independentsforkerry.org

In a press release sent to Green Party Watch, the Green Party of the United States endorsed plans to engage in a long term protest in Washington DC. Echoing the call from October2011.org, the press release quotes Sanda Everette of California.
“In making this endorsement, we’re challenging the dangerous political direction of the US. [...]
Green Party Watch

Nurses from across the U.S. will stand up to Wall Street on Wednesday, June 22 to demand the high rollers in the finance capital of the world pay to rebuild the economy of a nation they have done so much … Continue reading →
republican-elephant.com

According to the blog of Dr. Tom Stevens:

On November 23, 2010, Alden Link, the Libertarian Party’s Candidate for Lt. Governor of New York State in 2010, resigned his membership in the Manhattan Libertarian Party in protest to the way it and the New York Libertarian Party has treated Libertarian Party of Queens County members Sam Sloan and Dr. Tom Stevens.

In an e-mail to Mark Axinn, New York Libertarian Party Chair and Manhattan Libertarian Party Secretary/Treasurer, Alden Link wrote the following:

I am saddened by the dispute between the LPQC and the MLP, with Tom Stevens and Sam Sloan in particular being victimized by the NYLP and MLP.

I feel my continued membership in the MLP is not in my best interests or that of the LPQC. Therefore, I hereby tender my resignation from the Manhattan Libertarian Party.

Should the two groups reconcile their differences with apologies to Tom and Sam, I would certainly reconsider this decision.

Dr. Tom Stevens, LPQC Political Director, responded as follows:

I appreciate Alden Link ending his association with the Manhattan Libertarian Party. The MLP’s County Committee declared war on the Queens LP by asking its Political Director to resign his membership and by suspending the membership of Sam Sloan, a prominent LPQC member, who was unanimously elected by the MLP membership to be its State Representative. In addition to that, Mark Axinn, as NYLP Chair, spoke in favor of forming a Special Committee to investigate charges against John Procida, the former LPQC Chair, as a prelude to taking action to suspend Procida’s State Party membership, as was just done to former LPQC State Representative Dr. Tom Stevens, and LPQC member Sam Sloan, who the LPQC endorsed as its candidate for governor.

Mark Axinn believes the insults and injuries to the LPQC can just be swept under the rug and that by taking no further aggressive actions against the Queens LP leadership, that all will simply be forgiven. This will not happen!

I can confidently say the Libertarian Party of Queens County seeks peaceful, friendly relations with the Manhattan Libertarian Party. All that is required to restore good relations is an apology to Sam Sloan and myself with an invitation extended to us to rejoin the Manhattan Libertarian Party.

Mark Axinn and the County Committee of the Manhattan Libertarian Party created this situation and it is within their power to resolve it. However, without justice, there can and will be no peace!

Independent Political Report

Thomas Sipos writes at Libertarian Peacenik:

Third parties often fantasize that their vote totals are the tip of the iceberg. That for every vote they receive, there’s a large pool of Silent Supporters who would vote for them, but that these Silent Supporters don’t want to waste their vote on a third party that can’t win.

This long-discussed theory is known as the Wasted Vote Syndrome.

It goes like this: A Libertarian Silent Supporter (LSS) prefers the LP candidate, but because the LP can’t win, the LSS votes for the “lesser evil” Republican to prevent the Democrat from winning. Likewise, the Green Silent Supporter prefers the GP candidate, but votes for the “lesser evil” Democrat to keep the Republican from winning.

Caveat: Some libertarians believe the LP has an equal number of supporters among both Republican and Democratic voters. But that doesn’t affect the Wasted Vote Syndrome theory; you still have LSS voters choosing a major party over the LP.

But just how many votes does the Wasted Vote Syndrome cost third parties? I don’t deny that some people vote for a major party, though they prefer a third party, because they don’t want to waste their vote on a third party that can’t win.

Yet there’s a countervailing force at work here. Let’s call it the Safe Protest Vote Syndrome.

I suspect that some people vote for a third party precisely because third parties can’t win. Some voters may feel anger at the system as a whole, or disgust with both major parties, or simply be in a generally nihilistic mood at the time — so they vote for a third party that they also hate, as a form of protest. They may feel that voting for an obnoxious third party is a safe way of “giving the finger” to the system. Safe, because there’s no chance the third party can win.

Third parties like to imagine that while the major parties attract many votes from people who can’t stand them, that every vote for a third party comes from an enthusiastic supporter.

I don’t think that’s true.

Should a third party start to grow, it may attract new voters who previously feared wasting their vote — but I suspect they will also lose votes from people who no longer think it’s safe to vote for that party, because now there’s a danger that they might actually win.

I wonder how much the Wasted Vote Syndrome hurts third parties — and I also wonder how much the Safe Protest Vote Syndrome helps third parties?

Independent Political Report