So Ralph Nader is going to run.
My response is one that would be filled with expletives. I voted for Nader instead of Gore, to my eternal regret. I would never do it again. And while I at first rejected the notion that he was a spoiler, I believe now that his entry into the race may have been what gave us Bush as President. I believe that he shares some culpability.
Especially since he's long since abandoned any pretense of trying to accomplish anything. Nader's big selling point in 2000 was that he was going to get enough votes to get federal funding for a third party, and to a guy so commonly disgusted with both parties, that sounded like a worthy goal.
This year, though? There's no way he's going to get that many votes. He's certainly not going to be President. And his issues are tarnished in importance when, instead of dealing with serious candidates, he puts in a Presidential bid that can only be viewed as helping the Republicans by drawing away votes.
Nader is running for his ego, and nothing more. He's tarnishing whatever good works he's done with these pathetic displays, and certainly I've lost a lot of the respect I once had for the man.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Randy
I just have to wonder what the deal is with this guy? Is it spite? Does he for some reason what a Republican win? He's certainly seems to doing what he can to get one.
I think that it's a combination of an inflexibility in terms of compromise in wanting to push every bit of his agenda through, ego and a desire for the limelight and a genuinely naive belief that running as a third party candidate somehow helps the system.
I think he honestly believes that the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is negligible, and that he's making an important stand for change.
Honestly, I'd respect it if he hadn't run four previous unsuccessful campaigns. If he really wants to make change, he needs to try for a Senate or House seat, but that doesn't provide the same news spotlight for him.
Don't get me wrong, I do believe that something other than a two party system would be healthy for the nation, and to some degree I can agree with the idea that Rep and Dems share many common failings, I myself have no party affiliation. But in election as important as this I would think he'd do what, by his own beliefs, would be better for the nation.
I guess you're saying he thinks he is, but it strikes me as the same sort of blind arrogance that got us into the mess we're in now, even if in his case it comes from the left rather than the right.
I totally agree. I'd love a viable third party... hell, I'd love a viable fourth and fifth party. But it's become clear to everyone but Ralph Nader and his dwindling number of supporters that Nader is not going to be the guy to lead us to that promised land.
He's not even making baby steps towards the goal.
I agree totally with your post, Randy, but ... if Hillary Clinton somehow manages to get the Democratic nomination (and Hell immediately freezes over) I will vote for Nader.
And if the Democrats lose in November it'll be their own damned fault for not nominating the candidate who could win (Obama).
Post a Comment