Slashdot Log In
Colbert Ballot Bid Shot Down
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Nov 01, 2007 04:10 PM
from the can't-make-a-dishonest-living-no-more dept.
from the can't-make-a-dishonest-living-no-more dept.
wizzard2k writes "Some of you may have seen Stephen Colbert's bid for the South Carolina Presidential Primary, however it seems his hopes to appear on the ballot as a candidate for the Democratic Party have been shot down. From the report: 'Stephen Colbert's bid to get on the ballot for the upcoming Democratic primary in his home state was shot down on Thursday (November 1) by the executive committee of the South Carolina Democratic Party. Colbert's bid was voted down 13-3 ... Using criteria such as whether the candidate was recognized in the national news media as a legitimate candidate and whether they'd actively campaigned in the state, the committee put the kibosh on the Colbert bid.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Colbert's Run For President May Be Criminal 625 comments
eldavojohn writes "Some of you may know about Steven Colbert's fake presidential campaign... although are you sure it's fake? Well, it had better be because if it is taken too far — such as if he actually gets on the Republican and/or Democratic ballot in South Carolina — his use of corporations & advertising to back his campaign could get the attention of the Federal Election Commission. Doritos & Comedy Central could be facing some problems as well, funding a man running for president." A million Facebook users have signed up for the "1,000,000 Strong for Stephen T Colbert" group in the last week — though the group could be read as a satire of Barack Obama's similarly-named group, which has fewer than 400,000 members after 9 months.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:5, Funny)
Two-party duopoly? THREAT DOWN!
Re:Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:4, Interesting)
The Daily Show gets people interested and in fact cynical of politicians where they otherwise would not have even cared.
I won't however defend colbert, I've seen him bring too many guests on the show with important things to say, only to have him run his mouth and waste time as if its all a joke. It may be mocking political pundits, but his guests are real and were brought on for a reason, and he talks over them like a moron.
Re:Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:5, Insightful)
He's our generation's Andy Kaufman. If you get him he's a mastermind, and if you don't well, I feel sorry for you.
Re:Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:5, Informative)
(A side note: I was a young worker at Warner Qube during a time when Mr. Kaufman was performing semi-regularly there. He was a genuinely interesting man, his talent was significant and worthy of our respect.)
Re:Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bloomberg/Colbert '08. (Score:5, Insightful)
The real reason they quashed it... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:5, Funny)
Well, admittedly it had only been a week and a half after he announced his intent to run that his numbers were there. Imagine if he'd had over a year like all the other guys. He'd be at like 120-125% by now.
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:5, Funny)
The best part would be when he got 125% of the popular vote... but still lost in the electoral college.
:-D
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:4, Funny)
If not higher!
Re:The real reason they quashed it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Mainstream Media Decide WHAT? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait a second... not only do the media have massive power to influence how people vote - their approval is also are one of the criteria used to decide if a candidate is allowed to run at all? WTF?
Why does anyone bother to vote at all? It would be faster to just let the media companies nominate our public officials directly.
Re:Mainstream Media Decide WHAT? (Score:5, Insightful)
But, but... Can He Dance? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Mainstream Media Decide WHAT? (Score:5, Funny)
Democracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well I hope at least they gave him back his $2500.
Re:Democracy? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Interesting level of power they have. (Score:5, Funny)
2 things: (Score:4, Insightful)
Anybody can run. He ran. I guess I don't see how this changes things. Anybody can run, but there can be only one President of the United States of America. It is the responsibility of the SC Democratic Party leadership to make sure their state has the greatest possible chance of helping their candidate be elected President. To do otherwise would turn the Democratic Party into a less viable party than the Republicans. Perhaps it would let some other party sneak in there and usurp their place as the other major party in that state.
If you think Colbert had a good enough chance that he should have been put on the ballot, you should register as a Democrat in South Carolina as soon as possible, and work your butt off so you can be on that committee some day.
That's part of the reason I finally registered with a party. I wanted more of a say.
Fear (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fear (Score:5, Informative)
If Fred Thompson and Ronald Reagan can run... (Score:5, Funny)
Is it because he is just too damn smart and over-qualified?
Todays WØRD: SHAMOCRACY
Man, I suddenly have a hankering for some Doritos.
