Darrell Castle Thread (Constitution Party Nominee)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stylteralmaldo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stylteralmaldo

Guest
I’m starting a general Darrell Castle thread.

Moderator notice regarding:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=14101178&postcount=10

Some general guidelines on Darrell Castle:

castle2016.com/platform/

Includes his stances regarding:
  • Adherence To The Constitution
  • Withdrawal From The United Nations
  • End the Federal Reserve
  • Agenda 21 (Private Property Rights)
  • Pro-Life Stance
Note: This is not necessarily an endorsement of his candidacy, but I do encourage those considering a 3rd party option to consider what he stands for compared to other candidates.

Thank you.
 
I appreciate the Constitution parties’ platform. Every couple years I check back in with them and they don’t seem to be getting a lot of traction. Not sure if it is a financial issue, leadership / organizational issue, or if the country has just moved so far away from their core principals that there is little interest.

I wish them well.
 
Paganus said:
Are we allowed to mention the fund raising efforts of the candidates?

If so, as of June 30, 2016 Castle has raised $10,289. This candidacy is not viable.
Click to expand...
I am not under the illusion that any 3rd party candidate can win this November. There is a 99.999999999% probability that the next President will be Trump or Clinton. In my opinion, the only reason to vote 3rd party is if the two majors are equally bad. Clinton is a criminal (can’t think of a softer term to describe her) which automatically eliminates her because I believe she likely can be blackmailed. Trump does not seem competent and is impulsive and it is obvious to me that he will not embrace conservative values once in office. I’m trying to decide if that is equally bad as Clinton. I’m not sure - thus I’m on the fence as to whether to vote for a principled candidate (I pretty much agree with the Constitution Party platform) or the least damaging candidate (which at this point I’m unsure who would be least damaging).

I’d be curious where you got your information regarding fundraising information. I don’t think it’s against forum rules.
 
Paganus said:
Are we allowed to mention the fund raising efforts of the candidates?

If so, as of June 30, 2016 Castle has raised $10,289. This candidacy is not viable.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately these secondary parties only make themselves known after the two national parties have run their course in the primaries and conventions. When candidates like Wallace or Perot announced their candidacies well in advance they managed to get a larger share of the popular vote. Wallace even managed to get some electoral votes.
 
I very much like Darrell Castle and the Constitution Party and I dislike the two major party candidates. The problem is this:
Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be nominating Supreme Court justices on a Court which will set precedents on issues such as life, religious conscience, and religious liberty.
 
bk2049 said:
I very much like Darrell Castle and the Constitution Party and I dislike the two major party candidates. The problem is this:
Either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be nominating Supreme Court justices on a Court which will set precedents on issues such as life, religious conscience, and religious liberty.
Click to expand...
I might vote for Castle since I figure Trump will win my state easily anyhow. If I thought there was a chance Hilary could win it I would probably have to vote for Trump on the hopes he’d more likely appoint less liberal judges. 🤷 Not great options.
 
I like his ideas.

1st hundred days:
Get out of the UN,
End the Federal Reserve control of our money,
Get spending in line,
Protect the US rather than the world.
 
ChurchSoldier said:
I like his ideas.

1st hundred days:
Get out of the UN,
End the Federal Reserve control of our money,
Get spending in line,
Protect the US rather than the world.
Click to expand...
I like those ideas, too, but I don’t think they’re doable to completion in the first hundred days. Maybe the first year . . .
 
Jill Stein and Darrell Castle Qualify for Louisiana Ballot
Click to expand...
August 19 is the Louisiana deadline for qualified parties, and also independent presidential candidates and the presidential nominees of unqualified parties, to file presidential elector candidates. On August 19, Jill Stein and Darrell Castle filed. As of this moment there are eleven presidential candidates set in Louisiana. With two hours to go, there is still no filing by Rocky De La Fuente, Evan McMullin, or Jim Hedges. Many campaigns have been having difficulty with the Louisiana filing because this week’s floods have forced many residents to flee their homes, and it is diffiult for some presidential elector candidates to sign, notarize and deliver candidacy forms.
Click to expand...
ballot-access.org/2016/08/19/jill-stein-and-darrell-castle-qualify-for-louisiana-ballot/

According to Darrell Castle, including today’s news regarding Louisiana, here’s the other states that he’s eligible:

us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=b0212aa6690083a860340c168&id=e88d7cda71
  • Alaska
  • Arkansas
  • Colorado
  • Florida
  • Hawaii
  • Idaho
  • Iowa (plan to turn in petition soon)
  • Michigan
  • Mississippi
  • Missouri
  • Nevada
  • New Jersey
  • New Mexico
  • Oregon
  • Pennsylvania (petition turned in)
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Utah
  • Washington
  • West Virginia (petition turned in)
  • Wisconsin
  • Wyoming
 
ChurchSoldier said:
Protect the US rather than the world.
Click to expand...
That sounds attractive in some ways but it also means the US will have no push to intervene in humanitarian crises. That’s also a virtual guarantee of pulling out of the UN.
 
Idaho to have different Constitution Party nominee

BOISE, Idaho (AP) -

Idaho voters won’t see the national Constitution Party nominee when they go to the polls this November.

Instead, Rev. Scott Copeland of Texas will be Constitution Party’s nominee in Idaho rather than Darrell Castle of Tennessee.

The Spokesman-Review reports that Idaho was the only state to hold a Constitution Party primary while the other states sent delegates to the party’s national convention, where Castle was nominated.

Copeland won Idaho’s first-ever Constitution Party presidential primary in March. Castle did not run in the Idaho primary.

Idaho law states that a presidential nominee must be certified by the party’s state chairman to go on the ballot.

Betsie Kimbrough, state elections director for the Idaho Secretary of State’s office, said the state accepted Copeland as the party’s candidate earlier this year.

Castle did not respond to requests to his campaign for comment.

localnews8.com/news/idaho-to-have-different-constitution-party-nominee/41312670
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top