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.
No comments:
Post a Comment