Nader loses another state and voting hasn't even started..

story.news.yahoo.com.../ap/20040910/ap_on_el_pr/nader
First virginia cuts Nader now florida is trying the same thing .
Not a legit party? whats with that I was under the impression all you needed in order to run for presedent is amicrian citision ship?
Funny I read these conspierse threds thinking yea right just anothe tabloyd story but realy What are these guys worred about let nader run if he wants even if he cant win he should be able to run .

[edit on 10-9-2004 by John bull 1]

Simcity,
The Democrats do not want Nader on the ballot because he will take votes from Kerry. They are afraid their base will leave for Nader because he is more liberal than Kerry claims to be.

This is making me sick. I'm really out of words to say what I think of people that would try and stop a presidential candidate from being on a ballot just because he "will take votes away from the Democrat." How much longer are we going to take this? I'm really starting to believe that people's consciousness and morals have been totally wiped off the face of the Earth.

Shame on the Democrats for this nonsense, and shame on Republicans for Badnarik nonsense.

Jazzerman, I agree with you. If you meet the qualifications to be president, the n you should be on the ballot. I don't care if you are a Republican or a Democrat. America is about freedom. this is nothing more than an attempt to disenfranchise any voter who does not vote the way they want.

The only thing he is doing is holding the door open for "Dubya". I don't like the 2 party system, but until a strong 3rd party is formed they serve absolutely no purpose other then to suck votes away in a close race.

Our democracy is on life support. If we can't regain control of our government the right way...we may have to do it the hard way.

Read my sig...

There are laws that dictate whos names can appear on the ballot. In order to get on the ballot you must follow those laws, period. You have to get X amount of signatures etc.

If it is ruled that Nader did not follow those rules, and that the chicken without a head Reform Party did not follow those rules, too bad, he's off.

That's how it works. I don't think any of us want to move to a system where a voter has to read through 300,000 names on the ballot because every clown that wants to "run for president" out of his basement without any support should be on the ballot. Run all you want, if you don't meet the state's guidelines your name is not on the ballot in that state.

He must have followed Oregon's rules because they allowed him on the ballot. So... Follow Florida's too. No one is going to allow him to be on the ballot just because he wants to be.

[edit on 9-10-2004 by Djarums]

Originally posted by valkeryie
The only thing he is doing is holding the door open for "Dubya". I don't like the 2 party system, but until a strong 3rd party is formed they serve absolutely no purpose other then to suck votes away in a close race.

If Nader is holding the door open for Dubya; so what? Again, some people like neither party, and if Nader wants to run then its his RIGHT plain and simple. Its becoming increasingly clear that both of the two major parties are trying to overt Democracy and morality in order to achieve their goals. If you are fine voting for either one of them, then so be it, but I would not want it on my conscious when I leave this world. I want to think I voted based on my own morals, and voting for EITHER Democrats or Republicans that clearly think they are above not only the American people, but the laws as well, do not deserve my vote.

No purpose other than to suck votes away in a close race? Yes...and I commend him for doing so.

if Nader wants to run then its his RIGHT plain and simple.

Correct, any American who fits the requirements of being over 35 and being born in the US etc etc has the RIGHT to run.

They do NOT in any way shape or form have the RIGHT to be placed on the official ballot in ANY state unless they follow the rules and guidelines set forth in that state. That is the law. Nader can cry about it somewhere else. Follow the rules, or you're not on it. That's all.

[edit on 9-10-2004 by Djarums]

Originally posted by Djarums
There are laws that dictate whos names can appear on the ballot. In order to get on the ballot you must follow those laws, period. You have to get X amount of signatures etc.

If it is ruled that Nader did not follow those rules, and that the chicken without a head Reform Party did not follow those rules, too bad, he's off.

That's how it works. I don't think any of us want to move to a system where a voter has to read through 300,000 names on the ballot because every clown that wants to "run for president" out of his basement without any support should be on the ballot. Run all you want, if you don't meet the state's guidelines your name is not on the ballot in that state.

He must have followed Oregon's rules because they allowed him on the ballot. So... Follow Florida's too. No one is going to allow him to be on the ballot just because he wants to be.

[edit on 9-10-2004 by Djarums]

I do see what you are saying; however, thanks to the influx of electronic voting, write-in's may become a thing of the past and people that want their vote expressed by another party may never get the chance to again. Now how is that Democratic?

