Ralph Nader: It's not always about winning

I'm not convinced it's all about the viability of a third party. I tend to believe it's more about him.

Wasn't it in 2004 that Nader promised not to campaign in swing states so he wouldn't help put the Republicans in office - and then decided that pledge was 'no longer operable'?

How can it be all about him when he knows he's not gonna win?

Saddest part of all is that people still remember his name. Sometimes, these ego-maniacs just need to fade away.

Nader's a tool--he gets his money from the right wing capitalists.

Egotism.

Hopefully those who can be inspired to support the Quiotic will have better sense than to actually do so this time.

Ron Silver?? The 3rd rate actor who suddenly saw the light and became a Republican?? Independent??

Yeah, right. As "indie" as any other right wing talking head.

I'm not convinced it's all about the viability of a third party. I tend to believe it's more about him.

Posted by: bill r. | February 26, 2008 7:58 AM

bill r As usual your wrong again , i believe he'll make a great candidate for the fringe lunatic left. GO NADER GO !!!

Cement shoes for the DNC "singer" John Everdumb

bill r I agree, Nader has the right to run if he wants, but I think more than anything else it’s about his ego. I think that if Nader wants to do something for people he should take the millions he’s going to spend on a worthless campaign and give it to people who could really use it.

I wouldn't mind supporting a viable third party candidate sometime in the future – I've just never thought of Nader as such. Remember – he was all, but silent, when thousands of blacks had their voting rights trampled upon in Florida during the 2000 election. NOW he wants to cite that – and not his own candidacy – as the reason for Bush's stealing that contest?! He needs to take some responsibility as well!

Ralph,

But we are at the point that it HAS to be about winning. Symbolic victories are so 2004. We can't afford anymore of your grand symbolic gestures.

It's not about winning? Well, it's not about losing either.

Dear Mr. Silva,

Thank you for writing an article that includes such relevant insights about Mr. Nader; it is all the more commendable in a climate that promotes the oversimplification of our political process and our ever growing allegience to style over substance.

Mr. Nader's presence in politics should remind us of some forgotten qualities of good leaders: integrity, courage and action. It is obvious that Mr. Nader's candidacy is not about winning the presidential election, but this fact appers lost on the public. Have we forgotten the value of political disssonance and citizen action in our American history? Debate, discourse (not rhetoric), and choice are GOOD for our country. It is not about winning, it is about challenging our system, and by doing so, making it better and more responsive American citizens.

It isn't about winning. It's about one man's ego. It's too bad Nader can't find something constructive to do with his time.

This man brought issues to the public attention that have changed the fabric of consumerism. He brings silliness to the election process.....
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/02/24/ralph-nader-is-a-beetle/

I guess I'm confused.

Obama, Clinton, McCain, Romney, Guilliani, Edwards... these folks are NOT ego-maniacs???

But Ralph Nader, stalked, harrassed, villified, threatened... hes' the narcissist?

You folks need a reality check.

Anyone who seriously thinks they deserve to be the most powerful person in the world has an ego the size Jupiter.

He's holding the Democrat's feet to the fire. He's asking them to advocate "real change", not platitudes and bribes.

This man brought issues to the public attention that have changed the fabric of consumerism. He brings silliness to the election process.....
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/02/24/ralph-nader-is-a-beetle/

Hasn't he done enough damage already? There has to be a better way for him to get his message out than to screw up another election. Despite his protests to the contrary, if not for him, Dubya would never have had the chance to be our worst president ever.

Michelle,

Well, you make some good points. I would agree if we lived in a democracy that toted up votes and distributed the spoils proportionally. One man one vote. This form gives small parties and third parties a chance to participate without skewing the results 180 degrees.

Unfortunately we live and vote in a winner take all republic. This is more like one woman 1/3 vote which dilutes democracy to the point it's almost pointless. (In the presidential race)

However, if we go the proportional route, it has to happen in all 50 states simultaneously, or the results would be chaos. I don't know how that could happen short of a constitutional amendment.

