Possible Nader run?


PDA






hillbilly
February 16, 2004, 09:22 AM
Talk about a Third Party candidacy that's Kerry's worst nightmare.....

http://www.politics1.com/

NADER ON VERGE OF FOURTH RUN? According to close associates of former Green Party Presidential nominee Ralph Nader, he is leaning heavily in favor of announcing his Independent candidacy in the coming days. Nader plans to make his decision -- one way or the other -- within the next two weeks. Nader had suggested in interviews that he would not run in 2004 if either Kucinich or Dean won the Democratic nomination, as he believed they had adopted views somewhat similar to his own. With those two now out of contention, Nader is ready to make a fourth White House run. Nader ran as a Democrat in the 1992 NH primary, as a Green in 1996 and 2000, and now plans to run as an Independent in 2004. Without running under the Green banner, Nader will have no automatic ballot status anywhere. Instead, he'll have to create an organization that pays filing fees and/or collects enough valid signatures in each state to secure a spot on the ballot.

If you enjoyed reading about "Possible Nader run?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Mark Tyson
February 16, 2004, 09:31 AM
Supporting a "spoiler" third party is probably one of the most underused political dirty tricks out there. Republicans and conservatives would be smart to support the Green party, while Democrats/liberals ought to bankroll the Reform party.

HankB
February 16, 2004, 09:57 AM
Based on the way Papa Bush (in his re-election bid) and Bob Dole spent their campaign money, they could get a LOT more "bang for the buck" by funneling some support to a leftie party like the Greens. Democrats/liberals ought to bankroll the Reform party. Or the Libertarians . . .

Sean Smith
February 16, 2004, 10:32 AM
Well, since the Green Party beat the snot out of the Libertarian Party in the last presidential election, I'd say that the Democrats have alot more to fear than the Republicans. On the presidential scene, the Libertarians are on course to be in a statistical dead heat with my Dad's dead Boxer, "Pooter." Kerry's apparent impending nomination is a strong indicator that the Democrats are leaning further left than ever (see his voting record for details)... but he's too obviously a special-interest-cash insider to completley appleal to the leftmost fringes of the Democrats. That being the case, Nader could easily steal a plie of votes from him (for a third party, anyway).

Dannyboy
February 16, 2004, 11:05 AM
Didn't Nader already come out and say he wasn't running this time around?

Cactus
February 16, 2004, 06:35 PM
On the presidential scene, the Libertarians are on course to be in a statistical dead heat with my Dad's dead Boxer, "Pooter."

My monies on Pooter!:D

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised to see Howard Dean run on the Green ticket.

SAG0282
February 16, 2004, 06:46 PM
Even if Nader does in fact run, I frankly doubt it will have the same impact it did in 2000. Sure, a lot of the granola set here in the PacNW and in other areas might vote for him, but then this is a state Bush is unlikely to win in anyway.

However, many are so incensed at Bush's perceived failures and shortcomings that they now share the "anyone but Bush" mindset the Democratic party at large has. I'm pretty sure they'll be willing to compromise their ideals a tad in order to oust Dubya.

greyhound
February 16, 2004, 07:26 PM
I agree with Siegfried 100%. The hatred of Bush is just too great for Democrats to make a protest vote. (Though getting Kerry instead of Dean may sway a few).

Plus, note that Nader would be running as an Independent, not a Green. (Don't know why but thats what the article says).

hksw
February 16, 2004, 07:27 PM
I hope Nader, Ku-veg-ich, and Sharpton all run on non-Democrat tickets.

