Talk Elections

I listened to Ralph Nader on the Ed Schultz show last night.  Ed asked Ralph how many state ballots he was actually on.  Ralph responded that he expected to be on 42 states in November because lots of states are fairly easy to get on and the deadlines aren't until August-September but that means that their are a lot of fires to put out.



Nader off the ballot in Arizona.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0702nader-ON.html (http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0702nader-ON.html)

Confusion in Oregon
 http://www.mtv.com/chooseorlose/headlines/news.jhtml?id=1488815  (http://www.mtv.com/chooseorlose/headlines/news.jhtml?id=1488815)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/30/bush.nader/  (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/06/30/bush.nader/)
 http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D83IBJJG0.html  (http://www.kgw.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D83IBJJG0.html)

And he's flat off in Indiana
 http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/local/9057672.htm  (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/local/9057672.htm)

What do you think?

I have no idea

Expect an organization to run an ad attacking the dems for that in AZ.

i think it is an f'ing outrage what the democrats pulled out in arizona.    and i cant believe the media hasnt called them out.

the democrats have bellyached for four freakin years about the supreme court deciding an election.  then they turn around and haul ralph nader to court to keep him off the ballot.

im sure those kind of actions will make nader supporters run to the polls in november to vote for john kerry.

I agree.


See both parties are the same :(


No but hopefully they'll vote for Badnarik  ;D

I give him around 15.  His campaign is seriously lagging, he's on maybe ten now, with two being challenged, I believe (AZ, IL).  He not only has to withstand the litigation and fury of the DNC, he has to withstand the ire of progressive Kerry-voting Democrats and the competition of the Greens and Cobb.  He had the resources and support before when he combined the left Democrats, the Greens and others into the foot soldiers and lawyers to get petitions and ballot access across the country.  He doesn't have that this year.  He's pissed off the activists and organizers who helped in 2000 because they don't want him to run - and those that did wanted him to run as a Green.


All in all, a poorly run campaign.  He might make the 19-24 bracket, maybe with a lot of luck up to 30, but ultimately he's going to get screwed.  I predict he'll drop out at some point, getting some kind of discussion or agreement with Kerry.  He might use Edwards' appointment as VP (if it happens) as an excuse to bail out of this mess he's built for himself.  If he takes it all the way to November I don't see him breaking past the 20s, assuming he gets that high.


Only Reform got him this far and they don't really have  the manpower, organization or resources to do a whole lot more than a dozen states.  They gave him eight state and a step up in a couple others, but other than that they're on their own.  I don't see it happening, sorry Nader.

Without the progressives, he's just a regulation-fetishist :P without a constituency.

Hah, I didn't see that he was off AZ.  Loser.

Badnarik, despite what this centrist-biased article says, is on the ballot in Arizona.  He also has the support of L. Neil Smith - the Libertarian who with Vun Suprynomicz rebelled against Browne 2000 due to ethical and corruption charges (which were actually true, most likely) and because Browne said in 1996 he'd only run once.  So the Libertarians can very likely spoil AZ 2004.

Nader down to six states as of the second.  Great job there, Ralphie.  Maybe you can break into double digits by October.

My god, enforcing the law, to prevent invalid Republican signatures from qualifying Nader. That's just.... just awful.

I took a guess and said 25-30

Do I wish that the Democrats were unsuccessful in removing Nader? Yes.

Do I think that it's inconsistent to cry foul when one side uses the law in one election then use election laws advantageously the next? Yes.

Does it bother me? No. Every state has election laws and anyone active in politics knows that use of the rules is very much part of process. If an opponent errs on procedure it's fair game to win in the process and avoid the election. This is common in IL and many races are decided at filing rather than at the election.

7-12.

7-12 the 7 Reform Party Ballots + Texas, New Mexico, Nevada, Florida and a mystery state.

He already missed Texas after the TX Greens refused to help him (this was pre-convention).

19-24, just a guess though.

No he made Texas as an Independent.
http://www.votenader.org/ballot_access/texas/

Forgive me, I hadn't heard.  I just knew the Greens screwed him over and it was funny enough for me to remember. :P

Remember Nader might not have a free ticket to the ballots that the Reform Party gave him.  Many states require that the candidate be chosen at a convention.  Nader was chosen as the reform party candidate on a conference call.  Come on how many people do you think were on that conference call.  Nader will drop out in Late August when he is having trouble getting on to the "easy" states to save whatever diginity he has left.

I can't believe that anyone (other than Nader supporters, perhaps) are complaining about the Dems actions in AZ.  If the shoe were on the other foot, I would put money on it guaranteeing the the Reps would do the same thing.  And, frankly, they'd be right to do so.  The signatures were illegal.  Those with a vested interest (in this case the Dems) should challenge them and would be idiots to not do so.  I am all for third parties being on the ballot.  I have voted third party in two of the last three elections, and I most closely align myself with a third party (Libertarian).  But, uh, how about at least making a slight effort to follow election laws to get on the ballot?!?!?  Nader has no business being on the AZ ballot.  Honestly, at first, I thought the Dems were being underhanded as well... until I learned more about the case.  Some of these "illegal" signatures were so obviously and clearly a violation that it was an outright fraud by Nader and those who wanted him on the ballot.  The Dems would have been morons had they not challenged it.