The New York Times of September 23 has this interview with Ralph Nader, written by Katherine Seelye. The title is “Nader, Drawing Votes – from McCain.” The article itself does not actually present the data to support its title, but notes that Nader makes this allegation and accepts it. UPDATE: the New York Times piece has been revised and improved on this point; the link above goes to the updated Times article. Thanks very much to reporter Katherine Seelye for pointing this out. Seelye is a heroine of the ballot access movement. In 1997, she publicized in the Times the story of how the Pennsylvania legislature had quadupled the number of signatures, by amending another election law bill in a 3 a.m. session. The publicity engendered by her story lead to Governor Tom Ridge vetoing that repressive election law bill.

The article says Nader only received one-third of the vote for president in 2004. Actually, he got .381%. It would be more accurate to say he got .4%, or possibly to say he got three-eighths of 1%. He received 465,650 votes, out of a total vote for president of 122,295,345. Thanks to Rick Hasen’s ElectionLawBlog for the link.

The Mississippi ballot access case, on behalf of the Natural Law Party and Brian Moore, will be Thursday, September 25, at 9:30 a.m. in U.S. District Court in Jackson. The Illinois ballot access case, on behalf of independent U.S. House candidate Allan Stevo, will also be on September 25 in the morning, in the 7th circuit, in Chicago.

Although no date has been set for the Pennsylvania Supreme Court hearing in the Republican appeal to remove Bob Barr from the ballot, the briefs are due October 2. Both sides must file simultaneous briefs. Obviously the brief for Bob Barr will include the recent Massachusetts opinion.

Ron Paul today endorsed Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin.

Paul made it clear that he was responding to Bob Barr’s criticism for “remaining neutral” by supporting the four significant alternative candidatesm, specifically mentioning Barr’s failure to appear at Paul’s unity event “by canceling his appearance “forty minutes before the pess conference started…To say the least, I was shocked and disappointed.” He continued:

The Libertarian Party Candidate admonished me for “remaining neutral” in the presidential race and not stating whom I will vote for in November. It’s true; I have done exactly that due to my respect and friendship and support from both the Constitution and Libertarian Party members. I remain a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party and I’m a ten-term Republican Congressman. It is not against the law to participate in more then one political party. Chuck Baldwin has been a friend and was an active supporter in the presidential campaign. I continue to wish the Libertarian and Constitution Parties well. The more votes they get, the better. I have attended Libertarian Party conventions frequently over the years.

I’ve thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the November election. I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate.