Constitution Party Presidential Debate

On Saturday, March 31, 6 candidates seeking the presidential nomination of the Constitution Party will debate each other in Lansing, Michigan. The event is at 10 a.m., at a restaurant at 3420 South Crayts Road. The event is free to the public, but seating is limited.

The six candidates are: Susan Ducey of Kansas, former Congressman Virgil Goode of Virginia, Michael Kennedy of Maryland, J. L. Mealer of Arizona, Dr. Laurie Roth of Washington state, and former head football coach at Savannah State Robby Wells of South Carolina.


Constitution Party Presidential Debate — No Comments

  1. Additionally, Randy Stufflebeam of the Illinois CP is hosting weekly presidential debates – of which these six candidates have already been participating. The audio is usually posted the following Friday. Here are the links:

    PS: Since he is from Michigan, will “Mad” Max Rieske finally participate in this debate?

  2. This will be more meaningful than the pre-approved candidate shows by the duopoly. May the waves ripple throughout the states!

  3. The trouble is that most people have never heard of any of these candidtes. So without millions of dollars, the vote totals will remain low.

  4. I’m rooting for Goode; he’s not perfect, but he’s the best we got.

    No way in hell would I support J.L. Mealer -judging by comments he made in a IPR article about Zionism, that man is obviously a anti-Semite. The CP isn’t stupid enough to have him on their ticket.

  5. Oops, I take that back- J.L. Mealer wasn’t the one that made those comments, it was “Mad Max” Rieske that did, so it would be Rieske that I would be opposed to.

  6. Not a Constitution Party supporter in any sense, but as a supporter of minor parties in general I wish them the best of luck, and am glad they are having these debates to help their supporters vet the candidates.

  7. I know why Virgil Goode is running. I know why Gary Johnson is running. I’m pretty sure that I know why Rosanne Barr or Jill what’s-her-name of the Green Party are running. There is a long term purpose for what each of them are doing, I believe. The hope for each of their supporters, I would have to think, is that their respective party will be better off on the day after the election than it was at the beginning of the campaign because of their candidacy…meaning that the candidate brings something to the table to improve the lot of the party.

    What is the purpose of the myriad of other people who are running? Can somebody tell me why people who are completely unknown; who have no money or prospects of raising any; who have no credibility with the media; who have no popular following; who bring nothing to the table to help their party move forward; and who at best parrot the party line as hundreds of others could do just as well, or at worst are in LalaLand; choose to run for President of the United States? I have an answer, but it isn’t very kind. Am I missing something? I’ve only been involved in third party politics for 41 years, so maybe I have much to learn. Or maybe I’m crazy, too.

    Am I the only staff person who gets calls from people who ask, “Can you tell me what I have to do to run for President?” I had one guy call and say that he was calling for his wife who wanted to run for President. Well, at least she knew enough to have a staff and delegate authority.

    I will say, in regards to my own party, that Susan Ducey and Robby Wells would be excellent Congressional or perhaps statewide candidates. So why can’t people start there?

  8. Cody Quirk, thanks for clarifying that it was Mad Max and NOT JL MEALER who made those “zionism” comments.

    My mother’s family would hate me if I hated them!

    And, Odom-

    The REASON that anyone who wants to actually make a difference as POTUS and make the run for POTUS first is because once they take ANY OTHER elected official position, they accept 12 USC, Sec 289 funds and become tainted to do what must be done as POTUS.

    The REASON that anyone who wants to actually fix this nation as POTUS makes their first run as an elected official for POTUS first is because they might know the Law. I know I do… and because of this, I know that once tainted by playing elected official (bribe taking maggot as ALL elected officials become by default and the law noted above), I would be impotent to place Congress and the Lobbyists [including the Fed Res under Title 10 USC notice that the laws (that I have never violated) are now in force and that they will be held accountable for sedition, fraud, et al., and the buck stops here].

    The thing is YOU KNOW THIS IS TRUE because I’ve explained it to you a few times and have sent you my detailed book about it “AMERICA SHRUGGED”.

    You, like other party players is simply looking for a cash pay-out like the Arizona CP group has told me. Funny thing is, I have it in writing from both that this is a money game for you.

