Please get out of the presidential race.
Visit the site to support one of Nader’s causes if he leaves the race. If he doesn’t, the contributions will be diverted to organizations working directly to defeat Bush (you choose from five options).
It would be a real crisis for democracy if an actual anti-war candidate runs for president at a time of war!
Oh for proportional representation!
I’ve never understood why people talk about proportional representation during Presidential elections. Are we going to genetically engineer a President who is 49% Kerry, 48% Bush, and 3% Nader?
Maybe wealthier individuals than I can try to buy Ralph out of the race. Myself, I’d rather contribute to John Kerry now, when it counts.
“Nor, for that matter, did Ralph Nader go wrong after decades of doing good. The qualities that liberals have observed in him of late—the monomania, the vindictiveness, the rage against pragmatic liberalism—have been present all along. Indeed, an un-blinkered look at Nader’s public life shows that his presidential campaigns represent not a betrayal of his earlier career but its apotheosis.”
…
“‘Ralph could have had a consumer agency bill in any of three Congresses,’ liberal consumer activist and former Nader associate Mike Pertschuk told Martin. ‘But he held out for the perfect bill.’
“The final defeat came in 1978. Again, Nader’s strategy was to impugn every Democrat who harbored any reservations at all about the bill. … He so alienated Democrats that, as the measure went down to defeat, one reportedly said as he voted no, ‘This one’s for you, Ralph.’ House Speaker Tip O’Neill told The Washington Post, ‘I know of about eight guys who would have voted for us if it were not for Nader.’”
…
“Liberals today who anguish over Nader’s insistence that no important differences exist between the two parties should note that this belief dates back more than two decades. … As Nader addressed a gathering of supporters in 1981, according to The Washington Post, ‘Reagan is going to breed the biggest resurgence in nonpartisan citizen activism in history.’
“Of course, that did not happen. But twelve years of Republican rule failed to dim Nader’s conviction that little difference existed between the two parties.”
…
“As Nader embarks upon his fourth protest run against the Democrats in as many elections, there is something slightly ridiculous about the shock of his liberal critics. They still don’t know who they’re dealing with. Nader is not a heroic figure tragically overcome by his own flaws; he is a selfish, destructive maniac who, for a brief historical period, happened upon a useful role.
“In the waning days of the 2000 election, some of Nader’s campaign advisers urged him to concentrate on uncontested states, like New York and California, where he could attract local media without competition from the major-party candidates and win liberal voters who needn’t fear tipping the race to George W. Bush. Instead, he chose a whirlwind tour of battleground states, campaigning in Pennsylvania and Florida, where votes would be harder to come by but more consequential to the outcome of the race. Liberals assume Nader tried to maximize his vote total without regard to how it affected Bush and Gore. The truth is that he actively sought to help Bush, even at the expense of his own vote total.
“It’s therefore both comic and sad when liberals take Nader at his word that he does not believe he affected the outcome of the 2000 race. The website RalphDontRun.net patiently explains how, if Al Gore had netted even 1 percent of Nader’s 97,000 Florida votes, he would have overcome Bush’s 537-vote margin. Like other liberals, the people behind the website seem to think, if they could only persuade Nader that his candidacy might help reelect Bush, it would dissuade him from running. More likely, it would have the opposite effect. The real mystery is not why Nader would do something so destructive to liberalism. It’s why anybody ever thought he wouldn’t.”
(http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040308&s=chait030804 but you know, read the whole thing.)
There is nothing that will persuade Nader not to run. What we have to do is persuade people not to vote for him.
There is nothing that will persuade Nader not to run. What we have to do is persuade people not to vote for him.
I don’t get to vote, and wouldn’t vote Nader this time anyway. But why does it turn out to be so hard to persuade people not to vote for him?
Anyway, I disagree. If you want Kerry to win you should be trying to persuade people who wouldn’t be voting for Nader to vote for him.
PR wouldn’t help in Presidential races, sure. But run-offs would. Having a run off would have surely won it for Bush in 1992. I don’t know what it would have done in 1996, because Clinton wouldn’t have been a candidate, nor, most likely, would Dole, so who knows? I’m all for a more democratic way of electing the President. But be careful what you wish for.
Single transferable vote is the way to go here.
Gore’s biggest problem in 2000 was that Democrats voted for Bush in numbers that dwarfed the vote that Nader received. Can Kerry do better? He seems to be having a hard time giving people a positive reason to vote for him. Maybe ABB is his best strategy, but I doubt it.
Digamma, people talk about PR in the context of presidential elections because we don’t elect a president, we elect electors. If states elected electors with STV (choice, or preferential, voting), that’d be a step in the right direction without needing a constitutional amendment.
Of course, direct election of the president via nationwide IRV would be (conceptually, at least) the simpler solution. But it would require a constitutional amendment, and it would require a uniform nationwide voting system and centralized counting.
How about we on the left stand on principle and support Nader’s right to run, instead of acting like the talk radio right in trying to find the essential gotcha moment where he is revealed as an egotisical fascist (he’s egotisical? um, isn’t Kerry, just a lil’?) or running him off the ballot in Arizona (isn’t that where the Texas Democrat state legislators camped when decrying the unfairness of getting boxed out on the redistricting issue?). After all, do you think anyone who still wants to vote for Nader now would vote for Kerry under any circumstances?
And, practically speaking, maybe we should hold off on this chant until we confirm that the Dems won’t do everything they can to prove they are best at shooting their own feet by selecting Gephart as Veep?
i can’t believe you stupid whimpering losers. complaining about ralph nader - someone who has literally dedicated their life, money and time to address the very issues that YOU complain about. you are all a bunch of slaves, cowering under john kerry’s nuts only (yes, ONLY) to defeat bush, even if it means ignoring someone with true integrity in order to embrace yet another consumate career politician. well here’s an evolutionary perspective for you - maybe this country NEEDS another 4 years of bush to get its head straight. maybe we NEED to start ianother horseshit war, kill another 10,000 people and screw over the bottom 70% of the population another 4 years BEFORE people like you realize that it’s time to stop playing this lame political game and stand behind someone who will take a radically different approach to our problems. and for anyone on the “left” that supports kerry - let’s see where this jackass get us in 4 years. if the best you can say is that he won’t get us into another ridiculous trillion dollar war, you might want to start thinking about raising your pathetic expectations.
Yeah, Nader had enough “integrity” to specifically target Gore in battleground states, instead of trying to build a viable Green party in safe liberal states where he’d get more votes but fail to endanger the Gore campaign. Nader doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the people who die or get screwed over by a Bush presidency, because Ralph Nader and his constituency have the comfort of living in a tidy bubble of white upper-crust affluence.
Ralph Nader and his constituency have the comfort of living in a tidy bubble of white upper-crust affluence
Be careful — that’s exactly what Republicans like to say about Democrats. They have some data on their side I believe. Do you? If so, I’d really like to see it. Or is it just what comes out when you don’t have an argument?
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review