Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 221 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Buddy Roemer Won’t Be the Arithmetic President

One of Buddy Roemer’s latest tweets sounds fairly optimistic for a presidential candidate who has been working to get people to vote for him on Americans Elect for three months and who has less than a month to go:

Buddy Roemer Tweets: Only 25 days left to get 10K supporters on @AmericansElect - I'm 1/3 of the way there. Need your help, America!

Thing is, Buddy Roemer’s not actually “1/3 of the way there,” because to get on the Americans Elect ballot he doesn’t need to just get 10,000 votes of support. He needs to get 10,000 votes of support by getting at least 1,000 votes in each of 10 states (see the rules). Votes outside those top 10 states don’t count. This is Buddy Roemer’s current level of support from his top 10 states at Americans Elect:

Votes of Support for Buddy Roemer on Americans Elect as of April 18 2012

Those top 10 states represent just 1743 votes, and those are the only votes that count toward his ballot access. If you don’t live in California, Texas, New York, Louisiana, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Ohio or Washington, then you really can’t help Buddy Roemer out. Sorry, but that’s just how Americans Elect’s system works. Roemer’s only 1/6 of the way there, not 1/3 of the way there.

Is Roemer on a pace to make it onto the ballot? Let’s compare his vote total now to his vote total at the beginning of this month:

Buddy Roemer had 1743 votes in the Americans Elect ballot access system on April 1 2012

On April Fool’s Day, Buddy Roemer had accumulated 1304 votes in his top 10 states. This month, Roemer’s only gotten 25 votes a day in the 10 states that count. On that pace, Buddy Roemer won’t qualify for the Americans Elect 2012 nomination ballot until March 2013.

3 comments to Buddy Roemer Won’t Be the Arithmetic President

  • NobodyAskedMe...But

    Buddy Roemer’s problem is not an inability to do arithmetic. It is an unwillingness to accept any negative truth. He fabricates false statements of fact. This is a character flaw that has been his signature political style for decades.

    Many things he says about his past are false. See this web page where he obtained a reputation in Louisiana as a “consummate liar.” http://www.first-draft.com/2011/09/rubberband-man.html

    This political journalist on the leading New Orleans newspaper jibes Buddy for creating a fantasy description of himself and his campaign:
    http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2011/03/who_is_this_man_former_louisia.html

    He lies about the reason he was not invited to any debate. He fabricates a conspiracy theory that the Republican party excluded him. Not true. The debates were run by the networks and they set the rules, not the Republican party. The networks announced that the candidates must have received only 1% at least on several national polls (as the debates went on, they increased the thresholds). This was the same type of minimum standard that has been used since the 1960′s. The networks do not allow candidates who are not serious contenders to crowd the podium and detract from the real contenders, and this is a fair and objective way to qualify only the serious contenders. Buddy falsely claims he had 4% or 5% on national polls and they still would not let him on. The truth is that he never received anything close to 1% on any national poll. He was not in any debates because he did not meet the reasonable minimum standards. If he had 4%, as he falsely claims, he would have been on all the debates.

    He lies when he says he balanced the budget of Louisiana during his one term as governor. False. He ran out of money and had to borrow to pay the expenses, issuing government bonds to place the deficit burden on future administrations. He held up state payroll checks at the end of the year so the checks would be paid out of the money for the subsequent year. Balancing the budget each year means that the government does not spend more than the revenue it takes in that year (taxes, fines, fees). If the government has to borrow money to meet its expenses, so that future governments and taxpayers will be stuck with the bill, that is not balancing the budget. It is called deficit spending.

    He lies when he says that he has always campaigned with a $100 limit and never taken big donations or PAC money. His very wealthy family financed his Congressional campaigns. In 1991, when he was running for re-election after a failed term as Louisiana governor, he was unable to raise enough money and he was behind in the polls, so he switched from the Democrat party to the Republican party because the Republican party promised to finance his campaign. (It did not work. He came in third, 70,000 votes behind David Duke.) See this webpage: “The White House hopeful who lost to the Klansman” http://www.salon.com/2011/03/03/roemer_duke_president/

    Roemer now gives a false story as to why he switched parties in 1991. He claims he switched from Democrat to Republican because Louisiana was only a one-party, Democrat, state. He says he wanted to make Louisiana a two-party state. He claims he did it for the good of the people. This is a lie. It was already a two-party state and previously had a Republican governor (Treen 1980-1984). He did it for the large Republican party financing.

    Again in 1995 he tried to win re-election in a “lavishly financed” campaign. See this excellent history of Louisiana’s governors, pages 259-268:
    http://books.google.com/books?id=Y-0-kmu4vk0C&pg=PA259&lpg=PA259&dq=%22Often+wrong,%22+Roemer&source=bl&ots=GXt38E_jVv&sig=poXJMn9QbCUESjDIP2-foOb3YLY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n-xjT7CXDOORiQL8n_SiDw&ved=0CGMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=%22Often%20wrong%2C%20but%20never%20in%20doubt%22%20Roemer&f=false

    Like he did in 1991, when his campaign is floundering, he switches parties hoping to grab big money financing. Having failed as a contender for the Republican nomination, Roemer has switched to Americans Elect, seeking to use its $20 – $30 million financed by unknown donors to revive his campaign.

    He lies when he says he built a “billion dollar bank.” Sometimes he says $750 million. Sometimes he says “almost a billion.” He says whatever pops into his head that sounds good. He has been the figurehead for a bank that has assets of $654 million with a troubled asset ratio that exceeds the national median for banks: http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/louisiana/baton-rouge/business-first-bank/

    Roemer’s past is so heavily tainted with mendacity and failure, it is unlikely that Americans Elect will select him as its nominee. But without any candidate who has high political stature willing to accept its nomination, and with Buddy’s buddies Lessig and McKinnon on the AE board, perhaps the fix is in and we will see some unusual, fantastic acceleration in his AE supporter votes.

    • Joshua

      I am not here to defend Roemer or anything like that, but you can see a lot of national polls for the Republican nomination at Polling Report and more Polling Report. Many of those polls did not even include Roemer as a choice. Furthermore, he did occasionally poll at 1% and even 2%, occasionally tying with candidates who were allowed into the debates.

      • Nobody Asked Me...But,

        Thank you, Joshua, for finding that website that showed so many polling results. I had searched the internet and did not know about it, using Real Clear Politics as my primary source for polling information.

        Apparently, during the entire year of 2011, among many dozens of polls, he did poll 1% on three isolated polls and 2% on one other. Those results were well less than the margin of error in the polls, so they were statistically weak. For that reason, the networks required at least 1% average in several polls. Buddy Roemer’s scant isolated marks did not meet the minimum requirements.

        The only candidate who was allowed in the debates who polled near the bottom was Huntsman. But, unlike Buddy, he was polling over 1% in many polls, thereby meeting the minimum qualifications where Buddy did not. Eventually, as the threshold rose as the year progressed, Hunstman also fell below the bar and was excluded.

        Although I was incorrect to say that Buddy never polled close to 1%, it is still true that he was excluded because he did not meet the minimum reasonable standards and that he was not telling the truth when he claimed that he received 4% or 5% in the polls.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>