Relax, Nader Tells Democrats, but the Math Says Otherwise

[wyldwolf]

In answer to a question on Monday morning after a speech at the National Press Club about his decision to run for president, Ralph Nader said, "This candidacy is not going to get many Democratic Party votes."

His support will come largely from "conservatives and independents who are very upset with Bush administration policies," Mr. Nader said, and he urged "the liberal establishment to relax and rejoice."

But based on who voted for him four years ago, his analysis looks shaky. Voters leaving polling places in 2000 were asked by Voter News Service, a consortium of television networks and The Associated Press, how they would have voted if George W. Bush and Al Gore had been the only candidates on the ballot.

Among Nader voters, 45 percent said they would have voted for Mr. Gore, 27 percent said they would have voted for Mr. Bush, and the rest said they would not have voted.

In California, where Mr. Nader received 4 percent of the vote, 46 percent said they would have voted for Mr. Gore and only 14 percent said they would have gone for Mr. Bush.

Because there is no reason to believe the breakdown was not similarly lopsided in other states, it is safe to assume that Mr. Nader cost Mr. Gore states that Mr. Bush narrowly won.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/politics/campaign/24NADE.html?ex=1078203600&en=03b849e1e222df43&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. That's like saying loyal Ford buyers cost Chevy

Besides, no one ever complains about the Chevy buyers who switched over to Fords. (Ergo, all the Florida Dems who voted for $hrub.)

[iamjoy]

2. I Am Beginning to Wonder

if we shouldn't trust Ralph.

I mean, I see the electoral math, I believe a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. I believe Nader screwed us in 2000.

But, I wonder if this time he has a different strategy, he just can't announce it. I wonder if he isn't going to pull out at the last minute and endorse the Democrat (of course, I kept hoping he'd do it in 2000).

I wonder if he isn't what is often called a "vanity" candidate, like Sharpton and Kucinich. I think Sharpton and Kucinich are running to raise important issues that are otherwise ignored. Maybe it is the same for Ralph.

Maybe. And maybe my cat will start speaking English.

Just in case, the Democrats might be wise to hold off on attacking Nader.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. I'd love to see Ralph swerve at the last minute OR

pitch a campaign that appeals to conservatives that would bring votes over from the Repub side (esp fiscal conservatives since we know $hrub can't balance a checkbook).

[union_maid]

5. Bury him now

I'd trust this man just exactly as far as I'd trust Karl Rove. His strategy is plain. Try to get the Dems to calm down and ignore him the way they did last time so he can blindside them with RNC money. Those discontented Republicans are the ones that are going to help us remove Bush. And he's flat out lying about going for them anyway. And what's more it won't hurt them. But the hammering away at the Democrats in the venues and media where liberals are listening..that will hurt the Democrats and it will hurt the people. I want everyone to know this man has no honor, his word means nothing.

[Droopy]

4. It sounds like Nader is trying to convince himself

more than anyone else. Maybe he does have a conscience, albeit a tiny one, and it's starting to bother him a little.

[lancdem]

10. It does almost sound like that

[RichM]

6. So you're saying Dems should NOT relax. Good. I'm down with that.

Please, all Dem Party loyalists: proceed with your nervous breakdowns, conniptions, and hysterical hissy fits. Knock yourselves out.

[wyldwolf]

7. No, I'm quoting a NY Times piece... where on earth did you read...

..that I'm saying anything?

[lancdem]

8. Um, no, Nader's the one knocking himself out

trying to convince Dems he'll actually help them. Do you also believe in the tooth fairy, Ralph?

[union_maid]

9. Had a great day at work

I work in a place where liberals are the far right of the political spectrum. We have Kucinich, Dean and Clark Democrats. We have gay activists, AIDS activists, lots of anti-war activists, Union Yes bumper stickers. Everyone there works full time to make life a little better and more just for the most helpless, down and out members of society. It's very nice, actually, if very hectic and underfunded. Everyone there was very aware of Nader's announcement. The gamut of emotions ran from disgust to rage. The feelings toward Nader himself run more from hatred to extreme hatred. This is very encouraging. If he's found no supporters in this group, it's a very good thing.

[lancdem]

14. I'm encouraged by that, and not surprised

I suspect Nader had no idea the kind of backlash his announcement would bring. Now he's going to reap what he's sewn.

[George_Bonanza]

11. Isn't this what Nader said in 2000?

But I fully welcome Mr. Nader into 2004 not only because he has the right to, but also because I doubt his influence this time around.

[meow mix]

12. yes, relax.. as my missles are slamming into your compound

grrr
^&$@*&%@&Q$%FX*WWXS%^*&%^ him

[HFishbine]

13. Nader's a conveneint scapegoat for the dems' failings

The number of democrats who voted for Bush in 2000 was roughly equal to the TOTAL number of all Nader voters. Instead of scape-goating Nader, the democrats might work on shoring up support in their own party.

Here's what the dems whould be thinking about:

IN 2000

- 11% of dems voted for Bush (only 8% of a smaller number of repubs voted for Gore)

- 13% of liberals voted for Bush (Nader only got 6% of liberals)

- 25% of gay or lesbian voters voted for Bush

- 34% of union members voted for Bush

- 25% of those who said abortion should always be legal voted for Bush

- Of those who said Health Care mattered most (8%), 38% voted for Bush

- Of those who said jobs mattered most (18%), 37% voted for Bush.

- Of those who said education mattered most (15%), 44% voted for Bush.

- 9% of voters said Gore was too conservative, yet 42% of voters with that opinion voted for Bush.

- 46% of all voters said Gore's view of government agreed with theirs, yet 20% of voters with that view voted for Bush.

What seems overwhelmingly obvious to me is that Bush did a far better job of siphoning off voters from what should be the dems naturual constituency than Nader did. The dems need to stand, loud and clear, on their traditional issues and not let BUSH muddy the waters.

http://www.udel.edu/poscir/road/course/exitpollsindex.html

[lancdem]

15. I agree Gore's campaign wasn't the best

but Nader was a factor. He apparently is the only person who doesn't realize Dems deeply resent him for what he did in 2000, and that has resurfaced tenfold. He should not be the least bit surprised at the reception he is receiving.