Browse By

Last Americans Elect Gambit: to put Candidates on the Ballot despite Insufficient Support

Section 8.3 of the bylaws of Americans Elect state:

Section 8.3. Convention Votes. Votes to draft or nominate candidates shall be governed by the convention Rules as adopted by the Rules Committee and ratified by the Delegates in accordance with these Bylaws. Where these Bylaws provide for ratification by the Delegates, except on votes regarding nomination or endorsement of a particular candidate, the report of Committee shall be deemed adopted except by negative vote of a majority of all registered Delegates.

It looks like Americans Elect or people associated with it have begun a last-stage gambit to invoke Section 8.3 and change Americans Elect’s Rules in the middle of its ballot access vote, allowing candidates on the ballot even though they have failed to attract the required popular support by a wide margin.

A tip of the hat to Jack Newsham, who has e-mailed me with this screen capture of an advertisement — put out by people with “some money,” as he points out — that directs people to this page where a motion was been put underway just yesterday:

I also requested a list of rules committee members with contact information. I also messaged a copy to Christopher Arterton Facebook profile because he is listed as the co-chair of the rules committee along with Tom Sansonetti.

Each person supporting Americans Elect needs to send a copy of the motion or second the motion. We may need a 1000 people to respond to get the rules commitee to act on this motion.

I would like to make a motion recommendation for consideration of the rules committee of Americans Elect.

I would move that on May 15, 2012 if no candidate qualifies with the necessary 1000 or 5000 delegates in 10 states rule that this rule is suspended and is replaced with the rule that the top six supported candidates listed at who also have agreed to abide by the rules and spirit of the Americans Elect process be move immediately to the convention selection process and that the convention process is conducted as 5 rounds of single elimination voting where the lowest vote garner is eliminated until one candidate is selected as the Americans Elect candidate for President.

Roger Ryan

PS Please send a list of rules committee members with the appropriate contact information for each.

Of the first people signing, I am aware that William Kelleher at least has been part of the Americans Elect public relations “rapid response” team. William Cerf is a named David Walker supporter on I don’t know who the other people are.

Will this motion be used to change the rules of the Americans Elect nomination while the ballot access vote counting is already underway? Time will tell. If you’re interested in Americans Elect, keep an eye on this.

8 thoughts on “Last Americans Elect Gambit: to put Candidates on the Ballot despite Insufficient Support”

  1. Nobody Asked Me...But, says:

    Of course they can do what they want, but the question I would ask is, “What is the point?”

    This attempt at a new, non-party, party has already resulted in a collapse of the original expectations of the founders, whatever their expectations may have been. I am guessing, after mentally exploring different possibilities, that they must have expected to attract a strong national figure who could make a solid run for the presidency and have an historical impact on the 2012 election, and the future. It was an experiment that did not succeed. So why eliminate the qualification standards to allow a politically weak or even embarrassing candidate to continue to enjoy this enormous effort with no likelihood of accomplishing anything worthwhile?

    If someone had invested heavily to breed a thoroughbred colt that was born lame, why continue spending money and time to train the colt to run in the Kentucky Derby? Why should AE continue to spend time and money qualifying for the ballot in the remaining 23 states for the sake of a candidate who will suffer a humiliating defeat?

    Instead, it would seem best to shut it down and go back to the drawing board. In this case, I would suggest developing the model for lower offices first, electing members of Congress before aiming at the presidency. That is how the Republican party developed in the 1850’s.

    1. William J. Kelleher, Ph.D. says:

      “I would suggest developing the model for lower offices first, electing members of Congress before aiming at the presidency.” I agree, it is beginning to look like AE put the cart before the horse. Peter Ackerman now says that he is looking to 2014 and 2016. I have given my explanation of why AE has failed to take off (see my second post on the getsatisfation link Jim gave, above). Pretty soon those of us who are interested in AE should probably start organizing a discussion group to start “developing the model for lower offices.” This group could have its central hangout at either or Ben Barber developed those sites especially for AE discussions and activity. There is zero control or influence by AE elites or paid staff.

      Also, in some states where AE is on the ballot, lower offices are already available for anyone to put their name on the ballot, through their Secretary of State. Anyone reading this could become a candidate for the US Senate or House or some state office. Just apply, and the AE ballot line is yours.

      Bill Kelleher

  2. AE Transparency says:

    The ballot has been conducted, and the results are in: by an overwhelming majority AECorp delegates have voted “None of the above.”

    We would not put it past Ackerman Elects to substitute a different result, more to its liking, by fiat…in fact, we fully expect that. And we look forward to having a ball with that.

    1. benjamin barber says:

      Its dishonest to say that the delegates have said “none of the above”, or that Ackerman has the ability of fiat decree.

      1. AE Transparency says:

        Fiat decree: read the Bylaws, Section 4.1, then get back to us.

        None of the above: a simple quantitative fact. If it were otherwise we wouldn’t be having this discussion in the first place.

  3. Joshua says:

    I wonder if AE will stop accepting support clicks at midnight on the night of May 14-15, as the existing rules contemplate. At this point, it doesn’t look like any candidate will get even 1,000 clicks from one state, much less from ten. (Ron Paul had been on pace to garner 1,000 from California, but he’s only at 965 now with less than 24 hours to go.)

  4. Mel says:

    Put Ron Paul on the ballot then.

    1. AE Transparency says:

      The use of the word “then” here is curious, implying as it does “because X, then Y.” As in “because Ron Paul lost, then he should be advanced to the next round.” White supremacist Merlin Miller didn’t earn enough support, either (in fact, he has just 0.16% of his required support total). Should he “then” also be advanced to the next ballot round, too?

      The sheer brilliance of Americans Elect’s scheme is that it is so good at convincing otherwise sane people that we should simply abandon democratic processes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!