A U.S. District Court in South Carolina will hear South Carolina Green Party v South Carolina Election Commission on September 18, at 2 p.m. The issue is whether the Green Party’s candidate for the State House should be on the ballot. After the Green Party nominated Eugene Platt for the 115th district, Platt also tried to get the Democratic nomination. He lost the Democratic primary, so now the state says he can’t be the Green Party nominee either. South Carolina permits fusion, so it is fundamentally silly of the state to punish someone for trying to be the nominee of two parties and only succeeding in being the nominee of one party.
The case is getting a fair amount of media attention in the state. Eugene Platt nearly won the 2006 election for the same seat, running solely as a Democrat. He’s served in an elected non-partisan position in local government for many years. Platt could win this race.
http://www.voteplatt.com/
” a complete list of all parties that are on the ballot in at least two states for president, ”
Apparently it’s actually a list of all the CANDIDATES (not parties) that are on in at least two states . . .
My apologies, I posted that in the wrong thread . . .
Nothing fundamentally silly about it. A lot of mischief can be played by someone who pretends to be a fusion candidate, but really wants to punish anyone who dares to run against him.
As for Platt winning this race, his votes last time out were mostly not FOR him, they were AGAINST his opponent, who shot at some SCE&G workers and was jailed for it, and was having a well-publicized messy affair with a fellow legislator and resulting nasty divorce. Platt is an amiable joke in his district.
Isn’t the incumbent you’re supporting the same trigger happy filanderer?
Feel free to post under your own name when you get serious.
Oh sure, Scott. I’m supporting someone by bringing up all his dirty laundry from two years ago. Are you nuts?
Y’all need to get real.
Some of us are real enough to use our real names.
Maybe you’re not FOR the incumbent, just AGAINST everybody?
It makes no sense to punish someone for trying to add another ballot line in a state that allows it.