Maine Democrats Sue Secretary of State to Get Independent Senate Candidate Off the Ballot

On June 30, the chair of the Maine Democratic Party filed a lawsuit in state court, to remove the only independent candidate for U.S. Senate from the November ballot. The case is Knutson v Department of the Secretary of State, Kennebec County. The Secretary of State had determined that the candidate, Herb Hoffman, has 4,000 valid signatures. The lawsuit argues that the Secretary of State is mistaken. The specific dispute includes whether a signature is valid if the signer gives a Post Office Box address, and whether certain signatures were properly witnessed.

Hoffman is a former Democrat who supported Dennis Kucinich for president. Hoffman became disillusioned with the Democratic Party, partly because of how Kucinich was treated, and partly he disagrees with the stances of the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate on foreign policy. If Hoffman is removed from the ballot, there will only be two choices remaining on the Maine ballot in November for U.S. Senate.


Maine Democrats Sue Secretary of State to Get Independent Senate Candidate Off the Ballot — No Comments

  1. Third party candidates do not help anybody in either party. We are a two-party system and ought to remain so unless there is an overwhelming demand for the third. 4,000 does not seem to be an adequate number regardless of the criteria or qualifications.

  2. Judith Rohweder, you really need to reconsider
    your thoughts. Just as the Communist nations rigged the deck to create and then perpetuate the
    party state, we have rigged the deck–the first past the post system, onerous ballot access requirements, anti-fusion laws, bipartisan manipulation of access to the debate stage, discrimination in access to public funding (though Maine is an exception here)–to perpetuate duopoly-
    the engineered manipulated two-party state.
    If you believe in democracy and a two-party
    system, join with us who believe that IF Americans want a two-party system they will enforce it by their votes on election day, after the undemocratic
    discriminatory props for duopoly come down.

  3. Well, Judith, this thing called the United States Constitution happens to apply to all American citizens – not just Republicans and Democrats. Matter of fact, the Constitution doesn’t even mention political parties, and with good reason. In the Federalist Papers, the Framers expressed considerable concern that parties (or “factions”) would undermine our democratic processes. They were right, of course: today the two major parties use discriminatory ballot access laws, gerrymandering and other anti-competitive devices to rig elections from beginning to end, such that 9 out of 10 electoral districts and 37 out of 50 states are considered “safe” – ie, don’t bother voting, because the outcome of the election is predetermined. That’s your two-party system for you. It’s gotten so bad that people like you openly encourage the craven Democratic Party when they openly try to win elections by depriving voters a free choice of candidates. And then the media dutifully chimes in with unthinking accounts of the so-called “spoiler” effect. Unbelievable.

  4. Third party candidates may not help people in either party but they’re the only ones at this point that might help the people of the United States.

    You party apparatchiks have had it your way for so long you’re not even embarrassed to make ridiculous statements like that.

    I hope that the combined non-duopoly vote this year will be high enough to make people realize that the “spoiler” is the duopoly itself. That we can turn them out of power and return control of our government to the people.

    Barr/Gravel/McKinney/Nader for President… and any non-duopol anywhere they’re able to get on the ballot.

  5. This seems to have become standard operating procedure for the Dems since the 2000 election. Why compete when you can destroy?

  6. Judith Rohweder doesn’t know the definition of “two party system”. It was coined in 1911 and it means a system in which two parties are much larger than all the other parties. It doesn’t mean a system in which there are just two parties.

  7. Two points:
    1) This is one more reason no rational person can refer to the “Democratic” Party. It is one more illustration of why we say “Democrat” Party.
    2) Judith, the “two-party” system has evolved, mostly because of manipulation, but it is nowhere mandated or required by the Constitution or even state laws. (And certainly not by common sense or decency.)
    It is, of course, being maintained by those two old parties, through such shenanigans as taxpayer-paid primaries and through mis-education in the government schools and by mis-information from the so-called “news” media.
    You might want to ask yourself why anyone calling themselves “Democrats” are so eager to prevent any real semblance of democracy.

  8. 4,000 signatures is not an “adequate number?” Leaving aside Ms. Rohweder’s other observations, if that is what the state of Maine has set as the number of valid petition signatures required to place a candidate on the ballot for U.S. Senate, then of course it’s an adequate number. At least it seems to be according to 4,000 of her fellow Mainers and the Maine Secretary of State. I’m sure it seemed like an “adequate number” to the people who went out and tried to collect thousands of signatures in a state that is not exactly one of the most populous in the U.S.

    I invite Ms. Rohweder (who is in all likelihood one of the many hit-and-run folks who visit here once or twice without returning and without leaving any contact link) to put her money where her mouth is, so to speak. She should contact her state legislators and ask them to introduce a bill repealing the statute that provides for petition signatures for independent candidates for federal office, and declaring that only candidates of the Democratic and Republican parties are allowed to run in Maine for the U. S. Senate. Good luck with that.

  9. I was going to reply to her earlier but couldn’t because I was at work. However, all of you above had very good responses so there’s no need. Still, I’ll say this. I tend to believe that old Judith is either a Democrat shill trying to spread their anti-democratic gospel, or just someone trying to provoke us on a site obviously opposed to everything she says in her commentary. After all, nobody can be that stupid.

  10. Furthermore, as I have been predicting for the past few years now (and still believe to be true), the Republican Party will be a minor-sized political party by the year 2012. If Judith Rohweder is a Democrat (as many of us seem to suspect), she really should not worry so much.

Leave a Reply

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