Stop Democracy - We Want To Win!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I signed a petition to get Nader on the ballot even though I probably would not vote for him. Everyone should have a right to run. I wish more would, as I am sick of the two party system anyway.
 
I would also sign a petition to put Nader on the ballot. I haven't been asked. The way people are responding to his campaign, I don't think he'll get nearly the votes he got four years ago. He doesn't have the support of the celebs or the publications he did then. That being said I'm not surprised at this lawsuit. Partisan feelings are running higher than I've ever seen, much higher than in 1992.
 
This is ridiculous. The Democrats have to play fairly. Under exisiting laws, as far as I know, whoever gets the required number of signatures and pays the appropriate fees can be on the ballot, whether that is Ralph Nader, Paris Hilton, or Donald Duck. Plus, people can always write in their choices, too.

:down:
 
paxetaurora said:
This is ridiculous. The Democrats have to play fairly. Under exisiting laws, as far as I know, whoever gets the required number of signatures and pays the appropriate fees can be on the ballot, whether that is Ralph Nader, Paris Hilton, or Donald Duck. Plus, people can always write in their choices, too.

:down:
Click to expand...

I agree. This shouldn't be going on. If they keep Nader off of the ballot that deprives the voters of their opportunity to cast a "protest vote", something I feel is important. Limiting the whole process to just two candidates is just plain undemocratic and shouldn't be going on. Of course you can write in your protest vote, but I don't like this. Let Nader get on the ballots, and then we'll have a more fair election. Stuff like this gives me this queasy "police state" feeling. Do you know where your government agent is?
 
Last edited:
Arizona Democrats charged that 72 percent of the signatures Nader submitted on his petitions to get on the ballot are invalid, mostly because many of the names do not appear to be those of registered voters in Arizona.

If the allegations prove to be correct, Nader would be more than 8,000 signatures short of the number he needs to get on the Arizona ballot.
Click to expand...

But what if this is true? I mean, if these Democrats are just doing it to tie up Nader's money in this lawsuit then it is shamefull. But what if 72% of the names on Nader's list are fake, then it would be a correct lawsuit right?
 
DrTeeth said:


But what if this is true? I mean, if these Democrats are just doing it to tie up Nader's money in this lawsuit then it is shamefull. But what if 72% of the names on Nader's list are fake, then it would be a correct lawsuit right?
Click to expand...

That would be if 72% of the signatures are not of registered voters. That would be uncool........but how do they prove that these people are not registered voters? It seems like they could use this for dirty tricks, to get the people to spend extra $$, then not get on the ballot. Sheesh.
 
DrTeeth said:


But what if this is true? I mean, if these Democrats are just doing it to tie up Nader's money in this lawsuit then it is shamefull. But what if 72% of the names on Nader's list are fake, then it would be a correct lawsuit right?
Click to expand...

Yes, the lawsuit would be valid. If the names are not valid then I don' t see what the problem is.
 
That's the beauty of the US legal system. If you believe you have a claim, you can tie someone up in litigation with little fear of retribution or penalty (if your claim is unsupportable).

There is always an error rate for petitions and signature gatherers always obtain more than what is required. The 72% rate seems phenomenally high, however.
 
72% *is* high, and I'll bet it's not true. They probably just blew up the numbers to make their case overwhelming. I don't think the Nader petition people are that stupid. I wish I could do something about this :censored: but I can't. It pisses me off big time. It's not fair. :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
verte76 said:
how do they prove that these people are not registered voters?
Click to expand...

I presume the US has something similar to the electoral register we have in the UK -- a list containing the names of all people entitled to vote in elections. So wouldn't the simple way to determine whether those who signed the petition are registered voters be to compare their names/addresses, etc with those on a list of registered voters?
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:


I presume the US has something similar to the electoral register we have in the UK -- a list containing the names of all people entitled to vote in elections. So wouldn't the simple way to determine whether those who signed the petition are registered voters be to compare their names/addresses, etc with those on a list of registered voters?
Click to expand...

You are correct. In California, the Secretary of State's office receives the petitions, compares them to voter rolls, and certifies the petition. If there are problems, the State invalidates the petition. It shouldn't take a lawsuit.
 
i had the fun job of cross referencing names like these when i worked on a campaign. good times.

anyway, i really hope nader makes the ballot.
 
The only way we will ever eliminate the two party system is to have a major overhaul of the American electoral system. If we had an electoral system not unlike Louisiana, where all candidates run, and if one candidate takes 50% or more of the vote, wins; and, if not, the top two candidates have a final election, I think a multi-party system could really work.

