I'm putting it out there: I think Ralph will say he's NOT running today

[Paragon]

1. Would Russert put Nader on if he wasn't making his decision? No -- so I think Ralph's using the "announcement" excuse to just get on TV and do some two-party bashing, with the lion's share going to Bush.

2. I'm also guessing he had the "He's In" leak sent to Fox News (knowing they'd probably be the only ones to run with it) to make yet another right-wing source look bad (after Drudge's "Kerry sex scandal" crashed and burned).

Having read his last book, I find it unlikely that he'd want to put himself through a process again that he sees as so unfair.

On the other hand, that's just the kind of challenge he may rise to. I could easily be wrong. :scared:

[POed_Ex_Repub]

1. I think you may very well be correct n/t

[jean]

2. Nader had a table/staffers at the Kucinich rally at Northrup in Mpls today

[Paragon]

4. Nader supporters doing so on their own accord, I'm sure

Kinda hard to have an official "Nader table" when the guy hasn't even announced yet.

[jean]

8. there were a number of tables, the hemp legalization guy, the

repeal concealed carry table, the UDFL kids, and others...there were two Naderites and a table full of stuff.

One, a guy, floated around handing out a sheet and telling people, "He is going to announce tomorrow morning." Didn't say what he would announce.

I'm hoping whatever he says will drive people out of the woodwork and to the polls in droves for the Dem.

[hlthe2b]

3. Well, I hope so....

All animosity aside, I think Nader COULD have some impact on the election and on the DEM platform if he does not run. That could be a good thing, IMO.

If he runs, though-- without the 2000 justification of trying to establish the Green Party as a contender third party, what can one conclude, other than he is running for his own purposes only? I think that will be the ruination of Nader should it come to pass. I'd find that a real tragedy-- given his years of contribution as a consumer advocate and as a populist voice.

[Paragon]

7. Plenty of repentant Nader supporters

He certainly won't have the same type of effect as he did in 2000, with Gore and Bush agreeing on almost everything in the debates the way they did. With Iraq, gay marriage, the economy, etc., the lines are very clearly drawn this time.

The media's jumping on this because they smell red meat, but he'll have little or no effect if he runs. I think Ralph's smart enough to realize that he'd be little more than a sideshow this time.

[LoneStarLiberal]

5. Troubling Points...

On #1, I certainly hope you are correct. A Nader run will make the inevitable Diebold non-audits and trips to the state and national Supreme Courts moot points come December. If Nader does run, I hope his campaign's financial background and his financial background will be as thoroughly scrutinized by folks as was each of our candidates' backgrounds.

On #2, makes good sense. I think Nader understands that the pool of support for him this year is smaller and that those not supporting him will not be ambivalent about him as they were in 2000. He's going to be in for a very hostile reception from Democrats this time, a reception that he didn't receive in 2000. Some of us see this situation for what it is and will see his choice to run for what it is this time and will not shrug our shoulders and move on.

I for one will dig like crazy to make certain he's 100% legit on the financial side if he decides to screw things up even further in 2004.

[katieforeman]

6. I hope you're right.

I just can't believe that after four years of Bush, he doesn't see a difference in the two parties.

[Stephanie]

9. I think it's irrelevant

Nader can announce whatever he likes - nobody gives a shit. Nobody serious is going to support Nader this year.