Ralph Nader is running for President again. Even if he loses, he might eventually get the Harold Stassen Award for the most number of pointless runs for the Presidency after you have already become a national laughingstock. If you follow the Stassen link to the bottom of the Wikipedia page you can find how the continually running candidate got his name into a Simpson's script.
If Hillary Clinton is the nominee, Nader might actually get a few votes. If Barack Obama is the nominee, it seems unlikely that he will even hit 1%. Few Democrats over 25 have forgotten that if Al Gore had gotten 1% of the 92,000 votes Nader got in Florida in 2000, he would have become President. Democrats under 25 seem obsessed by Obama. Republicans want no part of Nader.
By the way, Ron Paul said in a Tuesday morning radio show that he would not run as a third-party candidate because the institutional obstacles make it too hard and, "really undemocratic."
Another factor this time is age. Nader is 2 years older than John McCain. Here's an SAT math question: Ralph Nader is older than John McCain. McCain says he is older than dirt. What is Ralph Nader's relationship with dirt? Well, as the Green Party candidate in 2000, Ralph was representing what 2004 Greeny David Cobb said was the party that, "is the heart and sould of the Democratic Party. Greens stand up for the disenfranchised. We stand up for plants and animals and Ecosysystems."
Here is Nader announcing his latest run on Meet the Press last Sunday. In 2004, as an Independent, he was only on 24 state ballots. How many state ballots do you think he will get on this year?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23320281#23320281
Nader says it's not always about winning, as the Swamp reports here:
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/ralph_nader_its_not_always_abo.html
4 comments:
I feel bad for ralph. i don't like that his running for presidency is deemed pointless. He has some good policy proposals. People focus on his association with the Green Party, but really, there are flaws within Hilary and Obama's plans too. We still aren't sure of Obama's plan for change and Hilary wants a national health care plan but is taking money from the AMA. Its not fair to belittle Nader.
Ron Paul is right, besides the two main political parties, there is no possible chance for a third party to run. Our system is set up to hinder them and people should have the right to atleast an equal opportunity to run for presidency.
I certainly think the minor parties should be given some more media coverage, although I doubt this would increase support for them. Their views are usually to extreme for the casual voter. That said, Nader could act as a spoiler for the Democrats again, although it's doubtful he'll be able to pull that stunt a third time. People are getting tired of him. I would be surprised if he gets on the ballot in more than twenty states.
The reality of it, is that the system is set up against anyone not in a position of power already to run. The only way to fix this is to make runs all publicly funded. Unfortunately, this is never going to happen. As for Ralph Nader, he would have a better chance lobbying congress to stop lobbying, the conundrum that that is. The reality is that lobbying is a huge force in Washington, and always has been since the time of the railroad boom.
I don't really have a problem with Nader running again for president. I have a problem with everyone else having a problem with it. If he wants to run, let him. And whatever you do, don't say that he "stole" votes from Gore that could have won him the election. Gore didn't even win his home state! Plus, Gore has gotten over the 2000 election and so should the voters.
Post a Comment