To those who want Nadar out of the race, so…

I am left to wonder if you actually believe it is that simple or are just pretending for some reason.

It is is at least this complicated.

And trust me, if if would not screw green and middle class causes that Nader claims to support, I would vote for him. He was and in some ways still is the real thing…but splinter groups is not how to get the job done under our electoral scheme [unless you are Karl Rove and the faction you fraction is the other guy’s].

Are you telling me your experience is different? The Naderites in your comunity are not involved in grassroots organizations?

Bingo. I worked at a university, so Naderites were not in short supply. Most of the people I know who voted for Nader are not involved in local politics at all. They follow national politics, and while most are quite intelligent and informed, spend more time bitching about the two-party system than trying to institute a multi-party system. This is not to say that no Naderites are involved in grassroots politics, just to say that they, like most voters who go for Dems/Repubs, are largely apathetic to the system in place, despite their claims of “sending a message.”

What makes you assume that Naderites aren’t involved in grassroots politics. I lived 15 of my adult years in PA and 10 in FL as well as other areas of the country and every naderite I know has been extremely active in grassroots activism. Green party, amnesty international, environmental and poverty organizations, etc. Are you telling me your experience is different? The Naderites in your comunity are not involved in grassroots organizations? None of the hard working activists in your area are Naderites? Or is it possible you aren’t involved in those grassroots organizations enough to know if or how many Naderites are there?

one run (2000) was a symbolic gesture, the second run (2004) was simply futile, this run simply smells like one man’s potentially disastrous quest to prove to whomever might still be listening that he is relevant.

You can talk about how Nader’s campaign is “about democracy” all you want, but really, Nader’s got as much chance of winning the white house as a Dominican boy has of making it past Rush Limbaugh with his innocence intact

I’ve seen people saying they don’t want him to run which is saying they don’t want people to have a choice to vote for him

No, actually it isn’t. Saying I don’t want Nader to wage yet another vanity campaign is not an attempt to deny voters choice. It’s saying that presidential politics is actually important and should be about more than one man’s ego– that he should put the good of the people before his own self, which he does not. If people want to throw away their vote on him, I will not stand in their way, but at that point they might as well stay home for all the effect on our two-party system it will have. Instead of sending flaccid “messages”, why aren’t more Naderites involved in grassroots politics, rather than simply boycotting blogs?

If you voted for him in 2000, I can at least respect the choice because he was contributing an important voice for many progressives on issues that otherwise would have been ignored by the major candidates. There is no self-flagellation necessary in explaining being a Nader supporter in 2000, as far as I’m concerned. What did he add to the 2004 election? What will he add to the 2008 election? Not a damn thing. And in the meantime, he has spent no time putting his “ideals” into political action and making the changes he claims he wants. So what choice exactly am I supposed to be depriving voters by hoping Nader changes his mind about running? The choice to elect a do-nothing president? The choice to elect an absolutist with no pragmatic political agenda?

I also think that candidates who promote a platform of hate, exclusion, and intolerance (i.e Republicans and Libertarians) should not run for office and wish they wouldn’t. Not that they cannot run for office or that they should be legally prevented from running for office, but that (according to my moral/ethical outlook) they should not if they truly respect the people. Does that mean I am depriving hateful, intolerant people of their political choice too? I suppose to you it would. I guess to be proper progressive liberals we are supposed to give proper deference to authority figures and pretend that all candidacies are equally valid and valuable. Y’know, because having a negative opinion of Nader is just soooo intolerant.

Cry me a fucking river.

In 2000 and 2004, I had a hard time believing Gore or Kerry would represent me very well. Hindsight, blah blah blah. But it was a failure of messaging - the Democrats could not convince me they’d be better on issues than Nader, so I didn’t vote for them - they didn’t earn it.

In 2008, we finally have candidates willing to put their backbones to the test. It’s refreshing.