Sideshow in Oregon
For its sheerly bizarre aspect, little this election season will be able to match Ralph Nader’s effort to get on the Oregon ballot. Kevin gave you the very brief upshot downthread, but you miss out on the theatricality of the whole affair that way.
He’s off, Part 1
It all started this summer, when Nader decided–to the thrill of only Bushies–that he would run again. To launch his dubious campaign, Ralph came to the homeland, Oregon, the state that twice gave him his largest percentages and where, in 2000, 10,000 fans spent $7 a pop to hail him at the Rose Garden. It would be a nice launch. According to Oregon law, if you can muster a mere thousand people at one time and get them to sign a petition, you qualify as a presidential candidate. Whoops, just one hitch: only 700 people showed.
He’s off, Part 2
In attempt #2, Ralph got a little help from his friends–Republicans in tie-dye–but still missed the ballot. Whoops again. (By this time, accusations of wrongdoing were flying in all directions–Dems at Republicans, Republicans at Dems, Naderites at Dems, Dems at Naderites–and the noble Nader’s rep was looking a little tattered.)
He’s on(?), Part 1
Attempt #3 was the slightly more arduous task of collecting 15,000 signatures in a few weeks. Again, something that should have posed no problem for Ralph in greener-than-thou Oregon. It went down to the wire, and again the GOP were the main footsoldiers for the once-proud Republican foe. And, during this effort, the petitioners were blamed for fraud, causing another round of accusations.
He’s off, Part 3
Finally, when the Oregon Secretary of State had a chance to look at the ballots, he ruled that Nader missed the target by 218 signatures. (And guess what–there were more accusations. Shocking!)
He’s on, Part 2
But wait! In a reversal, Marion County Curcuit Court judge Paul Lipscomb ruled that Nader’s name should appear on the ballot. According to the judge, the Secretary of State had been inconsistent in applying rules for independent candidates. Need I mention the accusations? I will: they flew.
He’s off, Part 4 (and on, sorta)
Yesterday, the Oregon Supreme Court voted unanimously to reverse Lipscomb’s ruling and pulled Nader from the ballot. The ruling came before the regular statewide ballots have been printed, though the overseas ballots are already done, complete with Nader. (Call that a moral victory.)
But wait! . . .
Apparently owing to the Naderites’ sense of drama, Nader has now declared that he will appeal the US Supreme Court to get on the Oregon ballot.
I will not hazard a guess about what will happen next. This battle, which I declared dead after round two, may never end. It has already transcended reality to become mythic. Call it a latter-day tale of Sisyphus, with Ralph standing in as the doomed Greek. I think we can expect that long after November 2, Ralph will continue to push his boulder up snowcapped Mt. Hood . . .
September 23rd, 2004 at 3:16 pm
If Ralph declares he’s opposed to marrying grays (the GOP), maybe he could be an amendment, still.
September 23rd, 2004 at 5:26 pm
Aren’t Democrats at least a little ticked off that the DNC has spent so much money trying to keep Ralph OFF the ballot? And, on the whole, I think it’s unclear whether they’ve been successful in this nation-wide effort.
What really boils my blood is that the DNC and state Dem parties go after Nader’s ballot access hammer and tongs, but in Florida, Illinois and Delaware they rolled over and allowed Bush’s name to appear on the ballot, despite the fact that the Republicans missed the filing deadlines in those states because Bush officially accepted the nomination so late in the game.
So we have the Dems crying foul about Nader’s failure to follow technical ballot access requirements, but ignoring such technical requirements when the candidate seeking ballot access is Bush. And the Dems still have the audacity to claim Nader is a surrogate for Bush.
The whole thing has been shameful, wasteful and downright stupid. Yet another prime example of the Democratic preference to play not to lose rather than playing to win.
September 24th, 2004 at 9:28 am
Kumar,
Hard to compare the two examples you give, because these are all state actions. I doubt seriously if Oregon Dems would have stood by and watched Bush go on the ballot without proper channels.
But what is amusing to me is Naderites who want it both ways. They want to avoid questions about the politics of their own agenda (and how it screws Kerry), while crying foul that the Dems aren’t being honest about THEIR agenda. I got news for crybaby Naderites: it’s a political system, so don’t whinge about the politics.
(Incidentally, I proudly voted Nader twice, and don’t regret it at all.)