Right to Run for Public Office

2008 Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader answers a question about the right to run for public office and the states' role in federal elections. From the Open the Debates super rally in Minneapolis, Minnesota on September 4, 2008.Video by Karen Kilroy - http://karenkilroy.com

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• ralph
• nader
• president
• 2008
• mccain
• obama
• super
• rally
• open
• debates
• right
• run
• office
• vote
• karen
• kilroy

[realpundit]

I totally agree with what Ralph said. We need legal action against the Commission on Presidential Debates as they exist only to manipulate and rig the entire democratic process of the American people. We need to push to make lobbying any member of government a felony. It should also be made a felony for any former lobbyist to be a member of a political campaign. I commend Ralph Nader for going after the heart of the problem in Washington. We won't go anywhere until we clean house. GO RALPH!

[danthro]

nice vid! as Mr. Nader's pointed out on numerous occasions, voter's rights don't mean much without candidates' rights, because a right to vote doesn't mean much without a real choice in candidates or a right to allow candidates who represent ideas of millions of Americans on the ballot & debates.

Congrats to Nader/Gonzalez on making it onto 45 ballots! Now, if we can just get the cowardly corporate candidates to debate him! They say Nader's irrelevant & unrealistic--so what're they afraid of?

[JOMO59]

The problem with Nader's view is that it is The States that are a party to the compact known as The U.S. Constitution and as such it is the respective States that represent We the People in that compact. That is how our founders intended - patterned after Roman republicanism not Athenian democracy. We do not have a strict democracy a la what the French Revolution attempted and failed to do shortly after our own revolution - we have a Constitutional Republic - if we can keep it.

[Browned79]

In theory a State could deny suffrage to a citizen for reasons other then race, religion, sex, 18 age, literacy test or poll tax. This tends to involve disputes about indigent status, ethnicty, criminal convictions and (possibly) sexual orientation. The right to candidacy is even less protected although their is a proposed 'Civic Liberty Amendment' floating around.

[travelfar22]

* "Spoiler" is a politically bigoted word used by the opposing parties to keep the independents out of the race.

NADER/Gonzalez = WE the PEOPLE

Democrats and Republicans = THEY the CORPORATION$

* The two headed Democrat and Republican monster is not

to be trusted as they've proven over and over!

[Rhite5]

It means the Right-to-Vote is not stated in so many words in the Constitution. Many states have different rules about who can vote. Example: Rehabilitated Felons. In some states they get the Right to Vote as soon as they are released from prison. In other states, they will never get the right to vote. In other states they have to jump through a lot of confusing hoops to regain the right to vote after a certain period of time.

Nader feels the rules should be uniform across all the states.

[jalvarezvUtube]

If you listen to NPR, ask them to provide more coverage for third party candidates because apparently they think they are providing enough coverage to them. See: npr(dot)org/ombudsman/2008/07/­covering_thirdparty_candidates­.html

[Beadbud5000]

I saw the video as illuminating all that we have discuss. Wish I had more, but I don't

Bead

[MooseOfReason]

Bead, he did say, at 0:14, "Yes, I think the Constitution should be amended to give people a Constitutional right to vote, which they don't have at the present time, surprisingly enough."

So that is what he said. And we still don't have an answer for what he meant.

[Beadbud5000]

No. He was talking about just how each state has a different set of rules to apply to run for a federal position. Ralph suggests, and I agree, that they should be one standard not 50. If you are running for state office, it should be that states standard. But when runnibng for fed office, the individual state rules should not apply

[lunabargal]

I missed the broader context of the question and would like to know more about this idea that we do not currently have a "constitutional right to vote." Is that what he said?