Americans Elect, the organization for people without an opinion, has died, and not a moment too soon.

Via Washington Post's Chris Cillizza:

Late Thursday night, Americans Elect, a much-ballyhooed group dedicated to securing ballot access for a serious third-party presidential candidate in 2012, issued a statement acknowledging failure.

“As of this week, no candidate achieved the national support threshold required to enter the Americans Elect online convention in June,” the statement read. “The primary process for the Americans Elect nomination has come to an end.”

Darn. I'm not sure what anyone truly thought would happen with this group, but it was not one that benefitted progressives at all. Other opinions, via Cillizza:

In the end, no candidate was able to clear the relatively low 10,000-vote threshold to “win” the Americans Elect nomination. The candidate who came closest was Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who boasts a decidedly ardent group of supporters but is far from the centrist problem-solver the founder of Americans Elect had in mind when they hatched the idea. (And Paul wasn’t even a “declared” candidate for the Americans Elect nomination; former Louisiana governor Buddy Roemer, who got north of 6,000 votes, did the best of that group.)

McKinnon and other true believers in the possibility of a third party insisted all was not lost. “The results are disappointing, but until confidence is restored in the parties and our institutions of government, disruptive ideas will continue to emerge,” said McKinnon.

Added former Utah governor Jon Huntsman, who ran unsuccessfully for the Republican presidential nomination but since dropping out has been a major advocate for a third party: “Today’s pathetic political environment will be upended either by visionary solutions-based leadership or by the kind of disruptive organizing technology being fine-tuned by Americans Elect.”

Maybe. But the failure of Americans Elect to field a candidate in 2012 is yet more evidence that there is a cavernous gap between the idea of running a third party candidate for president and the reality of doing so — a gap no one has figured out how to bridge just yet.

Actually, I think a ticket with candidates who cancel each other out is a loser, and the death of this particular group is no great loss. Farewell, Americans Elect. Let's hope the Republican Party becomes as irrelevant as you were.

Chris Cillizza:

Kentucky: The biggest news of the night was in the Bluegrass State where former Lt. Gov. Steve Beshear (D) crushed Gov. Ernie Fletcher (R) 59 percent to 41 percent. Fletcher had long been seen as a dead man walking politically; ethics problems in his first four years in office had badly hamstrung his reelection chances. Beshear restores Democratic control to the Kentucky governorship, an office that the party has held for all but four years since 1967. Elsewhere on the ballot, state Auditor Crit Luallen (D) was reelected with 59 percent, a margin sure to stoke speculation of a challenge to Sen. Mitch McConnell (R) in 2008.

Virginia: Republicans appear to have lost control of the state Senate, as at least three Republican incumbents and a GOP-held open seat have gone to Democrats. The race we were watching most closely -- the 34th district battle between state Sen. Jeannemarie Devolites Davis (R) and Chap Peterson (D) -- turned into a rout, with the Democrat unseating the incumbent 56 percent to 44 percent. Democrats' gains are yet more evidence of the rapidly shifting demographics in the Commonwealth. Sen. Mark Warner (D) anyone?...read on

Kos says that the RNC is claiming victory!

Texas Monthy:

The fundamental change in the way people consume the news had to change the way we executed a communications strategy at the White House.

Q. How much attention did you pay to the programs on cable?

I never worried about a certain cable show. What I was looking for were trends that were shaping the narrative and the conventional wisdom and whether we had to be in front of or behind those things.

Q. What about the blogs?

We had to set up a whole new apparatus to deal with the challenges they pose. Are they real journalists? The Washington Post, for example, has journalists who are now bloggers. Do you treat them as bloggers? Do they get credentials?

Q. Let's think of it as a practical matter. If one of those journalists-turned-bloggers, Chris Cillizza, e-mails you to say he needs an interview, and at the same time one of the Post's print reporters-say, Dan Balz-e-mails you and says he needs an interview, and you can do only one . . .

Balz.

Q. Because the print edition of the Post has more of an impact?

Because Balz is on multiple platforms. He's booked more easily on television. He's read by more people. He influences people a bit more. Now, the question might not be as much Chris versus Dan as maybe, "Is it Dan Balz or one of the guys at [the conservative blog] Power Line?"

Q. Yeah, or what if [conservative blogger] Hugh Hewitt called?

That's when you start going, "Hmm . . ." Because they do reach people who are influential.

Q. Well, they reach the president's base.

That's what I mean by influential. I mean, talk about a direct IV into the vein of your support. It's a very efficient way to communicate. They regurgitate exactly and put up on their blogs what you said to them. It is something that we've cultivated and have really tried to put quite a bit of focus on.

Uh huh. That's what I thought.