Sean Smith
February 16, 2004, 08:41 PM
My monies on Pooter! :D

He might hump your leg, but he won't take your guns! :evil:

Michigander
February 16, 2004, 10:03 PM
Just so as y'know:

The Libertarian Party is the third largest party in the United States by most objective measures, including the following:

•The Libertarian Party is the only third party organized in all fifty states.
•In the 2002 elections, Libertarian candidates for state House of Representatives received more than a million votes -- more than twice the votes received by all other minor parties combined.
•In the 2000 elections, the party ran about 1,430 candidates at the local, state, and federal level. More than 1,600 Libertarians ran for office in the 2002 mid-term election. Both numbers are more candidates than all other third parties combined ran in these elections.
•Following the 2002 elections, more than 300 Libertarians hold elected state and local offices. This is more than twice that of all other third parties combined.
•In 2000, 256 candidates ran for seats in the House of Representatives. In 2002, 219 candidates ran for House seats. These are the only two times in over 80 years that any third party has contested a majority of House seats.
•In 2000, Libertarian candidates for U.S. House won 1.73 million votes. This count is more than any other third party in U.S. history by raw vote totals, although not by proportion of the electorate.
•In 2000, Massachusetts U.S. Senate candidate Carla Howell won a record 11.9% of the vote. Then in 2002, Michael Cloud won 19% of the vote for the other Massachusetts seat in the U.S. Senate. (In the latter case, the Republican candidate failed to meet ballot access requirements.)
•In 2002, Ed Thompson won 11% of the vote for governor of Wisconsin despite being excluded from the debates. As a result, one of the eight members of the Wisconsin Election Board is a Libertarian. No other third party holds a seat on the Election Board of any state.
•The Libertarian Party has run in all 50 states in four elections: 1980, 1992, 1996, and 2000. No other third party in U.S. history has managed to run a presidential candidate in all 50 states more than once. 50 state ballot access is so difficult that only the Democrats, Libertarians, and Republicans are even attempting it in 2004.
•Libertarian candidates have finished third in a presidential election twice, in 1984 and 1988. No other current third party has ever finished third in a presidential election more than once.

Sean Smith
February 17, 2004, 09:14 AM
The Green Party got 8x as many votes in the last presidential election as the Libertarians (2,883,064 vs. 384,490). Even known Nazi-snuggler Pat Buchannan got more votes (449,129).

No other third party in U.S. history has managed to run a presidential candidate in all 50 states more than once.

Hasn't done them much good in 2000, 1996 (distant 5th place behind Greens and Perot), 1992 (distant 4th place behind Perot with 0.28% of the votes cast) or 1980 (distant 4th place behind John Anderson with 1.06% of the vote). In the last 25 years their high-point in Presidential elections was a little over 900,000 in 1980; since then they haven't gotten half that many votes in a presidential election, often less than 1/3 as many votes as that.

Fact is, their presidential bids have been a waste of everyone's time essentially forever. And the topic of this discussion concerns 3rd party presidential bids, not how many dog catchers that third party has in office. ;)

wingnutx
February 17, 2004, 04:56 PM
On the presidential scene, the Libertarians are on course to be in a statistical dead heat with my Dad's dead Boxer, "Pooter."

I'm a registered Libertarian, and I agree with that statement.

Glock Glockler
February 17, 2004, 09:39 PM
Sean,

Was it the Green Party that got 8x as many votes as the LP or was it Nader, who was a somewhat well known personality, that got 8x as many votes?

Cactus
February 18, 2004, 01:42 AM
Was it the Green Party that got 8x as many votes as the LP or was it Nader, who was a somewhat well known personality, that got 8x as many votes?

It was Ralph Nader, of the Green Party, who received more votes than Harry Brown, of the Libertarian Party, in BOTH 1996 and 2000.

So what's your point! The only way third parties EVER draw large vote totals is by running well known individuals.

Instead of just sitting on the porch waiting to be annointed, or complaining that they're not allowed in the debates, maybe the LP candidate should go out and become known by people. It's obvious that no one is voting Libertarian based on the platform.

Sean Smith
February 18, 2004, 09:34 AM
Was it the Green Party that got 8x as many votes as the LP or was it Nader, who was a somewhat well known personality, that got 8x as many votes?

Or was it that the Libertarian Party was too stupid to run somebody with a shot of at least getting noticed, and the Green Party wasn't?

If you enjoyed reading about "Possible Nader run?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!