Ralph Nader Running for President—Again

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Calling Washington, D.C., "corporate-occupied territory," consumer advocate Ralph Nader launched his fifth campaign for the presidency Sunday.

"I'm running for president," said Nader in an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press." Nader downplayed the impact he might have on the ultimate outcome of the race, saying "if Democrats can't landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just wrap up, close down, emerge in a different form."

Read it all.

Filed under: * Economics, PoliticsUS Presidential Election 2008

Posted February 24, 2008 at 2:25 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]

1. APB wrote:

Just when you thought that the GOP couldn’t get a break.

February 24, 4:56 pm | [comment link]
2. azusa wrote:

It’s a plot by Karl Rove (1) to peel of 2% of the Dem vote in Ohio and 8% in Iowa (2) to make McCain the Younger Candidate.

February 24, 5:19 pm | [comment link]
3. David Fischler wrote:

Is “Ralph Nader” an anagram for “Harold Stassen”?

February 24, 5:34 pm | [comment link]
4. azusa wrote:

#3: no, it’s an angram for ‘Plan harder’.

February 24, 5:47 pm | [comment link]
5. azusa wrote:

OTOH, ‘Barack Hussein Obama’ is an anagram for
‘I smoke a Cabana shrub’.

February 24, 5:51 pm | [comment link]
6. physician without health wrote:


February 24, 7:48 pm | [comment link]
7. Irenaeus wrote:

Ralph Nader’s greatest political accomplishment is—-and will remain—-putting George Bush within stealing range of the Presidency in 2000.

Voters will remember that. The burned hand teaches best.

February 24, 11:55 pm | [comment link]
8. Wilfred wrote:

This is certainly turning out the be the most entertaining election I can remember, since “Shorty” Price ran for governor of Alabama.

February 25, 1:18 am | [comment link]
9. Philip Snyder wrote:

Irenaeus - Please provide factual evidence that President Bush stole the election in 2000.  I know you were upset with the results, but accusing Bush of election fraud requires some proof.  As I recall, the counties that were contested had election judges that were Democrats, not Republicans.

The problem with the Florida Election was multi-variant.  First was the infamous “butterfly ballot” that was designed (and vetted and approved) by a Democrat.  Second, the Media called Florida for Gore before the polls closed in the panhandle (leading many voters there to not vote).  Third, of the votes cast, the margin of error was greater than the margin of victory.  According to the rules, Gore lost the election and Bush won.  That was 8 years ago.  It’s time to “move on.”

Phil Snyder

February 25, 1:30 pm | [comment link]
10. magnolia wrote:

Mr. Snyder,  i think the following website sums it up succinctly;

“The United States Supreme Court voted five to four along party lines to uphold the vote certified by the Florida Secretary of State, Kathleen Harris, declaring George Bush the winner in Florida. Between undercounts and overcounts, that vote count was riddled with inequities. Harris’s role has been sharply criticized because she worked for the Bush campaign, and thus had a direct conflict of interest.

Because varying voting standards were used within different counties, the Florida Supreme Court said it was each county’s responsibility to ensure ballots were treated uniformly. Some counties began a manual recount of the vote. The United States Supreme Court, however, stopped the manual recount altogether by requiring canvassing boards to meet an impossible Electoral College deadline. “
oh yah, i can believe that certain party cronies threw the election to bush; look how many scandals of corruption have emerged since then from this government? can’t blame everything on the media.

ralph nader took votes that would lead to a decisive win for gore. he is a nothing in nat’l politics nowadays. too bad for kathleen harris though, the cronism debt wasn’t repaid when she was up for re-election, even after her suggestive ‘riding horse’ advert.

February 25, 2:14 pm | [comment link]
11. Andrew717 wrote:

Irenaeus, I’d disagreed with you, but I respected you.  I considered you a thoughtful person, even if in error by my lights.  I’m disappointed that you’ve joined the “it’s only democracy if I win” train.

February 25, 3:30 pm | [comment link]
12. Wilfred wrote:

#10 Magnolia -  The very fact that you cite, that Kathleen Harris was not “repaid”, implies that she was not involved in some secret crooked deal which you imply.

Albert Gore made a strategic error when he insisted on cherry-picking for re-counts only those precincts/counties most likely to give him additional votes.  It was this scam that the U.S. Supreme Court stopped.

If from the beginning Gore had pushed for re-counting the entire state, he would have had a stronger case.  But he would likely have still lost, because this would have produced additional Republican votes too.  As #9 Phil said, Bush won & it’s past time to move on.

(Liberals - they’re always living in the past!)

February 25, 4:42 pm | [comment link]
13. Alta Californian wrote:

Now all we need is for Ron Paul to run as an independent libertarian (which he has adamantly said he will not do) and we’ll have us a four-ring circus.

Wilfred, your parenthetical comments on liberalism continue to make my day.

February 25, 5:17 pm | [comment link]
14. libraryjim wrote:

CNN’s reports showed that Bush won with 537 votes.

WASHINGTON (CNN)—A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.

February 25, 5:31 pm | [comment link]
15. Will B wrote:

Someone should give Mr Nader a Corvair for use during his campaign.

February 25, 5:34 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.

Next entry (above): The NY Times Public Editor Goes After the Paper for the McCain Article

Previous entry (below): Christopher Howse: Rock of Ages and the rebel pilgrims

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)