Home General Nader Sues Democratic National Committee for 2004 Dirty Tricks
formats

Nader Sues Democratic National Committee for 2004 Dirty Tricks

Published on October 30, 2007, by in General.

On October 30, Ralph Nader, Peter Camejo, and six voters who wanted to vote for Nader in 2004, filed a lawsuit against the Democratic National Committee. The lawsuit, Nader v Democratic National Committee, 2007ca-7245B, was filed in the District of Columbia Superior Court. The complaint is 70 pages long. It details the national Democratic Party’s extensive support for challenges to Nader’s ballot positions, in states in which elections officials had accepted Nader’s petitions and placed him on the ballot. The complaint goes into great detail, including a coordinated effort to sabotage individual petition sheets in Oregon (anti-Nader activists were instructed to sign a petition sheet in the space reserved for the circulator, and then to line it out, which had the effect of ruining all the signatures already on that sheet). The complaint also talks about harassment of Nader circulators in Ohio and Oregon. The complaint also deals with incidents in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. The lawsuit asks for a jury trial, in a claim for monetary damages.

45 Responses

  1. Jeanette Doney

    RIGHT ON! I’m only sorry the complaint doesn’t include CA. It should!

  2. S. Maxon

    America should be suing Nader for giving it 8 years of George W. Bush. Nader has the deaths of somewhere over 100,000 Iraqi civilians on his head. How stupid and tragically ironic that Nader’s Green Party campaign caused the defeat of Al Gore.

  3. WILL

    3 CHEERS FOR RALPH.

  4. Nick B

    Hi, Richard:

    Any idea where would the monetary damages would go, if in fact they do win their case? Does it go to the Nader 2004 campaign, to Nader and Camejo as individuals, or what?

  5. Liar, liar, liar!

    Come on ‘S. Maxon': in California alone, with the anti democratic Electorial College and the ‘winner take all’ mind set and process any Nader vote is merely what it is, a mute protest against the million voter quad annual DNC steamroller.

    Nader, Camejo, Perot, Ventura, positive national icons all, are not responsible for the lack luster perspective or and or message of Bore Gore or Scarey Kerry.

  6. Nader did not make Gore lose. Those who voted for Nader would not have voted for Gore if Nader wasn’t in the race. Third party voters don’t vote for Republicans or Democrats. They vote against them. And if they can’t vote against them, they stay home. More sour grapes by a Republican/Democrat who who just can’t seem to understand that the two party system is ruining the country.

  7. Larry Reinsch

    come on Maxon ,check your facts , Gore could have won if he had only won his home state, the dems want you to think that Nader was a spoiler and you fell right into it !!

  8. jonathan cymberknopf

    I feel sorry for the people who blame Nader for the Democrats failure in 2000, 2004. I’m sure he is also responsible for the Democrats voting for the war, not impeaching Bush, not passing laws that protect consumers, Nader is probably also responsible for forcing Hillary to take more money from lobby groups than any Republican including George Bush.
    How sad is it that people buy what the Democratic machine tells them. I hate it when people become sheep. I wish more people were free thinkers and seekers of knowledge.

  9. WILL

    WE MUST HAVE A FREE SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY. WE MUST ALWAYS HOLD THE RIGHT TO SEEK PUBLIC OFFICE JUST AS SACRED AS THE BILL OF RIGHYS. RALPH NADER HAS BEEN WRONGRD AND THOSE WOUKD WHOM CAUSED THE TROUBLE NEED TO PAY DAMAGES. FREE ELECTIONS PLEASE

  10. Infringing on the right to choose is just as bad as infringing on the right to vote.

  11. Richard

    If the lawsuit wins damages, the people who sued would receive some money as individuals.

  12. S. Maxon

    It’s not the Democratic machine talking, it’s simple, inexorable logic. If Nader hadn’t run, Gore probably would have been elected and history changes dramatically. As for the 2004 election, it probably doesn’t make as big a practical difference (unless the administration decides to play “regime change” with Iran, which may yet happen).

