Thursday, August 24, 2006

Ralph Nader on the hook over nomination ‘deception'

Harrisburg, Pa. — Former U.S. presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his running mate must pay more than $80,000 (U.S.) in expenses for the lawsuit that challenged their nominating papers and kept them off the 2004 ballot, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in a decision released Wednesday.

There was an implication of “fraud and deception” in their petition drive, the court said in its ruling.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060823.wnader0823/BNStory/International/home

...pulled this one for Daniel Webster...our staunch Dem.

2 comments:

mr. mayor said...

Perhaps you saw the comment in the article which said something to the effect that "Mr. Nader lost my support when he ran as a third party candidate thereby letting W win...".
What some people don't seem to realize (including Daniel Webster) is that there is long-term value in refusing to blindly accept a party's platform. Call it a "Protest Vote" if you must. I tend to think of it as a vote of conscience. If such a vote, on the part of many, alters the outcome of an election then somebody at party headquarters should be wondering why people aren't subscribing to their party's platform and instead are voting for a third party candidate. They should be thinking "What is the attraction to this candidate?" or better still "What is that candidate offering that we aren't?"
The two party system has a basic weakness in that the parties are forced to come down on one side or the other on a particular issue so as not to offend a certain bloc of voters. It makes for strange bedfellows as the fireside chaps have discussed previously by the fireside, but most importantly, and most damaging to our country, is that it tends to make a voter accept a position and cast a vote , through association with that party, that the voter would not normally be likely to support. So, kudos to those who consider candidates and parties other than the donkey and the elephant. Hopefully casting your vote for what you believe important, and not to block someone from a different team, will in the end have a more substantial, and longer lasting impact on future platforms of the parties. Perhaps it is another way to determine platform planks rather than just buying them.

the kid said...

Well said, Mr. Mayor...