You said "I don't think any of us want to move to a system where a voter has to read through 300,000 names on the ballot because every clown that wants to "run for president" out of his basement without any support should be on the ballot." Actually, it is my belief that anyone who wants to run should be able to, and if that means 300,000 people on a ballot, then so be it!

why is it okay for Bednarik to be ballot in Fla but Nader? Why does a democratic judge have a say anyway. who challenged Nader's signatures. this is voter dienfrachisement, the Democrats cry foul while they are stealing the chickens.

Originally posted by Djarums
They do NOT in any way shape or form have the RIGHT to be placed on the official ballot in ANY state unless they follow the rules and guidelines set forth in that state. That is the law. Nader can cry about it somewhere else. Follow the rules, or you're not on it. That's all.

I know what you are getting at. However, what about the major 2 parties overting the system to get people like Nader and Badnarik off the ballots and not mentioned in the media? How is that lawful? Obviously the laws are not working to the advantage of THE PEOPLE from what I can see; only to the advantage of those that want to rule and already rule.

What I would like to know is why Nader who is only on a hand full of states ballots is mentioned almost everytime the candidates are brought but Badnarik who is on I think EVERY states ballot is not mentioned ONE time.

How can this be a "mistake"

[edit on 10-9-2004 by Amuk]

Amuk, if this is the case then to me it means that Badnarik is seriously committed to his race for President and has taken the proper steps to make sure his campaign is following the necessary rules to be on the ballots. He should then be given the proper respect and attention. If Nader can't play by the rules that's a shame for him.

Wouldn't it be sad if the only way Badnarik could get attention would be to "Pull a Nader" and shriek about how everyone is picking on him and keeping him down?

I hate the fact that our country is running itself in a fashion obviously showing that we have a two party system. I also believe that if Nadar would wish to be on a Presidential ballot then so be it. I would vote Nadar so fast without thinking twice. Yet im stuck in a hard place because i want Bush out and i am truely willing to veer my independant vote and give one for Kerry. Im not to keen on the man but i personally believe he can do a better job. But thats neither here nor there. Please lets see atleast a 5% vote and get our independants established. Having a third party that could win would truely make America better.
Badnarik should also be noticed all who run on a ticket should be equally noticed and repected.

But thats just my honest opinion.

On the fact about the two party system, something that recently perturbed me was this. Im an Illinois resident and a internet site ilsenate.com has done a blatent special preference to the two parties. It lists on the left side the "Candidates", matter of facts all candidates that ran for the parties nominations as well. Yet there is NO single name from the Indepentant or Libertarian, etc. parties. To be such a site with such a address, you would believe they would show the candidates in full but yet they do not. Just something that really annoys me.

[edit on 9/10/2004 by unknown_artist]

Originally posted by Djarums

Wouldn't it be sad if the only way Badnarik could get attention would be to "Pull a Nader" and shriek about how everyone is picking on him and keeping him down?

He would have the right to.

On some news shows you have to agree not to mention his name before you will be interveiwed

When I was in 9th grad our schhol set up REALY voting booths in the hall and had us Vote for the next presedent (jimmy carter
anyway half the year was all about our voting rights and the rights of someone to run for presedent.
Never once was anything said about needing to meat cearten RULES except needing to be Born here .
As a matter of fact we were also informed about the wright in vote so the school got toghter and voted snoppy presedent lol.
anyway the point is anyone BORN here should be alowed to run even if it ment 3,000 people on the balet .
aleast there would be more of a choice .
Ps the voting based on electrol votes should be rethought as a post here says if the poplar vote went to bush in virgina the electrol vote would go to kerry regurdless . The electrol vote should NOT determine the out come of the presedential race . after all if its the electrol votes that count then why do they have us vote? I understod this from day one in 9th grade . In the end its not up to you who gets the office but who gets the most electrol votes regurdless of how the people voted.

Sim and Jazz,

I agree with both of you completely in concept. However it's just not possible. A few facts stand in the way.

1) This is a country of a quarter billion people.
2) The office of President is crucial to the survival and well being of the nation.

Why does that stand in the way? Well, if there were no guidelines or rules to follow and any American who wanted to run would be put on the ballot no questions asked I do not believe that it would be possible for the American public to make an educated and knowledge-based decision on who to vote for. That is too important to me to support such an initiative, no matter how noble the concept may be.

If a voter walks into the booth and is faced with a 75 page list of names we are going to end up with 1) less voters due to lack of effort and 2) people getting elected without the public knowing enough about them.

If there is a way to implement your suggestions without those problems I would welcome it in a second.