ZhengHe
02-24-2008, 10:54 PM
Ralph Nader Enters US Presidential Race (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/24/uselections2008.usa) - The Guardian
Nader to Run Again (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/nader-to-run-again/) - The New York Times
Nader Says He's Running (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080224/NATION/866199175/1001) - The Washington Times
Nader to Run for President as Independent Candidate (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120386274009888761.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news) - Wall Street Journal
Nader Announces Run for Presidency (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/5565915.html) - Houston Chronicle
Can anyone hear the collective groan of an entire nation? I sure can. The question that has always baffled me about this man is why run when you know you can't win? By his own admission, in a somewhat indirect way, he knows he can't win either. So what could he possibly hope to accomplish? A last hurrah in his old age? Elevation of certain issues, which haven't been brought up in the current debates? The ability to engage these candidates one on one? A mobilization of apathetic individuals who wouldn't be voting otherwise? Some extra pocket change to pay for new initiatives?
All of these objectives could be dealt with without a presidential run, and arguably in a more effective manner. Not to mention that if he really wanted to effect the debate he should have done so before hand. There's also the question of his age, which begs the question: If he won would he live through his presidency? While I tend to think that he doesn't actually believe that he is a spoiler that is really the only thing that he will be accomplishing by running, and not even in a significant way? What difference is 1% of the vote going to make anyway? Can he even muster that much with only 8 months until election time?
In the end I suppose it doesn't matter that his decision is generally confusing to the general population, because he is going ahead with it anyway. Still, a decent justification would be at least marginally more comforting then a lot of heady rhetoric and even more finger pointing. You really have to wonder whether or not he would have accomplished that much more if he just continued his current work instead of going out on these political adventures, which in the end have no resolution and only the barest of real impacts.
With all that against him the turnout of his last run was a bare 0.3%, which begs the question of exactly how much of an impact he could possibly make? Many people view him as a spoiler in 2004, which caused Al Gore the election. Whether or not that is true, it bodes well against him getting even a meager 1% of the body politic. In the the words of Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, in this election it truly is "a non-event" though an interesting distraction for sure.
Nader to Run Again (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/nader-to-run-again/) - The New York Times
Nader Says He's Running (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080224/NATION/866199175/1001) - The Washington Times
Nader to Run for President as Independent Candidate (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120386274009888761.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news) - Wall Street Journal
Nader Announces Run for Presidency (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/5565915.html) - Houston Chronicle
Can anyone hear the collective groan of an entire nation? I sure can. The question that has always baffled me about this man is why run when you know you can't win? By his own admission, in a somewhat indirect way, he knows he can't win either. So what could he possibly hope to accomplish? A last hurrah in his old age? Elevation of certain issues, which haven't been brought up in the current debates? The ability to engage these candidates one on one? A mobilization of apathetic individuals who wouldn't be voting otherwise? Some extra pocket change to pay for new initiatives?
All of these objectives could be dealt with without a presidential run, and arguably in a more effective manner. Not to mention that if he really wanted to effect the debate he should have done so before hand. There's also the question of his age, which begs the question: If he won would he live through his presidency? While I tend to think that he doesn't actually believe that he is a spoiler that is really the only thing that he will be accomplishing by running, and not even in a significant way? What difference is 1% of the vote going to make anyway? Can he even muster that much with only 8 months until election time?
In the end I suppose it doesn't matter that his decision is generally confusing to the general population, because he is going ahead with it anyway. Still, a decent justification would be at least marginally more comforting then a lot of heady rhetoric and even more finger pointing. You really have to wonder whether or not he would have accomplished that much more if he just continued his current work instead of going out on these political adventures, which in the end have no resolution and only the barest of real impacts.
With all that against him the turnout of his last run was a bare 0.3%, which begs the question of exactly how much of an impact he could possibly make? Many people view him as a spoiler in 2004, which caused Al Gore the election. Whether or not that is true, it bodes well against him getting even a meager 1% of the body politic. In the the words of Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, in this election it truly is "a non-event" though an interesting distraction for sure.