It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Michigan Republicans File 42,000 Signatures to Get Nader on Ballot

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Ralph Nader's campaign was only about to scrounge up 5,400 signatures for his petition to be placed on the Michigan ballot for the presidential election. To his surprise, or probably not, the remaining signatures were filed by Michigan Republicans on his behalf. The signatures from republicans more than met the requirement to appear on the ballot.

Democrats are challenging these signatures in court, already overturning a decision to put Nader on the ballot in Arizona. Nader is threatening legal action for the Democrats role in keeping Nader off the ballot in many states.
Nader says that his place on the ballot will give more choice to Americans.

The Republican groups who are playing devil's advocate stated that their goals are to split the liberal vote and to get Kerry to define strictly his stance on many issues. They claim Kerry is appearing as more moderate, and they want him to stay on the liberal side.



Pro-Nader Republicans and anti-Nader Democrats may now be waging more aggressive Nader campaigns than even Nader's own effort.


abcnews.go.com...

Third party candidates are just being used as a ploy to take away votes from other parties. In this case though, the liberal Nader is being used as a tool to take away votes from the Democrats. That is fairly obvious and has even been portrayed as such by Republicans, yet Nader is trying to play dumb. When will get a serious third party taking votes away from both parties?

Vote libertarian Libertarian Home Page

[edit on 25-7-2004 by Jamuhn]




posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Third and fourth and fifth party candidates have as much
right to run for president as the Republicans and democrats
do. I signed a petition for Nadar to be able to get on the
ballot here in Delaware. I hope to see the Greens, the
Libertarians, and the Independents on the ballot as well
as the Republicans and Democrats.

America deserves more than two choices. Even though it
is unlikely anyone from those parties would win this year,
they have to get started at some point. This election year
is as good as any.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:51 PM
link   
i think nader is genuine, but is a waste. you throw your vote away on this guy. if he wants to stay on the ballot fine, but if by september, the race is that close, he just drop off. not ruin it like he did in 2000.

ahh, i miss kucinich...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I don't think nader is going to make any real trouble in Michigan after all Michigan has bee democratic for 15 years, I see it as an effort of the republicans to gain more control of this state, but democrats will do the same if it was the other way around.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 12:57 PM
link   
What do you think about the tactics being used to get Nader on the ballot? A reason Nader is on many ballots is because of help from the Republican party. A reason he is not on many ballots is because of challenges from the Democratic party. I couldnt agree more that there should be many parties on the ballots, but their actions will obviously affect the outcome of the election. Hopefully, this will have such an effect that will boost third, fourth, fifth, whatever extra party support in the future.

But its pretty dirty on both the big party's parts.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The Democrats are taking for granted that if Nader was off the ballot they would get his votes, especially after the fact that the Dems are the one's who are digilently trying to keep him off the ballot.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:02 PM
link   


The Democrats are taking for granted that if Nader was off the ballot they would get his votes, especially after the fact that the Dems are the one's who are digilently trying to keep him off the ballot.



somehow, i dont see a bush supporter sitting on the fence wondering if he should vote for nader...2 different ideologies there...way different...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I have the feeling that compared to last elections this time whoever wins is going to be by a landslide and this time is going to be a precedent amount of voter that will show up for the elections. I see it as a patriotic thing.

This is just an opinion.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   


I have the feeling that compared to last elections this time whoever wins is going to be by a landslide and this time is going to be a precedent amount of voter that will show up for the elections. I see it as a patriotic thing.



i think its going to be a landslide as well. i think the media wants to give us the impression that it is a close race so we will keep watching, but i think the reality is different.

it seems that every president i can remember has won reelection by a landslide. if it was reported as a "close" race, the incumbant lost...personally i feel that kerry has this thing locked in...



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
What do you think about the tactics being used to get Nader on the ballot? A reason he is not on many ballots is because of challenges from the Democratic party.


Democrats attempting to disenfranchise voters who aren't happy with the Republicans or the Democrats. They are forcing a vote for Democrats when the voter really doesn't want to.

Disenfranchisement. That's the tactic.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
So you think that the actions of the Republicans will have a good effect on the representation of more ideologies on the ballot? I agree, but I think their intentions are very dirty, I'd like to see a conservative third party with the same hype as Nader on the ballot. It would make things much more interesting.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
somehow, i dont see a bush supporter sitting on the fence wondering if he should vote for nader...2 different ideologies there...way different...


I doubt it also, but I have found that some potential Nader supporters I know are upset that they won't have their choice on the ballot and they would rather stay home than vote for Kerry. It goes to your idea that voting for Nader is throwing a vote away, Nader's supporters do not think they are throwing away their vote, they believe in his message and after all they should have the right to choose him if they want to.

