Service union contends signatures for Nader petition faulty

[eeyore]

Just found this report from the front page of today's Oregonian...

"A public employees union claimed Monday that it has uncovered widespread fraud in the Ralph Nader campaign's effort to gather enough signatures to qualify for Oregon's ballot."

"Nader's campaign discounted the allegations and said the Service Employees International Union -- which supports Democrat Sen. John Kerry -- is trying to intimidate its petitioners as a way of keeping the independent presidential candidate off the state's ballot."

more...
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_page/1092743727240641.xml


I have a friend who was greeted last night at his door by someone wanting to know if he is a Nader supporter. He said, "Absolutely not.", and was told that his signature is on petitions for Nader this year. He has not signed anything for Nader since 1999. The guy who came to the door is a lawyer representing whoever is challenging Nader's signatures, maybe an SEIU attorney. Anyway, the guy took my friend's deposition right there on the front porch, then went on his way. Verrrrry fishy stuff!

[sniffa]

1. nader, nader, nader .. i made you out of cLay

[Old and In the Way]

2. Is this a crime?

It would be ironic to see Ralph frog marched into court...

[eeyore]

3. Forging signatures?

I would think so, but it would probably fall upon his delusional minions of petitioners. Doubt old Ralphie would be touched by it.

[gratuitous]

4. Well, you have to figure out who actually did it

I don't think Ralph personally forged signatures on his petitions, so it's doubtful he'd be on the hook. They had an interview with Greg Kafoury on the local news last night, and he's hopping mad about SEIU challenging the signatures. There's just one thing wrong with Greg's anger: He's railing against a perfectly legal tactic, and one that's designed to assure the integrity of the ballot.

Nader won't be on the ballot in Oregon, I think. Too bad for the Oregon GOP and some grim hangers-on.

[eeyore]

5. My freind is pissed his name got forged!

Kafoury has no grounds to be upset. If someone showed up at my door to tell me that Nader was using my name I'd gladly join a class action then and there. I really hope this goes national and takes Ralph down!

[Career Prole]

11. It was in a CNN teaser right before I left for work this morning...

They had blown up copies of petition forms on easels and they zoomed in on several "signatures" that were different names but obviously (at least to my untrained eye) written by the same person.
This could take off.

[denverbill]

6. It ain't Nader committing the crime.

And I'd be very very surprised if it was a Naderite even. More likely than not, it's a Bushie.

[Old and In the Way]

7. But why would a Bushie to anything to hurt Ralph's ballot chances?

Maybe the GOP wasn't clear that they'd only pay for valid signatures. But, hey, want can one expect for a buck a signature?

[denverbill]

8. Pukies want Nader on the ballot. They want to try to split liberals.

They don't give a damn if they are valid or not.

They probably found a list of Greens or pulled the petitions from 4 years ago and just started copy names figuring nobody would bother checking with the actual person. At most, they probably figured authorities would verify that the person was a legal voter and lived at the address given.

[amber dog democrat]

9. I think you are right - they did what they do best - cheated

and probably got called on it this time.
Greed and Stupidity. A winning combination.
Nader is going to have cause to regret his new allies.
it figures. Nice try.

[eeyore]

10. That's exactly what happened to my friend

He had not signed a petition for Nader since 1999. He's a registered Dem and voted for Gore, but signed to get Nader on the ballot for 2000. I think it's interesting that the lawyer was coming to the houses of people on Nader's current petition, looking for people who had not signed this time around. He took a deposition right there and then. Let's hope this goes national!

-eeyore

[Tippy]

15. Ultimately Nader is responsible......

He should do the honorable thing and withdraw but we already know he is not honorable....

[denverbill]

17. Oh baloney.

When you have some evidence that Nader supported Republican operatives forging signatures to get on the ballot, then he's responsible. Til then, blame the sleazebag Republican that was trying to help his candidate.

Instead of blaming the 2.74% of the populace that voted for Nader for the 2000 election results, blame the 50% of the population that didn't bother voting at all.

Or, blame Browne, Buchanon, Hagelin, Harris, McReynolds, Morehead, and Phillips. After all, if any of them hadn't been running and had his supporters vote for Gore, Gore would've won Florida, since every one of those candidates got at least 500 votes.

