“Nader effect” not a threat to Dems
admin - March 12th, 2008On Feb. 24, Ralph Nader decided that this presidential election was not interesting enough and threw his 100 percent hemp hat into the ring. If you believe the talking heads of the world, Hillary Clinton and/or Barack Obama lost a little sleep that night, thinking about all the votes that Nader may pull away from them.
Oh, wait. Sorry. I was back in 2000 for a minute. I respect Nader for his many successes in losing presidential elections. He’s really quite good at it. This will be the fifth time Nader has made a run at the oblong office and, if history is any indication, he has about as much chance as you do of becoming our next Commander in Chief – assuming you are not John McCain, Clinton or Obama.
Nader has never won a single electoral vote. In the three elections that he stuck around until November, Nader has garnered a vote total of 4 million and change.
By contrast, Ross Perot, that billionaire from Texas who wanted to be president for a bit, won more than 19 million votes in the 1992 election alone. To say that Nader will not matter to the outcome of this election is a waste of breath.
Democrats’ fears that Nader will take away votes from their nominee all stems from the infamous 2000 election, where then-Governor George Bush beat then-Vice President Al Gore in Florida by 537 votes. Nader received over 90,000 votes in the state.
Some blamed Nader for taking support from Gore and costing him the election – in spite of all of the other candidates listed on the Florida ballot who received at least 537 votes.
There was a reason why 2000 was Nader’s best showing in any election (2 million votes that year): the other candidates were boring, typical and just plain bad. Nader did not cost Al Gore the election, Al Gore did. Were Gore a better, more compelling candidate, we would all be mad at him right now instead of Bush.
In fact, Gore took away a fair number of votes from Nader. Why did the media not blame Gore for costing Nader the election?
The populous does not seem to be as disenfranchised with the major parties’ choices this time around. More people are voting in primaries, the Clinton/Obama fight is making for great TV and, if McCain’s 71-year-old self makes it to November, he’s going to be tough to beat.
All Nader will do is make some speeches, host SNL, maybe pull the Democrats slightly to the left on an issue or two and disappear for four more years. That’s what he’s here for – to make this crazy election just that much crazier.