POLITICS: Ralph Nader to Announce Presidential Bid

Ralph Nader, the notorious consumer rights activist and Green Party member, is set to make an announcement on Meet the Press Sunday regarding his decision to enter the 2004 Presidential race. His work is credited as the basis for the creation of the Freedom of Information Act, OSHA, and the EPA.

UPDATE: Meet the Press. Nader is in!
Guardian.co.uk
Nader is considered by many Democrats the reason Al Gore lost the 2000 Presidential elections. Nader's percentage of the popular vote was greater than the difference between Gore & Bush in popular vote, which indicates Gore would have likely won the election if Nader had not run.

Indications point to Nader's announcement Sunday being a confirmation that he will enter the election race. He is scheduled for a press conference on Monday, and will take interviews after Saturday's appearance. The last few months have seen Mr. Nader engage in a flurry of fundraising.

Nader will not run as a member of the Green Party, if he indeed runs this year, but as an independent. Despite the fact that running as an independent will make it difficult for Nader's name to appear on the ballots in all 50 states, many Democrats are expressing concern that a Presidential bid will all but guarantee another term with President Bush.

Related News Stories
Reuters
MSNBC
FOX News

Related Websites
Wikipedia Profile



[Edited on 22-2-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

[Edited on 23-2-2004 by Zion Mainframe]

Nadar is responsible for the Bush Presidency.

For those saying Bush is a criminal, or caused 500 unnecessary deaths... here's the real origin: DARTH NADAR.

[Edited on 20-2-2004 by RANT]

Nadar seemed to be against running for a third party, at least in mid-late 2oo3. Wonder what changed his mind...?

What a little spoiler!

It would be a great thing if he got elected to th white house..but thats just a dream.

[Edited on 20-2-2004 by McGotti]

bad news for the dems! Rove is going to exploit this: Nader was against the war, Kerry flip flopped, driving the antiwar types away from Kerry. And surely Nader's camp will do the same thing.

After the last election, Nader said "Al Gore cost me the election"

RANT: perhaps, but Perot was responsible for the Clinton presidency

Nader was always a little too wacko to be electable, he's trying to steal all the votes that Dean had before he goes ahead and gives someone a backing, the left of centre college kids who are idealists will love Nader.

Ya know...the Communist Party got 1500 votes in Florida in 2000. We could also say that the Bush Presidency is the fault of the Communists.

Maybe he'll team up with Dean and bring an end to the Democratic party. This may make things unbearable in the short term (Im speaking to all the progressives here) but might revitalize a "true party of the people".

Originally posted by Bob88
RANT: perhaps, but Perot was responsible for the Clinton presidency

True. Though some claim as many Dems voted for Perot as Repubs. But either way, the Dems didn't fund Perot's run...he did.

We've seen some shady contributions from Repubs lately going to Sharpton. I predict ALOT of money going under the table from the RNC to Nadar now.

An errant millionaire could effectively give the race to Bush simply by supporting Nadar. This is far more likely than people think. Nadar should know better, but seems to be quite the egomaniac, and won't care where his funds come from. He's trying to buy a vice presidency as a spoiler. It's akin to blackmail.

There's a left wing that actually WANTS more Bush, a Patriot Act III, total economic disparity, etc. to induce socialism. These are the ones that think you get to heaven through hell, and are planning for 2012 not 2004. They exist. And hate conservative Dems with a passion. They are the real enemy to progress, says Nadar.

Remember the 'vote trading' in the last election? Republicans trading their votes to Nader supporters in areas Bush was expected to win, and Nader supporters then voting for Bush in areas Bush was to have trouble with.

Originally posted by Bob88
Remember the 'vote trading' in the last election? Republicans trading their votes to Nader supporters in areas Bush was expected to win, and Nader supporters then voting for Bush in areas Bush was to have trouble with.

Never heard of that. Question: would you trust either side once that curtain closed?

Send Mr.Nader a message that he should not dilute the American vote again, he cost Al Gore the election in 2004, tell him not to do this again!!!

