Re: “Ralph Nader Loses Maine Court Appeal Over Ballot,” Portland Press Herald, 5/23/2013.
The article states, “The Democratic Party said it has a constitutional right to challenge Nader’s efforts to get on the ballot.”
What about Nader's constitutional right to run for office in the first place?
Here’s the thing: Even if the Democratic Party does, as it claims, have a legal right to intentionally obstruct an opposition candidate from running for office, it is still a highly anti-democratic maneuver. It also suggests how little confidence the Democrats had in John Kerry’s ability to honestly defeat Nader in the realm of political debate. (Not that Nader would have been allowed to participate in any of the actual debates, of course. But you get the idea.)
The Democrats are traditionally held up as the party of inclusiveness, multiculturalism and diversity. But the reality is just the opposite. The party is just as exclusive, politically homogenous and elitist as the Republicans.
Maybe if the Dems had not devoted so much time and millions of dollars to kicking Ralph Nader and his running-mate, the late Peter Camejo, off of every state ballot they could, but instead focused on running a substantive campaign based on actual progressive issues beyond the pathetic “Anybody But Bush” rationale, they might have actually won.