Page 1 of 1
I won't be voting for Steven Colbert
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:38 pm
by themanintheseersuckersuit
Democrats deny Colbert's ballot bid
Comedian Stephen Colbert’s whimsical bid to get on the 2008 ballot for president in his home state is a bust.
The South Carolina Democratic Party's executive committee decided Thursday Colbert would not be included on the ballot.
The S.C. Democratic Presidential Primary is scheduled to be held Jan. 26.
While Colbert, political satirist and self-proclaimed favorite son did not make the ballot, little known Henry Hewes of New York did.
Colbert collected the signatures required to be on the ballot and paid a filing fee.
No word yet of a write-in campaign, or if the Democrats plan to refund Colbert his $2,500 filing fee.
Colbert, host of Comedy Central’s "Colbert Report," toyed with running for president on the S.C. Republican Party’s primary ballot, too. But he reportedly decided to pass on the Republican's $25,000 filing fee.
http://thestatecom.typepad.com/ygatoday ... eny-c.html
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:51 pm
by peacock2121
Like you would have anyway.
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:38 pm
by silvercamaro
peacock2121 wrote:Like you would have anyway.
I dunno. I can envision Colbert in a seersucker suit. If only he'd known that was the key....
Re: I won't be voting for Steven Colbert
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:27 pm
by MarleysGh0st
themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:The South Carolina Democratic Party's executive committee decided Thursday Colbert would not be included on the ballot.
Did he not collect sufficient signatures on his petitions or is this an arbitrary decision by the executive committee?
Re: I won't be voting for Steven Colbert
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:18 am
by earendel
MarleysGh0st wrote:themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:The South Carolina Democratic Party's executive committee decided Thursday Colbert would not be included on the ballot.
Did he not collect sufficient signatures on his petitions or is this an arbitrary decision by the executive committee?
It was a decision by the executive committee. I'm of two minds about this - I think he should have the right to run if he meets the requisite requirements. But BTST he is doing it for the entertainment value, not because he has a realistic shot at winning, and in so doing is making a mockery of the electoral process (some might say it's too late for that).
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:19 am
by eyégor
If you meet the requirements given to you for inclusion in a primary, you should be able to run, regardless of why you choose to run.
To exclude Colbert puts the SC Democratic primary in a category usually only occupied by sham elections in totalitarian regimes. There is no difference between this barring of a candidate and one based on the likelihood of someone defeating the executive committee's preferred candidate.
sad
Re: I won't be voting for Steven Colbert
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:21 am
by MarleysGh0st
earendel wrote:MarleysGh0st wrote:themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:
Did he not collect sufficient signatures on his petitions or is this an arbitrary decision by the executive committee?
It was a decision by the executive committee. I'm of two minds about this - I think he should have the right to run if he meets the requisite requirements. But BTST he is doing it for the entertainment value, not because he has a realistic shot at winning, and in so doing is making a mockery of the electoral process (some might say it's too late for that).
Just like the NOTA vote, comedians who run to make a point (and get a huge outpouring of popular support in the process) are part of our political system, too. How dare the executive committee reject the voice of the people?
Especially if they'll leave Henry Hewes of New York, whoever the heck he is, on the ballot...
Re: I won't be voting for Steven Colbert
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:29 am
by earendel
MarleysGh0st wrote:Especially if they'll leave Henry Hewes of New York, whoever the heck he is, on the ballot...
According to his official Web site:
http://www.henryhewes.com/about/index.htm
He was a Republican until 2004 when
his strong opposition to the war in Iraq and to the degradation of civil rights that flowed from the war on terror made it impossible for him to remain a Republican. He supports a $10 minimum wage, universal health care, and is opposed to abortion.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:12 am
by Appa23
I say three cheers for that executive committee!!!
Clearly, they are like me and really enjoy The Colbert Report, so they did not want him to have to quit the show.
He could not be a political candidate and have a national cable show.
(Meanwhile, we wonder who, if anyone, will challenge TNT showing re-runs of the Fred Thompson episodes of Law *& Order.)
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:19 am
by peacock2121
Appa23 wrote:I say three cheers for that executive committee!!!
Clearly, they are like me and really enjoy The Colbert Report, so they did not want him to have to quit the show.
He could not be a political candidate and have a national cable show.
(Meanwhile, we wonder who, if anyone, will challenge TNT showing re-runs of the Fred Thompson episodes of Law *& Order.)
tee hee
clearly
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:21 am
by TheCalvinator24
Has the Ex Council issued a statement? If I had to guess, I would say they had valid grounds to exclude him because I seriously doubt that Colbert filed all the appropriate paperwork with the FEC.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:24 am
by minimetoo26
TheCalvinator24 wrote:Has the Ex Council issued a statement? If I had to guess, I would say they had valid grounds to exclude him because I seriously doubt that Colbert filed all the appropriate paperwork with the FEC.
What I read is that it costs the party 20 grand for every name on the ballot. It makes good fiscal sense to eliminate the less-than-viable ones.
As much as I love the guy, it was a joke, and you're nowhere near viable if you only run in one state, and pick your party affiliation based on how much they charge you to file.
Jokes over. Back to the day job....
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:26 am
by PlacentiaSoccerMom
I am sure that all of the people who voted for Nader in Florida in 2000 wish that they could take back their votes.
I'm sure that people voting for Colbert would be throwing away their votes in a similar way. He isn't a viable candidate.
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:45 am
by earendel
minimetoo26 wrote:What I read is that it costs the party 20 grand for every name on the ballot. It makes good fiscal sense to eliminate the less-than-viable ones.
OK, but
Henry Hewes????