Good morning Mr. Silva,

Thank you very much for writing this article about 2008 Presidential candidate Ralph Nader (www.VoteNader.org). I think people oftentimes get his crusade to fight for certain ideals confused with some kind of an "ego-trip." Let me tell you first-hand from working on the 2004 campaign, Ralph takes a lot of very unnecessary and torrid verbal/physical assaults for peacefully bolstering strong American values (fiscal prudence, job security, etc.). And all for what? For being a true American and standing up for what he thinks is right, by using his eloquent and well-thought words to corroborate his stances? He is forced to gather hundreds of thousands of signatures across the country, amidst torment from Democracts (who, ironically enough, have the word "democracy" in their name...), just so that Americans have a choice at the ballot booth in November. How disgraceful is that?

America needs Nader in the race, and hopefully many people will see what he is fighting for is what a majority of them want and need.

Thanks again, Mr. Sulva for letting Ralph's, mine, and other American's voices be heard.

Best,
Nigel

And besides, just like in 2000 and 2004, he gets to keep all that money the Republicans are giving him to run.

"REPUBLICAN THINK TANK THINKS"

THERE WE GO RALPHIE BOY, THERE WE GO!

Impeachment, Censorship, End of the Iraq Occupation, American Middle Class Recession, No Congressional Churn towards the law. Congressional Subpoenas not answered. Indicted Former Majority Leaders on CNN while awaiting "TRIAL"

All children left behind, that is if you were God's children born before 1964!

Oh Yea, courage, 90 days before the election instead of the last six (6) years while his "CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN THINK TANK" THINKS!

We are sure alot of fiscal conservatives, moral, ethical and professinal want their elected sitting president to be IMPEACHED!

To Thwart an election that means everything to the American People, again, just doesn't make sense for the GOOD OF THE COUNTRY!

Long Live Nancy Pelosi!

Why is the press giving him any more coverage? He is no longer relevant. Despite his legacy as a consumer advocate, he is now just an embittered, angry old man who won't let go.

I think there is plenty of room for a third party. The problem is....Nadar isn't the man to lead it. In the mean time, there are big differences between the 2 we are ultimately stuck with at this time. When the time comes that a real leader would emerge as a viable candidate, I think you will see a change, but Nadar isn't the guy. If he were, you would have seen a third party by now.

Evidently.

This is great! Republics who call Obama a Socialist or a Communist will look like even bigger idiots when you compare and contrast Obama's centrist policies and Nader's left wing politics. Thanks Ralph! A stroke of genius. Oh yeah, and he'll siphon money from Republics who are more likely to give to a "spoiler" like Nader than quasi-Democrat McCain.

Ralph, Are you running again?....Well you should Stop..Cause you Smell Tired !!

Go away Ralph. We already have a crazy old white guy running.

the liberal 'education' of our electorate is truly on display when Nader is considered a right wing capitalist.

Ego???? Ralph Nader is one of the most self-less politicians of the 20th-21st century. You get in your car and are able to strap yourself in because of Nader. You are not eating lead because of Nader. The narcissism BS isn't even logical. He puts is reputation on the line for egotism? Huh? As for accepting campaign contributions from "right wing capitalists," you're an idiot. The third party candidate brings the issues to the table w/o expecting a vote.

Shorter Michelle Tuten:

I'm a bloated, Republic party hack.

I think the headline was written incorrectly.

It should have said "Ralph Nader: It's ALL about whining"

I think Nader is somewhat correct when he says that too many other thoughts are missing from the campaigns, but I completely disagree with the title "it's not about winnng". The Democrats have to win this election to prevent the Republicans from destroying the US Constitution through a thousand legal loopholes. In today's Wall Street Journal Sen Bond R-MO, Rep Hoekstra R-MI and Rep Smith R-TX wrote an opinion piece in which they list the 4th amendment right to probable cause as a "legal hurdle" that prevents them from collecting information. They state that the 4th amendment was not intended for terrorist electronic communications. I know our founding fathers didn't intend it for terrorists, but they intended it to prevent a government from spying on its citizens and legal residents for no reason. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why we have checks and balances in our government. By the way, I want my Habeus Corpus back.

