News Nader snowball's chance in hell of actually winning

  • Thread starter Thread starter chroot
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on Ralph Nader's candidacy and its implications for elections, particularly regarding the 2000 presidential race between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Participants express frustration over Nader's perceived role as a "spoiler," arguing that he siphons votes from Democrats, thereby aiding Republican candidates. Some suggest Nader's motivations may include promoting the Green Party or a lack of concern for Democratic outcomes. The conversation highlights the systemic issues with third-party candidacies, noting that many states have restrictive ballot access laws that hinder third-party candidates. There is a consensus that the absence of run-off elections complicates multi-candidate races, leading to messy outcomes. Additionally, Nader's views on both major party candidates are questioned, with some asserting he does not favor Gore over Bush. The dialogue reflects broader concerns about electoral fairness and the challenges faced by third-party candidates in the U.S. political landscape.
chroot
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
10,266
Reaction score
45
What is this guy's problem?

He's widely believed to be the reason Bush even had a chance against Gore, since he steals far more of the democratic vote than the republican vote. I assume that Nader himself would have preferred to see Gore win. I assume Nader realizes that he has a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning.

So what is his problem? Why is he running again? Does he enjoy slanting elections against the candidate he'd presumably prefer to see win?

- Warren
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think he is counting on the press he receives to advertise the green party. Either that or he's a closet Republican!
 
:rofl so many excuses! Gore lost because Gore wasn't good enough. Nader isn't too blame. He, Bush, and Gore all went in knowing the rules. Just because Nader is a better alternative than Gore for some doesn't mean they would have voted Gore.
Had the democrats done something besides whine for the last 4 years ,they would be handing Bush his ass, EASILY, right now. Instead, you guys just sit around making excuses for the last time. You have to identify the REAL problem before you can fix it.
 
The real problem is that we do not have run-off elections. IMO, elections with 3+ candidates are just too messy.

- Warren
 
chroot said:
So what is his problem? Why is he running again? Does he enjoy slanting elections against the candidate he'd presumably prefer to see win?
Aw, c'mon, that's an easy one. I'll give you a hint: it starts with an "e" and ends with a "go".
The real problem is that we do not have run-off elections. IMO, elections with 3+ candidates are just too messy.
I tend to agree, but I think this is a relatively new phenomena. Not a whole lot of 3rd party candidates get enough votes to matter, but then we had Perot and Nader.
 
Channel surfing a few weeks back I caught a TV show (I believe it was Bill Maher's new one) with Bill and Michale Moore on their knees in front of Ralph begging for him not to run...they were dead serious.
 
I'm considering trying to gather support to demonstrate in front of voting precincts in November, just reminding people that essentially a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.

- Warren
 
Nader is apparently not on the ballot in a number of states.. I'm not sure what that means. How can a candidate still be in the running at all if only some Americans can vote for him?

- Warren
 
chroot said:
Nader is apparently not on the ballot in a number of states.. I'm not sure what that means. How can a candidate still be in the running at all if only some Americans can vote for him?

- Warren

third party rules are slanted to keep them out of the national level Each state gets to handle their voting regulations, and many do anything they can to keep third parties off the ballot. It's stupid.
 
  • #10
Nader's response to the "spoiler" criticism:
http://www.kintera.org/AccountTempFiles/Account9873/images/65643_spoiler_kit2.jpg
:smile:
Gotta love him!
 

Attachments

  • nader spoiler.jpg
    nader spoiler.jpg
    19.6 KB · Views: 491
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
chroot, Nader doesn't appear to be much of a bigger fan of Al Gore than George Bush. In fact, he stated once that we would have invaded Iraq no matter which one was President.
 
  • #12
JohnDubYa said:
chroot, Nader doesn't appear to be much of a bigger fan of Al Gore than George Bush. In fact, he stated once that we would have invaded Iraq no matter which one was President.

It seems that he's come down with dubya's black-and-white syndrome.
 
  • #13
Huh? Can you elaborate?
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
Replies
10
Views
7K
Replies
12
Views
14K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
6K
Replies
10
Views
12K
Back
Top