Reply
Fri 20 Feb, 2004 05:49 pm
This is from FOX News, so one never knows if it is true.---BBB
Nader to Jump in Presidential Race
Friday, February 20, 2004
By Liza Porteus
NEW YORK ?- Ralph Nader (search), the consumer advocate who ran for president in 2000 as a Green Party candidate, will enter the 2004 race for the White House as an independent candidate, advisers told Fox News on Friday.
A formal announcement by Nader is expected this weekend.
"He's felt there is a role for an independent candidate to play," Linda Schade, a spokeswoman for Nader's presidential exploratory committee.
The relationship between Nader and the Green Party (search) has not been smooth in recent years. Money and ballot access continue to be Nader's main concerns as he's mulled a run this year.
Nader's move came as John Edwards (search) threw down the gauntlet.
While spending Friday campaigning in states where he has a chance at beating John Kerry (search) for the Democratic nomination, the North Carolina senator awaited a response to his proposal to take on the front-runner in four one-on-one debates.
For more on the campaign, click to view Foxnews.com's You Decide 2004 page.
In addition to a debate in Los Angeles, the former trial lawyer sent a letter to the Kerry campaign Friday, saying, "I ask that we also give people in places like New York and Ohio the chance to see where we stand on the issues."
Edwards has called for debates in New York and Georgia -- states that hold primaries on March 2 -- while campaigning in those states. Kerry has already committed to the Los Angeles debate so long as Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich (search) and the Rev. Al Sharpton (search) are involved.
"My view is the people of this country deserve more than one debate," Edwards told reporters Friday. "We ought to have at least four debates so they know what each of us has to offer, what our differences are, and our vision for the country."
The Nader Factor
Some are wondering what effect, if any, Nader's entry into the race will have on the other candidates, particularly as Kerry and Edwards both try to attract independent voters. Nader's 2000 presidential run is blamed by many Democrats for tilting a close election in favor of George W. Bush.
"I don't think it will have a tremendous amount of effect," Edwards told reporters Friday. "I think if we have a candidate across the ticket that's appealing to independents, appealing to the kind of people that might be attracted to a Nader campaign, then we'll be fine. And I think I am exactly that kind of candidate."
In Savannah, Ga., on Friday, Edwards tried to court black voters, touting his commitment to civil rights issues. He then headed to Maryland and traveled on to Buffalo, N.Y., to kick off his campaign in upstate New York, where he says manufacturing jobs have been lost to free-trade agreements.
Kerry spent Friday in Boston to take a breather from public events.
Edwards won't be on the ballot in Vermont's March 2 primary, which means he won't have a chance to capture the state's 15 delegates.
Back in January -- when candidate had to decide whether to get on the primary ballot -- it was assumed former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (search) - the former front-runner in the race until the Iowa caucuses - would easily win that state.
Don't Duck the Debate
Edwards used his solid debate performance in Iowa and Wisconsin to catapult him to contention. Experts say it wouldn't be smart for Kerry to ignore debate challenges.
"John Kerry is positioning himself as a leader," said Democratic adviser Richard Goodstein. "I think that Kerry would be fine in debates against Edward but I think the appearance of trying to duck them would be very harmful to him."
Edwards' upbeat, relaxed style plays well on the debate stage and in states like New York and California - where campaign advertising costs an arm and a leg - debates will provide Edwards with free access to thousands of potential voters.
"Debates are important to John Edwards because he needs the opportunity to stand side by side with Senator Kerry and have people take the measure of them in that way," said David Axelrod, a media consultant for Edwards.
But the Massachusetts senator likely wants to make Edwards earn support with endorsements, paid media and big crowds - a greater challenge to a candidate with less money and a thinner national political organization who has been cherry-picking states in which to campaign.
Edwards insists he's running a national campaign.
"I don't set those kind of standards," Edwards told reporters when asked how many Super Tuesday states he would need to win to remain viable.
"I am running a national campaign, I am going to compete everywhere. There are some places that are obvious good places for me," including Maryland, New York, Ohio, Georgia and California, he added.
Taking on Trade
Edwards has been using the trade issue to highlight the main difference between himself and the Massachusetts senator as the clock ticks toward Super Tuesday.
Edwards casts himself as a leading opponent of deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (search) and others, a stance that Kerry disputes.
A statement issued by the Kerry campaign Friday said that Edwards delivered a "major economic address" last year in which he didn't mention trade.
