bluestateguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:04 PM
Original message |
States with Democratic Secretaries of State will block Nader from state ballots |
|
We are fortunate that today, as compared to 2000, more states currently have a Democratic chief elections officer (usually the Secretary of State). They will use their powers to prevent the Communist candidate , Ralph Nader (I'm not pulling any punches here folks; deal with it) from getting on their ballots. Every last signature will be scrutinized down to each un-dotted "I" and un-crossed "T". Any signature that is illegible will be discounted. Every address will have to be verified, and every signatory's voter registration status will be scrutinized. We will tie Nader up in knots, forcing him to go to court to get on the ballot in every state, draining his campaign funds and his time.
If necessary, Democratic secretaries of state will use Katherine Harris or Ken Blackwell tactics to do what has to be done.
|
LTR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:07 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I say let him be on the ballot |
|
Give Ol' Ralphie enough rope to hang himself.
|
Benhurst
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:13 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Is this the "new politics" Obama talks about? |
|
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 01:18 PM by Benhurst
It sounds like something straight out of Boss Tweed's playbook. New politics, indeed.
|
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:38 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
6. They did it in 04. Both party's are always desperate to keep any percieved threat off the |
|
ballot.
Where have you been?
|
Benhurst
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
13. I was here, and I complained about it at the time. |
|
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 09:53 PM by Benhurst
And again, it's straight out of Boss Tweed's playbook. "New" politics, indeed. Same old crap in a different wrapper.
|
John Q. Citizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
19. I'm not getting how you are blaming Obama for what the OP predicts will happen |
|
by SOSs in the states.
Can a presidential candidate order SOSs to let Ralph on the ballot?
|
yourguide
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
16. how is THIS obama's fault??? |
OHdem10
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. For the Democrats to do this--Republican Tactic--I say no |
|
Interfering with Democracy is wrong no matter which party does it.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. This OPINE is coming from an Obamafolk (OP)--figures! |
|
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 01:20 PM by rodeodance
bluestateguy (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Feb-24-08 12:04 PM Original message States with Democratic Secretaries of State will block Nader from state ballots We are fortunate that today, as compared to 2000, more states currently have a Democratic chief elections officer (usually the Secretary of State). They will use their powers to prevent the Communist candidate , Ralph Nader (I'm not pulling any punches here folks; deal with it) from getting on their ballots. Every last signature will be scrutinized down to each un-dotted "I" and un-crossed "T". Any signature that is illegible will be discounted. Every address will have to be verified, and every signatory's voter registration status will be scrutinized. We will tie Nader up in knots, forcing him to go to court to get on the ballot in every state, draining his campaign funds and his time.
If necessary, Democratic secretaries of state will use Katherine Harris or Ken Blackwell tactics to do what has to be done.
|
stevenleser
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:24 PM
Response to Original message |
5. All of you acting so indignant should go tell the spouse of a parent of a dead soldier how upset you |
|
are. I dont happen to agree with the tactics bluestateguy advocates, but I understand the anger that got him there. Hundreds of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis and tens of thousands of dead/maimed/psychologically scarred military men and women because of this arse, and yes I do blame him for his stupid rhetoric and convincing just enough people that there was no difference between Bush and Gore. When you think about it that way AND factor in that Nader is so stupid and selfish that he refuses to learn from his mistake, all kinds of things come to mind to try and stop him. im not saying i would try them or advocate for them, but you cant stop thoughts from entering your mind.
|
RestoreGore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:42 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Why? What are they afraid of? |
Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:43 PM
Response to Original message |
8. The ideal of government in the public interest |
|
....is progressive, not communistic.
The problem with Nader is that he's running third-party instead of running for an office as a Democrat, not what he would do if he were elected to an office.
|
DaDooRonRon
(418 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:46 PM
Response to Original message |
9. The "Communist candidate" |
|
Honestly, if this doesn't tell you all you need to know about the "Nader haters."
What's next, the Green Party folks are all Marxists and we're all heading down the road to socialist hell if we don't straighten up and fly Dem???
:rofl: :rofl:
|
CK_John
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 01:51 PM
Response to Original message |
10. Nader is just in it for the matching fund. He'll collect fund to get on the ballot and then fall off |
|
the radar screen. The Green Party has already selected their candidate, so he will have an even tougher time in many states.
|
Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Why does Nader want the matching fund? NT |
More Than A Feeling
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 03:56 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Joe McCarthy, is that you? |
|
Labeling left-wingers like that, even those you hate, serves nobody but the reactionary right.
|
ElsewheresDaughter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 09:52 PM
Response to Original message |
14. Please if Nader is no fool....if he meets all the requirements they can't do jack shit... |
|
your are talking nonsense
|
BlackVelvet04
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 09:53 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Nice to know you approve of katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell. n/t |
Tatiana
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 09:58 PM
Response to Original message |
17. Let's not perpetuate the politics of fear. If his paperwork is legit, let Nader go on the ballot. nt |
monomach
(619 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Feb-24-08 10:09 PM
Response to Original message |
18. Not sure why they'd bother. |
|
Ralph Nader isn't going to eat away at Obama's base. He's going to get the Gravel voters, and that's about it.
|
MaineDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Feb-25-08 07:11 AM
Response to Original message |
20. If he legitimately qualifies, why should they block it? |
|
What legal reason would they have?
What you're suggesting is done now in almost all states for all candidates. Signatures ARE checked.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 02:56 PM
Response to Original message |