Bu on the Ballot

While most assume the race for Hawaii governor is between Linda Lingle and three Democratic somebodies, there are in fact seventeen candidates on the ballot this year, including Kaui Hill, a.k.a. "Bu La`ia."

Last time, he ran as a Green Party candidate, and they didn't like it. This time he filed under the Natural Law party... and big surprise, they're not fans either.

I really feel for third parties. On top of everything else, they certainly don't need press like this. In addition to Hill, a comedian and former fugitive (he briefly went into hiding after an altercation with an airport security guard in 1996), the Natural Law party is also battling Big Island marijuana advocate Jonathan Adler. Fortunately, the Star-Bulletin notes, "Adler will likely be removed from the ballot when he is sentenced for marijuana possession later this month."

Part of the problem, it seems, is the even slimmer pickings available to non-partisan candidates. They need ten percent of the votes cast (or at least as many votes as the least popular partisan candidate) in the Primary Election in order to remain in the running. Not surprisingly, few if any have made that cut.

My favorite part of the Star-Bulletin piece is the last three paragraphs, where the strange turns surreal:

Meet Daniel Cunningham, who entered politics when he realized he was the Daniel — Daniel of Revelation of the Ecclesia. From the Bible. He tried to be a Libertarian, but they wouldn't have him (or rather, they didn't like his proposal to "use decommissioned nuclear submarines to provide free energy for the state." His solution? The Free Energy party.

And you thought voting for Ross Perot was unusual. (And I did, my first ever vote cast in a presidential election...)

Comments

Actually Ryan, there are 20 people running for Governor. The link in your post to the election website shows only the candidates who submitted a profile for the site's online voter guide.

You have to go to the Candidate Filing Page to download the PDF files that contain the complete, state certified lists of all candidates who filed for office, regardless of whether or not they submitted a profile for the elections profile page.

The 3 candidates not listed on the profile page are:

Jason Ganzagan - non partisan candidate

Paul J. Mattes - non partisan

John Carroll - Republican candidate; I am a bit suprised he has no profile as he has some support and paid media behind him.

The non-partisan and 3rd party candidates have some interesting ideas, but generally are on the fringe of the popular political spectrum.

They do need to be covered a little more in the mainstream media just so that people know that there are alternatives out there, no matter how strange their viewpoints are.

Didn't Kaui Hill ran as a Democratat about 8 years but couldn't because he wasn't old enough?

Maybe he should run as a Lt. Governor first.

Well, I guess Hirono will get my vote because there's just something about Lingle I don't trust and no one else has thus far gotten my attention. I do agree though with the person who noted how silly Hirono's slogan on her campaign headquarters is.

It should certainly say "the best time I spend", not the "best minute".

The so-called "third-parties" are right, of course, in complaining about candidates who run under their banners but don't toe the parties' lines. The Libertarians, as quoted in the article, say that they get around that by stating in their by-laws that in order to run as Libertarians, candidates need to agree with every plank in the party platform, or at least not speak on those issues they disagree with.

I understand the reasoning behind this, but Libertarians shoot themselves in the foot when they do stuff like this. How many candidates of ANY party agree wholeheartedly with everything in a party's platform? I'm a card-carrying member of the Libertarian party, and will vote Libertarian this year, in all likelihood, but I have definite Republican views on some issues and definite Democratic views on others.

The Republicans don't disown Linda Lingle for being pro-choice; neither should Libertarians alienate potential candidates for being pro-state-sponsored social-welfare-programs.

The Libertarians know they're going to lose, which gives them the luxury of being so selective when it comes to embracing potential candidates. However, by excluding people who have definite Libertarian leanings, they do their cause more harm than good, because if the Libertarian cause is ever to be given serious consideration by the voting public, it will have to come in small doses.

We desperately need Bu La'ia
for govenor of California. He is the best hawaiian for da kine!

Post a Comment