Re:If Fred Thompson and Ronald Reagan can run... (Score:5, Informative)
When Colbert Read the Requirements... (Score:4, Insightful)
Please take the hint (Score:5, Interesting)
Somehow I doubt the Republicrats and Democans will listen to this warning, though. I remember in college when a local comic-strip character (Hank the Hallucination, no less) won the student government presidential election (beating Paul Begala who went on to serve Clinton). All the budding young politicos were incensed that their resume-padding ambitions were being damaged by the will of the student body. But it didn't really change anything then and a fear Colbert short-lived candidacy won't change much now (but I can hope!).
Pat Paulson (Score:5, Informative)
But what I remember best was his bid to get on the California primary in '96. He had twice the number of required signatures on his petition, paid the fees, filed well in advance of the deadline, but was still denied. March Fong Yu, California Secretary of State, explained the denial as "he's not serious about the campaign."
Paulson's response: "You mean those other guys are?"
310 of us wrote him in anyway....
So Sad (Score:5, Insightful)
I find it amazing that this board has the power to eliminate him from the primaries so arbitrarily.
If I were Colbert, I'd be seeking justice from the courts on this one. Show them just how serious a candidate he is.
Re:So Sad (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not the irony, that's the REASON. The last thing the Democratic party (or any party) wants is someone like Colbert on any podium with their guys. This campaign was a serious threat to the status quo -- not earth shattering stuff, but it would have made people look stupid, shown people to be liars, made people think -- this is not desired by either of our two political parties.
"If I were Colbert, I'd be seeking justice from the courts on this one. Show them just how serious a candidate he is."
We vote for candidates from two parties to run our government, but the parties are NOT the government. He may have far less rights to get those parties to do anything they don't want to than you realize.
More fodder for the master (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to directly compare Stephen to greats like Pryor or Carlin, but how many comedians have had this much impact on political discourse, this quickly? Most subversive types get the soccer moms up in arms, but there's more mainstream media hand-wringing over Colbert than I ever remember seeing before.
Also his persona is dead-on perfect for this sort of stunt. I mean, come on: "Democrats lead in all the polls by at least ten points, except one... Fox News. That is with a margin of error of plus-or-minus the facts." Beautiful.
Colbert bumped (Score:4, Interesting)
Colbert has handled this poorly, and while I'm dismayed he won't be on the political stage, I think it's his own fault.
I think he would have taken the place by storm if he'd gone out of character when off his show and dealt with people as a regular person, instead of making any attempt whatsoever to be funny. It would have put people off guard and left him the upper hand to control the political stage.
Nothing would have shown modern politics for what it is better than to have people show up to debate with him, armed with one-liners so they could compete one what they imagined to be the called-for level only to find that he was armed with complete thoughts on issues that he surely knows about but does not normally speak of.
That he has left people unsure about what he's doing is not the fault of the people he's confused. He's the one with the savvy to have overcome it, and his entire point is that people are not good about setting serious agendas. They're waiting for someone else to do it in lemming-like ways, and then instead of him doing it, he's leaving it to others to figure him out.
I love his show, but I think he has botched this. He could still recover, I think, but the only way I see him doing is stepping out of character. And to be honest, I think he's afraid to do that, which bodes ill for him as a candidate.
He wants to orchestrate things, but the US situation is not something that needs orchestration right now. It needs plain honesty. Honesty we know he's capable of. But it needs it straight up, not confusingly presented.
I don't care what he says on his show--I'll still watch the show. I care a lot that off the show, if he's going to do this, he do it as a regular guy, not a persona.
Re:Colbert bumped (Score:5, Interesting)
I love his show, but I think he has botched this.
I think you are confusing what he was trying to do with what you wish he had been trying to do.
They had no choice but to quash his bid. (Score:5, Funny)
Otherwise no one would take the Democratic Party seriously. They'd be powerless. Impotent. Laughable. They could run a Nobel Peace prize winner against a guy who can't say "nuclear," and still lose. But by quashing Colbert's bid, they retain their power and dignity.
HORRIBLE PR move (Score:4, Insightful)
Blocking Colbert's nomination has the very serious potential to completely alienate their base. If he's only running for the SC primary, the amount of potential damage is extremely limited, and not likely to make much of a difference even if he wins the nod in that state. On the other hand, if Colbert runs as an independent in the general election, he has a very serious chance of fucking things up completely.
