Will he win this time? (No.)
Ralph Nader is running for president again. He's widely blamed for taking votes from Al Gore in 2000 and handing the presidency to George W. Bush. Now, in a year that seems to favor Democrats, is Nader positioned to play spoiler again?
The automobile fatality rate per miles driven was less than one-third as high when "Unsafe at Any Speed" was published as it was back in the 1920s. But facts never carry as much weight as a dramatic vision of "corporate greed" sacrificing helpless consumers until they are rescued by "consumer advocates" and federal regulations. For the left, Nader was playing their song and they danced to it.
In one of his earliest writings, Nader said, "the consumer must be protected at times from his own indiscretion and vanity." In other words, he wanted the Ralph Naders of the world to be able to dictate to consumers and producers alike. It's all about him. So is running for president.
Nader insisted this morning that there’s a real hunger in the country for a third-party candidate, but there’s ample evidence to the contrary.
To be sure, it’s likely that Nader’s ability to influence election results has passed. After “peaking” in 2000, with 2.7% of the popular vote, Nader dropped to 0.38% in 2004 (which was even worse than the 0.7% he garnered in 1996). It stands to reason that he’ll fare no better in 2008.
But given all of this, why bother? Why would someone with an impressive legacy on behalf of consumers take additional steps to make his enemies happy, his allies resentful, and his reputation tarnished?
Thoughts
Nader: Wrong On Everything, But Still Has Right to Run
Submitted on February 24th, 2008 by Chuck_JohnsonThe only thing Nader and I agree on his statement that Hillary Clinton is a "political coward."
He was dead wrong about energy deregulation.
That said, I find it disgusting when the Democratic party (and the Republican party) tries to restrict our choices in November.
Whatever happened to being "pro-choice"?