I just realized something - Nader may not be a factor after all...

[jeter]

You have to get so many signatures to be placed on the ballot in any given state right?

Well Nader's running as an independant, not as a Green. When he ran as a Green candidate, he had the support of the Green Party machinery (as small as it was).

Now who will he have to go door-to-door to get signatures and the like?

I'm not too sure what the rules are, but I remember reading something about Perot running and having to keep Stockdale on the ticket for this reason.

What do you guys know about this?

Nader ran in 1996 and got less than 1% of the vote - something like 0.6% actually because he was only listed in a couple of states.

[MurikanDemocrat]

1. He hasn't even said he's running yet.

[WatchWhatISay]

2. "Now who will he have to go door-to-door to get signatures and the like? "

Republicans?

[jeter]

3. If Republicans did that...

...I just can't see any self-respecting liberal voting for Nader.

Jesus Christ, how much more transparent could that be?

[SW FL Dem]

4. There were rumors that

the Repubs financed ads in California in 2000 for Nader, people still voted for him.

[jeter]

5. 2004 will be different than 2000

People understand what happened in 2000. In 2000 we didn't have the benefit of hindsight.

I heard that too. But he still had the Green organization. Now he doesn't have that.

He won't get the Michael Moore's and other Hollywood celebs supporting him.

He'll only have the Republicans.

If Republicans want to vote for Ralph Nader, let them. That means they won't be voting for Bush.

[jeter]

6. New nickname: Ralph Nader = Bush's poodle

[G_j]

10. I guarentee he wouldn't get on the ballot

in many states. Here in NC, I believe you need 10,000 signatures. no possible way

[LiberalFighter]

12. Indiana requires 29,552 by June 30

[Virginian]

7. Maybe he isn't running.

The other night, one of the TV talking heads mentioned how right before Arnold announced he was running for Gov, his "people" leaked that he was not going to seek office.

So who would watch if Nader said he was going to announce that he wasn't running?

This could be a snazzy way of endorsing a major political party.
That would be nice, wouldn't it?

[jeter]

9. If Ralph Nader endorses either the Dems or Green Party

Tomorrow I will come back and apologize to the bastard.

[Maddy McCall]

8. 700,000 signatures to get on ballot in all fifty states.

[shance]

11. The factor is yet again, electronic voting....

In California, on the recall ballot there were approximately 150 or so candidates. In Riverside county where electronic voting is alive and well, there was an inordinate spread of high numbers amoung all the 150 candidates most of whom had no legitimate connection with Riverside county to be justifying such a higher number of votes going to these 150 essentially unknown individuals. Coincidence? Doubt it.

The problem here with Nader running is two fold. Now with electronic voting, votes could be conveniently moved from lets say, the Democratic candidate over to Mr. Spoiler man. This is why electronic voting is our problem, NOT Ralph Nader.

Im not applying this to your thread, but for the past two months, what I realized today was such a large waste of time was focusing on the candidates, when our election system is totally flaud, and cake walk for fraudulent outcomes, and quite simply MUST BE ADDRESSED.

Electronic voting, which includes the optical scanner is the most immediate problem. Its quite frankly both pointless and counter productive to be discussing any candidate issues, much less there should be no Democratic primary and no General election until we either get rid of the Trojan electronic machines or ensure that every single vote in America is done on a separate paper ballot that enters a ballot box which is property of American citizens and taxpayers.

[buckeye1]

13. All states are different.

It takes money and time,Ralph has neither. Perot has more money than God so it was no problem. I am sure that the Greens are automatically on the ballot in many states. The reason they ran with him in 2000 was to get enough votes to qualify for Federal funds. Ralph let them down. As I understand it, the Green strategy this time is to only work hard in safe blue states. IMO Greens are taking too much flak for this.

As for 2000,its foolish to blame the Greens for doing well in Fla. Thats democracy. Gore blow it when he didn't pick Graham for VP.(among other things).

I doubt Ralph will even last until Nov. All the noise is mostly crybabies that were suckered by a poor candidate.