
Many Democrats blame him for Al Gore's loss in the 2000 presidential election. They believe the 97,488 votes that Nader received in Florida tipped the election to George W. Bush. So Democrats want Nader, the star of the documentary, "An Unreasonable Man," to just go away.But Nader isn't going anywhere. In an appearance on "Meet the Press," he told Tim Russert: "The political bigotry that's involved here is that we shouldn't enter the electoral arena? We, all of us who, who, who think that the country needs an infusion of freedom, democracy, choice, dissent should just sit on the sidelines and watch the two parties own all the voters and turn the government over to big business? What's really important here is, if you want to look at it analytically, is there--Mr. Gore would, would tell you if he won Tennessee, anything else being equal, he would've been president. It's his home state. If he won Arkansas, everything else being equal, he would've been president. "
Nader has a point. Given that his supporters are "special," they probably would not have voted if he wasn't on the ballot in Florida.
But that's crying over spilled milk. If Nader gets on the ballot in key battleground states, Democrats may be crying in their beer in November.
Polls show the general election will be close. John McCain and the Democratic nominee, whether it's Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, are in a statistical tie. In this unbelievable election year, Nader may be a factor. According to a recent Zogby poll, six percent of voters support Nader. Among voters under age 30 and libertarians, his support climbs to 12 percent.
So, add the "Nader effect," along with the "Wright effect," to the political lexicon for Election '08.


Comments: (12)
Add a comment
By: Bob Marston on 3/21/2008 5:07PM
"Polls show the general election will be close."
Really ?
Well there are unmistakable signs the public is hungry for change and a new sense of direction. About a month ago on one of the Sunday Morning Chat Shows Tom Brokaw said the following: "The era of dogma that has dominated our political discussion since 1980 is over. People are looking for hard solutions." Did you ever expect to hear that from a talking head ?
This is exactly the reason why what the Democrats and Republicans have be shoveling to us over the last 5 months is wholey unsatisfactory. Until they annuciate a policy that spells out in intimate detail what they will do if elected to office we should not even bother to give them the time of day ! For my money the only two candidates worth such attention Are Ralph Nader as and Independent or Cynthia McKinney as a Green.
To the lesser evil argument the only logical response is to answer the proposition with a question.
If the policies of one political machine kills 1500 people per day and the policies of a second political machine kills 1200 people per day do you vote for the machine that kills fewer people ?
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Victronix on 3/21/2008 8:03PM
Yes, a series of cliche sentences strung together . . . This endless rehashing of the hoax "spoiler" label is really sickening. Who cares what a candidate stands for when all that matters is what label the Democrats have put on them? Has anyone noticed that Obama voted FOR the PATRIOT ACT? We never hear anything about issues or votes (except for Hillary's one that showed whose side she is really on), only gossip, personal attacks and labels. How idiotic. This country is pathetic.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Go Head Nadaer on 3/21/2008 8:45PM
I applaud Nader for running for president. Who the hell are the Democrats or anybody else to tell him not to run! The absolute nerve. I am so tired of this two party rule system in this country.We always get stuck with the same old leftovers and for once I want a real choice.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: steve conn on 3/21/2008 11:54PM
Nader's right to be on the ballot and people's right to vote for Nader and what he stands for is a civil rights issue for Nader and for voters alike. When you deny either his right to stand for something like ending the war now or impeachment of Bush and my right to vote for him, you are standing with the KKK and the White Citizens Council no matter what's your race! Think about it.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Suave on 3/22/2008 3:57AM
Nader is being funded (as if he needs the money) by the Republicans. Their hope is that he will draw enough Democrat votes to deliver that the war monger with get in office. The only reason Democrats are asking him to stay out is because the only thing that can happen is just this. How many people knowingly enter a race that they can't win? What would it profit other than to take away from someone who could win. Fortunately, in this race, he will not matter. My support was for Ron Paul but then I knew that it would be a wasted vote because he could not win so, I went with the next best thing. The worldwide Rock Star - Barak Obama. He's the only one (including Nader) who is NOT playing politics. It's time for a change.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: REALchange on 3/22/2008 9:03AM
Obama is just another in the long list of hypocrites that will leave us right where we are right now...divided and bitterly disappointed.
Read up Obama and Exelon Corp., look up and read up on Obama and his vote confirming Condi Rice, look up his YES reauthorization of the ill-named PATRIOT Act, look up his war monies authorization YES votes, look up his money support for pro war cheerleader Lieberman, on the campaign trail, he has repeatedly stated his desire to add more than 100,000 combat troops to the military, this is not change at all.
Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall.
In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data.
Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: BRAD on 3/23/2008 7:39PM
Nader as anyone else has the right to run. The country has to decide, status quo, or change. The democrats seems to have enlarged their base during this election season. I believe it was due to Obama's appeal to young voters who are looking for something different in the candidates of the past, republican, democratic and independant. As for the special group of Nader voters, I believe all voters realize that this election is critically important in determing the future direction of the country. All voters are important and their candidates ideas should be aired.
bradsbeatblog.blogspot.com
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Andrea on 3/24/2008 2:35PM
Nader is nothing for us to worry about at this time. Nader is not on one single state ballot now or in the Fall. He has a long road to go to get on state ballots -- he'll have his work cut out for him.
Let's give Barack all of our support and stop Hillary from trying to steal the nomination from Barack.
Barack has Won the Most Pledged Delegates
Barack has Won the Most States
Barack Has the Most Votes
Barach has Raised the Most Money
He deserves the nomination right now! Hillary needs to step aside!
Are you interested in working from home?
Check out my work at home jobs site:
http://www.jobs-from-home.com
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: Connie on 3/25/2008 10:28AM
Ralph Nader is an under cover Republican just trying to steal votes from Barack Obama like he did from Al Gore. Let us as a people not fall for this , WE NEED TO BARACK THE VOTE. We can get Obama elected if we all just stick together, and not let the likes of Bob Johnson, or Charlie Rangel who by the way wouldn't get my vote if he ran for dog catcher sway your vote to Hillary, some say we shouldn't vote for Barack Obama just because he is Black but white people won't vote for him for that same reason because hes Black. So I say IT IS TIME FOR CHANGE. BARACK OBAMA IN 2008!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply to this Comment | Report This
By: james dome on 3/25/2008 12:07PM
Any change is a change. Clinton and Obama won't bring us a change, Nader will. If there weren't so many unwise people in our country we'd find that out.
Reply to this Comment | Report This