Ralph Nader has achieved nothing as a presidential candidate except for the election of George Bush. This is a fact. Rather than indulging in yet one more ego trip, Nader should retire from public life, his head hanging in shame for assisting the selection of the most horrific administration in this country's history.

nader has a right to run...it is a democracy for God sake. I support Obama but let Nader keep him honest...Al Gore lost that election because he lost his spine...he got it back after losing that election...Who knows how bad or good he would have been...We need more of our ideas to run this country. I have been to washington and the average person making decisions for us is a political moron...trust me on that

Someone should run him over with a Chevrolet Corvair before he screws up the general election. Wait until either the Republicans or Democrats figure out that Ralph Nader is an Arab-American and Photoshop a turbin onto his head. If Nader really wants to do something meaningful he should advocate against the drug and medical insurance companies who have screwed so many consumers over the past 20 years and stay out of politics.

It's about ego. And pathetic -- like Harold Stassen, a promising young governor who ran for president so many times that he became a joke. Nader will be ridiculed, but largely ignored and will probably get even less than the .3 he received in 04.

We not only need to "...free the free market from the corporate destruction of capitalism" but also to free our political process from corporate domination.

Thank you, Ralph!

Bigotry?! Maybe Hillary is a bigot for thinking the nomination was to fall in her lap by Super Tuesday, or how she blew off states where she lost as insignificant. Her husband said that those who participate in caucuses are well to do, and don't need a president but do want a change. If it's mindset and elitism that Nader is running against, he should have ran as a Republican in 2000 and 2004, and every Congressional and Senate race that would have him in between. Nader's candidacy comes off as an irritant, an annoyance and unnecessary discomfort for the serious candidates in this election. If his candidacy isn't all about him, Nader's sure having a hard time hiding it.

Saddest part of all is that people still remember his name. Sometimes, these ego-maniacs just need to fade away.

Posted by: Paul | February 26, 2008 9:23 AM

? - no matter what you think of nader running as an independent candidate, you cannot argue his import on your life. seatbelts? air bags? general car safety? labeling on medicine? food labeling? the list goes on and on. what is strange is that he not more widely known for these things. he does not flaunt these accomplishments, and he knows he is risking his "name" and "legacy" - whatever people know of it - by running. while he is not immune to criticism, calling him "egotistical" is quite a stretch.

This country is lost to cynics. Many of you fail to see this is beyond symbolism or ego. Many of you are supporting the people who screw you every day, and complain about those who try to make a difference, however small. You buy into they smear campaigns because you are too lazy to think during a commercial break during your primetime shows. Here's a question for all of you who call Mr. Nader ego/pariah/selfish... when your college degree is only worth minimum wage, China controls your food supply, and oxygen masks become part of your daily wardrobe... who will you blame then? Lemmings!

To read about how the Democrats ran the dirtiest, most slanderous, undemocratic campaign in American history, read my new book, "What Was Ralph Nader Thinking?" available only at http://thewomandirector.com

Jurgen Vsych
Nader Campaign Filmmaker

I'm thrilled Nader is running, now I have a reason to vote.

Go vote for your Demopublicans and you'll see real change Sheepeole!!!

SMH

Yes, I agree that this is all about Nader's ego and his 'legacy'. But I'm thinking that McCain, Obama & Clinton all have over-sized egos as well, along with most other national politicians.

That being said, he should use the money he's going to waste on this actually doing some of that good he espouses. But he can't.....his ego wants back in the limelight.

Nader is a very special person who has done more for America than any almost any other figure in the post-war period. If people knew about his contributions to their lives, they would praise him not revile him. Please see the documentary An Unreasonable Man (and watch the special features too) before you judge him. Clean water, clean air, safe food, safe autos, patient rights, the list goes on . . . If people truly believe that the empire is collapsing and the US is going down, largely because the politicians have advanced their corporate cronies and squeezed the poor and middle class, failing to attend to the infrastructure of our country, there is only one choice and that is Mr. Nader.

