The death of a dubious idea (Americans Elect)

[ProSense]

The death of a dubious idea

By Steve Benen

Last summer, there were plenty of centrists who expressed genuine excitement about a project called Americans Elect, which its backers perceived as a vehicle towards bipartisan governing. Thomas Friedman, last summer, devoted a column to singing Americans Elect's praises, saying its organizers are "really serious, and they have thought out this process well."

As it turns out, that wasn't quite right.

Americans Elect, the deep-pocketed nonprofit group that set out to nominate a centrist third-party presidential ticket, admitted early Tuesday that its ballyhooed online nominating process had failed.

The group had qualified for the general election ballot in 27 states, and had generated concern among Democrats and Republicans alike that it could wreak havoc on a close election between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.

But just after a midnight deadline Monday, the group acknowledged that its complicated online nominating process had failed to generate sufficient interest to push any of the candidates who had declared an interest in its nomination over the threshold in its rules.

I never fully understood the appeal of this enterprise. Voters were supposed to gravitate towards Americans Elect out of a desire to see a presidential campaign committed to centrist, compromise-focused policymaking. Americans Elect did not, however, have a candidate. Or a platform. Or a policy agenda. Or even vague positions on any issue. It had money, a slot on 27 state ballots, and the admiration of some moderate-minded newspaper columnists, but nothing else.

So what, exactly, was the point? Apparently, the entity's organizers intended to hold an online convention, in which "the people" would nominate a ticket with two candidates: one from each party. What would be the value of this? No one ever got around to explaining that.

Real-world problems, however, kept getting in the way.

Credible candidates, for example, weren't interested. Americans Elect talked about bold, democratic principles, but it collected tens of millions of dollars in secret donations, then built a series of "anti-democratic measures" into Americans Elect's structure: "the power of a board to set aside (subject to a veto override from 'voters') the People's Choice in order to create a legitimately 'balanced, centrist' ticket, whatever that means."

- more -

http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/15/11714809-the-death-of-a-dubious-idea

[sadbear]

1. Good riddance.

[Schema Thing]

2. Sketchy from the start since our President epitomizes a Centrist, compromise-focused Policymaker.

[JHB]

7. Not sketchy at all! Just a convenient way to relabel Obama as "the left"...

...the Teabaggers as "the right", and meet in some nice warm, fuzzy, corporate- and wealthy-tickling "center".

Call it the Oaferton window.

[MH1]

3. Let's be very clear about the issue with a third party candidate.

When someone votes for a third-party candidate in this country, it is almost always the case that they are ceding their opportunity to vote for or against one of the people who WILL actually win.

We need to change the SYSTEM that causes that fundamental problem, before third-party candidates will generally be viable in this country. Sure there will be exceptions, but people who understand the system and give a shit about the result, know they have to choose between the current major parties. Until we move to a run-off system or some other way that voters can express their preference between the final two candidates.

[CTyankee]

4. I was suspicious from the outset. It seemed like a backhanded way of getting

more support for seemingly "moderate" republicans (no such thing of course) and then surprise, surprise! we have a full blown republican monster. But of course with the "blessing" of "the people" and not the "politicians."

This had "bait and switch" written all over it!

[hatrack]

5. "Americans Elect, the deep-pocketed nonprofit group . . . " Or, in plain English:

Front, fraud, astroturf.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. Good news

I always thought it was a joke. Their organization exemplified the phony "both sides are rotten, extreme, bad" false equivalency that has plagued our country and its "free" press for much too long IMHO. Plus, as has been mentioned, we already have a centrist/left of center person ALREADY at the helm, a person who based his campaign for President, as well as much of his first term devoted to the ideal of bipartisanship and compromise with the other major party only to see that other party totally unwilling to work with him and dogmatic in their attempts to undermine his Presidency and prevent him and his party from governing and/or fixing any of the major problems in our country.