"Apparently, cracking down on unfair trade practices and promoting fair and balanced trade was not a priority for John Edwards just eight months ago," the statement said.
Although Edwards has been trying to make trade the line-in-the-sand issue, some experts say that won't resonate with voters.
"The fact of the matter is, there's not all that much daylight between their positions on trade when all is said and done," Goodstein said. "If Edwards thinks he's going close the gap on one issue, I don't think that's going to be it."
And the Polls Say ...
A Fox News poll released Friday shows that 58 percent of Democratic voters favor Kerry over Edwards. Only 21 percent of voters would back Edwards if an election were held today. There was a 5 percentage-point margin of error.
Latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics Poll
A poll by Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion shows that Kerry is leading Edwards 66 percent to 14 percent; 10 percent were undecided.
The Public Policy Institute of California found that Democrats there favor Kerry with 55 percent of the vote, while Edwards has 10 percent.
According to the Fox poll, when asked who would do a better job as a wartime president, 50 percent said Bush, while 38 percent said Kerry. Kerry beat Bush when it came to who voters thought would handle the economy better, 47 percent to 40 percent.
With Nader now in the race, 43 percent said they would vote for Bush if the election was held today, 42 percent for Kerry and 4 percent for Nader.
"You're looking at a nation at war," said Fox News analyst Tammy Bruce. "With that realization, President Bush does win in the polls when it comes to handling the war. Americans really in the back of their minds understand -- who do you want [in office]? A guy who should be in a Calvin Klein ad in the White House," she said, referring to Edwards.
"I really believe Edwards is still maneuvering into a second place spot. I think he knows he can't win and he's really trying for the vice presidency."
Fox News' Carl Cameron, Steve Centanni, Major Garrett, Yolanda Maggi and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Well there's a place several Deaniacs will be going.
Re: Nader to Jump in Presidential Race
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:With Nader now in the race, 43 percent said they would vote for Bush if the election was held today, 42 percent for Kerry and 4 percent for Nader.
NOooo! NOT AGAIN!!!!!
Nader got Bush elected last time. Now the s0b is going to try to do it again.
I keep hearing that he doesn't officially announce til tomorrow.
Do you get the idea that Ralph Nader is SERIOUSLY pissed off at the Democratic Party ?
Whatever it is that you Dem's did to him to cause him to do things like this, keep it up!
It strikes me that Mr Nader has a very large ego. It doen't bother him that the Green's no longer support him; it doesn't matter that he may do harm to the Dems. He gets to be on Meet The Press tomorrow morning! Yippee! That's all he wants.
Will he get the attention and the few percentage point votes he craves? Probably. Can he swing the election to the Repubs again? Perhaps.
He marches to his own drummer, doesn't he?
Ralph Nader
I've known Ralph Nader since the 1960s when he was very young. We worked together on consumer issues for many years.
I respected Ralph then and continue to do so---however, I wish he wouldn't help George Bush win reelection, no matter how principled his motives were and remain so.
BBB
Ralph Nader is a brainless egotist who is going to single-handedly ruin the chances for a Democratic president. Again.
I understand your feelings, BB, but all things considered, Nader is a disgrace.
Fact is, all things considered, Nader has done more damange to the environment and the other causes he champions -- than any other human currently alive.
damn, the way Nader regards the public, you would think he was a candidate from a major political party.
Interesting, Frank, I see your point on that.
I believe if Nader does run he stands to alienate 70% or more of those who have always supported him. I would continue to like him, but, his influence as a public figure might well end if he really does run this time.
I would hope so. I mean his ability to cream off votes that might go to lesser harm.
I'm pretty eco myself, but nothing if not practical.
Again?
Will Darth Nader fight for the Darkside again?
Nader's nadir
The following represents how I feel about any Nader 2004 candidacy, which would tarnish his admirable reputation of over 40 years. The only thing I disagree with is that it's about his vanity and ego. Ralph passionately believes what he says about the corporate takeover of America and wants to build a third party to help the people regain their power over the government.---BBB
Nader's nadir
By Eric Boehlert
Even many of his former allies don't support maverick Ralph Nader's presidential bid. And more mainstream Democrats aren't just mad, they're apoplectic.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Feb. 21, 2004 | Word that Ralph Nader will formally announce his plan to run for president this weekend as an independent stirred harsh words and emotions not just among Democrats, but even among the leftists and independents who supported Nader four years ago. Facing an election that they regard as the most crucial in decades, they're stunned and angry that Nader has decided to reprise his third-party candidacy from 2000, which played such a crucial role in siphoning votes away from then Vice President Al Gore and handing the election to George W. Bush.