[MadAsHell]

18. Excuse me, is this a private fight or can anyone join in ...

However noble anyone feels Ralph's intents were, it is simply delusional to contend that Mr. Nader's candidacy was not decisive in Florida. He draw 90,000 thousand votes in Florida alone and in the bigger picture he clouded the issues at hand with his "there is no difference between the parties" meme.

You have to contrast his actions in this and the last election cycle with those of Howard Dean. Both men sought to change the debate, one succeeded in doing so in a way that may end the Bush pResidency. The other has acted in a way that leaves him open to charges of collaboration.

[denverbill]

21. It wasn't a 'fight' and it certainly wasn't private.

His "there is no difference between the parties" meme, as you call it, has been pretty well reinforced in 2004, frankly.

I didn't vote for Nader in 2000 and it's highly unlikely I'll vote for him in 2004 either, but Nader is spot-on in his criticism of the two-party system.

Dean did change the debate, temporarily and I was a very strong Dean supporter. Nader said he wouldn't have run if Dean was the nominee. But alas and alack, the Democratic Party didn't really give a damn what Ralph Nader thought, and chose someone else. Now that the candidate is selected, they suddenly care about old Ralph again.

Well, I tell you what. Old Ralphie will probably collect his 2% again, and once again, 50% of the population won't vote. And guess what? That 50% is a fairly liberal-leaning bunch, because most studies show that the poor, minorities, and blue collar workers are the least likely to vote, and that's where we are losing the elections. If you can convince 5% of the non-voting population to vote, Kerry will win in a landslide.

[MadAsHell]

23. Ok, lets see ...

The patriot act, the Iraq war, the four pages of "rewritten" regulations that Jim Hightower holds up during his presentations, the recess appoints of nutjob judges, revitalized Stars Wars, corporate friendly responses to mad cow, energy policy, western fires, and on and on and "Nader is spot-on in his criticism of the two-party system". When you have a system of winner takes all elections, you simply can't profess to stand for progressive viewpoints while whacking at the shins of the only organization with a legitimate chance of making any of it happen and not deserve a little scorn.

Why exactly should anyone in the Democratic party give a damn what Ralph Nader thinks? After all he is, proudly, not a member and is often openly hostile to candidates that carry the party label. And as to caring if he is on the ballot or not, lets not be naive. Of course, it would serve the Democratic ticket if Mr. Nader went way and didn't collect 2%. After all 2% is nearly half of the 5% needed to "win in a landslide". And it is terribly difficult to accept the "I will pull more Bush votes than Kerry votes" line.

To the point of individuals reviewing the nomination papers of a ballot place seeker, that is simply par for the course. Any campaign worth its salt will at least roughly verify the papers of a opponent and also make sure to collect many more signatures then are required. And by the way, something of deep concern is a foot when in his zeal to get on the ballot, regardless of his motivations, he has accepted help from groups that are at complete odds with his stated positions.

You also refer to the Democratic Party like is some is some sort of lock-step machine that can chose this candidate or that, cares or cares not about Mr. Nader's options, last time I checked the selection of candidates for the Presidential ticket was an "open to the public" affair, a primary election in most cases.

[Green Lantern]

24. Golly

If the DP has an "open to the public" process, don't you think Nader should be allowed the same privilege? I saee a lot of heat but little fire-where are your facts? Show me how Nader lost the vote for Gore.

BTW-you cite many Bushwa actions, none of which I agree with-I think he is the worst we have ever produced, but I would like to ask you where the DP was on, oh say, the Kyoto Protocols, the International Criminal Court, the Landmine Treaty, the International Women's Right Treaty, etc etc - maybe AWOL would be a good definition. How was it the DP supported the WTO, NAFTA et al. which have subsequently been priven a disaster for the working stiff?

Nader has the right to run. You have the right to vote for the candidate of your choice. If you don't like Nader don't vote for him. The first Tuesday in Nov is the determinant for the right to govern.

If you anti-Nader haters don't start to focus on 2004, you will once again see an election go down the tubes. and this time you would be right-Nader would have cost you the election-not because he got the votes (no more than he did last time) but because you all are fighting a phantom from the election of 2000.

How does Nader's presence on the ballots explain why the DP and Gore lost Tenn, Ark and West Virginia- normally a solid blue state? How does Nader's presence explain the 8 million or so Reagan Dems who marched out and punched Bush for Pres on their ballot.

Oh yeah-if Nader ...Florida-well Buchanan took from Bush. So what?

Gore saw the writing on the wall and did't really fight for his election.

