Nader loses appeal of ’04 ballots in Maine

[DonViejo]

Source: AP


BY ASSOCIATED PRESS

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Ralph Nader has lost his bid to punish Democrats he has accused of trying to keep him off ballots in Maine during his failed presidential run in 2004.

On Thursday, Maine’s highest court affirmed a judge’s dismissal of several counts of Nader’s lawsuit and ordered that the remaining counts against the Maine Democratic Party also be dismissed.

Nader, the consumer advocate and Green Party candidate, had claimed that the Democratic Party and allies orchestrated a nationwide effort against him using illegal and malicious tactics. Many Democrats blame Nader for siphoning away votes in an election won by Republican George W. Bush.

Nader’s lawyer said Thursday that he’ll need to review his options before deciding whether to ask the court to reconsider or to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

###

Read more: http://www.salon.com/2013/05/23/nader_loses_appeal_of_04_ballots_in_maine/

[Drale]

1. And people wonder why I think Nader is an embaresment now

its not about what he did in the past, its about how he is acting now, and hes acting like a child who didn't get his way.

[iandhr]

2. +1

[Arkana]

3. Has anyone told Ralph that it's 2013 and he lost this battle 9 years ago?

[Pragdem]

4. Too bad they didn't keep him off the ballots in all 50 states in 2000 and 2004. nt

[byeya]

5. You have to keep plugging away against the system to occasionally get a good result. I wish there

a dozen parties to choose from. In NYC there were always at least 4 parties listed with slates of candidates.

[Tarheel_Dem]

6. Fuck Ralph Nader, and all his minions.

[another_liberal]

7. I spent most of my life viewing Ralph Nader as a hero.

Since the 2000 election, I have seen him as a pitiful old attention whore and willing dupe of the Republican Party. He has destroyed himself, at least in the eyes of most liberals.

[BillyRibs]

8. Whether you Like him or not,

Whether you Like him or not, this is a blow to the democratic process. and a sad day to any who would like a third party. But a Great day to all you Oligarchs out their among us!

[olddad56]

9. Is he still alive. Wow, I didn't know that.

[LiberalLovinLug]

10. Its a shame that progressive parties have to hate each other

If America (and Canada!) had Proportional Representation voting systems you wouldn't have this. ie...if 10% of the population votes Green, you'd have 10% representation in Washington. So even if there are less Democratic party winners, those that are elected would at least be able to work with the Green party to achieve progressive policies. And it would end vote splitting wars.

And I'm sure you'd also have extreme wingnut Tea Bagger parties breaking off from the main Republican party. Which would be a good thing. It would allow the moderate branch of the Republican party to re-establish themselves as a separate group because they wouldn't be beholden to the baggers and probably marginalize them as a fringe element.

Some say it makes government too complicated with multiple parties. But I think its democracy in action. Forcing parties to cooperate with those that hold the closest views.

[CanSocDem]

13. You only have to read DU...

...to realize "...it makes government too complicated with multiple parties." the truth of this.

"But I think its democracy in action." I agree.

.

[karynnj]

16. In 2004, Nader was not really a party's candidate as much as he created a party to run under

The Green party had its own candidate.

It is not true that the Democratic party "hated" Nader. The fact is that long before the election, the Democratic nominee actually had a meeting with Nader and Nader came out saying very good things about Kerry. Nader then spoke of running because he could then attack Bush in ways that could not be done by Kerry without insuring a Bush landslide. This argument NEVER made sense. If Nader, as an activist, wanted to attack Bush he could JUST as effectively while NOT running. By running, he risked helping Bush narrowly win states - as happened in NH and maybe FL in 2000 - if the Nader votes would have gone to Gore.

As to the Green party, the fact is that the Democratic nominee had a stronger, longer resume as an environmentalist than almost any candidate of a national party (including Al Gore, who was great on climate change and not so good on other issues.). Yet, unlike some of the NY state third parties, there was no thought on their part of "giving their line" to Kerry to throw their weight behind someone who - while not perfect - was excellent on their key issue.

As it was, maybe because of what people learned in 2000, neither the Green candidate or Nader really changed even one state.

However, the Democratic challenges to Nader's petitions were completely legal. The problem - as has happened to others including both Democrats and Republicans - is that in many states, Nader paid people to get signatures - and some paid people did a very sloppy job leading to many names being struck off as not legitimate. Whether you think ballot criteria should exist or not - the fact is that they do. It was completely reasonable to challenge when the rules were not met. (In fact, in many states, it was the state - not the Democrats - who refused to put Nader on the ballot.)

[name not needed]

11. Go home, Ralph.

[onehandle]

12. Loser does something. nt

[jessie04]

14. Gee, i can't wait for him to run again in 2016.

That's a joke.

[Brigid]

15. Isn't there somebody . . .

Who can find Nader real job?

[hughee99]

17. He lost appeal to voters, too. n/t

[libodem]

18. More crazy than I suspected

FN Republican operative. He took a ton of their money to make sure Bush got elected. He can therefore be held responsible for all the global warming Gore would have prevented, and both those ridiculous wars and all the causalities, torture and maiming. Yep. That is what I think.



FUCK NADER!!!!!!