Blackwell Campaign Blatantly Lies About Peirce

I figure the HoT readers will get a kick out of us catching these morons from the Blackwell campaign in the act at the Cincinnati debate rally:

On a side note that’s just funny, while we were driving down to Cinci from Cleveland, we happened to get passed by one of Blackwell’s SUVs carrying what looked like his campaign manager. We paced them for long enough for me to lean towards the window and flap my arms like a chicken. The next thing I know, they actually were stupid enough to pull behind us and turn on the flashing blue lights (who knew the Secretary of State had such perks?). Of course, they quickly turned them off and sped past us while glaring out their windows. I think the multiple Peirce stickers might have been a clue that abuse of power would have been a really stupid idea.

Stephen VanDyke

I've published HoT along with about 300+ friends since 2002. We're all Americans who are snarky and love our country. I'm a libertarian that registered Republican because I like to win elections. That's pretty much it.

  1. More publicity for Peirce might be in Blackwell’s favor, then. Maybe someone could point that out to his campaign.

  2. Doug Craig: Web only here, just creating our own videos to share online (it’s effective).

    We have a 30 second spot in post-production that we’ll be putting online to try and raise some funds for (for the XXXXXXXX can’t divulge but libertarians always say advertise there spot on cable). We have some 30 second radio spots that are being made on the cheap and we might fund raise for in conjunction with the TV ad, and we have 18 billboards up across the state that we haven’t had the time to put out a press release on yet.

    So yeah, we’re doing ads like a mofo, but we’re slammed because this is that time in campaign season where I wish I had a couple clones.

  3. Derrick: We’re thinking the typical voting Republican is seeing Blackwell so weak right now they are probably foaming at the mouth for a strong 3rd party break-away like Peirce.

    Remember that a huge chunk of them wanted Petro to win the primary anyways, so they aren’t going to feel terribly bad walking away from a losing Blackwell now.

  4. FYI, those first couple spots where you display the text should last a few seconds longer (especially the second one). It’s hard to read the entire message before it disappears.

  5. Stephen, you guys are doing a great job, and Peirce is a great candidate who would make a fantastic Governor. Keep plugging away and don’t give up. If you can get just a little bit of traction things could really snowball overnight.

  6. Robert Mayer: Once it hits YouTube, it’s pretty much final because of the way their uploading works :(

    Anyways, it was just a quickie to pass around. I’m still pretty new at making videos, so I’ll take a mulligan on this one :)

    The really good video is going to be the debate stuff, Bill is actually a very well-spoken debater even considering his competition for attention was the very-loud Fitrakis (IMO he was over the top and a tad shrill” which works well for Bill in a side-by-side comparison).

  7. Derrick: At the bare minimum, I’m banking on us getting the 5% needed for party status (we’ll get a lot of break-away votes if Blackwell’s poll numbers stay in the dumps).

    If we can get that, we’ll free up a lot of time from petitioning for candidates, and put that toward getting some ballot initiatives going like Instant Runoff Voting and reverting Ohio to a paper ballot (both have overwhelming public support).

  8. And for any one curious, Peirce is the second Libertarian candidate for Ohio governor ever, and the last one was 24 years ago. There’s very little party support structure here, but I’m not about to let the LPO hang up the gloves November 8th.

    The last thing we should be doing after the election is hanging our heads down and walking away again. It’s time we started mimicking the perpetual campaign machines in order to better compete with them.

  9. At the bare minimum, I’m banking on us getting the 5% needed for party status….

    I’m just curious: here in Massachusetts, some activists believe major party status is noxious because it means that Libertarian candidates can only use signatures by registered Libertarians or by unenrolled voters to get on the ballot. So in other words, being a major party makes it harder to get anyone on the ballot.

    Is that true anywhere in the other 49, or is that ust our little oddity?

  10. 1. Show up at debate.
    2. Kick in doors.(or open gently if you’re in the mood)
    3. Take stage with followers.
    4. Denounce affair for the fraud it is, in front of cameras.
    5. Leave.

  11. Derrick,Stephen, when Peirce makes 5%, the LP will still be screwed, as he’s an “other party” candidate. Will their support of him actually count for anything legally?

  12. It would sure grab some attention if the chickens managed to run in and disrupt the debate. I’d be a chicken and go to jail for that.

  13. Great work, Stephen!

    I wonder what the effect of a POST election TV/radio ad would be? IE, “Yeah, you voted for Blackwell/Democrat and wasted your vote because your going to get screwed anyway. Had you voted for Bill Peirce, blah blah blah would be happening right now instead of blah blah.”

  14. Equal Opportunity Cynic and Jeffrey Quick: I’m not up to date on the nuances of any pitfalls tht party status brings us in Ohio. That said, I’ll take every inch I can get from them, however small, because we need to practice what we preach and have the long-term vision for getting to where we need to be in order to have some political clout (that includes putting our party name next to our candidates on the ballot).

    As the next step beyond this year, I’m hoping we can nationalize a ballot initiative for the 2007 elections for Instant Runoff Voting (and a return to paper ballots where feasible). If we can neuter the wasted vote syndrome (and capitalize off the press in leading this effort), our ability to win elections will begin to take shape. We lead the way and the other third parties will easily fall in line for petitioning this effort.

    2006 is going to prove that running competitive campaigns (even financially) with competent candidates is not getting us anywhere and is burning out our brightest and best activists.

