Supreme Court won't let Green Party candidate Jill Stein on Nevada ballot

Good. One less State allowing her betrayal of America.

“We are stuck with Biden[/Harris] now, in a two-party duopoly, if one should be defeated ferociously, the logic is that the other one prevails.” (Ralph Nader, 2023)

Putin’s Shill Stein wants Nato disbanded, the US to give up their SC veto, and revoke weapons to help Ukraine defend itself while simultaneously forcing ‘peace’ (subjugation) negotiations with russia.

2015 Stein breaking bread with Putin, his senior staff, and Mike Flynn (later Trump's national security advisor

More context:

Emir Kusturica is a propagandist filmmaker quoted as saying "if I was Russian I would vote for him". He also supports Russian annexation of Crimea.
Willy Wimmer was a Right-wing German politician who in his retirement has effectively become a far-right conspiracy theorist that regularly posts to the Epoch Times.

For those that don’t understand how the Electoral College + FPTP voting works, voting for her means helping donald become president due to the spoiler effect.

No, not good.
Anyone who votes for her is a fucking moron who is wilfully ignoring the reality of how FPTP voting works.
But they should still have that right. It's undemocratic to say otherwise. Saying they shouldn't be allowed to run just because you don't like the effect that voting for them might have is the mark of autocracy.
- Couldn't agree more. They used the form provided to them. Withholding ballot access based on a technicality smacks of disenfranchisement.
Your vote for Harris takes away a vote from a 3rd party candidate and gives it to Trump
- This is why we need better education. People who think they can just say words and they don't even need to make any logical sense
- Your vote for any candidate that isn't yourself takes away a vote from the only candidate whose opinions match yours perfectly.
Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from third-party candidates who represent real change. By sidelining those voices, you’re indirectly helping Trump win!
- This idiotic "point" will always fall flat. Your third party spoilers will get less than 3% combined nationwide. And your vote will be worthless unless you're trying to help Trump.
- She doesn’t seem that far off from Trump based on both wanting daddy Putin’s policies anyways.

Good, if your campaign isn't competent enough to even file the right bureaucratic papers you proooobably don't have anything together enough to run a country

In fairness to the Greens, they actually had the right paperwork prepared and ready to file, and it was refused with the state officials saying to file incorrect paperwork instead.
I feel this is bad in terms of (non-legal) precedent - the GOP might be able to use a similar strategy to keep the Dems off the ballot in the future in any battleground states where they control both the governorship and the state legislature.
E.g.
Dems: Here's the correct paperwork. Put us on the ballot and see you on election day.
State officials (GOP affiliated): No, wrong paperwork. Fill this out.
Dems: You sure? We think this is right.
State officials: Yep, you gotta do this one or no election for you.
Dems: Fine.
National GOP: They filled the paperwork wrong. Keep them off the ballot.
Dems: Nope, we were told do this by the State.
State officials (GOP affiliated): Sorry, we made a mistake. You're off the ballot.
Dems: Courts?
Courts: Sorry, but you're still off the ballot even though it's not your fault.
Her campaign filed the correct forms, the elections official lied and gave them the wrong forms to resubmit. The DNC will lie and cheat if they feel threatened
- No, they filed the wrong forms because they didn’t do any due diligence on what a clerk mistakenly sent them. The whole SCOTUS case was because they were saying that just because they were idiots, it shouldn’t stop the signatures from still counting. However there is well established precedent on the similar cases that puts the onus on the people filing paperwork with the government.
- <<<<<
  <Citation Needed>
  >>>>>
- Verified proof of this? Or are those your Russian talking points given by your contacts?
- You are absolutely right here and I appreciate you trying to inform people. Unfortunately this crowd is mostly anti-green-party to the point that it blinds them from being reasonable on the subject.
- Got a source for that bullshit you just said?

A full report on your failure is due tomorrow morning in Daddy Vlad’s quarters, Shill Stein.

SoMeThInG sOmEtHiNg DuPpOlY ThO!!1

It's odd because if I am understanding correctly the unsigned order does not explain why.

Which means no precedent is set.

But on the flip side, I would have liked to know if the SC declined to hear it because they thought it should be left to the State, it was undue federal interference if they overruled a state supreme court on a matter of State law, or there was some federal law that barred the suit, etc.

Anyways, this does raise the following contradiction - if both Stein and the SC are in the GOP's pocket, how come the SC didn't help the GOP by ordering Stein back on the ballot?

Anyways, this does raise the following contradiction - if both Stein and the SC are in the GOP’s pocket, how come the SC didn’t help the GOP by ordering Stein back on the ballot?
Exactly! Very good question.

Media Bias Fact Check | bot support