Nader and the Florida Ballots

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

Before I get flamed, let me start off by recognizing Nader's spoiler role in this and the last election. This is not in any way a pro-Nader post. That being said, what exactly is the legal basis for keeping him off the ballot in Florida? I was watching a bit of the oral arguments for the court challenge on C-Span. Laurence Tribe was arguing on behalf of the Florida Dems, and his argument seemed to boil down to two points:

1. The Reform Party is not really a national Party, and Nader's candidacy is thus not significant enough for consideration

2. If we let anyone on the ballot, without restriction, we'll have too many choices, and impede the power of the voters to vote.

With all due respect, this doesn't really wash. I'm no legal expert, so if there is an over-arching legal premise here, let me know, but I have a hard time buying the idea that having more choices inhibits the power to make a choice. If I switch from a bookstore with 4 books, to one with 4 million, how is my power to choose reduced?

As for the first point, how do we decide which Parties get legitimized> What criteria do we use? Shouldn't the state legislatures decide this, per Article II of the Constitution?

This whole event seems only to fuel Nader's cause. Naderites who say that the two parties are trying stifle other voices, only come out of this as martyrs, because it looks like the Dems are trying to thwart Nader and his minor party, simply because they're minor.

I could be missing something here, and if I am, tell me. I say again, this is not a pro-Nader post. I'm simply concerned about what appears to me to be an ecercise in legal foolishness.

Flame away, anyway....

[oasis]

1. Remember the California recall ballot? 135 candidates. Who would

want to sift through that mess each time election day rolled around?

Under normal circumstances, primary elections do a good enough job in narrowing the field.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

2. Good point.

I almost forgot about that. It should be noted though, that while that whole recall was a circus (not to mention a Republican one at that), ecery candidate had the right to be on the ballot, as long as they had enough signatures, and met all the deadlines. As that the issue? Does Nader not have enough signatures?

[ever_green]

3. He has the right, but is it right?

I suppose he has the right to be on the ballot, but he should examine his conscience- Does he really want to compete with Kerry- the only person who can get Bush out of the White House? Not cool Nader.

[mdmc]

4. welcome to du

I love Nader. Sure, I wish he was out in 2004, but I wouldn't kill him to keep him off the ballot.
America will survive Kerry, America will survive Bush. America will survive third party access to ballots, lol.

[Flubadubya]

7. "America will survive Bush"

A person can survive a car wreck... as a paraplegic.

That's what I'm afraid surviving another Bush administration will be like. This country is likely to lose most of his real functionality and usefulness, most certainly its coherence and its standing in the world (pun intended).

It definitely will not be a positive experience, and we will never be the same. America may be forever crippled because of this jackass!

[ClintonTyree]

8. Can America......................

survive another four years of Bush? If it does, it won't be an America that we recognize. It will be an America that exists in name only, not in the tradition of fairness and peace that made it the beacon of Freedom around the world. It will be an America that forces it's will upon any country that doesn't toe our line and fall in behind our political and economical agenda.

It may yet be called America, but the dynamics of the country will have been so mutated by Bush's policies that it will exist in name only. Another more sinister and corrupt America will have taken it's place.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

9. True enough.

I won't disagree with you at all. Nader's presence will only aid Bush, whether he knows it or not. I respect Nader, but you know what I'm saying.

[Demit]

5. On choice: if all 4 million books were on the same topic...

You're into distinction-without-a-difference territory. Then the positive aspect of choice becomes a hindrance. Shopped for shampoo lately? Or switched your accounts to a new bank? The "choice" is either an empty marketing promise or a deliberate obfuscation.

For example, I cringe every time I hear the Republicans want to give me more choice. It's a smokescreen. You know they're going to be taking away something good, or slipping in something bad, under the guise of "choice". Like Bush's Medicare plan, or his "flextime" proposal.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

11. True, but in this case, are we dealing with

a distinction without a difference? To use the bookstore analogy again, what if they weren't all on the same topic? Certainly, more choices might lead to more effort being required in making the choice, but the power of choice is not reduced. You could argue that Nader and Kerry are basically the same choice, but that could be debated.

BTW, you point about the Republicans and choice is well-taken, but that is a different issue. When the Republicans talk about choice, (i.e. school choice, etc), they are talking about eliminating one thing and replacing it with another (defunding public schools, and the false choice of vouchers). I don't think Nader's case is like that.

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. Actually, this time around I think Nader

is going to hurt Bush more then he will hurt Kerry.

First of all, I know of no Dem who is going to throw their vote away this time. But there a lot of Repugs that are fed up with W, but just can't bring themselves to vote for a Dem.

I think this whole Nader thing is a big miscalculation on Rove's part.

[Hippo_Tron]

10. I'll believe it when I see it

Republicans aren't going to vote for Nader because they are pissed off with Bush.

[MooPie]

14. Actually a friend of mine is

He told me last week that although he's disgusted with Bush, he just can't bring himself to vote for Kerry, and will now vote for Nader. He voted for Perot when he ran, Bush the last time, and will now for Nader. So, keep you're fingers crossed, this may backfire after all as I know of no Democrat and Naderite who isn't voting for Kerry. Those I know who voted for Nader say they aren't going to repeat their mistake.

[cheshire]

12. If we can learn one thing here let it be laws and rules don't count .

It's like locks on your car will only keep honest people from stealing it.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

13. Awfully cynical of you...