The Presidential Candidacy of Ralph Nader
Quadrennial presidential candidate Ralph Nader recently declared his candidacy for President of the United States. His reasons, as usual, are that he doesn’t like the current crop of candidates, and that they are all in the pockets of Big Business. Has there ever been, in his mind, a candidate who has not been? Whatever the answer, for the last twelve years at least, no one else has been good enough to get done what Mr. Nader sees as needing done. Every Democrat and Republican has been tainted by Big Business in some way. The parties and Washington D.C. itself are swimming in a sea of lobbyists and special interests and big business payola.
Whatever Mr. Nader’s reasons are for running, and in reality, however loathsome his politics and opinions, he has the right to run for president. A right which is bestowed to him and every other eligible U.S. citizen by the United States Constitution Article 2, Section 1.
Some critics, mostly Democrats, opinion columnists, and liberal bloggers, even say Nader has the right to run. But soon after benevolently granting him said right, they immediately immolate the man for doing so. It is unvarnished, unstealthy, naked hypocrisy. (Mr. Nader appears above the fray, though maybe a little tired of it.)
Mr. Nader’s critics try to have it both ways. But it cannot be had both ways. The sun is either in the sky or it is not. Your clothes are either on or they are off. Someone other than a Republican or Democrat can run for president or they can’t.
If you don’t know the story, some Democrats view Ralph Nader as a political spoiler. He saunters into the presidential race every four years and spoils it for the Democrat candidate. Theoretically, he helped George W. Bush win the election in 2000 by “stealing” votes from voters who would otherwise have voted for Al Gore. Sitting Vice President Al Gore(!), whose apparent incumbent imprimatur was not enough by itself to win over sufficient voters that he had to have Mr. Nader’s too.
Never mind the fact that Mr. Nader pulls Republicans as well. Mr. Nader also brings his own faithful, those very people who campaign for him and others unhappy with the mainstream choices, to the polls where they might not have gone in the first place, just to vote for him.
Besides the Democrat, and Republican parties and the Independent (unaffiliated) voters, there are also seven other parties which run presidential candidates with varying levels of national success (Constitution, Green, Independence, Natural Law, Libertarian, Reform, and Socialist). We’ve all seen candidates from some of these parties on our ballets. Most voters don’t vote for people in these parties because they recognize that it is an exercise in futility. Their votes will be wasted. And because people think that way, the prophecy fulfills itself and all these parties, which may have ideas and ideals that appeal to a wide range of the voting public, never get any traction. Other people don’t vote for third parties because they recognize that they are often extreme or outside the mainstream of ideas. But these candidates do get votes.
For example, in the year 2000, Nader with the Creen party got 2.7 million votes, the Libertarian candidate got 384,000, the Constitution Party candidate received 98,000 votes.
Mr. Nader is not alone as a third-party candidate, but it does seem like it the way that he is vilified for doing what is his perfect right, and doing what many other people do every four years and have always done. Was H. Ross Perot raked over the coals for stealing votes from George H.W. Bush and handing the election to Bill Clinton? Was Mr. Perot taken to task for taking votes away from Bob Dole and handing the 1996 election to Mr. Clinton again? The question doesn't matter because a third-party candidate has his or her very own right to run for president, regardless of what the competition says.
A third-party is not, nor should it be, viewed as the spoiler party. Nor should the fourth, fifth and sixth parties for that matter.
Political parties were not even something the founding fathers bothered to worry about in the U.S. Constitution. Individuals have the right to run for president and they may or may not be affiliated with a party. And just as no party should be considered a spoiler, no individual should be considered a spoiler.
Mr. Nader is correct in saying that that his critics should “get over it”, because in this writer’s opinion, the complaining is getting old, and a citizen who has always had the interests of other Americans at heart is being treated childishly by people with less than childlike tools.
Nader is also correct in suggesting that if the Democrats want to win a presidential election, that they have it fully within their power to do so. They have, according to Mr. Nader, had perfect situations for beating Republican candidates by wide margins, yet have somehow not been able to put forth a candidate with the ability to close the deal.
Perhaps this election year will be different and a political scapegoat won’t be needed. Unfortunately, Mr. Nader’s critics won’t change, so it will depend on how well his campaign and that of the Democratic nominee’s are waged.
I don't want him to win, but no matter who he pulls votes from, I'm glad he's running.
