Tag Cloud
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Peace and Freedom Party candidate
by Justin Smith, published on February 10, 2010 at 12:36 AM
Storyline: Sacramento
The Peace and Freedom Party is gathering signatures in Sacramento to put Daniel Fredrick on the ballot in the November election.
Fredrick is running for Assembly District 4 against Republican incumbent TedGaines. Fredrick has made his reasons for running against Gaines abundantly clear: “In a nutshell, what separates me from Ted Gaines is everything! Whatever he stands for, I am the opposite. So are my solutions.”
Fredrick made the decision to run during a meeting in which Ray Reynolds, a ocal member of the PFP, said, “We are never going to get any young people in this party by running our tired old asses again. Daniel, you need to run”.
The importance of getting a younger demographic into the fray of politics is the PFP's goal. It offers a litany of platforms that appeal to a
younger generation, above all including them in politics. The PFP goes beyond the generic political party side choosing.
Explaining his view about why young people are so important to the PFP, Fredrick remarked, “ Easy; it’s the future of this party. I am the
youngest representative here and I’m 35!” Beyond just including the young and rebellious, a different perspective on economics is of great concern to Fredrick.
The commitment to the working class is one of Fredrick’s many priorities. According to Fredrick, “ The reason for the low approval rating for the California Legislature is because they are not working for the people. That simple. No one is looking out for the working
class.”
According to the Public Policy Institute of California, the California Legislature has a 16 percent approval rating, 75 percent disapprove
and 9 percent decline to state among registered voters. The current population of California is just under 36 million.
Reflecting on the signature-gathering drive, Fredrick said, “It has been great talking to people and letting them ask questions on what I stand or.” The advantage is two-fold in Fredrick’s eyes: “I can register more Peace and Freedom Party members and really meet people that want to vote for us.”
Since a political party of this nature typically doesn’t have the war chest of Republicans and Democrats, paying a $2,000 fee to be
placed on the ballot isn’t an option.
One accomplishment the PFP can take credit for is being an integral part in passing a law that allows political parties to gather
signatures to be placed on the ballot instead of paying $2,000.
Every election cycle is crucial to the party. The PFP needs 2 percent of the vote every election cycle to keep its status as a
ballot-qualified party.
Fredrick is currently the vice president of the Central County Committee for the Sacramento Peace and Freedom Party.
Justin Smith can be reached at justinsmiths@gmail.com
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
thsas
February 10, 2010 | 12:36 PM
I think I saw this episode on Seinfeld.
0
0
REPLY
Justin Smith
February 10, 2010 | 9:17 PM
Hilarious, you must be one of the writers for the situational comedy. Do you have another joke?
1
0
REPLY
zoltandebugh
February 13, 2010 | 1:49 AM
It's nice that P & F is champion of the working class--most, if not all voters and candidates of P&F are sons and daughters of working class folkx. But where is the working class vote to vote for P&F? It this great "socialist" party is the "vanguard of the working class" why are these "working class" voters either voting for the GOP or not at all? Clearly, the working class doesn't vote for their working class interest, otherwise they would vote for P&F?? Yeh, right. The explanation for this phenomena is that the workers all think they're allowed to identify as members of the middle class--or as as a term "invented" during a recent election, goes: the "working middle class." Is that anything like the "working poor."
0
0
REPLY
Lindol French
March 8, 2010 | 4:08 PM
I'm all for anything that helps us break the two party monopoly in politics. We have a certain percentage of people, say 40 percent, who are going to vote Republican no matter what, and a similar percentage who will vote Democrat come Hell or high water. What ends up happening is the person who can peel off the most from the undecided 20 percent in the middle emerges victorious. For the most part in recent years this has been achieved by going furthest towards the middle. The obvious exception being Obama who achieved his goal by energizing a huge segment of the population who would not have otherwise voted. The fact is, as long as we have a two party system we won't have any meaningful democratically achieved change. Some people say that you're wasting your vote if you vote for a third party. I'd venture that you're wasting your vote if you don't.
0
0
REPLY