    Sadly, it falls on Nader. He doesn’t deserve 100% of the blame – there are obviously others who are more responsible for the current mess than he is. But it’s on him too. He gave us 2 terms of GWB and the misconceived Iraq war, plus he permanently discredited the Green Party and in fact the entire multi-party system.

  13. NE

    To “S. Maxon”: far more Democrats voted for Bush in 2000 than voted for Nader. And it was the DLC and you DLC hacks who made Ralph Nader want to run as a third party candidate in the first place. So blame yourselves (and see you again at the polls in 2008).

  14. Matt

    Just for once it would be nice if people blamed George W. Bush for the current Bush presidency, but that would be too obvious I suppose.

    I wonder, do Greens ever go to mainstream Democratic sites like Dailykos and complain that Gore cost Ralph Nader the election? ‘Cause that would be funny. :)

  15. There has been research on Nader’s impact on 2000 that clearly shows that had Nader not been in the race, Gore would have lost by an even greater margin! Nader actually helped Gore by mobilizing young and first time voters, many of whom wound up voting for Al Gore instead of Nader.

    See Simmons S. (2004) “One in ten thousand: Ralph Nader takes on the Presidency.” Wisconsin Political Scientist Vol 10, No 2, Summer 2004, p. 3-6

    Online here:
    http://www.uwosh.edu/political_science/word/Wisconsin_Political_Scientist_Summer_2004.doc

  16. Susan Tripp

    Do you know why SEIU was named in the suit? In the interview in July on Democracy Now, Nader complained that Andrew Stern participated in ads advocating universal health care.

    SEIU endorsed the Kuehl bill for single payer health care, like universal medicare, that
    saves a lot of money. It passed in California but was veoed by Schwarzenegger.

    What does SEIU have to do with ballot access? I think a lot of union members will be puzzled since Nader has been working on union issues for a long time.

  17. Richard

    The SEIU office in Oregon apparently helped find people to sabotage the Nader independent petition, and also to go sit in the Nader meeting (he wouldn’t have needed a petition if he could have got 1,000 people into a room simultaneously, each of whom would sign as a participant in nominating Nader at that meeting). People hostile to the meeting took up room in the meeting and then the Secretary of State’s observer wouldn’t let anyone else into the room, after there were 1,100 people in the room. But the hostile people wouldn’t sign the paper.

  18. Michael

    Ironic. The Democrats might have won in 2004 if instead of using the $4 M they spent on lawyers trying to keep Nader off the ballot in different states they had used it on media and events in the key states like Ohio.

  19. Deran

    I think the really telling thing abt the Democrat’s whining abt Mr. Nader is this: their illogical assumption that everyone who voted for Nader was a mindless zombie, too stupid to have considered the cosequences of their actions, and they were not active agents in their own decision making. That is outrageously elitists (not to mention pathetic).

    I also think there were plenty of people who voted Nader/LaDuke in 2000 who either do not vote regularly, or like me, never vote in presidential (or most elections) for a major party candidate.

    And let us not forget what crappy, uninspiring centrists Gore and Kerry are. And, I imagine that when the Democrats nominate Clinton 2.0, the only thing going for her, as far as inspiring to voters, will be that she is a woman. That, and repulsion of the idea of another Republican in the WH, may well be enough to get her elected, but if she is, it won’t be based on her “ideas” or policies!

  20. Logic might suggest that the folks who blame Nader for eight years of Bush II should be leading the charge for instant runoff voting, or at least two-round runoff. I suspect the opposite is true, that they are among the most vocal opponents.

  21. Tom Yager

    “I suspect the opposite is true, that they are among the most vocal opponents.”

    From what I’ve seen so far, hatred of Ralph Nader and the Green Party is directly proportional to opposition to IRV.