As a person far wiser than I once said: first seek to understand, THEN seek to be understood. How many of you have bothered to engage any Green Party/Nader voters/supporters in any kind of substantive discussion of why we feel the way that we do? Most of us are pretty thoughtful and intelligent, just like you. I've been at this for over thirty years. We're not the stupid and deluded sycophants you seem to think we are, as if Ralph Nader were Lyndon LaRouche.

First, a small correction to something Ralph said: Norman Thomas ran six times, not five times (from 1928 to 1948).

Second, he never "promised not to campaign in swing states" in 2004, and in fact ended up spending a grand total of two and half days in Florida, one of which was due to the fact that one of the debates happened to be there.

I strongly recommend that people who so virulently despise the man watch not only the documentary "An Unreasonable Man," but also a speech he gave in October 2004 at Harvard directly addressing all of these objections in a very vigorous question and answer session (and keep in mind that he wasn't even on the ballot in Massachusetts in 2004). It's archived at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government Institute of Politics website.

Third, why not throw the E-word (egotism) at Norman Thomas, William Jennings Bryan....anyone who has run for president more than twice? Was Ronald Reagan full of egotism? He ran numerous times. Isn't anyone who runs for president an "egotist" to some extent?

I'm glad this story mentions Norman Thomas because he's a perfect example of someone who ran many times without winning but effected some real change as a result. Like Thomas, Nader will be remembered far more kindly by history than the superficially hysterical reactions of Democrats would lead one to believe.

I was against Ralph running as an independent in 2004 (and told him so to his face) and am against it now. There is a very strong movement within the Green Party supporting a GP Nader candidacy. However, I would never tell him, or ANYBODY, not to run at all. I thank him for never shrinking from putting the injustice of our current ballot access/winner-take-all system front and center in the public debate. I've been heartened by the many Democrats I've run into since 2004 who agreed that things are unfair and told me how ashamed they were of their party's attempts to kick Nader off the ballot in various states and deny people who wanted to vote for him the opportunity to do so. These decisions are up to voters, not party operatives and attorneys.

To Democrats with knee-jerk reactions and little historical understanding of the role of 3rd party presidential candidates of all kinds going back to the mid-19th century: why not support instant runoff voting (which Vermont is soon to adopt), proportional representation, and other reforms that would render your complaints moot? It's not George W. Bush that is the ultimate problem, it's the fact that we have a system that allows people like him to get elected in the first place.

Should Obama win the Democratic nomination, I will most certainly campaign on behalf of Ralph Nader.

A least he actually talks about issues.

I've supported Nader for years but running as an independent is not the way to go. It does seem more about him. If he wants credibility, viability, and a real voice in this election he needs to run as the Green Party again. Otherwise, even us Greens don't take him that serious and probably won't vote for him.

And WHERE is his funding coming from?

It looks like a dozen or so of Nader's 100 supporters are on this blog.

I know alot of people blame Nader for Bush winning in 2000, but I don't think that's accurate. In 2000, every poll showed that it was going to be a very close election. If voters prefered Gore to Bush, they voted for Gore. Why would someone who prefered Gore vote for Nader, especially in a close state? I think that Nader's supporters would have chosen another third party candidate (there were several) or not voted if Nader didn't run.

Nader Runs, A Nation Ralphs!!!

Yes, it's not about winning. It's about an ego trip from someone desperate to stay in the news.

It's about Nader drawing votes away from someone he agrees with on most issues, for the benefit of a candidate with whom he disagrees with on everything.

"Nader, who ran as the Green Party candidate in 2000 and an independent in 2004, said he probably will align with no party, but run as an independent."

This means Cynthia McKinney probably will win the Green Party nomination, and whatever tiny fraction of the electorate they represent, will be split between them.

Thus, both will be rendered essentially irrelevant in the 2008 presidential campaign. So this is all a bunch of talk and ink about nothing . . . kind of like the Ron Paul campaign.

