That's right, boys and girls!!! Ralph Nader just put his name in the running for a third party bid to be President! While being interviewed on Tim Russert's MSNBC show Meet the Press, Nader announced his intention to seek the White House, yet again. See Yahoo news link below.
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/080224/5/45qi.html
So what will this mean for the 2008 Presidential election??? Lots of pissed off Democrats, for one. Lots of Republicans jumping for joy, too! You should have seen my reaction when I saw it on CNN this morning. Not that I'm a loyal Republican, I actually can't stand a large number of them and have some major disagreements with them, being the small l libertarian that I am. But I'll take McCain with all his flaws over either Barack or Hillary any day, especially with a Democratic controlled House and Senate.
So could this siphon off enough votes from the Democrats for McCain to clinch it? According to the above linked Yahoo news article, Nader was able to get 2.7% of the vote in 2000, and many Dems blamed him for costing Gore the election. No doubt, that 2.7% of the electorate was faaaaar left, being that Nader ran as the Green Party nominee. No doubt, he'll be catching many of the same voters in the 2008 election, just the sort of people the Dems are going to need voting for them in the election.
Many of the media pundits had been saying they thought Nader would stay out of it this time around, that he wouldn't want to be blamed for ruining the chances of the potential first female or black President. Well, apparently they were wrong. Apparently I was wrong too. I figured he'd stay out of it myself, if for no other reason than to keep from giving the neo-cons a leg up.
So what could be motivating Mr. Nader? Maybe the Democrats aren't swinging far enough left for his liking? Maybe he doesn't see enough change on the horizon in an Obama administration? I'm not going to try to get too far into Ralph Nader's head, because to be quite honest, I really don't understand him a whole lot. But suffice it to say, Republicans and everyone else who DOESN'T want to see an Obama or Clinton administration are jumping for joy today.
We live in interesting times...
4 comments:
BTW, this is Seth, I changed my user name on here. Initials and my last name was just waaaaaaaaay too boring.
Now please, do discuss!
Personally I'm pumped, as any McCain supporter would be.
I also think it's a really good thing in the wake of all this crap about McCain supposedly having an affair with a lobbyist.
Good thing the NY Times likes to put articles on the front page with anonymous sources and speculation without hard facts to back them up.
Nader may well have had an impact in Florida at least in 2000--remember it is a state by state race in the Electoral College. Of course there were many other factors in Florida.
On what Lindsay has to say, I guess I'm going to assume that McCain's alleged affair scandal was on the front page of the NY Times (yes, I should stop by the HUB more often to pick up a free NYT or at least go the the website more regularly to read the news).
Assuming that McCain'story being front page is true, I just think that it's kind of ironic that the other day, in class, we all agreed on the fact that the NY Times was "not very liberal." Of course, I'm not about to tell you that it really is, but it can realistically be seen as a stab at conservatives and those sorts of candidates. I say this because I can't imagine there'd ever be a plug for a candidate like Huckabee, Paul, Romney, Giuliani, or, presumably from an attack article like this, McCain.
Ultimately, I could never predict a person like Rupert Murdock to ever even consider putting a pro-democratic front page story on his papers/websites/et cetera for that exact reason, that his convictions are ultimately conservative.
This is all subjective, so if anyone has criticism on this, I'm more than willing to hear it.
Post a Comment