  15. If Pierce isn’t on the ballot as a Libertarian (which seems to be what Jeffrey Quick is saying) then he could get 100% of the vote and still not give the LP any official status. If you’re working on the campaign, Mr. VanDyke, I would think this would be an important thing to understand.

    Bill Pierce is probably the best Libertarian candidate going in the United States right now. Thank you for working on his campaign.

  16. Nationalize a referendum? I don’t think there is any means to do so. And besides, only one election is extra-state; that being the presidency. IRV would wreak havoc on the Electoral COllege anyway – it’s pretty much not applicable. Focus on getting IRV in Ohio. Every other state can do the same.

  17. Nationalize the referendum the way the eminent domain people did (Dondero, where you at with the stats on how many states have this on the ballot dude?).

    Organize nationally for 50 ballot revolutions.

  18. Stephen, don’t quote me on this, but I believe the Property Rights/Anti-Eminent Domain Initiative is qualified in 6 states. Montana – semi-qualified, Washington State, Oregon, Nebraska, and Arizona. I’m about 70 to 80% certain of this. I could be wrong on one or two.

    There’s something on the Florida ballot too, I believe?

    I know we got kicked off in Missouri, and Oklahoma.

  19. Hey Dondero. I assume it was a liberal cabal that hatched the plot to expand eminant domain. After all, you know how much liberals love Wal-Mart. They just want to take property from poor farmers and give it to corporations. This is what socialism is all about!

  20. Here’s another thought about getting coverage for Peirce and other candidates. Instead of trying to score home runs with larger media outlets, how about instead focusing on getting as much coverage as possible from smaller ones?

    In other words, instead of trying to get the Cincinnati Enquirer to write a story, how about instead hitting up 10 local papers in small/midsize towns? A phone call along the lines of “Our gubernatorial candidate will be in your town on Oct 10. Can we schedule an interview?” would get a better response from a 15K-circulation paper than a 200K one. I know my local newspaper would be happy to do a story on an LP gubernatorial candidate.

    This is analagous to the ‘bottom up’ strategy of getting libertarians elected first to local offices and state legislatures, and then using that foundation for Congressional runs. In this case, though, you’d get 100 stories from local papers, and then use the buzz from those to land one story in a big paper.

  21. I like that idea, Derrick.

    I also think it is a good idea for excluded candidates to debate one another. Others disagree.

  22. I didn’t want to pee in anyone’s Wheaties about the ballot access issue. But experience has proven that if you aren’t twice as parnoid as TPTB, they will cut you off at the knees.

    Yes, IRV would mess with the Electoral college, if it’s winner-take-all within the state. The winning candidate in the EC needs to have a majority of all votes, else it goes to the House. In an IRV system you’d presumably have more than 2 candidates winning states, so you’d have plurality winners.

    As for chickens disrupting the debate: Communists do that sort of thing, not us. See the recent riot at Columbia University re the Minutemen.

  23. The winning candidate in the EC needs to have a majority of all votes, else it goes to the House.

    Actually I don’t think IRV (or any multi-party reform) would overturn things that quickly. You might see third parties start polling at 10 or 20% first choice, given the disappearance of the wasted vote syndrome. The Republocrats would still win the lion’s share in the short-term, but Libertarians and others would have a platform to build on because the polls would show the true level of their support.

    But once things really did get multiparty, the public would probably build consensus behind doing away with the Electoral College. As much as I love the Framers, the EC is really an anachronism.

  24. I was thinking about the EC two days ago. I think that what needs to happen is the Senate again be elected by state legislatures, rather than popularly. After that and either preference or IRV voting systems were adopted, then it might be appropriate or even advantageous to abolish the EC. It was devised as a means of separation of powers, giving the states an indirect say or influence alongside the people. Otherwise, the states have absolutely no representation at all within the Presidental election. And all us smart libertarians do know the dangers and evil of democracy, do we not? Unless of course the Federal Government is supposedly spreading the damned stuff all over. The stuff the Federal Government is really spreading most however, is terrorism and DU.

  25. Yeah, but think it through Mr. Quick. You’d have IRV to get the EC votes, and then IRV in the EC… That’s a mess! The winner would NOT necessarily be the preferred candidate. And besides EC electors can do whatever they want, anyway. Who’s to say that they’d go along with IRV, especially when it would produce fucked up results, guaranteed.

  26. We do need a healthy dose of proportional representation in our voting, but it would be much easier done at the state legislature and house of representative level than at the Presidential level where even abolishing the EC it is still a winner take all election. It would be helpful in the presidential and senatorial elections to possibly get rid of the “better of two evils syndrome” but ulitimately many people will still not be represented because only one person is getting elected. However, in the state legislature and the House a proportional representation system could do wonders for ensuring that most everyone is represented and that would most likely include getting many libertarians elected to these offices.

  27. As the next step beyond this year, I’m hoping we can nationalize a ballot initiative for the 2007 elections for Instant Runoff Voting (and a return to paper ballots where feasible). If we can neuter the wasted vote syndrome (and capitalize off the press in leading this effort), our ability to win elections will begin to take shape. We lead the way and the other third parties will easily fall in line for petitioning this effort.

    Great idea in principle, but if you look at how many signatures it takes to actually get initiatives on the ballot in all the initiative states and the advertising it would take to pass – if we had that kind of money, we would already be major parties. Still, if we can pass it in an easy state or two, that would be a huge step forward.