Ralph Nader will announce this Sunday

[still_one]

It is being reported that Ralph Nader will announce on Sunday whether he will run for president or not.

Any thoughts on whether he will run or not?

[maddezmom]

1. I bet ~YES~

[still_one]

4. I sure hope you are wrong

but I cannot imagine him appearing on a talk show on Sunday because he was not going to run.

Then again Gore did exactly that

[maddezmom]

7. he's stated in the past

if Dean didn't win the nomination he would run.

[pezcore64]

10. ....

also if Kucinich didnt.

[liberalnurse]

17. Not Dean.......

it was Kucinich.....and Kucinich is still there......

[robsul82]

20. Dean AND Kucinich.

Yeesh!

Later.

RJS

[RichM]

26. No. He said Kucinich only. Not Dean. Nader wouldn't be fooled by

a centrist like Dean.

Dean did bring certain novel aspects to the campaign, but his program would not remotely satisfy Nader's basic desire of seeing the Democratic Party move in a more progressive direction.

[Doogie]

27. I agree

Yup, he'll run. But he won't get NEARLY the votes he got last time. There was no ABB sentiment last time.

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Of course

Was there ever a question?

[Faygo Kid]

3. I like Ralph. But don't run, Ralph.

He has every right to run, of course, but I hope he doesn't. Anything that helps Bush is something I must oppose, and his candidacy would undoubtedly help Bush. There is simply too much at stake. I know I will be flamed for this, but I am ABB, and Ralph Nader should not run.

[underpants]

9. I agree. He will never win but he CAN still run

but he shouldn't.

I know a lot of people aren't ABB but what this election, to me, is about is to wipe the neo-cons out and get back to normal governance. Okay I don't agree with the Repubs on most things but there used to be some negotiation and the minority at least got to be heard and partially impliment legislation. The "win today at all costs"neo-cons and Gingrich's New Republicans have to be stopped then the pie can be redistributed.

[CivilRightsNow]

32. But what about Federal funding for a 3rd party?

I think if ever, this is the best election to make that happen. He may not win, but if he garners enough of a vote, he could give the progressive/liberal movement a very important opening for 2008.

[0rganism]

40. He's running as an independent candidate, no 3rd party involved

I don't know what happens to campaign funding if he happens to win 5% that way. Maybe he gets to start his own party, the Nadercrats or the Ralphublicans.

[BurtWorm]

5. My guess is he will run because he will say the Dems have chosen

to nominate Bush lite and he'll claim he only wants to present more of a choice.

[still_one]

6. It is interesting

that in 2000 if we had the Nader votes in RI and FL we would have won

[argonne]

13. You're absolutely right!

Nobody likes to say it but it's undeniable. NADER to a large part caused Bush to win. Just look at the numbers in Florida.

[CivilRightsNow]

33. I still content that you are all ridiculous

For bashing a man for participating in our democratic process.

EVERY Jackass that sat on their ass in front of the boobtube is way more at fault then Ralph Nader. The DLC and Al Gore with their spinelessness are way more at fault then Ralph Nader.

But let's not accept responsibility and work on making our party stronger. Let's blame Ralph Nader.

Fan-friggin-tastic.

[BurtWorm]

14. 92,000 Nader voters in Florida.

They can't all be feeling very proud of their votes.

[flpoljunkie]

22. That's actually 97,488 Floridians who voted for Nader in 2000!

And this was after Ralph said he would not campaign in any state where the vote was too close to call on the eve of the election.

Additionally, a national USA Today/CNN/Gallup Tracking poll a few days before the 2000 election found that only 43 percent of likely Nader voters would vote for Gore as their second choice. Twenty-one percent said they would vote for Bush second. And an equal number said they would vote for Nader or not at all. Nader continues to lie about this, too.

[vet_against_Bush]

8. I don't pray but

if I thought it would help, I would.

[maddezmom]

11. welcome to DU, vet_against_Bush

:hi:

[flpoljunkie]

23. Welcome to DU, and the Kerry campaign, vet_against_Bush!

We are honored to have your support.

[David__77]

12. If he does, he gets less than 1% of the vote.

There's no way he'll garner 3,000,000 votes again. That won't happen.

[AndyTiedye]

24. Nader Would Get Lots of Democratic Votes from the Diebold Machinez

The Democrats look to be pulling too far ahead for a plausible theft of the election
unless there is a third party candidate on the left.

With Nader in the race, they can Diebold us out of twice as many votes
before it fails the "stink test".

It does not matter that very few people would really vote for Nader.

[Meldread]

15. He's running. No doubt in my mind.

He's going to announce on the anniversary of his last Presidential Nomination. That alone says he is going to run. If he's going to run I wish him good luck.

[Crunchy Frog]

16. Oh God I hope not! n/t

[lovedems]

18. I hope if he does run Michael Moore who was a supporter of him in 2000

comes out and publicly announces his disappointment with his decision. I read an article by Ted Rall who was also a Nader supporter in 2000 and Rall was begging him not to run.