  22. Caleb Friz

    Just in case anyone was still hoping that the Democrats were going to save us from the Republicans, here’s your reality check: the Democrats are just as corrupt, petty, and nasty as the Republicans when it comes to getting votes, excluding opposing points of views, and maintaining and expanding their power. Leave the Democrats, leave the Republicans, and vote for third party candidates if you want to restore Democracy to America!

  23. Rich

    In response to S.Maxon’s comment below, the idea that Nader is responsible for Bush is totally invalid, since Nader rain AGAINST him. Why doesn’t anyone ever blame the Republican voters? It’s clearly their fault. There is also the fact that the voting system in this country is racist and rigged. There’s that too.

  24. WILL

    Nader pulls votes from the right left and center.A lot of people admire his honesty and candor. a rare trait for a political figure. the same goes for Ron Paul.

  25. Paul A.

    Good for them. They can pay there debts off if they have any and make a run for the 2008 elections.

  26. Michal Mudd

    Good for Ralph. I was wondering when the outrageous injustices he was subjected to were going to be addressed. I just wish he would also sue the organization that organizes the debates!
    Truly, some of the dirty tricks the Dems played on Ralph and other candidates from the Green Party in the last election prove to me that there’s not a dimes worth of difference between them and the Rovian Republicans. Reading the details of this suit confirms it may actually be closer to a nickel now.
    I hope you’re proud of your party, S. Maxon. With our fellow citizens dying to bring democracy to Iraq supposedly, their assault on our own democracy is especially shameful and cowardly.

  27. Idiots like S. Maxon assume that our votes belonged to Gore and Kerry, and that Nader “took them away.” Well, you may have given away your vote. I CERTAINLY DID NOT! My vote was mine, and the only party that has tried to “take it away” has been the so-called “Democratic” party by trying to leave me no options but to vote for their dumbass candidates.

    By the way, it was the Green Party of Florida that got a copy of the voter rolls and gave them to the ACLU, which the ACLU used to prove race-based disenfranchisement of African Americans in 2000. Dems didn’t want to touch that one. Why fight for their base when they can take that base for granted?

  28. Joe A

    I voted for Kerry/Edwards, but in retrospect I wish I would have voted for Nader/Camejo or David Cobb. In some ways, I know I threw my vote away, but I fell prey to the politics of fear and compromise that S. Maxon is infected with. The Democrats took over Congress and 10 months later the Democrats continue to stand with the Republicans on the most important issues- 10 months later, we’re still in Iraq and Afghanistan and now looking at war in Iran; they raised the minimum wage to distract from the fact that they’re passing a new trade bill favored by corporate Republicans that further undermines jobs for working U.S. citizens and unions; and they continue to fail to hold to oil industry accountable for price gouging; the fail to block Bush court nominees, etc…

    I’m sorry that people still refuse to believe after strong evidence that the voting system is rigged by the two major parties and their game is so strong that people like S. Maxon really believe that there is still major differences between the two parties, and spout off lies about Nader being accountable for 8 years of G.W…. S. Maxon, please dont make me break it down for you with statistics.

    Gore/Lieberman won in 2000, despite Nader/Laduke’s votes. Furthermore, even if 100% of Nader/Camejo’s votes went to Kerry/Edwards, along with the Green Party and the Socialist Workers Party and the Libertarian Party and even a couple of other parties, Bush/Cheney probably still would have won in 2008, although a few incidents in that election remain questionable as well, none of them involving Nader.

  29. deaner

    you democrats with your undying loyalty toward candidates who are identical to the corporate-pandering, anti-union republican creeps!

  30. Ian

    We tried desperately to get Ralph on the ballot in CA, but the amount of signatures needed was ridiculous. The money won in the lawsuit should go to Ralph’s ’08 run. We need a 3rd party option, and Bloomberg will not get my vote!

