Now that the August primary is safely in the rear-view, the rest of the November ballot is rounding into shape. Actual winners earned their spots on August 11; now we’re seeing a parade of no-hopers, never-wases and cranks making their way onto the ballot through processes that have nothing to do with, you know, actual appeal to the electorate.

The usual suspects are being joined by a new crop of “candidates” who are not worth a moment of your time. Hopefully they don’t clutter up the debate stage, although I’m sure some of them will.

(And please don’t @ me about accessibility and openness and such. There is no constitutional right to a spot on the ballot or a lectern at candidate forums. Any debate that’s all-inclusive is a waste of everybody’s time. It only takes away from a viewer’s ability to learn pertinent information about people who might actually be elected because the fringies Must Get Their Share Of The Attention.)

Like, for instance, “Not That” Zachary Hampl, who weaseled his way to the Progressive nomination for treasurer despite the party’s refusal to endorse him. (He has a track record of conservative activism covering his entire and brief adulthood.) Credit for his “victory” goes to the Progs’ complete inattention to their own primary, since they didn’t bother to nominate an alternative and turnout was as dismal as usual; Hampl won with the distressing total of 289 votes.

In the entire state.

But it was enough, because only 474 people bothered to vote in the Progressive primary. In the entire state. Kinda makes you wonder if the Progs should be doing a bit more to earn their “major party” status.

Continue reading →