Don Quixote Nader (Plus 2)
Perennial leftist gadfly Ralph Nader is preparing to tilt at yet another windmill with another presidential run. Added to the prospects of third-party challenges by well-funded pseudo-libertarian R0n Paul and/or self-funded moderate Michael Bloomberg, this presents the possibility of an outright circus in the 2008 general election that may eclipse even the carnival atmosphere of the primaries.
The increasing pervasiveness of the Internet and the closely divided playing field between the major parties may be what is causing the increasing prominence of fringe candidates. The rise of the Internet allows formerly isolated cranks, malcontents, and members of tin-foil-hat brigades to come together into passionate brigades of slogan-spouting ideologues (which readers of comment sections have come to know all too well). And the tight division between the major parties offers the possibility that even marginal candidates might be able to play spoiler, exaggerating their true influence and taking vengeance upon major parties that their supporters see as corrupt and self-serving.
2008 may be shaping up to be a mess than makes 2000 look like a political blip.
I don’t agree with Nader on a lot of issues, but I do respect the man. All his life he has served people. He has, whether you like it or not, made a big difference from, say, 1960-1985.
I don’t agree with him, but he stands for his beliefs.
Nader is well more liberal than me, but a lot of the issues he raises and other third party candidates raise can be important. Bloomberg also wouldn’t be ‘fringe’ if he ran.
Also, no matter what you say about Nader’s chances of winning, at least being in the race can help him set up challenges to ballot access and debate inclusion; and could help set up the viability of third party runs in the future, by more mainstream candidates who aren’t billionaires
McCains success may be upsetting Bloomberg’s presidential plans:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR2008020202076.html
He also made a big difference in 2000. In fact, I think he made a huge difference in the lives of thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers. Granted, not a positive difference… I think Ralph Nader should retroactively be named man of the year for 2000. He could join such august figures as Hitler, Stalin, Ayatollah Khomeini, and Putin.
Bush stands for his beliefs too. So did all the aforementioned people. I submit that merely standing by your beliefs is a piss-poor reason to like somebody.