on Presidential Debates Considers Ditching 15% Rule for Third Party Candidates]

While Winger’s analysis shows that even in worst-case scenarios a larger debate field could be managed, looking back at 2012’s presidential election, if all ballot-qualified candidates had been included, the debates would have only featured four candidates: Green Party candidate Jill Stein, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson, Republican Party candidate Mitt Romney, and Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama.

Currently, basing general election debate participation on the ability to obtain ballot access would likely allow Americans to hear a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and Green candidate, four parties that encompass a broad range of ideological views in U.S. politics.

On the other hand, limiting the debates to only those candidates who have obtained at least 15 percent in five nationwide opinion polls has frozen third parties out of general election presidential debates and effectively created a two-party duopoly, disenfranchising independent voters and dimming Americans’ confidence in their political system.

The Commission on Presidential Debates should consider Winger’s analysis and accept the reality that it will always be possible to put together a coherent general election presidential debate featuring all of the candidates from parties organized well enough to achieve ballot access in enough states to where it is mathematically possible for them to obtain the 270 electoral votes required to become president.

The Republicans and Democrats in charge of the Commission on Presidential Debates can no longer claim that four candidates is too many when their own primary debates feature many more. It is time to change the rule and let voters hear from all of the small number of candidates each cycle who qualify under the law to potentially win the presidency.

For context, the Truth in Media Project recently released a Consider This video highlighting the fact that independent voters now outnumber Republicans and Democrats. Watch it in the below-embedded video player.


For more 2016 election coverage, click here.

Poll: Independents Will Soon Outnumber Republicans and Democrats Combined

By Jane Susskind (IVN) – A recent NBC poll confirms that the partisan political environment is, in fact, taking a toll on the two major parties, with voter registration revealing that self-identified independents are the fastest growing voting bloc in America.
NBC commentators coin it “the rise of an ‘independents’ era,” reporting that in 2014 the number of people self-identifying as independent was at 39 percent, passing that of Democrats (32 percent) and Republicans (23 percent).

[bctt tweet=”45% of voters now self-identify as independent #election @chucktodd”]

As of June 2015, the number of self-identifying independents has grown to 45 percent — just 2 points shy of the number of Democrats and Republicans COMBINED.

“The largest political party in the United States in no longer a party at all,” NBC commentator Chuck Todd reports.

“In the 31 states plus the District of Columbia where voters have to pick a party when registering to vote, unaffiliated or no party voters are now the leading political party in 12 of those state, and in a few of them, they are the majority of all registered voters.” – Chuck Todd, NBC News

In Florida, a major 2016 battleground state, the number of independent voters has grown by one million voters in the last 10 years. Democrats have only seen an increase of 300,000 voters, and Republicans lag with just 200,000 additional voters in the same time period.

What does this mean for 2016? Candidates will have to start listening to the nation’s increasingly independent-minded electorate if they want to distinguish themselves. The only issue is, do they know how?

For more election coverage click here.