Well, not exactly. I'm hoping he runs, though. I think he said he'll announce his intentions Sunday. If he does run, that could take votes away from Kerry. Which will in turn favor Bush, whom I hope wins (and I still think he will). It's just an interresting scenario. Think back to the 1992 election. Clinton got about 45 million votes, Bush Sr. got 39 million, and Perot got 19 million. Now, I doubt Nader would get near 20 million votes. But with the close numbers it predicts to be on either side, every little vote counts. If it wasn't for Perot, I certainly think Bush Sr. would have been re-elected. Perot was more concervative than Clinton, so it would seem that he stole votes from Bush. Just as Nader is more liberal than Kerry, so he could definitely steal some far wing, but important, votes from the Senator.

 

The timing of these rumors leads me to believe that Nader thinks he'll get a bunch of support from the Deaniacs now that their horse has dropped out of the race.

The thing with Nader is that he has a genuine disdain for both political parties so when people appeal to him by saying if he runs it helps Bush win the election, he doesn't buy it. He won't acknowledge that publicly, at least. The problem he has is there just aren't enough uber-liberals out there to actually get a far-left candidate into office. There are more variations of conservativism that a third party candidate could perhaps run on which is why Perot managed to get as many votes as he did.

 

That's why I wish there were more bonafide candidates on the Independent party. I thought Perot would help boost the party into the forefront and give us a legit 3rd party for more options (contrary to what you may think I'm not GOP or bust ). I'm rather dissapointed the "I" party never really took solid ground. There were hints here and there with Jesse Ventura and the like. But I'm talking about congress as well. It would be nice to see 20% of the house Independent.

 

In my humble opinion, Nader's supporters should force him to support a Democratic candidacy instead of his own if they expect to have an impact.

To Nader's supporters, I would think that it would be more important to defeat Bush than anything else right now. LOL...

(These comments are not meant to be construed as an extension of any particular political belief or support of any particular US candidacy.)

 

Let the grumblings begin! I guess Nader is going to run on the Independent ticket, but he's way too much of a tree hugger for most "I" people. Now I hear democracks are infuriated that he is running, as the votes he gets are going to be from people who would otherwise vote for Kerry (assuming he's the dem. nominee). Lord knows the Bush voters won't vote for anyone else, anyway :wink: . Ahh, behold the guts and glory of American politics in the new millenium.

Nader has got to know he has no chance of himself getting elected, and yet he wants to get Bush out of office, but he doesn't understand he won't steal Bush votes, only Kerry votes. He's a quack if you ask me.

 

I dunno I agree with some of Naders outlooks and ideals but he is a bit too radical for me to actually expect him to either get support enough to get into office or actually finish on both feet.

I thought he had said just a few months ago that he was not running in this race and probably wouldn't ever run again after his last defeat?

 

Where's Ross Perot when you need him?

 

All Nader is going to do is help Bush in the long run. For the Dems this is not a good thing especially if he takes votes away from Kerry or Edwards in places like Florida and NH that were narrowly won by Bush in 00.

 

There's no such thing as the Independent party. Perot started the Reform party. "Independent" means no party affiliation, like Senator Jim Jeffords and Representative Bernie Sanders.

As for Nader, just because he has declared his candidacy doesn't mean he's going to make it on the ballot(s). He needs to get 700,000 signatures to make it onto the ballot in all 50 states and I don't think he's going to be able to get the same kind of support he had in 2000. Back then, we had 8 years of a Democrat president and the far left wanted to push even more in that direction. Now we've had a Republican for 4 years and he is universally despised by anyone more than a little left of center. Even though Nader refuses to acknowledge the spoiler theory, people who voted for him in 2000 will most likely be more focused on unseating Bush than on making a statement. He's got a whole argument about how he didn't cost Gore the election in 2000 but the data isn't really convincing. No doubt some of the Deaniacs will jump ship for Nader (I personally think the timing is mighty suspect) but I think most of them will congeal around whoever the Democratic nominee is.

 

http://www.ralphdontrun.net/

This year the left cares more about unseating Bush than anything. And generally the far left is intelligent enough to realize the fact that Nader will not win the election but is rather the spoiler this year and that to get a man they hate out of office it might take a vote for the candidate they do not like the best, but rather the one who is more popular and whose chances of getting dubya out of office are greater. Right now they are talking simply about money- its going to take millions just to get Nader's name on the ballot in most states and people are starting to wonder if the price of running alone might dissuade Nader this year.