From the oval office to a jailed office.
Editorial
Daily Vidette Editorial Board
Issue date: 4/17/08 Section: Viewpoint
From the time we begin learning about governments, democracy and United States elections we are told that our government is by the people, for the people, and most notably, of the people.
Most anyone can run for public office, from town council all the way up to President of the United States.
No matter what race, religion, gender or creed a person is, they are still capable of running for office.
There are a few restrictions, such as age and place of birth, but the majority of people are completely eligible for office.
Even those who have been convicted of crimes.
Keith Russell Judd, currently serving time at the Beaumont Correctional Institution in Texas, has gotten his name on the ballot for the Idaho Democratic presidential primary.
Judd has been incarcerated since 1999 and is not due out until 2013, which ironically, would be the last year of the presidential term he is a candidate to have.
In addition to Judd qualifying to be on the ballot in Idaho, he qualified as a write-in candidate in Kentucky, California, Indiana and Florida.
A government of the people indeed.
On Judd's votesmart.org biography it lists his reason for running for public office as "To make the world a better place."
At least his priorities are in the right place.
It is especially odd that Judd is a convicted felon who makes it on to a ballot for president. In many states, people who are convicted of felonies are not even allowed to vote.
It seems odd that, although convicted felons are not allowed to vote in many states, they should be allowed to run for the offices that they can not vote for.
This is not the first time that Judd has applied to be a candidate for president. He was also a candidate in Idaho in 2004.
He received zero votes.
His point is clear: if anyone should be able to run for president, why don't more people?
Common people, convicts or not, have just as much right as any political figure does to have a say in the direction of this country.
That being said, it would be a shame if someone's vote went to Judd.
His point has been made by simply putting his name on the ballot, but to offer up votes for a man who will not have the ability to actually secure the nomination is taking it too far.
As much as the Daily Vidette Editorial Board supports his point and his ability to run for any office he chooses, it can not endorse voting for a person whose stances on issues are unknown and whose background is so checkered.
Especially when the Democratic primary is in such a dead heat between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Your vote can count, why not let it?
Along the same lines, all superdelegates should save their endorsements for candidates with a real shot. After all, what political pull will Judd give the superdelegates if he is named president?
About as much as you or me; maybe that is the point after all?
Most anyone can run for public office, from town council all the way up to President of the United States.
No matter what race, religion, gender or creed a person is, they are still capable of running for office.
There are a few restrictions, such as age and place of birth, but the majority of people are completely eligible for office.
Even those who have been convicted of crimes.
Keith Russell Judd, currently serving time at the Beaumont Correctional Institution in Texas, has gotten his name on the ballot for the Idaho Democratic presidential primary.
Judd has been incarcerated since 1999 and is not due out until 2013, which ironically, would be the last year of the presidential term he is a candidate to have.
In addition to Judd qualifying to be on the ballot in Idaho, he qualified as a write-in candidate in Kentucky, California, Indiana and Florida.
A government of the people indeed.
On Judd's votesmart.org biography it lists his reason for running for public office as "To make the world a better place."
At least his priorities are in the right place.
It is especially odd that Judd is a convicted felon who makes it on to a ballot for president. In many states, people who are convicted of felonies are not even allowed to vote.
It seems odd that, although convicted felons are not allowed to vote in many states, they should be allowed to run for the offices that they can not vote for.
This is not the first time that Judd has applied to be a candidate for president. He was also a candidate in Idaho in 2004.
He received zero votes.
His point is clear: if anyone should be able to run for president, why don't more people?
Common people, convicts or not, have just as much right as any political figure does to have a say in the direction of this country.
That being said, it would be a shame if someone's vote went to Judd.
His point has been made by simply putting his name on the ballot, but to offer up votes for a man who will not have the ability to actually secure the nomination is taking it too far.
As much as the Daily Vidette Editorial Board supports his point and his ability to run for any office he chooses, it can not endorse voting for a person whose stances on issues are unknown and whose background is so checkered.
Especially when the Democratic primary is in such a dead heat between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Your vote can count, why not let it?
Along the same lines, all superdelegates should save their endorsements for candidates with a real shot. After all, what political pull will Judd give the superdelegates if he is named president?
About as much as you or me; maybe that is the point after all?
Be the first to comment on this story