Why would the GOP want the Greens to be stronger? Because it will draw votes from the Dems! My Republican friends are not dumb. If it's a tight race or one they are behind in, the answer is "divide and conquer!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in this case. We Pennsylvanians are sick to shit of Santorum and his role in the Bush theocracy. True, the Democratic candidate for Senate--Bob Casey, Jr.--is not much better, with his opposition to women's reproductive choice. But even we Green Party folks aren't so blinded by frustration and anger that we can't see the need for a Democratic Congress.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania Republicans, and their large corporate pay-masters have been truly exposed by their cynical and incredibly disrespectful treatment of Pennsylvanian voters. By throwing the Green Party five figures to get their U.S. Senate candidate on the November ballot, state Republicans feel they need only buy their way to victory. No new ideas, no compelling platforms for the future is needed. Just add to the campaign what the Republicans seem to have the most of, that being money, and the election is won.

In reality, the joke is actually on both of the old corporate parties and their two-party only political protection racket. Beside the extreme social conservatism favored by Santorum, he and Bob Casey have more in common than issues that separate them. Both candidates are outside the mainstream of American values and beliefs on the questions of abortion, the war in Iraq, corporate accountability, environmental concerns, and national healthcare, among others. Democrats who may resent the inclusion of a Green candidate should pause to consider why it appears state Democratic Party leaders continue to favor star-power over bold and innovative candidates that offer substance over style.

By helping the Green Party overcome its unfair and anti-democratic ballot problem, Santorum and Casey now face a Senate candidate in Carl Romanelli who will effectively highlight their (Santorum and Casey’s) similarities in political beliefs while accentuating his own strengths.
These strengths being Green Party values that the majority of Pennsylvanians’ favor; for women to continue to have the freedom to choose their reproductive future; for an end to a seemingly endless war in Iraq, and commitment to long-term nonviolent solutions to conflict in the world; corporate accountability where market fundamentalism does not triumph over the sovereignty of its citizens; sustainable clean sources of energy and an expanded manufacturing base to provide for new energy and conservation products; and universal healthcare for its people.

Vote for Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli for U.S Senate November 7.

Tim Reim

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So the PA Greens got the REPUGS to pay for their campaign - probably without lifting a finger!?

Clever. Good for them.

The Dems have a simple way to keep the Greens out of their hair: beat them on the issues. Hell, they might even start winning elections. Wonder why they don't do that?

Or, of course, they could push preference voting (does anyone still need a refresher on this? Basically, it's a quick, cheap way to achieve a runoff vote) and eliminate the spoiler effect altogether. Of course, if they did that, they might have to deal with the issues Americans really support. And we don't want that, do we?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Anyone remember Ralph Nader? Divide and conquer? Been there, done that - and ain't we all still paying for falling into that shithole? Santorum is a dangerous fanatic, an avid end-o-timer, more at home with the Talibaners who meet at the mega faux churches. He can not relate to liberal philosophy and finds it an affront to his sanctimonious self when one points out that 'his' jesus was the founder of the true liberalism. His stance on taxes - rich people deserve the whole enchilada but makers of the actual enchilada barely deserve $5.15 per hour. His take on environmental issues - if god put it here he meant for us to use it at our discression as it says clearly in his bible. He abhors birth control of any stripe - (except artificial insemination cause he just doesn't get it). Sex education - anytime, anywhere he deems immoral. He condemns condems as promiscuous wrappers probably invented by the devil anti-christ, who seems to be constantly on (or UP) his ass, feeding him his outrageous speechifying claptrap, and he advocates doctors and pharmacists not perscribe those nasty 'women' pills cause they only promote whoring around yet he'll righteously defend unqualified distribution of viagara never be disrupted. Anything remotely gay to him is anything that gets him UP making him feel all-dirtylike! He's head of the clown class of sanctimonious nitwits, his qualifications for governing and his heartfelt blind faith in his twisted version of religious tenents would be holy assets to make him a shoo-in for mayor - of Tehran. Things to remember for anyone voting Green in Pennsylvania!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am not advocating for anyone to vote for a party. All I am saying is that, THIS TIME IN HISTORY the stakes are too high to allow the same bunch now in complete control of both branches of our govt to remain in their positions. The war will never be questioned by this republican leadership that vote in lockstep with their embarassment of a president. The democrats are calling for an end to the violence. If they regain some power, they will get to finally expose the treasonous exploits of how this Iraq war was sold to us, where and how billions of dollars have been squandered and stolen and many questions we all need answers to that, unless democrats get subpeona power, will go unanswered and the neo-conartists who perpetuated these war crimes will go unpunished. I would like to change this two-party system and create a 'peoples' party that would reflect the issues of actual citizens, not elitists and corporations. As I see things RIGHT NOW, voting for someone with NO chance of winning is throwing away your vote and with it, the opportunity to affect change from the policies that are RIGHT NOW, destroying our democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Vote for peace. In some states the Repug candidate is more progressive than the Dimo(RI for instance). Why legitimize militarism by electing Dimo warriors.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have no use for Casey or Santorum and am glad to have an alternative in Romanelli. As for the Dems crying foul though, they did
the very same thing two years ago. Read this from the Philadelphia Enquirer:

On Monday, Clymer submitted about 36,000 signatures to the Pennsylvania Department of State to gain access to the November ballot. His candidacy, he said, gives voters an alternative because Hoeffel and Specter are "two peas in a pod."

Even some Hoeffel volunteers helped Clymer circulate petitions, which Hoeffel said he did not know about but had no problem with.

"The more the merrier," said Hoeffel, 53, who represents parts of Montgomery County and Philadelphia. "I support the concept of ballot access for any political party... . It will give the conservative wing of the party, which is so unhappy with Arlen Specter, a place to go."
The Specter campaign called it a "dirty trick."

"It is a clear admission that they can't beat Sen. Specter one-on-one," said Christopher Nicholas, his campaign manager.

The state GOP has been examining the petitions for irregularities but has yet to decide whether it should file a court challenge, Nicholas said Friday. The deadline is tomorrow.

In the April primary, 512,000 Republicans snubbed Specter in favor of U.S. Rep. Patrick J. Toomey, a Lehigh Valley conservative who tapped into anger over Specter's record that traverses the political spectrum. Toomey lost by fewer than 13,000 votes.

Specter, 74, has drawn back some conservatives, including endorsements from Toomey and the Club for Growth, the Washington group that helped bankroll his campaign. Robert Guzzardi, a major Toomey and Club for Growth donor who lives in Lower Merion Township, recently threw his support to Specter after wavering.
...
Clymer said he is in the race to win, targeting his limited-government, lower-taxes platform to taxpayer groups, abortion opponents and gun owners in Central and Western Pennsylvania.

But if his candidacy helps defeat Specter, that's fine with Clymer, too.

"I am not running this race to help him get elected," he said of Hoeffel, "but if that ends up being the result, I still think that I accomplished something."
posted by Chris at 10:55 AM

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]