Florida Presidential Ballot

From the informative website, Ballot Access News, comes this ballot from Palm Beach County, Florida.  The ballot, for the purposes of this website, contains all of the candidates who qualified for President in the state of Florida.  As mentioned before on this blog, ballot access laws in the 50 states differ from state to state.  In order to qualify as a candidate for President in Florida, a candidate must belong to a party that is recognized by the state.  The qualification for candidacy is less stringent than in other states.  Oklahoma for example with the toughest ballot access laws in the country, will only have two candidates for President on the ballot.

Here is the list of Presidential candidates and their Vice-Presidential selections as they are listed on the ballot in Florida.

Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan–Republican

Barack Obama/Joe Biden–Democrat

Thomas Robert Stevens/Alden Link–Objectivist

Gary Johnson/James P. Gray–Libertarian

Virgil H.  Goode Jr./James N. Clymer–Constitution

Jill Stein/Cheri Honkala–Green

Andre Barnett/Kenneth Cross–Reform

Stewart Alexander/Alex Mendoza–Socialist

Peta Lindsay/Yari Osorio–Party for Socialism and Liberation

Roseanne Barr/Cindy Sheehan–Peace and Freedom Party

Tom Hoefling/Jonathan D. Ellis–American Independent Party

Ross C. “Rocky” Anderson/Luis J. Rodriquez–Justice Party

Should there be a limit to how many Presidential candidates qualify for a ballot?  Is this ballot an example of how democracy is supposed to work in the United States by being open to many who desire to run for office?

 

 

23 responses to “Florida Presidential Ballot

  1. The founders of the U.S. would probably have been unhappy with this ballot. Many of them were solidly in favor of the representative democracy we have today. Democracy is more pluralist then a representative democracy. Therefore, this ballot is unusual in the American system, which is dominated by two powerful parties. I do not, however, think it is bad to have numerous parties involved in the political process. People need choices to force the main parties in the direction favored by the people, at-least. In short, I do not believe there should be a limit on how many parties qualify for a presidential election.

  2. This large number of parties on the ballot appears to blur the process. This can cause confusion for many, especially those that do not follow politics closely and are simply looking for a candidate that best represents them. That being said, I do not see how we can restrict the number of candidates. If they are placed there thought the proper channels, then denying them that access would, in my opinion, go against our democratic beliefs.

  3. There should not be a limit on how many candidates there are on the Ballot. It hampers freedom to choose.

  4. My issue isn’t so much on how many individuals are listed on the individual ballot as much as there are such inconsistencies in-between the individual states. What makes our government great is that the federal government doesn’t have complete control and allows the states to enact their own laws all the way down to local communities as most laws do not transcend across all boundaries. The problem is this is a national election so there should be a standard of getting on the ballot for every state. This may not mean every third party makes it on every state but a party that has stronger support in one state may not be on their ballot while they will make it on another state’s ballot where they have less support because of the differences in their laws.
    As Dr. Schreck pointed on in his essay “Commentary: The Importance of Several Voices” in our textbook it’s bad enough the third parties cannot make it into the presidential debates since the Democrats and Republicans run the Commission on Presidential Debates. Nor does the national press report on these third party candidates making it nearly impossible for them to make any real headway out of their home state. The more boundaries we place in their way the fewer candidates we get to choose from meaning the two main parties will remain in power for the foreseeable future.

  5. Personally I think it’s ridiculous of how many candidates there are on the ballot for Florida. We know there are two major parties Democrates and Republicans and always a third party that is looking for 5%. We all know that only a Democrat or Republican will win the vote. I believe the highest third party should be invited to the presidential debates. Ralph Nader in 2000 fought for that, but we all know he didn’t get invited. I just think it’s ridiculous and time wasting to have all these people run for the White House when they already know they’re going to lose.

  6. I don’t think there should be a limit to how many people can be on the ballot. Although it’s a lot of names to look through, it seems fair to me that if someone makes it on the ballot, then that’s that. I feel that this ballot is an example of how Democracy is. Everyone should get a chance even though you most likely won’t even know who they are throughout the election. If they went through all the trouble to get on the ballot, let them stay on the ballot because there’s no harm being done.

  7. i think its insane how many people are on ballot. Mainly because its not really fair to the less popular candidates. Voters are going to see the ,ost popular candidates at the top of the list and maybe take one glance at the names at the bottom. I mean ya it does represent Democracy in a way since apparantly Florida will let anyone be a candidate, but you would think that the requirements would be much higher since were talking about the future president

  8. I personally believe there should be a limit to how many Presidential candidates qualify for a ballot. This ballot would rise much confusion to the voters. This ballot does show how this country should be open to whoever desires to run for office, but they took it over board.

  9. I think that it is okay to have more than two candidates on the Presidential ballot as long as there are strict requirements to get on the ballot and as long as the candidates from the two major parties are at the top. I think that it is important to have strict qualifications so that we could separate those who really want to run for President from those who want to get on the ballot just because they can. Selecting the President of our country is a serious step and I think that it is important to make sure that we take the process seriously. Also, I think that it is important to have the candidates from the major parties at the top because the majority of the people who are going to step into the voting booth will already have their minds made up between one of these two candidates. I think that having the two major candidates at the top of the ballot would help the process move faster and it would be more fair to those candidates since they are representing the two major parties.