  9. Mr. Mealer, I have my issues with Goode and would like for there to be a “modal” CP candidate contesting him, as for example Lee Wrights might be considered a “modal” Libertarian candidate challenging the big name presumptive nominee Johnson. But I don’t see that candidate yet.

    While I wouldn’t say it quite like Mr. Odom, I do think that a candidate who is running for the nomination of a party should at least have some previous connection with the party (unless they are a major party convert and it would be better even then) and appear to understand the party.

    Many of us who are sympathetic to the CP are so because it is a conservative/rightist party that has adopted (by and large) a non-interventionist foreign policy. You, however, specifically single out Israel for US protection and even have an absurd plan to make part of Israel American territory which is a completely unveiled attempt to forever make Israel an American Military protectorate.

    Are you even aware that the CP is non-interventionist? That many CP supporters are supporting Ron Paul in the GOP primary? Why don’t you bring your Israel plan to the convention and see how that works out for you. By far the “modal” CP position is that the US should avoid entangling alliances and that Israel should be treated no better or no worse than any other ally.

  10. Let’s not made the state of Israel an American military protectorate. Let’s go forward and do the one thing that will protect Israel and its people: make Israel the 51st state.

  11. I agree 100% with Red Phillips, JL Mealer is a hardcore Zionist and should not try to taint the CP with his radical ideas! Let’s put America First, and stop all foreign aid, including to Israel! And furthermore it would be stupid to nominate someone who no one has ever heard of and is not even prominent enough to have a Wikipedia article written about him.

    And Michael wants to make Israel the 51st state? Go tell that to the survivors of the USS Liberty massacre and see how they like that. Israel should get absolutely no preferential treatment and should also stay completely out of foreign policy.

  12. Pingback: Constitution Party Presidential Debate |

  13. Red, my ties with the CP run deeper than anyone currently in the party. I was in it back in the Howard Phillip US Tax Party era and worked on the name change. This is on file with the Arizona Maricopa County recorder.

    As far as the “ring” around Israel, that “ring” prevents anyone from killing each other, REMOVES and REVOKES our aid to those countries as well as to any country it also works around and makes the US money rather than spending money.

    Krysztof… I am hardly any type of Zionist.

    Radical ideas are the violations of the US Constitution that every elected official is doing right now and since 1912.

    My ideas are solid plans to create jobs and end foreign aid without having a bunch of the Muslim Brotherhood taking over every country that we rely on for a trade route or strategically against our long-time enemies.

    My ideas do not require waiting for a corrupted Congress to throw pork and special interest budgets into the laws that must be passed and removed in order to save our nation.

    If the CP wants a Model candidate that conforms to every plank of the party platform and will serve the party over the “must do” plans to save this nation, they should choose someone such as Robby Wells (whom I admire for his game plan. The only problem with a “game plan” is that the new POTUS would need to wait for a corrupt Congress to approve of his ideas when they BY LAW, should be in GITMO [It’s OUR rights they are violating! What is not clear about that?]
    … Virgil Goode is just another typical shyster politician.

    If you have not read AMERICA SHRUGGED vol One, I’ll be happy to fwd you people a copy in Pdf.

    I am not your enemy. My plans are the ONLY viable plans that will work with the corruption that has destroyed this nation. How else can I spell that our for you?

  14. Correction: US TAXPAYERS PARTY…to CONSTITUTION PROVISIONAL, to Constitution Party. A lot of infighting on the name change in Arizona. Good thing national chose the latter although provisional makes sense as the nation cannot move forward and out of the corruption with the Constitution (Bill of Rights) being Provisional for the government to operate.

  15. Mr. Mealer, I am glad to hear you have some past connection with the Constitution Party. If you have a connection with the party that goes back that far then you should know that the party was at its creation heavily Buchananite, so its non-interventionist streak pre-dates Ron Paul making non-interventionism cool.

    Your Israel plan is gimmicky and absurdly interventionist. It would forever lock us into the region. We don’t need to be locked into the region. We need to disengage from the region and fast.

    You can’t decry special interests and at the same time put forward your plan. The America must militarily protect Israel crowd is no less a special interest than is the ethanol lobby or the green jobs lobby.

  16. Mr. Anderson, I have posted a link to your blog post and an excerpt at Independent Political Report. Do you mind if I post the whole thing?

  17. Pingback: Constitution Party Presidential Debate | US Voter News

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.