(As a sidenote: I'm a strong proponent doing away with the 2-party system by allowing voters to cast a vote for as many candidates as they want. If you like both Nader and Gore, vote for both of them! If for some unholy reason, you want to vote for both the republican and democratic candidate (ie. you hate independents with a firey passion), there should be nothing stopping you from doing so. This means that there's no longer such thing as a 'wasted vote', and if the independent candidates are truly unviable, we'd be no worse off. This would be a huge boon to candidates like Mike Gravel or Ron Paul)
Why are primaries taxpayer funded? (Score:5, Insightful)
genius (Score:5, Insightful)
The denial of his candidacy is a stark reminder of what is really going on with political parties in the USA. It is an old-boys power network, and frankly, Colbert was not playing by their rules. Those rules are (im my opinion) pretty close to these: be rich, be a career politician, suck up to companies, trade favors with those more powerful, be a political insider, lie cheat and steal your way into power -- and, depending on the party, when one meets most of these rules, the current party system will accept you as one of their own, and "allow" you to run.
Why are there 2 private organizations that run how governement works in the USA? That's crap and very few people see it. No one elected the leaders in these groups to decide "the party line", to pressure senators to vote a certain way, to hide emails, and whatever else they do. Why on earth should 13 people in SC get to tell the people of that state if a legal citizen can or can't run for president? Show me where the Constitutional process for how the Rebuplic runs discusses that kind of political power. It is an abomination of the system the US had.
While I don't think Colbert is a serious candidate, his running was deeply meaningful. His rejection highlights the absurdity of the process, and the entrenched position of political parties that control the US and governements.
Re:Now here's where the hope comes in (Score:4, Insightful)
Why should they break with tradition?
I have yet to hear any candidate with a convincing tale that they should be President...have you?
Re:There's Ron Paul (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:There's Ron Paul (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:There's Ron Paul (Score:5, Informative)
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964#By_party [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act#Vote_count [wikipedia.org]
Disclaimer:
I'm not trying to say the Republicans are champions of Civil Rights. Far from it, just look at the Patriot Act. But the Democrats aren't any better. If you want truly equal treatment for all, vote Libertarian.
Re:There's Ron Paul (Score:5, Insightful)
I listened to him on a local talkshow on KSEV and it consisted of...
The hosts ask him a biased question "when did you stop beating your wife type"...
He starts to give a surprisingly straight-forward and honest answer...
They cut him off and accuse him of hating the troops...
He starts into how we shouldn't be covering the oil companies security costs...
They cut him off and start some other angle in a very abusive tone
repeat this for 25 minutes.
After he signs off they basically call him a loon and accuse him of wanting our troops to die a couple more times.
Then invite him to come back on again anytime he wants to "debate" with them.
---
I disagree with at least 40% of Ron Paul's positions. But for god's sake, at least I know where he stands. Almost every other candidate on both sides of the race lie, evade, and have hidden unknown agendas that they will really push for once they get in office (Are huckabee and guilanni really pro-life or pro-choice?... Just how pro-chinese are the Clintons really? Does Thompson really believe much of anything except a couple religious positions? Does Obama really believe much of anything and have the strength to make hard decisions???"
On the other hand, Ron Paul has a long history of principled voting AND working with the rest of congress.
Try to break free of the liberal and conservative media trying to manipulate you into dismissing Ron Paul out of hand.
Re:There's Ron Paul (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:These quotes appeared in Ron's newsletter (Score:5, Insightful)
It is likely that the point of that statement about criticism was that whenever people criticize Israel (constructively or not) there are many who automatically cry "anti-semetism," this is used in order to stop discourse or label legitimate criticism as "racism."
Evil may not have been the best choise of words, but without the context who knows what the speaker meant by that; it is exactly this sort of quid pro quo and worse taking place in washington that has corrupted our system to where it is now - plenty of people are suffering because of surversion of the process..
Re:Now here's where the hope comes in (Score:4, Insightful)
I hope for America's sake (and that of the world) that American voters wake up and stop voting Republican or Democrat.
Two sides of the same coin...
Re:Now here's where the hope comes in (Score:5, Funny)
-G
Re:Now here's where the hope comes in (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Now here's where the hope comes in (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Good... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's one thing to joke about politics, it's another to make the politics into a joke. In doing the later, Colbert was going to take the focus off of the race and put it onto himself.
I hardly give Colbert credit for making politics into a joke. It was that long before he made the scene. The fact that a good portion of the MSM couldn't suss out whether Colbert was actually kidding or not for a while (and Rasmussen actually put a damn poll in the field) should be evidence enough.
Re:Good... (Score:5, Insightful)
When a satirist can steal (or come close to stealing) the political process, it says more about the political process than it does about the satirist. He isn't making politics into a joke. He's simply pointing out that it is.