Why Nader's run MAY actually help:

[lams712]

I know there is a lot of negativity and Nader-bashing going on right now (some of it might even be justified), but I do believe there is a scenario where Nader's candidacy might help.

First, with Nader running, the incumbent will be facing a two-pronged attack, which can help the Democrat immensely. Granted, the Democrat would also face some attacks from Nader, but the attention will be on the current administration and its failed policies. I think if Nader participated in nationally televised debates with the Democrat against Bush it would make for good television and would help the Democratic candidate more than it might hurt him.

In addition to changing the tenor of the debate, a Nader candidacy will help cause the Democratic candidate to work harder and hopefully not "move to the center". In 2000, shortly before the election, most polls showed Gore losing to Bush and Nader polling at around 5%-6%. Gore went into a more populist mode and ended up getting more votes than Bush and holding Nader to 3%. I believe that Gore's better effort (and actually moving AWAY from the center) in the waning weeks of the campaign allowed this to happen. I feel that this year, the Democrat can similarly benefit.

Finally, Ralph Nader can reach out to people who don't vote at all. These NEW voters, I believe, who are voting for Nader at the top of the ticket will be very likely to vote for Democrats (or at least more likely than votiong for Republicans) lower on the ticket. Control of Congress can change for the better with this higher turnout.

[Maddy McCall]

1. Haven't I heard this justification before?

Oh, yeah. That's right. It was in 2000.

[Dookus]

2. yes

and it worked so well then, didn't it?

The flaw in the argument is that Nader will only attack Bush. There's no reason to believe that to be the case. Nader will attack Kerry just as badly, if not worse.

[lams712]

9. Yeah, and in a way it worked!!!

Al Gore won in 2000 (for all intents and purposes) because of Nader. Gore was on the verge of losing outright until he amped up the populism. Gore DID take away thousands of Nader vote at the last minute and Nader's presence did help out Democratic congressional races.

[wellstone_democrat]

3. Bush* won't "fight" Nader

except in some half-assed pretend way---why should he? And, why would he since Nader regularly consorts with Republican funders like Norquist. What's it gonna drain from that vaunted "war chest?" About 4 bucks? Whoa, bet they are runnin' scared!

Oh, and make the Democratic candidate work harder! Really. You figure that being the challenger isn't hard enough?

And, once Ralph gets done with his voter registration/voter 'education' that gets new acolytes to his cause, they are going to vote for Democratic candidates for lesser office. Oh yeah, suuuuuure they are.

But, thanks for the time machine trip to 2000!

[lams712]

10. Yes, it would make the Democratic nominee work hard for the...

...more liberal/progressive votes. I think (and indeed hope) that Nader's presence will prevent the Democratic candidate from lurching to the right after the primary season is over. I think the populist momentum that has been built up during our primary/caucus process should remain on through the general election.

If it's "business as usual" with the Democratic candidate however, I will strongly consider the Nader option.

[bushwakker]

4. Try as I might

I can't see anything good coming from this. Also Nader will not be in any of the debates.

[lams712]

11. It's true that Nader will probably not be in the debates....

...and that is an INJUSTICE and ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE ARROGANCE OF THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM.

If Nader were in the debates though, it would benefit the Democrat much more than it would Bush.

[Guava Jelly]

5. It may help ..Bush that is

Nader could actually be a catylist for change yet he chooses to help Bush..Thats what hes doing Helping Bush..Proof...He hasnt a icecubes chance in hell of winning just spoiling

[lams712]

12. FOR THE BILLIONTH TIME..............

.....the Democratic Party is NOT ENTITLED to every progressive/liberal vote in this country. NOT EVER!!!!!!


SO stop believing that Nader automatically helps the Republican because it won't. The campaign will have a lot of discussion about the current administration's policies, and most of that discussion will be negative. THIS WILL ONLY HELP the Democrat who's running. Unless, of course, that Democrat had a hand in some of these failed policies. If that's the case, then Nader's run is justified on a whole new set of grounds. If the Democrat is sufficiently distanced from Republican policies, then all of the negative press will only help the Democrat.

[Guava Jelly]

14. for the billionth time times 2

Nader helps republicans more then democrats.
I hope you enjoy 4 more years of bush.
Because thats what this Nader crusade is attempting to do

[lams712]

17. NO Nader does NOT want to help Bush

He wants to change the corrupt two-party system. He is also an EXTREMELY HARSH CRITIC OF BUSH'S CRONY CAPITIALIST STYLE with the Enrons and Haliburtons of the world.

The Democrat can chose to join the criticism of the Enrons and Haliburtons and the tax cuts for the wealthy,etc. or ignore these issues.

The Democratic track record for the past 12 years has been very POOR on this account.

I want the see the Democratic Party be more for the people and make the Ralph Nader's of the world unnecessary. But if DLC/centrist/corporate kow-towing elitists are running the party, then there's little chance of that happening.

[Guava Jelly]

18. Drug addicts dont really want to be addicts

Nader slanders Democrats as much as he does republicans.
He spreads the malarky that their is no difference between the parties.
I beg to differ..Gore would have bombed iraq paleese
Helping Bush is a biproduct of Naders addiction.
If you greeniacs cant bury the hatchet and work with the democrats to stop the conservanazis then He is helping bush and so are the holier then though ultra ultra left wingers.
Its Democrat or Bush period

[lams712]

20. I am not a greeniac, I am a Democrat that was abandoned by

my party after the 1992 election. I am willing to come back and help but I have been repeatedly marginalized and told that my brand of politics didn't matter, it wasn't "mainstream" enough.

If my type of politics "DON'T MATTER", then why do so many Democrats feel threatened????

If I (and people like me) don't matter, then we should pose ABSOLUTELY NO THREAT TO YOU, PRECISELY BEACUSE WE DON'T MATTER (according to most "mainstream" Democrats).

[RandomKoolzip]

6. Right. Now, let's hear the republican view of the positive aspects

of Nader's run.....

a) siphoning off votes for the Dem candidate
b) give the Don Quixotes a hero to rally behind
c) give airtime to attacks on Kerry that AREN'T coming from the right
d) 2000, act II

[terry4415]

7. Disaster in the Making

There is no way this will be anything but a complete disaster.

Let's review: In 2000 Gore lost in Florida by 500 votes, and Nader got almost 100,000 votes in the state. There is no way to put a positive spin on this.

[lams712]

13. GORE WON FLORIDA

He "lost" it due to Republican illegal activities that denied thousands of voters the right to vote.

[newyawker99]

21. Hi terry4415!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Piperay]

8. "Two pronged attack" it's the Democrat that

will face that, not chimp the incumbant. Nader always saves his venum for the Democrats not the repukes.

[lams712]

15. The incumbent will be at a disadvantage...

...because he's the incumbent and Nader's and the Democrat's campaign are about CHANGE.

IN 2000 IT WAS DIFFERENT. The Democrats were the incumbents and the Republican vote and Nader's vote were both reflective of the desire for CHANGE.


The incumbent is almost ALWAYS at a disadvantage when there is a STRONG DESIRE FOR CHANGE.

[Alex146]

16. The two pronged attack will be aginst us

wake up already

Nader=bad for Democrats

Nader=Good for Bush

[Spirochete]

19. Only good thing I can hope for

is that some of the people who would be too lazy to go vote if they thought whichever "Senator John" we put up had it in the bag, will realize "Ack! That asshole Nader's running again! I better go vote for the Dem, so Nader doesn't give the Chimp 4 more." Probably too much to hope for, though.

[mmonk]

22. Can only help if it peals away votes from bush

instead of the dems. I don't see that as a reality.