Skip Nav
40 Hilarious Costumes For the Funniest Couples
The Top 15 Movies With "Cougar" Characters
31 NC-17 Movies That Are Basically Porn With a Plot

Ralph Nader Is Running for President

Headline: Ralph Nader Declares Candidacy

On Meet The Press this morning, Ralph Nader, perennial third-party candidate, said he's running for president of the United States. Launching his third bid in as many races, Nader said,

Dissent is the mother of ascent. And in that context, I have decided to run for president.

Shunning the notion that he serves as nothing but a spoiler for a Democratic party victory, Nader shot back,

Not a chance. If the Democrats can’t landslide the Republicans this year, they ought to just pack up, close down, and re-emerge in a different form.

How will this development affect the race? Could Nader's entry bait other third-party runs? Is Bloomberg on Nader's speed dial? Though many nations have political landscapes that support lots of political parties, can our solidly binary system support triangulation by a third — or does the other candidate stand to be a mistress, a spoiler distracting voters from working on their relationship with their party?


Join The Conversation
minaminamina minaminamina 9 years
Jen - look at Obama's record. One issue specifically, since I have the information on hand, is in regards to Palestine. Obama was fervently against the occupation of Palestinian lands and the construction of the Israeli's "Security Fence". When he announced his campaign, however, he did not receive money from AIPAC, but attended many functions they held subsequent to his switching his position to absolutely supporting Israel's political goals in regard to Palestine. Why? Because even associating with a certain group can lend support to a campaign - no president has ever won an election since AIPAC was formed without AIPAC's support. They may not take funds from lobby groups, but politicians know what they have to in order to cater to the people whom these lobby groups are representing - such a drastic shift of position within a 2-year period is extremely suspicious, and it's one way in which lobbyists have control over elections completely outside of the voter turnout.
minaminamina minaminamina 9 years
If I believed that our electoral system really operated on direct democracy, I wouldn't vote for Nader, no. But since it does not, and since the sad realities of our very limited voting system does not equate a proper democracy in the first place, I'd rather put my imaginary vote towards a man who understands that imaginary votes are how this country runs. In all my years working towards a doctorate, I've found democracy occurs in odd situations, and the illusion of democracy tends to prevail in a structure built on the very antitheses of democracy - capitalism, classism, racism, etc. And I certainly did not mean to imply you were thinking something you were not, Jill.
jenintx jenintx 9 years
i am one of those independents who has voted for obama. i'm neither republican nor democrat, but i really like what obama has said in terms of health care and other issues. nader picked up about 97,000 votes in florida. if gore had received 2 to 1 of those votes, that would have given him about 2/3 of that number, which would have easily made up for the 500 votes short he was and, again, bush would have lost. also, one of the things obama boasts (it's also on his web site) is that he doesn't take money from PACs. i don't know what hillary's stats are on campaign fundraising and PACs, but obama has received almost 1 million donations without PAC donations, just to show that it is indeed the american people supporting him.
Jillness Jillness 9 years
"The problem here is that you're thinking only what Republicans or Democrats want" No, but nice of you to tell me what I think.;) In your previous post it sounded like you thought that Nader's run will wake people up to the flaws of the 2 party system. If Nader could make that happen, he already would have. His time has passed, and it is because of him we got Bush in the first place. If anything, people resent him for that. I think he will get even less votes than he did the last time he ran. There have been large numbers of independants voting for Obama, so I don't think you can say that the elections so far only reflect what the parties want versus what the people want. The people ARE speaking. They are voting in record numbers and crossing party lines for Obama. If you want more choices, voting for Nader won't help. Just as it didn't help when thousands of people voted for him in the last elections. A vote for him is a vote wasted. You only end up electing the candidate you like the least.
karmasabitch karmasabitch 9 years
Damn you Ralph Nader!!! Gotta love it when people flush votes down the toilet :OY:
minaminamina minaminamina 9 years
Jill, he absolutely did not - but nor do the Democrats pay mind to what a considerable portion of the American people want when they vote for Nader, or some other third-party candidate that represents an ideal that American's want to be paid mind. The problem here is that you're thinking only what Republicans or Democrats want - I belong to neither party, because neither represents me as an American, they only represent what lobby groups cater to them (not just in financial ways, either) - not the American people. If people don't have a problem with that, then I worry about the future of this country.
cageyme cageyme 9 years
I would vote for Nader. It really depends on who gets the nomination for both the Democratic and Republican parties. I am glad that there is a 3rd choice out there.
Jillness Jillness 9 years