To all you Republicans drooling at the thought of Nader draining off Democratic votes in November:

What happens if Ron Paul decides to dump the GOP and become the Libertarian Candidate for President?? The word around DC is that it is about to happen. How many Republican votes will go to him instead of McCain??

Keep on celebrating - you time is coming too.

Nader has done more for people than ANYONE else. THE three corporate candidates are not fit to tie his shoes... he is a relentless advocate for the betterment of all.

A BREATHTAKING LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Ralph Nader's Record of Accomplishments

Instrumental in the passing of the following legislation:

National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act (1965)
Clean Water Act (1968)
Clean Air Act (1970)
Co-Op Bank Bill (1978)
Law establishing Environmental Protection Agency (1970)
Consumer Product Safety Act
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Mine Health and Safety Act
Whistleblower Protection Act
Medical Devices safety
Nuclear power safety
Mobile home safety
Consumer credit disclosure law
Pension protection law
Funeral home cost disclosure law
Tire safety & grading disclosure law
Wholesome Meat Act
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act
Wholesome Poultry Product Act
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1970
Safe Water Drinking Act
Freedom of Information Act
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act

Founded or sponsored the following organizations:

American Antitrust Institute
Appleseed Foundation
Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest
Aviation Consumer Action Project
Buyers Up
Capitol Hill News Service Center for Concerned Engineering
Center for Auto Safety
Center for Insurance Research
Center for Justice and Democracy
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Center for the study of Responsive Law - 1969
Center for Women Policy Studies
Citizen Action Group
Citizen Advocacy Center
Citizen Utility Boards
Citizen Works
Clean Water Action Project
Clearinghouse for Professional Responsibility
Congress Project
Congress Watch
Congressional Accountability Project
Connecticut Citizen Action Group
Consumer Project on Technology
Corporate Accountability Research Group
Critical Mass Energy Project
Democracy Rising
Disability Rights Center
Equal Justice Foundation
Essential Information
FANS (Fight to Advance the Nation's Sports)
Fisherman's Clear Water Action Group
Foundation for Taxpayers and Consumer Rights
Freedom of Information Clearinghouse
Global Trade Watch
Government Purchasing Project
Health Research Group
Litigation Group
Multinational Monitor
National Citizen's Coalition for Nursing Home Reform
National Coalition for Universities in the Public Interest
National Insurance Consumer Organization
Ohio Public Interest Action Group
Organization for Competitive Markets
Professional Drivers (PROD)
Professionals for Auto Safety
Public Citizen
Pension Rights Center
Princeton Project 55
PROD - truck safety
Public Citizen's Visitor's Center
Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGS)
Resource Consumption Alliance (conserve trees) 1004
Retired Professionals Action Group
Shafeek Nader Trust for the Community Interest
Tax Reform Research Group
Telecommunications Research and Action Center

If you go to a restaurant and have to wait a long time for service, the restaurant is dirty, the food is not good, and you pay too much, you would never go back to that restaurant. Why don't all you stupid Democrats and Republicans apply a similar standard to something more important--our government? All you do is use that same old lines fed to you by your parties to exclude 3rd parties and hold on to power at all costs. The Democrats and Republicans have had decades to do things right, but they're only concerned about serving their own selfish interests. You never hold them accountable, because all you do is replace them with another automaton from their party. Wake up and try thinking independently, instead of blindly following empty promises from hollow politicians. None of the candidates the Republicans or Democrats offer have done anything near as much for the people of this country as Nader has done. Go Nader!

Mr. Nader's running for President is a good thing for democrat Americans!

With Hillary out of the way he can take on Obama's left wing views by himself and expose Obama's flawed ideas on healthcare and 'change.'

Mr. Nader will come as a blessing for the libs and maybe can fix the 'holes in their souls' with the truth.

'For the first time in my adult life' I'm proud of Ralph Nader.

Go Ralph Nader!

Paulo

Bu$h Whacked = John E

Although Nader has achieved numerous acomplishments as a consumer advocate, there is really no point to him running in the race. He's only going to take votes from the democrats, which will allow McCain to win come november. Check out this video of Barack responding to Nader's election bid.

http://campaigncircus.com/video_player.php?v=7979

tina anne, you forgot one item that trumps all others: Got "W" Bush elected.

tina anne, you forgot one item that trumps all others: Got "W" Bush elected.

wow! the ignorance level is simply astounding.

unless nader is secretly the supreme court, he didn't steal the election from gore.

try reading-not 30second msm soundbites.

or keep drinking the kool-aid and pretending that there's a difference between the top (R) and (D) cfr candidates.

obama's top advisor Zbig Brezneski is just waiting to continue the destruction of the Constitutional Republic of the USA.

Nadar is just looking for another 5 more minutes of flame - opps thats fame.

Ralph Nader has the intelligence, the education, the knowledge, the experience and the honor, integrity and dignity to be the President.

Once Ralph Nader was the consumer's hero but now he's a "has been" with his best days behind him. Being the spoiler in the last 2 presidential elections wasn't enough to stroke his ego so now he wants to screw the system (and all Americans) for a 3rd time and run again in 2008. He's probably very proud of himself for helping the worst president in our history - George Bush - be elected twice. That's a pretty sorry legacy for Nader. If he really cared about the future of our country and government, he would be trying other more constructive ways to bring about the change he alleges he's trying to accomplish. He just wants to be in the spotlight and keep his name in the news. Nader has become a tired, sad, old, misguided, and out of touch "has been". If he runs again this year, he will have truly reached the nadir of his public career and very few Americans will remember any of the positive things he did many years ago. He needs to retire gracefully and focus on something productive and beneficial for a change.

If Ralph was serious about creating a legit campaign, he would have started the ball rolling years ago - pahaps after the last election. But in true Republican form he throws his tired hat in the ring to help the GOP yet again. People dont be fooled, a vote for Ralph Nader is a vote for John McCain.

He's holding the Democrat's feet to the fire. He's asking them to advocate "real change", not platitudes and bribes.

Posted by: Eric Oines | February 26, 2008 10:35 AM

Good post Eric, the problem is the far left lunatic left only cares about one thing...and that's defeating the other side. They couldn't care less about running somebody that could be a good, , efficient administrator for our country. If they truly cared they wouldn't be throwing up people like Mrs. Clinton with her well documented transgression of years gone by , and the Chicago ties and total inexperince that Mr. Obama brings to the table. I'm afraid it will prove to be yet another painful election for my old party.

Democrats can stop whining that Mr. Nader is taking something away from them. I'm a registered Democrat and be assured, I'll vote for a Republican before I'll vote for Obama or Clinton. You can bet plenty of the literate sort of voters won't be able to hold their noses hard enough to vote for Obama or Clinton either. No way do those corporate-owned politicians represent me. Ralph Nader does, and he'll get my vote every time. Thank you Ralph for saving me from having to vote Republican. If the Democrats wanted to keep my vote, they could've at least nominated Kucinich.

It is true, Ralph is an ego maniac, just like every other candidate who has the strength to enter politics in the USA. The difference that Ralph brings is his record of accomplishment, which is magnificent. Tina is right on!

What is missing from the whole field of candidates is the advancement of meaningful dialogue by the people. The star of this show, in a democracy, is the people, without their power there is nothing. Without dialogue there is no adequate sharing of ideas, just shouting at one another. Without dialogue there is no meaningful participation, no real power for any candidate, just media dictatorship. The "media is the message" in this election, which is what makes the whole process stink. This is the real disgrace.

Good.
It will be nice to have a liberal candidate discuss ideas rather than be touted for his "rhetoric" without anyone questioning what he is actually saying.

Nader: The Anti Obama.

Nader running is a good thing.

this sentence = vote 4 Nader

"the problem is the far left lunatic left only cares about one thing...and that's defeating the other side. "

Exactly! Remember, they were for Cindy Sheehan before they were against her.

"Norman Thomas, the Socialist Party – he ran for president five times, he put forth social security, unemployment compensation, the progressive income tax, labor standards."

