S.C. Democrats Say No to Colbert

[carrie721]

a sad day indeed. :distress:

GREENVILLE, S.C. — The momentum of the Colbert presidential campaign hit a cul-de-sac today when the South Carolina Democratic Party decided he wasn’t a serious candidate and turned down his application to get on the ballot.

South Carolina is the only state where Stephen Colbert, the comedian and a native South Carolinian, has sought to get on the ballot. He did not try getting on the Republican ballot because that costs $35,000.

Mr. Colbert met the Democratic filing deadline of noon today to send in some paperwork and a check for $2,500.

But the party’s executive council just voted 13-3 not to certify him.

Carol Fowler, chairwoman of the state party, told us that the council “really agonized over this because they really like him, they love his show and everyone thinks it’s wonderful that he cares about us.”

But, she said, they decided he did not meet two basic requirements: that the person be generally acknowledge or recognized by the media as a viable nationwide candidate; and be actively campaigning for the South Carolina primary.

“The committee decided he didn’t meet those two basic requirements,” Mrs. Fowler said. She did not vote herself, saying she votes only in the case of a tie. Asked how she might have voted, she said, “We didn’t have a tie, so I didn’t have to vote.”

The committee also denied a spot to someone else who filed an application and sent in the check, but he was someone whom Mrs. Fowler said no one had heard of until today.

Both will be getting their checks back, she said.

[rhiannon948]

well, it should be an interesting colbert report tonight at the least.

[gldstwmn]

He didn't meet the criteria. :shrug: They were justified, IMO.

[SuzeQuze]

It would have cost the party $35,000 to put him on the ballot. He didn't meet the criteria. :shrug: They were justified, IMO.

Yes I agree. And if he were serious he would have made sure he did meet the criteria.

[carrie721]

He didn't meet the criteria. :shrug: They were justified, IMO.

Yes I agree. And if he were serious he would have made sure he did meet the criteria.

O RLY

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[mikeschmike]

To hell with South Carolina, I'm writing him in!

I'd like to think that Colbert wouldn't have voted for military action in Iran (Thanks Hillary)

Or added a formerly gay (and now quite anti-gay) preacher to his campaign trail (Thanks Barack)

Or bowed down to the monstrous Neo-con movement setting this country back by decades.

Oh well! I guess we'll just samesamesame ourselves into oblivion. Cheers!

[Nixxxed]

A sad day indeed for joke presidential campaigns.

Stephen Colbert drops presidential bid

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071105/ap_en_tv/people_stephen_colbert_2

NEW YORK - Stephen Colbert has dropped his bid for the White House.

His announcement came after the South Carolina Democratic Executive Council voted last week to keep the host of "The Colbert Report" off the state's primary ballot. The vote was 13-3.

Colbert poses as a conservative talk-show host on the Comedy Central show.

"Although I lost by the slimmest margin in presidential election history — only 10 votes — I have chosen not to put the country through another agonizing Supreme Court battle," Colbert said Monday in a statement. "It is time for this nation to heal."

Colbert had said he would run only in his native South Carolina, a key primary state. He said he planned to run as a Democrat and a Republican — so he could lose twice. Colbert, 43, later declined to file with the GOP, which has a much higher filing fee ($35,000) than the Democrats ($2,500).

"I want to say to my supporters, this is not over," Colbert said. "While I may accept the decision of the Council, the fight goes on! The dream endures! ... And I am going off the air until I can talk about this without weeping."

In reality, "The Colbert Report" was going off the air because of a strike by Hollywood writers that began Monday. Many talk shows were expected to be shown in repeats during the strike.

[Sugar]

I'd like to think that Colbert wouldn't have voted for military action in Iran (Thanks Hillary)

Or added a formerly gay (and now quite anti-gay) preacher to his campaign trail (Thanks Barack)


Oh well! I guess we'll just samesamesame ourselves into oblivion. Cheers!


Or you could support one of the other candidates. :shrug:

One of the real ones, that is. ;)

[carrie721]

^ i think his point is that if you look at the poll #'s, people don't want change, not that there are no other options.

[Sugar]

^Well, indeed one has to wonder. But after watching the Philadelphia debate I have to wonder if the media is playing too big a role in choosing who our candidates are. I saw Dan Abrams justify excluding Gravel because "maybe MSNBC was being realistic" about who the leading candidates would be and giving them more floor time. Now I'm no big fan of Gravel, but I don't agree with that approach.

I am also underwhelmed by both Hillary's and Barack's campaigns...my point is that if we have any chance of seeing somone else in the running, the people are going to have to start bringing the other candidates into the conversation. I, for one, am giving Biden a real good look. :thumbsup:

[mikeschmike]

Or you could support one of the other candidates. :shrug:

One of the real ones, that is. ;)

If only there were real candidates...

[JazmenFlowers]

If only there were real candidates...
a to the ****ing men

[Sugar]

But of course there are other real candidates, and while none of them are perfect, I think there's better than Hillary or Barack. I'm curious as to what your issues are with the other Dems. I'm a little surprised there isn't more support for Dennis Kucinich on the board.

[carrie721]

But of course there are other real candidates, and while none of them are perfect, I think there's better than Hillary or Barack. I'm curious as to what your issues are with the other Dems. I'm a little surprised there isn't more support for Dennis Kucinich on the board.

oh, much love for kucinich ... i don't think he has much of a chance, though, and it's just as you said - it's partially because of how he's portrayed in the media. however, he's just a little too meek for people to take him seriously IMO. for example, when he was asked about his UFO sighting, he should have said "yes, i saw and unidentified flying object." and left it at that.

[Sugar]

I was so pissed at MSNBC for asking that stupid question. As if it wasn't bad enough that the second and third tier candidates got so little face time, they pull that. You can't even tell me that wasn't designed to make him look like a fool. And I usually like MSNBC.

But yeah, it's kinda hard to get over the "little guy" thing.

[carrie721]

I was so pissed at MSNBC for asking that stupid question. As if it wasn't bad enough that the second and third tier candidates got so little face time, they pull that. You can't even tell me that wasn't designed to make him look like a fool. And I usually like MSNBC.

But yeah, it's kinda hard to get over the "little guy" thing.

i was shocked that not only was it msnbc - it was tim russert who asked that question. tim russert, one of the last few true journalists. it's pretty disheartening. sigh.