Disenfranchised?
Does it strike anyone else as ironic that the people who say “Bush wasn’t elected” because he didn’t win the popular vote in the last election are the same ones who are getting Nader thrown off the ballot in every state that they possibly can? I understand why they are doing it and if I were in a battle, I wouldn’t want some spoiler coming in and ruining my chances either, but this bit of ridiculousness is going wholly unchallenged.
Four years ago, votes were recounted. Some votes were thrown out based on technicalities. The whole system in Florida worked to disenfranchise lots and lots of people. This is a fact. People’s voices were not heard and their votes were not counted properly. As a result, the Democrats have been talking about this process for the last four years. (If I could go the rest of my lifetime without hearing the word disenfranchised, I would be quite happy.)
So now in a veritable hurricane of ironic action that makes “The Day After Tomorrow” look like a sprinkling rain the Democrats are proactively working to disenfranchise an entire group of voters. The Democrats can’t deal with Nader splitting votes with John Kerry like he did with Al Gore they are engaging in a huge systematic campaign of disenfranchisement nationwide. They are denying the right of Green Party members, supporters of a three party system, and anyone else who would have wanted to vote for Nader.
I do understand what they are doing and why they are doing it, and I also understand that Nader does nothing more than skew the results of the election on the democratic side. I also understand that Nader supporters can still write their guy in, but we all know that isn’t the same thing as being on the ballot. Nader is well within his rights to run and it appears that the Dems are going to all new levels of effort to get him knocked off the ballot in states where possible. This process more actively disenfranchises voters than anything that the Republicans did four years ago because it removes a visible choice from millions and millions of voters.
As long as it fits their purpose, I guess it is ok.
Is this moral relativism? Am I off base here?
Chris Said,
September 30, 2004 @ 10:45 am
Across the country, state GOP organizations have worked to get names for Nader’s petitions. Do you really think the Dems are out of line for challenging the signatures their rivals collected?
How is anyone being disenfranchised? I can think of about five guys I’d rather vote for than Kerry and Bush. You’re not disenfranchised just because you don’t like the available choices.
deezo feezo Said,
September 30, 2004 @ 11:50 am
Mr. Hero is dienfranchised in my town because they offer menu items different from those in corporate ly franchised Mr. Hero’s
kiddicus Said,
October 1, 2004 @ 1:26 pm
i’m very discouraged with the disenfranchised dysentary that is being discussed so disgustingly in this discourse. Dis is despicable, and disteny’s child is dis years disputable dissection of a distant dyslexic lexicon. dissed!