Why are you folks so afraid of Nader? Could it be that he represents more things which are in line with your own beliefs than the DLC poster children?

[eeyore]

22. People representing Ralph did it....

Regardless of whether they were GOP operatives or just plain old paid signature gatherers, they are representing the Nader campaign.

Until someone can explain how my friend's name and signature ended up on a Nader petition I have no choice but to suspect the Nader campaign.

This really has nothing to do with the 2000 race, this has to do with what's going on right now, which is pure and simple fraud. If you hire someone to gather signatures for you, you are accountable for their actions. Arguing otherwise is essentially going with the Rumsfeld meme of "it was a few bad apples".

Bullshit! How did my friend's signature end up on that petition?

[makeanoise]

12. Nothing wrong with Nader...

My friends, I am 100% united in defeating Bush this year with you.
But your hatred of Nader is unbelievable.

As Democrats, we must defend anyone's right to run for President.
If you truly believe a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush, then the monsters (Republicans) that you hate so much, have gotten you.

A vote for Nader is not a vote for KERRY or BUSH, it'sa vote for Nader. It's as simple as that. I voted for Ralph in 2000 and I am not sorry I did. This year I will vote for KERRY.

Nader is not owned by Republicans,nor Democrats, nor anyone else.
If I wanted to run for President as an independent, why would any of you try to stop me?

Gore lost because of the Supreme Court not Nader, and all I hear on this site is what the Republicans keep saying, yeah it's Nader's fault. When did Democrats repeat Republican lies?

I, for one, would not be surprised if Democrats in Oregon injected fradulent signatures to stop Nader. I hope that's not the case, but in politics, in power, and in greed, anything is possible.

Go easy on Nader, let's give Bush the hell he deserves, peace....

[nosmokes]

13. sorry, i totaly disagree.

ralph may have been a principled warrior for the common guy once upon a time, but he's little more than a corporate schill now. i don't know whether maybe the guy might not be suffering from early stage dementia or alzheimers? but i know this - his presence in this race is only helping bush, and if he wants to make a point he should get a branch and a knife and whittle one.

[yellowcanine]

14. Ok but he should follow the rules to get unto the ballot - you can't

just have anyone who fancies himself a candidate on the ballot or the ballots would get unwieldy in a hurry and pretty soon we have the Palm Beach butterfly ballot situation. Forging signatures is not kosher and calls into question all of the signatures collected by someone who would do that. Also it is not unreasonable to require that the signature collectors themselves be registered voters in that state, as is required in Arizona, which Nader is challenging in court.

[eeyore]

16. Go easy on signature fruad?

I think not! How would you feel if someone showed up to your door to ask if you are really a Bush supporter, and showed you your signature on a Bush petition? My friend felt pretty violated.

Anyone whose campaign pulls this kind of shit will never get any support from me. I'm all for the idea that we need more than two parties, but this is beyone the pale.

-eeyore

[progressivebydesign]

19. I don't defend hypocrites!

Nader is the one that whines constantly about the business-as-usual with the corporate Democrat and Republican candidates... all the while, he is gladly accepting help from the Repubicans. That is dishonest, and sleazy. Ralph is not a man of the poeple, he's a man of the Ralph. He doesn't care how he gets on the ballot, as long as he's on there. Why do you think the Green Party dropped his ass? He's a corporate whore.. just the same as the ones he rails against.

If he was the honorable man some people proclaim him to be, he would refuse those signatures.. and refuse to run. He's a joke, he's an egotistical, pathetic joke. He's becoming the Pat Paulsen of the century.

He's worse than a Republican, at least they're open about their sleaziness...

[progressivebydesign]

20. Not to let Nader or the GOP off the hook...

..but... I have no doubt the signatures were forged by signature gatherers. They sat down with a phone book, and wrote the names in.. or used voter rolls. They are paid per signature (which is SOOO wrong), so it's in their best interest to fudge it. I guess petition stealing is also a big one amongst these clipboards-for-hire. I believe it should be illegal to pay people to gather signatures. It should left to those that believe in the cause they're supporting, or the candidates. I really hate when a petition whore comes up to you, and has a stack of clipboards.. you ask them any question about the initiative or candidate, and they look at you like you've asked them for the recipe to beef wellington. It's a racket, and while I have no doubt there is an unhealthy push to validate Nader in these states, I still think it's the actions of the gatherers. (That's another job created in Bush's economy, I suppose).