• About
  • The Poetry of Protest

Show Me Progress

~ covering government and politics in Missouri – since 2007

Show Me Progress

Tag Archives: presidential primary

Missouri Presidential Primary 2020 – candidate filing

30 Saturday Nov 2019

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

candidate filing, missouri, presidential primary

November 26, 2019 was the first day of candidate filing for the 2020 Missouri Presidential Primary:

Republican
Name Mailing Address Random Number Date Filed

Donald J Trump PO Box 13570 Arlington, VA 22219 7 11/26/2019 1:56 p.m.

Bad combover. Check. Too long red tie. Check. Orange spray tan. Check. Tiny hands. Check. Cluelessness. Check…

Roque “Rocky” De La Fuente 5440 Morehouse Drive, Suite 4000 San Diego, CA 92121 46 11/26/2019 11:22 a.m.

Democratic
Name Mailing Address Random Number Date Filed

Amy Klobuchar PO Box 18360 Minneapolis, MN 55418 8 11/26/2019 8:13 a.m.

Senator Amy Klobuchar (D) [2019 file photo]

Tom Steyer PO Box 626 San Francisco, CA 94104 9 11/26/2019 11:11 a.m.

Tulsi Gabbard PO Box 75255 Kapolei, HI 96707 12 11/26/2019 8:03 a.m.

Leonard J. Steinman II 2217 W Edgewood Dr Jefferson City, MO 65109 15 11/26/2019 8:23 a.m.

Kamala Harris PO Box 86 Baltimore, MD 21203 17 11/26/2019 12:30 p.m.

Senator Kamala Harris (D) [2019 file photo].

Cory Booker PO Box 32009 Newark, NJ 07102 28 11/26/2019 1:39 p.m.

Senator Cory Booker (D [2019 file photo].

Joseph R. Biden PO Box 58174 Philadelphia, PA 19102 30 11/26/2019 8:46 a.m.

Vice President Joe Biden (D) [2014 file photo].

Elizabeth Warren PO Box 171375 Boston, MA 02117 35 11/26/2019 11:56 a.m.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D) [2019 file photo].

Pete Buttigieg PO Box 1226 South Bend, IN 46624 42 11/26/2019 8:10 a.m.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D) [2019 file photo].

Bernie Sanders PO Box 391 Burlington, VT 05402 43 11/26/2019 12:04 p.m.

Senator Bernie Sanders (D) [2016 file photo].

Velma Steinman 2217 W Edgewood Dr Jefferson City, MO 65109 49 11/26/2019 8:17 a.m.

Henry Hewes 515 Madison Ave. New York, NY 10022 11/27/2019 4:11 p.m.

Empty fields and empty lots don’t vote, cable news networks don’t do math

06 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Bernie Sanders, Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, presidential primary

Math is hard.

This from CNN:

DinnaHeotzCNN030516

Dianna Heitz ‏@diannaheitz
The #SuperSaturday totals:
Trump 2
Cruz 2
Sanders 2
Clinton 1
http://cnn.com/election
[….]
9:55 PM – 5 Mar 2016

Here’s the easy math. The vote totals:

State Date Clinton Sanders Spread
Louisiana March 5 221,615 72,240 Clinton +149,375
Nebraska March 5 14,234 18,940 Sanders +4,706
Kansas March 5 12,593 26,450 Sanders +13,857

Across the three states Hillary Clinton received 130,812 more votes. The Democratic Party proportionally allocates delegates with a minimum 15% threshold. The estimated delegate allocation from March 5th:

State Date Delegates Clinton Sanders Delegate Allocation Open/Closed
Louisiana March 5 51 (8) 35 12 Primary Closed
Nebraska March 5 25 (5) 10 14 Caucus Closed
Kansas March 5 33 (4) 10 23 Caucus Closed

[emphasis added]

Hillary Clinton (probably) picked up 55 pledged delegates yesterday. Bernie Sanders probably picked up 49 pledged delegates yesterday.

Do the math. Winning close or winning relatively big in a small population state with a proportionally smaller number of delegates is nice. Winning big in a large population state with a proportionally larger number of delegates is really nice.

Gee, you think all that “complexity” is just too undemocratic? Think again:

[National to date] Clinton Sanders Spread
Total [popular vote to date] 4,180,747 2,659,074 Clinton +1,521,673

[emphasis added]

Go figure, a candidate who gets more votes gets more delegates. Math is not hard, empty fields and empty lots don’t vote.

HB 1902: so it won’t matter

19 Wednesday Feb 2014

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

General Assembly, HB 1902, missouri, presidential primary

Yesterday a bill was introduced to change  the date of the Missouri presidential primary:

SECOND REGULAR SESSION

HOUSE BILL NO. 1902

97TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY

INTRODUCED BY REPRESENTATIVE DUGGER.