"It's hypocrisy of the highest level. It's egotism of the highest level. It's dishonesty of the highest level to say 'I'm running as an independent,' when all he's doing is helping elect Bush, and he knows it," says Elizabeth Holtzman, former New York City congresswoman and U.S. district attorney. "He's nothing but a shill for George Bush. A shill, period."
Another Nader candidacy "would be bad for him, and it would be bad for the country," says Danny Goldberg, founder of Artemis Records and longtime political activist. "My wife and I hosted a fundraiser for him in 2000. I was proud to do it. I think he's one of the great people of the last century. But I certainly wouldn't support him this time. His candidacy will tarnish his image and help the president. In my view that's unhealthy."
Even some of Nader's closest progressive allies have their doubts. "I love and appreciate him, but I definitely want to get Bush out of office, so I won't vote for him, which would be a first for me," says Medea Benjamin, the Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate from California in 2000. She says it's good that Nader is not running as a Green Party candidate, because it will allow someone else within the organization to gain national attention as a presidential candidate.
He did confirm this morning he is running as an independent.
I agree with much that Nader says, but will never vote for him again. He accurately pointed out that the two major political parties are on convergent paths. That is to say, the end effect of their policies are dictated by the special interests. Everybody applauded Clinton for taking away Republican issues by adopting them as his own. I would say that makes him as much Republican as Democrat. The one variable this time around is the loose cannons, Bush, Cheney, and the rest of their key decision makers. For that reason alone I will vote the Democratic ticket, regardless of who gets nominated. I long ago vowed to never vote for even the best Republicans, but I have not vowed to always vote Democrat.
Nadar's statement
Ralph Nader Announces Run for Presidency
By SAM HANANEL, AP
Nader will run as an independent.
WASHINGTON (Feb. 22) - Consumer advocate Ralph Nader announced Sunday he will run again for the presidency, declaring that Washington has become "corporate occupied territory'' and arguing there is too little difference between the Democratic and Republican parties.
Nader, who will turn 70 this week, said he contemplated retirement but decided against that. "I've decided to run as an independent candidate for president,'' he announced on NBC's "Meet The Press.''
"This country has more problems and injustices than it deserves,'' Nader said, bemoaning a "democracy gap.'' He said he needed to get into the race to ``challenge this two-party duopoly.''
"There's too much power and wealth in too few hands,'' he said . "They have taken over Washington.''
"Washington is now corporate occupied territory,'' Nader said. "There is now a for-sale sign on most agencies and departments. ... Money is flowing in like never before. It means that corporations are saying no to the necessities of the American people. ... Basically, it's question of both parties flunking.''
Asked if he would withdraw if he concluded his candidacy would merely ensure President Bush's re-election, Nader told interviewer Tim Russert, "When and if that eventuality occurs, you can invite me back on the program and I'll give you the answer.''
Nader decided against running under the banner of the Green Party. His candidacy four years ago has been blamed by many Democrats for costing Al Gore the election against George W. Bush.
Last week, Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe revealed that he had met with Nader several times urging him not to run.
"Let me say, this is going to be difficult,'' said Nader, who planned a round of interviews after his announcement. "This isn't just our fight. This is a fight for all third parties ... They want to have a chance to compete. This is not a democracy that can be controlled by two parties in the grip of corporate interests.''
Third party candidacies have been a greater part of presidential politics in recent years; businessman Ross Perot twice ran for president, winning 19 percent of the vote in his first try in 1988 against George Herbert Walker Bush and Michael Dukakis.
"It's his personal vanity because he has no movement. Nobody's backing him,'' New Mexico Democratic Gov. Bill Richardson said Sunday in advance of Nader's announcement.
"The Greens aren't backing him. His friends urge him not to do it. It's all about himself,'' Richardson told "Fox News Sunday.''
"Now, Ralph's made some great contributions to consumer issues over the years, but clearly it's not going to help us,'' he said. "I don't think he'll have a sizable impact, but it's terrible if he goes ahead because it's about him. It's about his ego. It's about his vanity and not about a movement that supposedly he headed for many years very effectively.''
As the Green Party's nominee in 2000, Nader appeared on the ballot in 43 states and Washington, D.C., garnering only 2.7 percent of the vote. But in Florida and New Hampshire, Bush won such narrow victories that had Gore received the bulk of Nader's votes in those states, he would have won the general election.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace