Conservatives Try to Get Nader on Ballot

AP — Conservatives Try to Get Nader on Ballot

Two conservative groups have been phoning people around Oregon this week, urging them to attend Ralph Nader’s convention Saturday in hopes of putting Nader’s name on Oregon’s presidential ballot. The groups make no bones about their goal –€” to draw votes away from Democrat John Kerry and help President Bush win this battleground state in November. “We disagree with Ralph Nader’s politics, but we’d love to see him make the ballot,” said Russ Walker of Citizens for a Sound Economy, a group best known for its opposition to tax increases.

The Oregon Family Council also has been working the phones to boost attendance at Nader’s event –€” with the idea that it could help Bush this fall. We aren’t bashful about doing it,” said Mike White, the group’s director. “We are a conservative, pro-family organization, and Bush is our guy on virtually every issue.”

Even if it comes from an unusual source, Nader can probably use the help, given that this will be his second attempt to win a spot on Oregon’s ballot.

This is somewhat less sleazy than efforts by one party to influence the primaries of another party, although not by much.

UPDATE (6/27): Washington Times has more coverage.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2004,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Security Studies professor at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College and a nonresident senior fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm vet. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. DANEgerus says:

    I live in the People’s Republic of Oregon.

    This is NOT an effort by the (R)’s to “influence the primaries of another party” as Nader is trying to get on the ballot as a 3rd party candidate not as a (D).

    And…

    Since when is a ‘choice’ on the ballot “sleazy”. This is the AP and you are actually giving them credibility as an ‘unbiased’ choice? It’s bad enough that MadHow showed up Friday to rant about the VRWC on talk radio while spewing (D)-meme’s about ‘attacks on Social Security’ demands for ‘Health Care for the Children’ and every other uber-Leftwing contrivance unchallenged… nay encouraged… by the fawning local press.

    Oregon has a mail-in ballot election. In every state in the nation the #1 association to voter fraud is absentee ballots… and Oregon has an absentee election that has resulted in very skewed consequences tilting agressively ‘Left’ since implemented.

    I have zero confidence my vote counted… not that it ‘counts’… but that it is ‘counted’.

    Why? Scandal associated with a viciously partisan Secretary of State Bradbury here in Oregon about his claims to ‘deliver Oregon’ was not reported at all… which briefly preceeded the ‘upset’ results putting Bush ahead of Gore in Oregon by 6000 votes when the state went to bed on election night only to wake up to ‘SURPRISE’: Gore ahead by 2800 votes. Their excuse? “Late returning ballots from Portland”. Not ‘Late returning ballots’ from BFE, or the Dalles, or Pendleton…

    “Late returning ballots from” right up the road in a State where ballots travel to the counting sites by mail for weeks prior to ‘counting’.

    A 9000 vote swing is a ‘billion-to-one’ improbability based on the votes cast… OK… maybe I exaggerate… but not by much. With most of the votes in and counted to get a 9000 vote ‘swing’ even given a 60/40 split in uncounted ballots would require about 100,000 votes were ‘left’ from the biggest population center in the state where most likely the very first, not the very last, were counted.

    That lame-ass excuse, ignored by the NewsMedia of course, only confirmed Bradbury(D) was true to his word as the (D)’s refused to do a ‘recount’ because 2800 was a couple of hundred votes above the percentage that would have required a recount by law…

    How convenient.

    I watched Perot result in Clinton elected with 42% of the vote TWICE. Like the (D)’s didn’t help him with the 24×7 media fawning?

    So now you call this ‘sleazy’?

    But the (D)ummocrit efforts to deny choice… this time… aren’t?

  2. Mark Thompson says:

    I don’t think it’s sleazy for conservatives to try to get Nader on the ballot. People foolish enough to vote for him should be siphoned off from the major party closer to their viewpoint. If the Democrats don’t like having their potential supporters vote for Nader, they shouldn’t be promoting the polarization of the electorate as they have. Having thrown in their lot with the lunatic Left, they deserve to suffer the consequences: the impossibility of keeping their crazy allies and their share of the center in the same tent.

  3. DANEgerus says:

    Perot = good
    Nader = bad

    Through the Leftist prism