I don't understand his suggestion that there is "dissent". Maybe on the Republican side, but democrats have overwhelmingly shown that they are very happy with the 2 candidates they already have. In fact, they are turning out in record numbers. I used to kind of like Nader, but now he seems like someone who desperately wants to be relevant. minaminamina, do you think George Bush took time to "think about the votes that went to Nader?" That just doesn't sound realistic.
Jillness Jillness 9 years
"So maybe we'll get more than just inspiring words, we'll get the nitty gritty things we need to elect our leader". There is 60 pages of "nitty gritty" on Obama's website that clearly lays out his plans. He has also discussed many of his policy ideas during his speeches...but you have to see the whole speech not just the little clip the news channels will play back for you. THe specifics have been there for quite a while now.
jenintx jenintx 9 years
i would be in favor of nader running b/c i saw him on meet the press and actually agree with a lot of his politics, but i don't really feel he has a chance at winning the election and will lead to mccain winning it all, like he did for gore in 2000. as for the "landslide," comment, i don't really think it's fair to say that when he primarily takes votes away from the democratic party (on meet the press, they said that if he hadn't run in 2000, gore would have picked up 2 to 1 of his votes in florida and would have won). in texas' last gubernatorial election, we had 4 candidates: the republican incumbent who had less than a 35 percent approval rating, a democrat and two independents who were slightly left of the center (meaning more liberal than conservative). the two independents split the democratic vote and the incumbent (whom even many republicans had grown tired of) won. sound familiar?
chakra_healer chakra_healer 9 years
Hehe, there were some arguments about this over brunch yesterday, ha. I think the more candidates the better and support Nader's bid completely. Ron Paul still has my vote, though,
GeriAnne1932 GeriAnne1932 9 years
I think it'll be refreshing because if Obama v. McCain....someone has to pull the curtain off of Obama to really test him because so many people have him up on a pedestal. McCain might not want to do it because it will piss people off or make him look bad. Nader might just do that for him. So maybe we'll get more than just inspiring words, we'll get the nitty gritty things we need to elect our leader. Another view is, who is to say that Democrats are the right vote...maybe Nader really is the voice of the people.. ;) If more people vote for Nader it will bring about the change that Obama even supports...or says he supports ;) (Not saying I agree with Nader at all) p.s. I have a lot of friends who are grass-root social change workers and advocates and to assume they are pot smoking hippies is a little immature. Might be true for the majority, but still a little judgemental ;) Be nice.
flutterpie flutterpie 9 years
im all for third parties, i crave it but i find annoying and insulting that nader chooses towards the end of primary to announce his candidacy. if he were doing this because he wanted to be president he would of started from the beginning. this is just a publicity stunt and intelligent voters will see right through it
minaminamina minaminamina 9 years
I'm voting for him. Yes, it is a protest vote. And no, I don't care. This so-called "democracy" we live in only displays TWO parties publicly, and it has got to stop. In a real democracy, we have OPTIONS - we have more than two people to choose from - why do I have to worry about offending Democrats by voting for the guy who IS running to make a point, and who IS addressing issues that neither party will talk about? Sorry if you guys disagree with me about this, but it has to be done... America will never be a true democracy if we only have the media lauding two or three candidates from two parties. This isn't right, and I feel, as an American, I have the opportunity to support a mandate to government and the media that says I WANT to have more choices, I WANT to be able to be heard, and any good president that is elected will consider the votes that went to Nader and say, "hmm... Americans want this, maybe I should address this."
k-squared k-squared 9 years
It rhymes, haha :]
k-squared k-squared 9 years
I don't even know the guy, but this is a slogan I thought of on the top of my head: Don't be a hater, vote for Ralph Nader!
kaenai kaenai 9 years
He is such a pain. I love how he disappears as soon as elections are over and done with. >.< Why can't he be a political activist instead of throwing his hat in the ring every four years? It isn't working, Ralphie Boy; go away, already!
kia kia 9 years
Why in the hell is the Green Party selecting him as their guy? This is so aggravating.
janneth janneth 9 years
GO AWAY, RALPHIE! He has all these "cool" ideas, I saw him on Meet the Press, but why does he only emerge at election time? He is a big selfish baby, a spoiler. He is the reason we are in Iraq.
Cassandra57 Cassandra57 9 years
If both parties would put up better choices, there would be no third-party candidates.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 9 years
Clarient, I agree that Ron Paul would take from both parties, but I still feel he would take more Republican votes. He's economically conversative, in favor of reducing big government, and very pro life. I don't have any polls or stats to back my opinion up though.
JadeBoho JadeBoho 9 years
Haha. Again? I love the tenacity.
Jude-C Jude-C 9 years
:ROTFL: philleif I've been waiting for this to happen. Well, he's not changing my vote, that's for sure.
bethany21 bethany21 9 years
:faint: oh dear lord, not this again.
philleif philleif 9 years
My theory is that Karl Rove is pulling some Mission Impossible face-swapping sh*t.
Celebrity Reactions to Transgender Military Ban
Lottery Horror Stories
Transgender Texas Woman Posts About Bathroom Bill
JonBenet Ramsey Murder Case Information
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds