I prefer to think of him as a tool of the GOP. He did so much to help them get into office the previous two times, so why shouldn't they ask him to do it again this time?
What I don't know is whether he is willingly a tool of the GOP.
As a friend reminded me in another blog, Bush took Florida by 800 votes...Ralph gained 20,000 votes from Florida that year.
But more importantly is this: Ralph Nader is not running for president, not then and not now, because he honestly thinks he can become president or because he wants to provide the people of America with a choice. If he was interested in any of those things, he would have been doing a whole lot more between 2000 and now. He hasn't done diddly-squat. Ralph Nader is doing nothing but interfering in the process for his own vanity.
I doubt he'll have much impact unless superdelegates put Clinton in over a strong Obama showing by the public. Most of the fringe Obama voters already feel they're voting alternative -- there are a stunning number of Conservatives and Libertarians and undecided and protest voters stumping for Obama.
But yeah, he's a self-centered prat. I could *sort of* see an argument that he had to go all the way to throwing the election last time in order to make a point about the two-party system. But the most likely outcome this time is that he dilutes any message he may have accomplished last time.
Click to view
Comments 8
What I don't know is whether he is willingly a tool of the GOP.
But yes, he is indeed a self-centered prat.
Reply
Reply
But more importantly is this: Ralph Nader is not running for president, not then and not now, because he honestly thinks he can become president or because he wants to provide the people of America with a choice. If he was interested in any of those things, he would have been doing a whole lot more between 2000 and now. He hasn't done diddly-squat. Ralph Nader is doing nothing but interfering in the process for his own vanity.
Reply
Instead, you get over my needing to get over it. I am so tired of that turn of phrase. It's so arrogant and elitist of you.
Reply
Reply
But yeah, he's a self-centered prat. I could *sort of* see an argument that he had to go all the way to throwing the election last time in order to make a point about the two-party system. But the most likely outcome this time is that he dilutes any message he may have accomplished last time.
Reply
Leave a comment