Don't worry about Nader - he's a non issue

[ringmastery]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/23/opinion/23MON1.html?ex=1078117200&en=b956ca41130f737b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

If Mr. Nader didn't learn anything from the 2000 election, the voters certainly did. People might have voted for him once under the impression that sending a message was more important than picking the next president. We doubt very much that they will make the same mistake twice.

So much has happened in the last four years that it's hard to remember how low the stakes seemed when Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush were running. The country was at peace and prosperous. The big issue in Washington was what to do with the budget surplus. Mr. Gore kept changing his message and Mr. Bush was promising to be a uniter, not a divider. Both men knew from their polling that victory would belong to the one who captured the affections of a small number of wavering voters in a few states, and both tried desperately to come up with the fuzzy, centrist message to win them over.

It's not surprising that in 2000 many people thought they could afford to express their irritation with a vote for Mr. Nader. If they did that again this November, it would be a repudiation of the Democratic nominee so thorough that the party would certainly have bigger problems than third-party candidates to worry about.

[kalian]

1. I'll find it quite ironic....

if he garners MORE votes this time around...
Why? Because many people are sick and tired of the "two-party"
system.