  10. We live in a free society, we should not have our choices limited. I believe that anyone who qualifies should be able to run. This gives the voters more options. Also because this is an election for the entire country, all the ballots in every state should be the same for president and vice president.

  11. When you have to many individuals on a ballot the reason why each person should be elected start to overlap and voteres can get confused. You also have to think about how voters tend to only pay attention to who makes the most publisity posititive or negative. You have to have money in order to make publisity and this tends to be a Democrate or a Republican because how much money they can raise. Last point is history has shown that not even a 3rd party can get at least a 5% vote what do these smaller ones think is going to happen?

  12. Of course there should be a limit. There is an age limit, there’s a minimum requirement of years spent in the country prior to running etc.More isn’t always better and we live in a country upheld by rules and regulations where our constitution is literally our guide to run our country. With respect to all those who wish to run we must all have more realistic expectations,for both the candidates and the voters. During elections the highest priority should be the voters. Less confusion and a more fluid system will encourage more people into the booths, not to mention just a heck a lot more sensible. I’m not saying we should only have two candidates, there should be more competition if only to shed light on issues ignored by Dems/Reps. But to allow this free for all circus act is not only inefficient but also drowning out the voices of those third party candidates might seriously have something substantial to offer.

  13. Although I admire their courage and efforts to run for office and bring attention to a less expose platform, I agree that there should be a limit to a number of candidates on a ballot. The more candidates the more confusion and burdensome for the elderly and less educated. As it stands today, less and less people are voting and having ballots that are burdensome and time consuming to get through will only discourage further voting participation.

  14. When it comes to the presidential ballot there should a limit to how many people can be on the ballot. There should be a limit because if there are to many people to pick from people may have a hard time deciding on who they feel will be the best person to pick to be president. For example we have all been to a restaurant that has to many things on the menu and you cant decide on what you want. Even tho that is not as important as picking the president it has pretty much the same meaning. This is exercising a democratic government however this is to extreme and there needs to be a line not to cross.

  15. Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination…. with all this being said, if they meet the requirments then they sholud be able to be on the ballot. Besides isn’t that what America was build upon the land of freedom and opportunity?!?!

  16. I believe that there should be a limit on how many names go on the presidential ballot. We have to be conscious on who we let run our country. Just because you can run for the election doesn’t qualify for the position.

  17. I feel that many candidates does follow along with our democratic government because they have the freedom to do that, but there should be a limitation on the number of candidates. First of all, the number of votes per candidate will eventually decrease to the point that there is no definite winner. Not only that, but more candidates makes the voting process more cumbersome for voters. This also means that voters who are very indecisive or aren’t well informed about each candidate will not be able to make a decision on who they feel will be the best President.

  18. Before actually seeing all of these names laid out, I believed that anyone who shows a genuine pursuit of becoming president should be allowed on the ballot. However, after seeing this long list of names, I do think it would be too much for the voter to have to choose from and would seem pointless for some of the smaller candidates who will receive very few votes. I believe that the ballot access requirements should be the same for all states. I think that all of the candidates, including those from the two major parties, should have the same requirements to have their name on the ballot. As a democracy, I think the United States should be modeling equality in the ballot access requirements for the candidates and for the states.

  19. Letting many different candidates onto the ballot does excercise a certain amount of democracy. But in this situation, democracy is not really working. Since these candidates are only running for the Presidency in Florida, mathmatically, there is no possible way that they can ultimately win the election. They could potentially win if they were on the ballot in all fifty states, but they are only on the in one state. Thus they will clearly not even come close to winning the United States Presidency. So in this case, democracy is more of an “illusion of democracy.” If the government is going to let anyone on the ballot and have a fair election, they should be approved by each state and one should be able to find the same list of candidates on the ballot in each state. This ultimately would prove to be a bit chaotic, considering some states would probably protest and disagree with each other. So, the smartest way to go about a fair election would clearly be to limit the amount of Presidential Candidates for each state. This would help the states to be a bit more focused on the election and would help them to take it seriously.

  20. Courtney Michalik

    I think there should be a limit to who goes on the ballot. There is really no point to have as many people as possible. I mean I get that you should have the ability to run and take a chance to elected for president or governor or whatever. I just think there should be a more realistic ballot. Having Roseanne Barr on the ballot does not make it seem legit. It makes it look more like a joke. People like her who have not devoted themselves to the government and politics are not going to be taken seriously enough to actually have a shot unless they prove they deserve to be on the ballot. It makes the 3rd party look like a nonsense addition.

  21. Jessica pinkston

    First off, did anyone notice that Roseanne is on the ballot? I feel that there should not be a restriction on the number on candidates because it contradicts our democracy. however, the requirements to get on the ballot should be uniform across the country. third party candidates
    already have an extremely difficult time running. When a.
    bunch of unqualified, u(nprofessional

    • Jessica pinkston

      unprofessional candidates run, it floods the ballot with not so serious individuals. this takes away from the serious third party candidates. basically, everyone should have the opportunity to run, but only if they have intentions. Celebrities like Roseann obviously did it for publicity.

  22. IF you are not a celebrity or a very well known person your chances of winning as a 3rd party candidate would be nil. Maybe when she looked at the options she felt she has as much a chance at winning as either the democratic or republican nominees. Who really rejoices at being able to vote for either of them!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s