Who would have thunk that the bedrock of the democratic party came from the Socialist Party? This blog just suprises me everyday.

I'm kind of excited that Obama might be president. Not that the criticisms aren't correct. It's just that we don't know yet what he might achieve. But if we really are going to have a debate on healthcare reform we all need to speak up in favor of single-payer. It's the best thing for business (think of GM's troubles), it's the best thing for individuals. That's why a Nader candidacy is a good and important thing. Otherwise we've alredy caved to the power of the health insurance industry. If Obama doesn't want to lose votes to Nader then he should open the door for single-payer.

Ironically, it is Nader and the GREEN Party who have been trying to get the "spoiler issue" out of American politics. Both are proposing election reform, such as Instant Run-off Voting [IRV], which would enable voters to vote for the candidate of their choice without fearing that their votes would help to elect the worst candidate, as happened in 2000. Did the Democrats or the Republicans get behind IRV or other forms of proportional representation? Nope!!
One can only conclude that the two major parties want to keep the "spoiler issue" alive, just to have somebody to blame if their candidate loses.
So, please, don't blame those who actually offer a solution to "the lesser of two evils" voting but those who refuse to implement available remedies.

I think Raplh Nader can accomplish a great deal in this particular election. There is a crying need for a third voice or viable third party in America.

If the Green Party or any other party can qualify for Federal Funding by winning just 5% of the presidential vote then they can go on in future elections using government funds to assure that they will be heard at least every 2-4 years. I think the Green Party name or a derivative of the Green Party name is probably the best vehicle to use to accomplish this very worthwhile goal.

Just as important would be to elect a few members of Congress to establish a day to day, issue by issue voice in the American political dialogue and provide a means of getting other views heard other than the party line policies and opinions of the Republicans and Democrats who too often march in lockstep to to their respective party lines. We need diversity of ideas and opinions because there are often more than two sides to each story or issue.

One a third party can establish a foothold in the National Political debate then we may have a better chance in the future of solving some of our important and crucial problems. It may take 6 to 8 years to fully and permanently establish a genuine third party but that may be possible by using a high profile person such as Ralph Nader to break the two party monopoly and bring more diversity to American politics.

Ross Perot was able to get 20% of the presidential vote in 1992 because he had some name recognition and championed an issue, fiscal responsibility, that many Americans agreed with enough to break away from their traditional voting habit of Republican or Democrat. Perot and his Reform Party had never run for politics before but he had one thing that Nader does not have and that was enough money to finance a nationwide 50 state campaign. Government funding should provide the money to perpetuate and establish a third party into the future. All it will take is 5% of the vote to eastablish a third party in America.

Ralph Nader has/had just as much right to run for president as any Democrat or Republican!

He has done more to help the citizens of this country than any other candidate and is the only one that will,with absolutly no doubt, fight to protect my rites and work to end the waste and greed that is destroying this country and our planet!

Voting for a Republican or a Democrat is a wasted vote! NADER FOR PRESIDENT 2008!

Consumer rights activist Ralph Nader will speak about “Careless Health Care” at 7:30 p.m. Tuesday, April 15, as the keynote for Harper College’s annual Wellness Week, in the Performing Arts Center, located at Roselle and Algonquin Roads, Palatine, Illinois. Harper will screen the 2006 documentary film An Unreasonable Man at 7 p.m. Tuesday, April 8 in the College’s Building J Theatre. The film, by Henriette Mantel and Steve Skrovan, features over forty interviews tracing Nader’s life and career. The An Unreasonable Man screening is free and everyone is welcome.
Tickets for Nader’s lecture are $15 for general admission with discounts for Harper students, other students and senior citizens; call 847.925.6100 for tickets and information. Nader’s book The Seventeen Traditions will be available for purchase, and can be signed by Nader after the lecture.

After reading through the comments, one thing has become clear: It IS about ego, but not Ralph's.

Along with Michelle Tuten, Eric Oines, Nigel T. Gully, Matt, MJ, JamieRH, Jon, vigdor and others I support and am confident in Nader and will be voting for him in 2008!