  31. Phil Sawyer

    Deran wrote:

    I think the really telling thing abt the Democrat’s whining abt Mr. Nader is this: their illogical assumption that everyone who voted for Nader was a mindless zombie, too stupid to have considered the cosequences of their actions, and they were not active agents in their own decision making. That is outrageously elitists (not to mention pathetic).

    Phil Sawyer adds:

    In addition, because it is so “outrageously” elitist, it is also anti-working class.

  32. Didrik Thede

    S. Maxon said, on October 30th, 2007 at 3:07 pm,
    “America should be suing Nader for giving it 8 years of George W. Bush. Nader has the deaths of somewhere over 100,000 Iraqi civilians on his head. How stupid and tragically ironic that Nader’s Green Party campaign caused the defeat of Al Gore.” That’s got to be one of the most twisted pieces of logic I’ve come across in a long while. Nader didn’t cause that any more than you did, and it’s not on his head any more than on yours and mine. You’d like to blame the candidate and his supporting voters for exercising their rights and judgement…? Why not blame the millions of Democrats who didn’t get out to vote?

  33. Aaron

    “America should be suing Nader for giving it 8 years of George W. Bush. Nader has the deaths of somewhere over 100,000 Iraqi civilians on his head. How stupid and tragically ironic that Nader’s Green Party campaign caused the defeat of Al Gore.”

    so we should limit our choices and silence the voices simply because they dont play by the two party game? WOW. how very very un-american of you!

  34. Perry T.

    @S. Maxon:
    Gore couldn’t even win his home state of Tennessee. How bad could he have done to turn his own state to vote for Bush? Nader’s votes didn’t cause Bush to win. The rigging of the election caused Bush to win. Kathleen Harris & Co. + hanging chads sealed the victory. Or rather, Bush stole the election through deceit, fair and square.

  35. Dr John Michael Nahay

    Ralph Nader is an international hero.
    Bush, Cheney, Hillary Clinton, some guy name Obama – all dems and pubs – are extreme narcissists, running for politics for no other purpose than their selfish financial wealth.

    I have absolutely no respect for any scum who have the nerve to preach to others that they “MUST” support the troops by supporting going to war in Iraq for the sole purpose of making CEOs of oil companies even richer. And then this scum complains that they (or their sons and daughters) get killed.
    Boo – hoo. That is THEIR choice.
    I disagree with Greens about their “non-violence”
    policy and even their “anti-war” policy. 1960s radicals should have used a lot more military (bombs, guns) force to end a military draft.
    All the pro-big-government extremists have no concept of CHOICE. I support CHOICE for wars.
    A person has and deserves the right to CHOOSE which wars to fight, for which purpose. Those who cannot understand that concept deserve to die, get
    killed, be tortured, be imprisoned for life.

    Nader and the Libertarians and the Greens need to be both much more aggressive and much clearer on these issues. Those who support unjust laws – e.g. government and business labs that torture and test on animals – deserve to die, go to prison, suffer, etc. for THEIR cause, NOT those who support just laws.

    We need to support war against Saudi Arabia and Iran to give women and atheists the same rights as men and religionists (muslims). We need to give them even MORE, to make up for past injustice. We need to bomb Peru to free Lori Berenson and to redistribute wealth.

    We need to support War for Animal Rights. Those whose cause is to eat hamburgers and friend chicken just because “they like it” – or other insignificant reasons, such as “culture” – should die and risk their lives for THEIR silly little cause.

    No one can call themselves “Libertarian”, nor talk about “self-reliance”, if they are not vegans and don’t test on animals. Just because you are hungry – that does not make it the animals’ responsibility.

    No one can call themselves a “pro-lifer” unless they are a vegan. If they don’t make the small sacrifice to be vegan, then they are hypocrites to dare tell woman to go through 9 months of pregnancy.

    Nader, Greens, Libertarian need to put these policies into their platforms. The further political candidates and their supporters are from these platforms, the less human they are.

