Talk:John B. Anderson

Untitled

This article really should have more complete information about his campaign platform in 1980. It would also be interesting to know who he supported in the 2004 presidential election. If anyone reading this knows anything about either of these things, please add it. Academic Challenger 04:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Two things

1. In "Radicals for Capitalism", it is asserted that the Libertarian Party in 1984 considered trying to get Anderson to run as a Libertarian. Anderson did well enough in 1980 that he would have qualified for federal funding had he run and the Libertarians were somewhat in disary following internal bickering.

2. I am not sure the Anderson race really was an example of IRV -- Reagan got more than 50% of the vote anyway.

Dropping out of the House

The article suggests that Anderson didn't run for reelection for his House seat in 1980 because of the crowded field of candidates. It's more likely that he had to drop out because state law prevented him from running for two offices at once. Most states don't allow this, consequently most House members who run for President or Vice President have to leave the House to do so. Does anybody know for sure? --MiguelMunoz (talk) 00:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Something needs to be done about the severely unencyclopedic language in this article.

Its quite obvious that this was written not as fact, but as a story about John Anderson. Don Lyon, was not and would not be considered by any standard in the local area a fundamentalist. Written in a style that more a campaign article or auto-biographical summation. I'm sorry but this reads like a fifth grade novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.193.72.15 (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I mean, "the bloom was off the rose"? This isn't up to Wikipedia standards. 24.214.230.66 (talk) 05:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:So fix it. Location (talk) 07:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's that bad. It's a nice short read that sounds as if it's lifted right from a book on the 1980 election. Hopefully that's not the case... At any rate only a few things need changed: dropping some adjectives and any similes or idioms, making the tone more neutral(not POV, but language overall) I think it's pretty well written and gave me a good idea of what his 1980 campaign was like start to finish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.129.177 (talk) 05:56, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I worked a little bit on the tone (e.g. "voters who had considered him a fair and moral fellow") as part of a series of changes I made in several parts of the article, tone that I assume is due to the use of the 2011 book by Mason cited in the references. The unencyclopedic tone needs further work. 72.244.200.41 (talk) 22:44, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree the language is very odd, not just the flowery stuff but it just seems off somehow. There are also an awful lot of uncited statements, making me wonder if there is some WP:OR here. --Nstrauss (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

4 years and still a mess. i wish people wouldnt add bad content. its so much harder to remove and rewrite, than to simply leave out until written properly. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Quote section

I removed the quote section because Wikiquote can cover that material. In fact, I just now created that entry. The material is not encyclopedic enough for this article. Binksternet (talk) 14:35, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

1980 Impact

This quote -- "Anderson's campaign turned out to be "simply another option for frustrated voters who had already decided not to back Carter for another term. Polls found Anderson voters nearly as likely to list Reagan as their second choice as Carter"" -- isn't supported in any way. The link is dead, and even if it was "alive," it's a link to 'Doonesbury!' If someone has a real link to a legitimate poll or study, post it.

Yes, that's more than a little POV; even supported, it should be replaced with the facts that support it, not summarised in a way that makes Wikipedia an opinion-post as well... whole point of NPOV is readers should have the facts and draw their own conclusions, one way or the other. Schissel | Sound the Note! 04:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes: According to a leading historian of third party races, Anderson's, by historical standards, very respectable 6.6% “tally drew far more votes away from Carter than Reagan.” J. David Gillespie, Challengers To Duopoly : Why Third Parties Matter In American Two-Party Politics (2012) 139-142. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.216.234.162 (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Another Wikipedia entry: "John Anderson's independent candidacy, aimed at eliciting support from liberals, was also seen as hurting Carter more than Reagan,[18] Skinner, Kudelia, Mesquita, Rice (2007). The Strategy of Campaigning. University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-11627-0. Retrieved October 20, 2008. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.216.234.162 (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

John Anderson in popular culture

Trudeau did a little more than just run several strips sympathetic to Anderson's campaign- he had Mike Doonesbury become one of Anderson's volunteers, canvassing and making phone calls on his behalf - more, however I think, to demonstrate how much current election law and practice (federally and in the various states) were biased in favor of the two existing major parties (none of whose Presidential candidates, once past their primaries, had to jump through the hoops that minor-party candidates had to in order to get on the ballots), than specifically, I think, sympathetic to Anderson - though there were, I think, one or two of those there also. Would have to check my collected Doonesbury editions (specifically, the one called "He's Never Heard of You, Either" - as in, Mike Doonesbury's response to "Never heard of him.")  :) Schissel | Sound the Note! 04:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Religious beliefs - What is Anderson's denomination?

In the infobox of this article, it states that Anderson was a member of the Evangelical Free Church of America denomination. Are there any sources for this? If not, it should be removed. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Subject Editing

The note at the top says the subject or someone close to them has edited the article. Does anyone know what's going on with this? --71.194.19.81 (talk) 09:35, 12 October 2016 (UTC)