6114H.01I     ADAM CRUMBLISS, Chief Clerk

AN ACT

To repeal sections 115.123 and 115.755, RSMo, and to enact in lieu thereof two new sections relating to the presidential primary election date.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:

[….]

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 1 of this section, an election for a presidential primary held pursuant to sections 115.755 to 115.785 shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in [February] April of each presidential election year.

[….]

[emphasis in original]

And I was so looking forward to seeing Rick Santorum (r) in Missouri in February of 2016.

Robin Carnahan on Election Reform at Netroots Nation

20 Sunday Jul 2008

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Annette Taddeo, Joe Sudbay, Marcy Wheeler, missouri, nomination reform, presidential primary, Robin Carnahan

The last panel I attended at Netroots Nation was on reforming the presidential nominating process, and as an extra bonus, Missouri’s own Robin Carnahan was one of the panelists. The other panelists were also stellar: Joe Sudbay of AMERICAblog as moderator, Marcy Wheeler AKA emptywheel of Firedoglake, and Annette Taddeo, a progressive congressional candidate in South Florida.

The aim of the panel as stated was to discuss the problems of the presidential nominating system that we have, and to propose some possible solutions. The discussion was actually heavily weighted to the problems in the system and rather light on the solutions. Interestingly, it was up to the politicians to put forth a couple of proposals.

A lot more below the fold.

Robin gave us a quick, lucid overview of the history of the nominating process, beginning with the 19th Century control of the party nominations by members of Congress, and on to the increasing role of primaries in selecting pledged delegates to the convention on behalf of a candidate. Each wave of controversy exposed new flaws in the system that in turn generated new democratizing reforms. In 1912, the first primary came about in North Dakota as a way of circumventing the power of the political machines that controlled and selected members of Congress. Primaries gained prominence over the next half century, but it wasn’t until the McGovern reforms after 1968 that they gained their status as the deciding factor in our nominating process.

Robin stumped the audience (but not me – I just read Nixonland) by asking how many primaries 1968 Democratic presidential nominee won en route to being selected as the nominee. The answer? Zero. And of course, Humphrey’s selection as nominee helped split a Democratic Party that won the presidency in a landslide in 1964 and held a majority in both houses of Congress, and Humphrey went on to narrowly lose the election. The McGovern Commission followed, reforming the nomination process to something close to what we recognize today. So Robin tended toward hope that each wave of crises and anger would engender new efforts of inclusion and reform, rather than cynicism and disaffection with a broken system.

However, as Secretary of State, Robin recognized the difficulty in reforming the system. National elections take place in principle across the country, but in practice they should really be thought of as lots of local elections happening at the same time, with a variety of voting practices that federal and state authorities have little ability to change (without offering lots of money.) The same goes for the patchwork system of primaries and caucuses (and the primacaucuses!), and there’s also the consideration of just how much uniformity we might want in a vast and diverse country.

Annette and Marcy mainly focused on the problems of this past year for their respective states (Florida and Michigan) in the primaries. Annette spoke of Republican meddling in the Democratic nominating process. Not only was the Republican-led Florida government responsible for moving Florida’s primary up into the early window for which they were penalized, they also scheduled the state-level primaries (where Democratic nominees for Congress and state legislature are elected)

for the same week as the Democratic National Convention.

The frustration boils over when rank-and-file Democrats and independents don’t realize the extent to the Republican meddling, and only perceive that Democrats are taking away a vote that they swore to defend in 2000 and after. According to Annette, the anger is real on the ground, and she shares it.

Marcy spoke about the institutional factors in the Michigan debacle – powerful Michigan party leaders who have been committed to diminishing Iowa and New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation status colliding with national party leaders skittish about a mad scramble to the front of the line, further complicated by presidential candidates who owe their nomination (or presidency) to a victory in Iowa and/or New Hampshire. But as Michigan is necessary to a Democratic path to the White House (even more so than Florida), a compromise was enacted in order to seat Michigan’s delegation and soothe the activists so crucial to a win on the ground in November.

Annette and Robin each had their preferred solution to the endless jockeying for the front of the primary schedule. Robin supports a rotating regional primary, where the nation is divided into four regions, and states in each region hold their primaries on the same day. Iowa and New Hampshire would be separated out and retain their status at the front of the schedule.

Annette believed that regional primaries would give too much power to big-money candidates able to dominate the populous states in the region. She instead favors a tiered system where the smallest states vote first, then in three more stages, successively larger states, allowing grassroots candidates a chance to compete while building up name recognition for the larger contests.

I hear her complaint, but the truth of the matter is, this money advantage is so great that I don’t imagine much difference being made one way or another without public finance reforms. I mean, Barack Obama’s strategy of countering Hillary Clinton’s early edge in big states by organizing in smaller states took a money advantage. In winning Iowa, nobody spent more than Barack Obama. (I don’t mean money is everything – John Edwards edged out Clinton despite spending half the money in the state.)