I would like at least 3 probably 5 candidates to choose from, this is the one thing I saw that Canadiens have that we don't, legitimate choices, hopefully we can get there.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
And what's the tactic of someone like you Flyer that admits signing a petition for Nader to get on the ballot, but based on your posts is most assuredly voting Bush?



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   
i think both parties like to kick nader around like a soccer ball (not literally, though that would make a funny scene). each panders to his core as needed. 5 people on the ballot would make it interesting...very interesting...split the vote nicely...good call....



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sublime4372
i think both parties like to kick nader around like a soccer ball


People like to make it seem like Nader is just some well intentioned noble guy. And that's a crock. He's an egomanical electoral terrorist. And I don't say that because he shouldn't be allowed to run, but because of what he does and says. For someone wanting to "give voters a choice" why is his hand so far in the Democratic cookie jar? Meaning why does he insist on all these demands meetings with Democratic leaders to review their policies and give his unwelcome advice, constantly saying he might consider dropping out if so and so demand is met?

He all but said Kerry should choose Edwards because of his strong consumer advocacy record then Nader would consider himself superfolous. Guess what? Kerry chose Edwards. Did Nader drop out? Does he ever?

It'd be fine if he just ran and got the coverage someone with virtually no support deserves, but he constantly steals Democratic thunder inserting himself in things he has NO business in. Living as a Democratic leech that must get all his aid and comfort from Republicans to continue his terrorization of the Democratic party!

Say what you will about Dems subverting Democracy (what a crock), but Nader is a TERRORIST making threats and demands where he has no business and the Republicans are harboring him.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:38 PM
link   
One thing to remember is that George H.W. Bush lost reelection and invaded Iraq. The big mistake is he didn't finish the job and would not take Saddam Hussein out then and he raised taxes. Also, he's the one who mentioned New World Order during his war speech. I've heard that George W Bush, George H W Bush and George W Bush's grandfather were or are all members of the Skulls and Bones free masonry group. Plus, they say John Kerry is also so perhaps there is a conspiracy that keeps other parties and competitors out of the elections.

Thus, George W Bush invading Iraq may be a wild card. However, other than the ridiculous price of gas the economy has improved of late.

I'd rather be a radical independent favoring someone who follows the constitution but you just waste your vote and there is a lesser of the two problems here.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Say what you will about Dems subverting Democracy (what a crock), but Nader is a TERRORIST making threats and demands where he has no business and the Republicans are harboring him.



Well, don't know if I'd go that far, but your point is well taken. It's not a legitimate choice unless the candidate is going about his agenda (hopefully an agenda for the people) without regard to the other parties. Negotiating with them is a ridiculous way for Nader to be behaving. It also really betrays some loyal people who truly want an alternative and are working their butts off for someone who doesn't deserve it.

Remember Perot? A lot of people really gave it all (I remember stories about quitting jobs, donating large sums of money , etc.) Really putting their entire lives on hold in the hopes that things could change. If people are going to support you, you should be true to their hopes, not be playing games with the system. Rather sad.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 02:01 PM
link   
I like what RANT and Relentless (
) had to say. I knew Nader was in the fault somehow, but I wasnt sure how to articulate it. Nader seems to be more concerned with making Democrats look bad than with his own campaign, at least in the article. He'd rather be used as a pawn by the Republicans to gain status than with his own campaign.

Everytime I hear about Nader these days its about how the big parties are fighting over Nader and then Nader stating, usually, why the Democrats are at fault for their position of Nader's campaign. He tries to be oblivious to the fact that Republicans just like him because he will take away from the Democrat vote.

I'm not a Democrat, but I wonder about the legality of their claims in court. Nader is stating that they are doing something unlawful, yet the Democrats are having success in courtrooms. Still no word from Nader on why the courts are supporting the Democrat's appeal. Nader just wants to be in the spotlight.

[edit on 25-7-2004 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I'm not a Democrat, but I wonder about the legality of their claims in court. Nader is stating that they are doing something unlawful, yet the Democrats are having success in courtrooms. Still no word from Nader on why the courts are supporting the Democrat's appeal. Nader just wants to be in the spotlight.

[edit on 25-7-2004 by Jamuhn]



Hmmm, you have peaked my interest again. I do not have time to research this but do have some first hand experience with the courts and election law (though only in NY State and it could be different everywhere, and I must humbly admit that my battles, though State Law, were at the local level).

If you have time to post any pertinent links about these court cases I'd love to add some speculations/opinions about what might be going on here.



posted on Jul, 25 2004 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Here's the one about Arizona:
www.azcentral.com...

It seems Nader was taken off the ballot because of technical errors. Nader's lawyer was a GOP election lawyer. Here's what Nader's lawyer said about it:



Kevin Zeese, Nader's national spokesman, said the independent candidate would have probably come up 550 signatures short of qualifying. He castigated Arizona's election law for making it so difficult for independent candidates to get on the ballot.


Seems that the dispute was pretty valid...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join