Talk:Third-party and independent candidates for the 2024 United States presidential election

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Third-party and independent candidates for the 2024 United States presidential election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Presidential elections / Government / History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Low-importance).

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Single candidate table vs multiple candidate tables

Longestview changed the list of candidates from being in a single table to multiple tables. Is there consensus that this is better? I personally prefer them in a single table. The maps are then aligned with the respective candidate and it is visually easier to parse. Dhalsim2 (talk) 19:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is how it's formatted on the 2020 page. No consensus as to which is better. Longestview (talk) 04:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, understood. No hostility from me. Just a sincere question. If people prefer the multiple tables, I totally accept that. I just hope others might speak up regarding which they prefer. Dhalsim2 (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the single table myself; the rendering works fine on mobile, whether on the app or the browser, but on a desktop, the alignment is a little off, since the Prohibition Party candidates don't have images (and the rest of the candidates in that section do). David O. Johnson (talk) 23:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How much time for comments is appropriate before moving back to the single table? I don't want to do anything unfairly. Dhalsim2 (talk) 03:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As it's been over a month with no objections, I've gone ahead and switched back to the single candidate table. Dhalsim2 (talk) 23:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cool Flags + My Tables

Hey everyone, in a recent edit I added some very neat animated flags. I'm wondering if we could make that the standard for the articles, as they seem to pop out more, they were reverted when I added them.

Another thing that was reverted was my tables for the PFP and the LMP, can these be added back? Microplastic Consumer (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Animated flags don’t seem to add any encyclopedic value.

I haven’t seen the ones you added, but to me that sounds reminiscent of the late-90s website kitsch and not really in character with what Wikipedia is going for. SecretName101 (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, finding your edit affirms my suspicion. It really does look late-90s geocities kitsch and adds no value SecretName101 (talk) 12:47, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with others. No offense, but this screams GeoCities. Dhalsim2 (talk) 00:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Write-In Access

https://www.eac.gov/sites/default/files/2023-10/Write_In_Voting_Designed_Report_508.pdf

According to clearing house, the following states do not require registration for write-in access. Therefore, can someone add these to the candidate maps (it appears someone already added most of them for Sonski/Wood)? Or am I missing something

Alabama, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wyoming = 82 EVs

Crazysportsdude1 (talk) 22:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it's already added for some candidates then it should be there for all. ~Politicdude (About me, talk, contribs) 17:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to a 2021 statute, write-in candidates for president and vice-president in Kansas are required to register with the state for their ballots to be counted. Doesn't say anything about signatures. Unless something changed in the last 2 years (nothing that I could personally find) then I don't think KS should be counted just yet. Longestview (talk) 13:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with @Longestview. That PDF seems to be wrong about Kansas. The statute that it cites specifies the voter procedure of writing in a candidate, but it doesn't have anything to do with candidate registration. Dhalsim2 (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, don't see how the 2022 statute referenced in the pdf changes the affidavit rule so looks to be an inaccuracy. Also as an additional source: https://sos.ks.gov/elections/candidate-information.html Crazysportsdude1 (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Arkansas is similar to Kansas. It is not the case that Arkansas is a no-registration-required state. See Third party and independent candidates for the 2020 United States presidential election. Unless there has been some change since then, I believe that the PDF is wrong. Dhalsim2 (talk) 06:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its a dot gov site from 2023 so unless there's a more recent source to the contrary we should stick with it. Crazysportsdude1 (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The report does come from a legit source (eac.gov) and was published recently enough (October 2023), but it's also the case that this federal-level source is simply doing its own state-level research in order to derive this data. They offer the disclaimer:

Data included in this chart is not intended to be exhaustive and is derived from a research partnership between the U.S. EAC and the National Conference of State Legislatures. This chart is not intended to provide legal advice. For the most complete and up-to-date information, please consult with state officials. If any information is inaccurate in this document, please email clearinghouse@eac.gov.
— U.S. Election Assistance Commission Write-In Voting Report, Page 6

In any dispute whether this Arkansas is wrong or not, I believe that the report would take precedence over original research, but looking at the 2020 election results, it seems clear enough that the community would accept that the report is wrong. If this acceptance by the community isn't the case, I drop my contention, and I'll leave it be. Dhalsim2 (talk) 16:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFK Jr is on the ballot in Hawaii

its apperently been confirmed by the Kennedy campaign that the Hawaii Sec. of State has certified the required signatures needed to put Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the ballot in Hawaii. Link: https://www.kennedy24.com/kennedy_supporters_signatures_we_the_people_party_hawaii Snowboi (talk) 05:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cornel West is on the ballot in South Carolina

It seems to be confirmed that, at least according to the West campaign, he's made it on the ballot in South Carolina (no word on if he missed Hawaii or not, though.) WriteInAcknowledger (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]