A lesson on third party history. If Nader is only polling 1% now...

[bluestateguy]

Historically third party candidacies fade into the night. What voters tell pollsters in the summer and fall is not the same as an actual vote in November.

Most of these third party flirters end up voting major party, as they want their votes to count. I would be surprised if Nader polls higher than 1% nationally. Few of any of these voters would vote for any electable Democrat. These folks are the Kool-Aid drinkers.

A look at some past Gallup polls:

2000



Nader ended up at 2.7%

1996




Ross Perot's slide took place much earlier than is typical for third party candidates. But there is a slide to be sure: He goes from a peak of 19% to less than 9% on election day.

1992




Perot's peaked at 39%, leading the presidential race in June, to 19% on election day (though the final poll was a little light for Perot). I hypothesize that because the media treated him as a major candidate, with all the scrutiny that comes with that designation, Perot's third party slide was predictably earlier than most third party candidates in the past.

1980



At one point John Anderson was polling at 24%, threatening to hit second place. He got less than 7% of the vote.

1968



George Wallace was up as high as 21%, but finished at 13.5%.

1948



Henry Wallace was polling as high as 6 or 7%, but eventually won 2.37%. Strom Thurmond was not listed in the Gallup Poll that year.

[BlueNomad]

1. thanks

Great stuff ---I remember that Anderson decline vividly...Perot too.... Also think some of those Nader folks will stay home plus he is in less states this time around, correct?

[jrthin]

2. Thanks, and

I appreciate the sobering info, but it doesn't help me hate Nader any less.