So — some folks now want to sue the former chair at a 100% loss to the LP based on their own conflicted, politically-convenient mudslinging? Well, I hope it will at least make some of them feel less insecure.
But — with respect to a more serious and substantial issue raised today, how can any Libertarian be taken seriously when our national treasurer today told us he was "highly skeptical" that the quality of the candidate could have any impact on public acceptance
in the presidential election?
What else is there to say?
Someone should really ask Mr. Redpath to break down how the $54,000 NM ballot access fund got divided up, and what each petitioner's take was.
Another great question would be about the decades-old "tradition" of "helping" other 3rd parties while petitioning for ballot access on the LP's dime (as was confirmed by Mr. Redpath during our September 10th LNC conference call, where he acknowledged he "should
have disclosed it")... shouldn't we maybe have some kind of policy in place to disclose stuff like that?
Are you guys going to sue Redpath next, after things to south between y'all?
We know some are chomping at the bit for lawfare, since they are politically powerless, but I really don't think any of that is going to improve the budget. Cutting off the ballot access cartel, however, would make a huge difference. We really need to be building
our own proprietary lists.
Austin Martin
R1
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
Lp.org/martindonor
Join the fight and support the removal of Socialism from the LP by donating at the link below:
Lp.org/martindonor
From: Evan McMahon <evan.m...@lp.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 6, 2025 7:39:50 AM