Petitions for Incumbent Pennsylvania State Legislators May have Forgeries

The Philadelphia News has this story. Last week, the Pennsylvania Attorney General said he is filing criminal charges against a former Pennsylvania House member for forging names on her 2006 primary petition. She did not run for re-election in 2006, after problems with her petition were revealed in 2006. She needed 300 valid signatures.

It should be noted that no Pennsylvania law official ever charged anyone in the 2004 Ralph Nader petition drive with a criminal forgery complaint. Also no one ever charged anyone associated with the Carl Romanelli 2006 petition with criminal forgery charges.

Meanwhile, two Pennsylvania House members running for re-election this year are also facing challenges that allege forgeries. Thanks to Larry Otter for the link.

Matt Gonzalez Acknowledges Spoiler Effect

The San Francisco Chronicle of March 2 has an interview with Matt Gonzalez, this year’s vice-presidential candidate teamed with Ralph Nader. According to the newspaper story, Gonzalez said “if Nader can be blamed for taking votes from Al Gore, it’s just as fair to blame Ross Perot for stealing support from George H. W. Bush and swinging the 1992 election to Bill Clinton. You have to be fair. Both sides have benefited from this.”

When Ralph Nader has been pressed on this point about the 2000 election, he says that there were many other causes of Al Gore losing. Interviewers never seem smart enough to respond to Nader that all complex events have multiple causes, but that the Nader campaign was one of those causes.

As to the point about Ross Perot’s 1992 race being one of the causes of Bill Clinton’s 1992 victory, there are those who say that exit polling does not back up this claim. But they forget about the October 1992 debates. Ross Perot was in all 3 presidential debates that month. Those debates had huge viewership. In all 3 debates, Perot constantly was very critical of George H. W. Bush, and never criticized Bill Clinton. Minor party and independent candidates can influence the outcome of elections in many ways. The effect of Perot’s strong remarks in the debate surely persuaded millions of people who liked and trusted Perot, to vote for Clinton and not for Bush.