Comments on: Green Party Sues South Carolina

By: Steve Rankin

Steve Rankin — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:39:49 +0000

#4: If a party wants to nominate or endorse a candidate, why shouldn’t it be allowed to do so?

One of the motivations for fusion in NY is that the parties have to poll a certain number of votes in order to maintain their qualified status.

History has lots of examples of people who moved between political parties: Theodore Roosevelt, Robert LaFollette, Hiram Johnson, George Wallace…

By: Bob Marston

Bob Marston — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:34:36 +0000

Platt got what he deserved !

If a candidate has so little conviction that he or she decides to run on multiple ballot lines that includes a major party that candidate deserves to run on NEITHER !

The Green Party in Northern California is infested with members routinely bop back and forth between the Green Party and the DemocRAT Party. After what transpired at the Green Party 2004 National Convention the eye of suspicion was firmly cast upon these members. With good reason may I add. Candidates for public office need to thoroughly vetted and should stand loyal to the party that nominates them.

Fusion is nothing more than a ruse to funnel the successful members of small parties back into the dominant parties.

By: Eric Prindle

Eric Prindle — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 14:48:59 +0000

Unfortunately, since it is an argument about the law, it needs to be made in the complaint, not by a witness. The complaint should include all plausible alternative legal arguments for the relief the plaintiff is seeking. Otherwise, the plaintiff will lose the right to assert those arguments at a later date.

It may be that the ACLU lawyers considered this argument and decided that it was frivolous. However, it would be worth checking in with them about it.

By: Gregg Jocoy

Gregg Jocoy — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:09:12 +0000

Eric, I am not an attorney. I have not read the full documentation. I did, however, make just that argument to the Election Commission.

I can only assume that the attorneys wrote what they thought would be their most persuasive case. I may be called as a witness, and if I am I can assure you that I will bring Eric’s point up to the judge or jury.

By: Eric Prindle

Eric Prindle — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 11:20:34 +0000

Why did the ACLU fail to argue, in the alternative, that the State Election Commission misinterpreted the statute and that it does not bar ballot placement when the nomination of one party is confirmed before the nomination of the other party is decided?

The ACLU made this distinction in its constitutional argument but did not make a separate statutory interpretation argument on those grounds.

This is at least a plausible enough interpretation of the statute that it should have been included as an alternative argument.