If that SOB runs again, I will have lost any and all respect I ever had for that man. He will join the ranks of the nasty republicans that I despise so much.

[diamondsoul]

19. I'm afraid he will run-

but I'm hoping he'll give me a birthday present and publicly endorse Kucinich instead.

[adadem]

34. totally agree

An endorsement for Kucinich would be a fine present, for you and all of us. :party:

[molly]

38. Ralphie's ego is too big

[bluedog]

21. will GOP pay for his ads again?

n/t

[RummyTheDummy]

25. Of course he'll run. His massive ego demands it.

And he wants to do his part to help ensure another four years of Shrubbery.

I used to respect Nader. Then I figured out he's just a flawed ego maniac in a cheap suit.

[onecitizen]

28. I just heard on Faux that.......

he's IN. It came on breaking news just 5 minutes ago that would be about 2:05 or so (PM).

The top of my head has just exploded.

[Doogie]

29. Yup, it's unofficial

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112049,00.html

Says it'll be formalized this weekend.

So...Who here is planning on voting for him? (not I).

[VOX]

43. As an independent, will he be included in the debating process like Perot?

I hope not -- there is way too much at stake.

Am probably looking too far ahead, but *if* Nader were included in the debates, and he is up to his usual tricks, he will go after the Democratic nominee, in the way that he went after Gore in 2000. The RW media will love this, and will try to make sure that Ralph is included.

If Ralph's included in the debates, and even if he were to go after * hammer and tongs and makes a good show of it, it stands to take votes away only from the Democratic candidate. Lose-lose.

Please, Ralph -- just go *away*.

[Tactical Progressive]

30. Nader won't do anywhere near the damage he did in 2000

if he decides to run this year. His running might even help the Democrats this time around.

By the same token, his not running this year doesn't in any way make up for what he and his party did in 2000. There's no way to wipe the slate clean by not doing it again. It just isn't the same equation.

[Skidmore]

31. And just how do you figure that he's doing the Dems a favor

as well as damage to the R's? I highly doubt that any Rs will vote for him.

So we repeat 2000? That's something to look foward to. I hope Naderites really enjoy four more years of * and co. For all the destruction they are willing to whistle by, I have yet to hear real solutions from Nader's people.

I will NEVER vote for any ticket headed by Nader.

[Tactical Progressive]

35. He simply won't take the votes away this time

First off just to be clear, there is no one more disgusted at greens, still, than I am.

But this time around the situation is completely different. Many Progressives have woken up to how politics really works now even if they haven't accepted their complicity in BushCo's reign. Michael Moore is a high-profile example of a much broader re-orientation. Nader won't get the support he did. Greens won't be able to be as dishonest as they were. They will fail dismally and in so doing will effectively humiliate themselves and in the process educate everyone else and possibly even themselves. Nader will pledge votes by the time it is over, but even that will be moot.

In the end it will show the strength of the Democrats. It will allow them to move more easily rightward in rhetoric. That's a good thing, and it won't cost anywhere near the number and kind of votes that it did in 2000. A hardcore few this time around, and it won't seem so principled either when they do.

My fellow Progressives pretty much destroyed themselves in 2000 by being dishonest and not listening to any of us tell them to do the right thing. If they want to try again by being bitter in November, they will complete the task. They're not quite that dumb, even though you'd never know it to listen to them.

[Skidmore]

37. So this is just a lot of p'ing in the wind?

I am furious with these people. This is the one time that being principled does not mean being a single-issue voter or a purist. This time is for keeps. There is so much at stake. I believe in many progressive positions but I also live in the real world where you need to get along with others.

I used to come to this board because it felt like a haven, but lately, I've become so discouraged by the rhetoric here. I am scared now--really scared. AND I'm tired of the bickering and hairsplitting. Sometimes doing the right thing means a little sacrifice on the part of all.

[Tactical Progressive]

39. If you're looking for a uninary metaphor

then yes, 'pissing in the wind' is more accurate than 'pissing up a rope' in this case because greenie sanctimony is going to splatter back on their own political viability for a long time to come, like it already did in 2000.

Don't be discouraged by the vestiges of their arrogance and denial lashing out like the political adolescents that they are. There won't be many that will repeat their sins of 2000. Let those that want to, go. It's not worth wasting emotion on. Real Progressives, which is many if not most Democrats I would guess, know the score and are willing to move one degree rightward for every greenie degree of betrayal on the left. There are alot more votes in the center for every degree of movement.

[sleipnir]

36. He'll get my vote...

NOT!

Sorry, as the old saying goes, fool me once, shame, uh, shame on me....fool me twice....uh....can't get fooled again!!!

And I didn't even vote for him in 2000....I pity those who did.

[adamrsilva]

41. He may drain some votes for awhile, but come election day

disenfranchised Dems, Greens, etc. will vote for the Dem because they hate Bush.

[adamrsilva]

42. He may drain some votes for awhile, but come election day

disenfranchised Dems, Greens, etc. will vote for the Dem because they hate Bush.