    NO one can say they support “freedom of speech” or “difference of opinion” unless they support speech and opinions which
    1) they oppose, AND
    2) NEED the support. e.g. there is no contradiction to say “I support difference of opinions” but I refuse to support christianity,
    because christianity has already GOTTEN its way for the past 2000 years.

    One of those opinions is: there is no difference between prisoner and prisoners of war.
    Another is: there is no difference between legal vs political vs ethical decisions. They are ALL decisions – with varying degrees of negative and positive effect.
    The bottom line is – the vast majority of so-called “humans” on this planet are nothing more than random atoms flying around who deserve what happened on 9/11 to happen to them. They enjoy it.
    It’s hilarious. I find it funny. They don’t feel pain. That’s all because they are simply too stupid (mentally inferior) to calculate the consequences of their actions and of ALL the laws (government, prisons, courts, businesses) they support.

  36. Well, I’m glad to see so many folks speaking out in support of Nader. He will get my vote any day as he is inspiring, honest and speaks truth to the power. If the best the Dems can offer is “anybody but Bush” as a serious contender, they deserve Bush as a president.

    Maybe the Democrats should seriously consider changing the name of their party to Un/antidemocrats as that would probably better reflect the actions of their party.

    Go Greens!! Go Nader!!

  37. Lori

    It is so great to find Nader supporters! He was so articulate and inspiring on Meet the Press announcing his candidacy. I can’t beleive how much negative crap there is about him on the web and it seems most people who consider themselves liberal are brainwashed into hating Nader. I really think if those people watched him on Meet the Press they would re-consider. It really helped 2 of my family members re-consider their avowed hatred.
    I’ve signed up to volunteer at nader.org and I hope you all will too!

  38. Jeanne Wimbley

    Perhaps Mr. Nader KNOWS just how UN-DEMOCRATIC the DNC operates. Example: THEY (DNC) DECIDED in advance WHO the Democrat NOMINEE WILL BE SENATOR CLINTON. And, to be SURE SHE “WINS” they give her 235 Super-Delegates–before the race officially begins. And,apparently PROMISED Her the “WIN” status. This not provided her a HEAD start,where she is so self-assured,haughty,and down-right arrogant with “mere Appearances” she is ahead ofObama. Obama’s Wins–are NOT supported by DNC, who are probably quaking in their boots because of “dumb” way they “punished MIch/FL votes” which was pre-calucalated FOR Clinton.

    What is “Democratic” about this election when DNC PRE-Determines WHO will be its Nominee? Even IF tthe Democratic Party FALLS to extinction? YAY. Nader, I say Keep them ON their toes because of DIRTY way thte DNC plays against one of MOST exciting Democratic Candidate, Barack Obama,whose electrification ogf People to BE involved politically is GREATEST OF TIME! Not just “since Kennedy” but, of ALL TIME–Period.

  39. Jeanne Wimbley

    NO, Nader’s entry in Presidential compition was NOT why Dems lost.
    Dems lose because its Leadership “cherry-picks” and resort to UNETHICAL, PRE-CHOOSING their candidates,and selling out REAL Winners as chosen by the people. And Party-Bosses usually pick LONG-WINDED, Repetitious Talkers, LOSE attention of regular folks living a REAL Lives–simply DO NOT HAVE time to hear speeches that go on and on and on! Bush– for example had almost NOTHING to say–BUT, his short,Simple Sound Bite mantras–STUCK to even swayed Dem voters–weary of LONG WINDEDS. To think of hearing it for 4 years?UNBEARABLE!McCain gets it.THINK before Speak & get to the POINT.
    Democrats are SO LONG WINDED–no wonder they are called “DO-Nothing Congress” to which I might add, “Do NOthing but TALK,TALK…” Their Ideas die there in mounds of excess verbiage. IF CLINTON, after all her “mistakes”Iraq vote,Can’t get it rifht FIRST time:Change of Staff,Campaign short-sightedness,extremely MIS-Managed Pres Campaign,$5 million LOAN to herself, against NOVICE Obama? Who brings MILLIONS of New Democrats–that this DNC is ready to dump all of them, to FAVOR their own Choice: Clinton? Let them do that to PROVE,DNC is just another are of Republicans and we can declare this Country’s notion of DEMOCRACY as officially DEAD! Only a THIRD party can still save us. It seems this election is run for the sole purpose of REVITALIZING CNN,MSNBC and other ADVERTISEMENT MARKETEERS–who Are TRUE Beneficiaries of ELECTION DOLLARS RAISED BY so-called “Candidates” and provide Party PARTIES of the Elite Party HEADS. at expense of WE the suffering Peoples of the USA. (In REAL quest of Better lives)