As it is, the electoral process is painfully stacked towards maintaining the two-party system. In fact, you can't seem to get any third-party into the major debates, and we all know how important exposure is.

Melon
 
When I was asked to sign the petition, it was in a parking lot. You had to put your SS# and phone # for verification. Surely they did that in Arizona. They also said you were under no obligation to vote for Nader, it was only saying you thought he should be on the ballot.
 
melon said:
The only way we will ever eliminate the two party system is to have a major overhaul of the American electoral system. If we had an electoral system not unlike Louisiana, where all candidates run, and if one candidate takes 50% or more of the vote, wins; and, if not, the top two candidates have a final election, I think a multi-party system could really work.

As it is, the electoral process is painfully stacked towards maintaining the two-party system. In fact, you can't seem to get any third-party into the major debates, and we all know how important exposure is.

Melon
Click to expand...

The electoral college is lame and outdated. It was offensive in the first place because it was saying people weren't actually voting for a candidate, but voting for the electors representing that candidate. It's time to can it, and the two party system!
 
I also think it is time to can the party conventions. They nothing but an expensive show, and, in the case of Boston, this expensive show is pretty much going to cripple the city entirely while the Democratic National Convention is here.

I'm sorry, but it is time to dump that expensive party.

Melon
 
I agree, conventions have become big, expensive parties that serve no real purpose or function. They did when the candidates were actually chosen there. Now they don't choose the candidates, so why have them?
 
I agree the two party system is ridiculous, I also think the Democrats are acting chicken shit, but I've also been very displeased with groups that are working to get Nader's name on the ballot. I've ran into several people with petitions in Dallas and in Chicago that I thought were acting very shady in their approach.
 
BVS, I agree, I've been wondering just who it is promoting Nader. It's rumored that his choice of a running mate is Peter Camejo, whom Californians will know as a gubernatorial candidate. Have you ever looked into that guy's background? It gives me the creeps.
 
verte76 said:
BVS, I agree, I've been wondering just who it is promoting Nader. It's rumored that his choice of a running mate is Peter Camejo, whom Californians will know as a gubernatorial candidate. Have you ever looked into that guy's background? It gives me the creeps.
Click to expand...

Nader has announced Camejo as his running mate. This will give Nader votes in California.
 
The first thing I realize after reading all these responses to the article is, where have you all been for the past 4 years!?

I spent hours upon hours trying to get Nader on the ballot in Oklahoma during the summer of 2000 only to fall short :(. Everyone in the process was told the signature goal was 20,000 higher than the amount needed. That's mainly because roughly 1/4 of the people who sign those things aren't registered or are disqualified due to other reasons.

Now, here we are; 4 years later and nothing has been done to ease the ballot access process. Blah. It's hard to rally behind something or ever change the status quo when nobody does anything besides TALK about the problem.

I hope he gets on all 50 ballots and wins the election. (Notice I'm just TALKING?)

I'm sick of this world and its corruption. Sick.
 
On CNN last night, they had a story about some Nader supporters who have written him an open letter asking him to drop out because they don't him to help Bush win. A Quinnipiac College poll shows that, w/ Nader in the race, Bush/Kerry are much closer..I think Kerry lost about 6 points in the poll. (he's ahead either way, but it's almsot tied w/ Nader in)..maybe cnn.com has the story since my recollection is probably flawed.

I'm sure Ralph Nader has many good ideas, but if he's going to help Bush win I don't want him on the ballot.
 
Last edited:
Which proves that money wins elections, not ideas. If this is true, then wouldn't be safe to suggest that our country isn't really a democratic republic, but rather a plutocracy of the rich and the elite? Hmmm...I guess that's not a surprise, but no one seems to mention that anymore.

Viva la Nader!

I'm still voting for Kerry ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Phantom Dreamer
  • Locked
D.A.R.N (Democrats Are Republicans Now)
Replies
5
Views
884
Diemen
Diemen
Phantom Dreamer
Gloria La Riva
Replies
15
Views
1K
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
  • Locked
Justin Trudeau Neoliberal
Replies
0
Views
767
Phantom Dreamer
Phantom Dreamer
jaimearodriguez
  • Locked
Is Aung San Suu Kyi a Fraud?
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
bobsaget77
bobsaget77
Irvine511
let's be honest: it's the Republicans who ruin everything
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
ladyfreckles
ladyfreckles

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom