← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · heritagelost
Thread ID: 12658 | Posts: 3 | Started: 2004-03-04
2004-03-04 22:46 | User Profile
Ralph Nader got a suprise 6% in a recent AP poll. So far he's not even on any (that I know of) ballots. 6% is pretty damn good considering this.
[url]http://www.votenader.org/why_ralph/index.php?cid=2[/url]
I've been looking at his webpage, and for the most part Nader talks a good talk. Naders' best potential is hurting the (highly undemocratic) twp party system in America. The way I see it, a vote for Nader is a vote of no confidence in America's two party system.
2004-03-05 00:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=heritagelost]Ralph Nader got a suprise 6% in a recent AP poll. So far he's not even on any (that I know of) ballots. 6% is pretty damn good considering this.[/QUOTE]
When he switched from GOP to Reform in Oct. of 1999, Patrick Buchanan was at 16% in the national polls. 13 months later, he scored 0.4% of the vote. Still, this 6% showing could be reflective of the fact that virtually every Democrat I have personally spoken to, as well as many here on the Internet, seem rather dissatisfied with Kerry as the nominee. In any event, however, Nader's probable inability to qualify for the ballot in many states, due to laws which effectively make it illegal to run for office as anything but a Democrat or a Republican (its funny how the great champions of "equal protection" via the 14th Amendment never seem to note this glaring inconsistency), is unlikely to be a factor. The media has been unremittingly hostile to Nader's 2004 candidacy and this will only get worse, until Labor Day, at which point I predict they will cease discussing him altogether. It remains to be seen, but I highly doubt Nader is going to be a major factor in this year's race. I might vote for the guy myself (though I doubt he'll make California's ballot) and certainly the best-case scenario (within reason) would be for Nader to break the 5% threshold necessary for him to gain access to Federal matching funds in 2008, without causing Bush to be re-elected....
2004-03-05 02:41 | User Profile
Naders' webpage tells how many sigs he needs for each state.
Some are easy. In one state, I think Tenn, he only needs 250 sigs of registered voters. That would be easy. Anyone could run for president in Tenn.
However, in Texas you need 65,000 sigs of people who DIDN'T ALREADY VOTE IN THE PRIMARY! That is totally outrageous and extremely undemocratic.