There’s a possible solution that I haven’t heard yet – leave the process alone! Didn’t this year prove that a well-organized candidate with an army of small donors could beat a party favorite with most of the institutional support? And didn’t this year prove that every state can get the attention and money that comes with a competitive primary? I don’t know if it’s really the answer, and implicitly by virtue of being the status quo, it’s already on the table, and should be discussed openly.

Curious results in Indiana, North Carolina and Pennsylvania

07 Wednesday May 2008

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Indiana, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, presidential primary

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that our media isn’t talking about McSame’s inability to seal the deal with a significant number republican voters in the republican presidential primaries?

For instance, last night in Indiana:

McCain 317,837 77%

Huckabee 41,018 10%

Paul 31,481 8%

Romney 19,480 5%

tiny URL

That’s 23% of the voters casting their ballot for someone else.

Then there’s North Carolina:

McCain 381,138 73%

Huckabee 62,917 12%

Paul 40,275 8%

No Preference 20,305 4%

tiny URL

“No preference” did quite nicely, especially since they didn’t spend any money.

And finally, of recent presidential primaries, there’s Pennsylvania:

McCain 587,210 73%

Paul 128,483 16%

Huckabee 91,430 11%

tiny URL

Wow. Over 200,000 republican primary voters in Pennsylvania didn’t vote for McSame. What’s he going to have to do to get their votes?

Tweety and the other cable network talking heads haven’t brought this up, have they? I wonder. It must not fit their selected narrative.

It’s going to be a long slog to November.  

Missouri presidential primary – candidates filed

23 Friday Nov 2007

Posted by Michael Bersin in Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

candidate filing, February 5, missouri, presidential primary

Twenty-seven candidates have filed with the Secretary of State to be on the ballot for the February 5, 2008 Missouri presidential primary. The list of candidates includes nine Democrats, six Libertarians and twelve republicans.

The Democratic Party candidates are (in ballot order)[name, address, first day of filing lottery number, date of filing]:

Hillary Clinton 4420 North Fairfax Dr. Arlington VA 22203 11 10/23/2007

Barack Obama 233 N. Michigan Ave., 11th Flo Chicago IL 60601 18 10/23/2007

John Edwards 410 Market St., Ste. 400 Chapel Hill NC 27516 10/24/2007

Ralph Spelbring 236 Bank Street Elkhart IN 46516 11/13/2007

Dennis J. Kucinich P. O. Box 110180 Cleveland OH 44111 11/16/2007

Bill Richardson 111 Lomas Blvd. NW, Ste. 200 Albuquerque NM 87102 11/16/2007

Joe Biden P. O. Box 438 Wilmington DE 19899 11/19/2007

Christopher J. Dodd P. O. Box 51882 Washington DC 20091 11/19/2007

Mike Gravel 1916 Wilson Blvd., Ste. 202 Arlington VA 22201 11/20/2007

In 1992 Ralph Spelbring received 537 votes (0.34%) in the Kansas presidential primary. In 2006 he received 10,324 votes (30.50%) in the Indiana 6th Congressional District Democratic primary. He does write letters to the editor.

The Libertarian candidates (in ballot order):

Wayne A. Root

Daniel Imperato

George Phillies

Michael P. Jingozian

Steve Kubby

Dave Hollist

The republican candidates (in ballot order):

Ron Paul

Fred Thompson

Mitt Romney

Rudy Giuliani

John McCain

Mike Huckabee

Virgil L. R. Wiles [from Missouri!]

Tom Tancredo

Duncan Hunter

Hugh Cort

Alan Keyes

Daniel Gilbert

I have a sneaking suspicion that Ron Paul will do fairly well in Missouri. Old time political conventional wisdom says that being at the top of the ballot translates into a few more votes.

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007

Categories

  • campaign finance
  • Claire McCaskill
  • Congress
  • Democratic Party News
  • Eric Schmitt
  • Healthcare
  • Hillary Clinton
  • Interview
  • Jason Smith
  • Josh Hawley
  • Mark Alford
  • media criticism
  • meta
  • Missouri General Assembly
  • Missouri Governor
  • Missouri House
  • Missouri Senate
  • Resist
  • Roy Blunt
  • social media
  • Standing Rock
  • Town Hall
  • Uncategorized
  • US Senate

Meta

  • Log in

Blogroll

  • Balloon Juice
  • Crooks and Liars
  • Digby
  • I Spy With My Little Eye
  • Lawyers, Guns, and Money
  • No More Mister Nice Blog
  • The Great Orange Satan
  • Washington Monthly
  • Yael Abouhalkah

Donate to Show Me Progress via PayPal

Your modest support helps keep the lights on. Click on the button:

Blog Stats

  • 843,134 hits

Powered by WordPress.com.

 

Loading Comments...