  40. Patricia Null

    I would be very happy to participate in a grass- roots campaign to have Florida’s primary votes counted. I think the decision to block the Florida Democrats from any representation at the convention was a big management decision MISTAKE.
    Please give the average person a chance to be heard. Remember, we are deciding the future of the USA, not settling a neigborhood squabble.
    Thanks for your consideration,
    Pat Null

  41. Ralph Nader is being perceived by a huge majority of Americans as downright senile and idiotic.

    Get the idiot out of the way. He is responsible for these Bush years and thoughtful folks KNOW it. You Nader fanatics are not gonna; spin your way out of this perception PERIOD!!!!

    Jim Willeford

  42. Mark Richardson

    Number 41, Mr. Willeford, I hope you are well and having a wonderful Mother’s Day. I understand your political frustration because I too feel things are hopeless at times. Please consider the effect this psychological trauma has had on you. When you resort to name-calling and negatively labeling anyone who doesn’t agree with you, or whom you perceive as a threat to your vision of the perfect world, it makes you appear childish and self-centered. You also reveal your disturbing comfort with your ignorance and/or intolerance of the motivations, ideals, and goals of “Nader Fantatics,” whatever those are, and of Ralph Nader himself. You say “Get the idiot out of the way.” You mean out of your way so you can have everything just the way you want it, correct? That sounds more like a – well, I think it’s obvious you’re not interested in promoting democracy. You’re for getting what you want and letting the ends justify the means. This is why your party is being sued.

    To all other masters of logic who have written in and bemoaned the consequences of Ralph Nader being on the the ballot in 2000, I gave a symbolic one-fingered salute to the dirty tricks played in 2004 when I voted for George Bush after the Democratic Party undemocratically prevented Nader from getting on the ballot in Oregon. It was symbolic because Kerry won Oregon, but it just shows the law of unintended consequences.

    I am working for Hillary now, though Obama will likely get the nomination. Really though, I’m in a quandry. I don’t want Barack, Hillary, or John. Please tell me what I should do. I wouldn’t want to stand in the way of other people having everything exactly the way they want it. The trouble is, some will want my wasted Nader vote to go towards McCain, and some will want it to be spent on Obama. I guess you just can’t please everyone. Maybe I should do what I believe would be best for me, my family, my community, this country, and the world. What a concept, to do what I believe I should do, instead of what other people are trying to force me to do. To that end, Jim Willeford, regarding your attempts to verbally bully me into doing what you want me to do, your comments are lame. Truly weak. Not even annoying really, just completely without effect.

  43. What happened to the lawsuit? I am certain that most of our federal judges will fuck it up somehow because they only want to be called “good writers”, an oxymoron! They have rules for every card played and will come up with more when they need them in order to violate our constitutional rights! Give me one instance where judges have upheld our rights and then I will ask that you identify another? Plus, aren’t half of those millions , at least, cases reported absolutely wrong, wrong? I have a couple that are!

  44. It is not the Presidential election that is important, it is the throwing out of either party that is important, otherwise we are going to get the same old money-changers back in office, regardless of their names!What is the next question?

  45. I dont usually comment, but after reading through so much info I had to say thanks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>