---------------------My Letter to Ralph -----------------------

This country can not survive another 4 years of Bush and his destructive group of criminals.
If you enter the race votes for the Democratic ticket could be syphoned away from our candidate.
Please sir, for our children, our elderly, and for our country, you must not dilute the vote as you
did 4 years ago that cost Al Gore the presidency and caused America to endure the last 3+ years
of this terrible regime.

Bush must not be allowed to steal another 4 years in the Whitehouse or our democracy could be
finished as we know it. I trust that you are an intelligent and rational man, do not do anything that
might jepordize the defeat of this crooked Bush regime. Regime change is not just a good thing
for middle-eastern dictators, its also a good idea for Americas Dictator!!! Help us to remove the
crooks from our whitehouse, please do not dilute the voters will. DO NOT RUN IN 2004!!!

Thanks Ralph!

Did you find that nice fat brown craft envelope that we left in your office? You know like last time?...

Viva la difference!

If the Perot third-party candidacy is what brought Clinton to the White House over Bush 41 (I'm not sure about that idea, as I had also believed he had supporters in both parties), then we can look to this another lesson learned for Bush 43's campaign and administration.

If the RNC has indeed contributed to Nader's campaign, then they could be looking to make sure the '92 result is reversed and that Bush 43 succeeds in serving a second term, unlike his father.

Look at the ways Bush 43's administration has made attempts to do things in a similar manner, yet calculatedly different from his father's. It's all in the timing.

Gulf War's victory was too soon for Bush 41 to ride his popularity into re-elction. Saddam Hussein was captured just as the Democratic campaigning against Bush 43 was starting to gain serious steam. Some have speculated that this was an event that was held off until it could be done late enough to stay in the public's memory at election time.

Adding the jobs of illegal immigrant workers to the recorded workforce could actually make the percentages of unemployment appear lower, thus hoping to prevent Bush 43 some of the backlash his father felt in '92 as the economy soured under his watch. This has been done at a time that would try to bring the economy (or at least some of its numbers) on an upswing for the election.

All of that having been said, Ralph Nader's entry into the '04 race will provide another distraction for the Democratic party, allowing a better chance for President Bush's re-election. Nader may want in on national politics, but I wonder if this is the role he feels he should play -- the spoiler who splits the vote.

You can't tell me that he actually believes he can win a national election without the backing of the two leading parties.

Originally posted by Voice_of Doom
Ya know...the Communist Party got 1500 votes in Florida in 2000. We could also say that the Bush Presidency is the fault of the Communists.

So there is a communist party in Florida and this party got 1500 votes ? What kind of americans can vote for the communist ?

...Nader gets my vote, again in '04
[even IF Sharptons' on the ticket!]

ah ha, just as i suspected, THENEO would
also be one to pass manila packets...

He's In. Nader announced his intent to enter the race. Is he a spoiler... or a 3rd party who can attack the President without causing the democrats to become caught up in a mud sling-fest? www.msnbc.msn.com... [Edited on 22-2-2004 by SkepticOverlord]

Well I guess that could be it, Bush for 4 more years (at least until he tries to change the constitution to allow him more time). Before you tell me he cannot do that or would not consider that he wants to change the constitution to stop gay marriage. Why not more once he and his buddy Karl are on a roll.

Seriously though, nothing would surprise me about this man any longer.

Nader is a republican puppet with an ego the size of Florida. HOPEFULLY since the mainstream media is talking about him ruining the dems chance there will be a rise up to stop him from doing this.

Unlike when he last ran, he's going to be an indy. Instead a true 3rd party candidate. So, he'll have to get enough signatures in each state. you might not even find his name on the ballot is some states.





[Edited on 22-2-2004 by Bob88]

Do you really think Kerry would be much better than Bush...they follow the same master, after all.

Nader may have been invited by the powers that be to take votes from Kerry. But the same people pull the strings of all the candidates.

It is ironis to me that I agreed with so much of what Nader said on meet the press, me being a conservative and all.

Originally posted by Bob88
Unlike when he last ran, he's going to be an indy. Instead a true 3rd party candidate. So, he'll have to get enough signatures in each state. you might not even find his name on the ballot is some states.
[Edited on 22-2-2004 by Bob88]

Bet you the Republicans have that covered. He'll get all the signatures he needs from the Bush camp.

[Edited on 22-2-2004 by RANT]