Nader set to take 4-6% of vote, to impact Kerry in swing states

[Woodstock]

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html

Democrats will wish that it’s only an April Fool's Day joke: Today the San Francisco Chronicle ( http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/04/01/MNG325UO541.DTL ) reports that Ralph Nader, according to several new national polls, is set to walk away with 4 to 6 percent of the vote this November -- perhaps just enough to parade George W. Bush, who’s currently in a statistical dead heat with John Kerry, back into the White House. It's still far too early in the campaign to know if the polls are on target, but what's more troubling is their indication of the specific damage that the Dems' most hated spoiler might cause:

"In key states, where mere dozens of votes could change the outcome and swing the electoral vote for president, early polls show Nader taking enough of Kerry's potential supporters to make it possible for Bush to win the state."

And the most likely stage for Nader's encore? That's right: Florida. "A sampling of polls in battleground states shows loud echoes of 2000. In Florida, where Bush defeated Gore by 537 votes in 2000, and Nader got more than 97,000 votes, or 2 percent, polling shows Kerry at 49 percent, Bush at 43 percent and Nader at 2 percent."

The Chronicle report forecasts a similar narrative in several other swing states, including Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Ohio. For his part, Nader continues to argue that his candidacy will sharpen the Democratic campaign to the tune of "populist-progressivism," while siphoning off some disgruntled Republican and independent voters who might have once supported Bush. But Democratic strategists aren’t buying it, and the latest numbers have them once again holding their noses.

[ixion]

1. I personally don't think Nader will get that much...

but it does really cause trouble that he's decided to run again. :-(

[Township75]

2. Nader isn't going to get Jack-Shit in this election!

I couldn't access the story from your link, but I think I got the overall message of it from your post.

People are not going to make the same mistake twice. Furthermore, I find it hard to believe that on the day of the election people are really going to be able to pull the lever for someone who doesn't stand a chance in the election.

Nader isn't going to get any backing from Moore, or Donahue or other celebs this time. He left the green party, so that is a no go too. I find it hard to believe he is going to get anything this election.

[Woodstock]

3. fixed the link

I think it's working now

[tabasco]

4. Lambs being lead to slaughter.

They follow their messiah, split the opposition to fascism, then cry "it's not our fault" as their country is destroyed from within.

[bobbyboucher]

8. It's not their fault.

You can't say that any more than they can say it is your fault for not voting for Nader.

[Touchdown]

14. Huh?

Care to elaborate on that circumlocution?:wtf:

[bobbyboucher]

16. It's Bush fault.

They're his policies that are hurting, not Ralph Nader's. Derrrr.

[Touchdown]

22. Oh' that old line again.

So Nader is just Bush's enabler. Split the liberal vote and a CON continues on his quest for a new feudalist system.

[Old and In the Way]

23. Well, based on Bobby's avatar, he may not have been around in 2000.

Really, it is the political virgins that'll follow the Pied Piper of Presidential politics into the Republican oblivion. They are the young, well-to-do, with a holier-than-thou utopian idea of politics. They've got their passport updated and have no real investment in seeing the coming dictatorship stopped.

[bobbyboucher]

26. That's rich.

Of course, you couldn't be more wrong. Thanks for playing though.

Just attract enough votes and you will win. Otherwise, you will lose. Blaming anybody but yourself is chicken-shit.

[Old and In the Way]

32. We don't want to leave any kids behind Bobby!

That's why I post to your comments. I don't blame political virgins for being niave...think of it as an educational PSA.

That's how we plan to attract enough votes to beat Dimson....again.

[bobbyboucher]

24. Just get enough votes and

quit your whinin'.

[Old and In the Way]

25. Bobby the waterboy.

Whose water are you carrying? George or Ralph's?

[bobbyboucher]

27. If you must know,

I voted for Al Gore in 2000. I like what Nader says though, and have no problem with him running. If the Dems would get their heads out of their collective asses then maybe they could attract those who choose not to vote because "it doesn't make any difference". But they just seem to want to run scared.

My point of taking on these hysterics, is that whining about Nader is just plain ridiculous. Nader supporters are one hell of alot closer to you with regard to beliefs than your average freeper, but you still insist upon treating them like shit.

You will get Nader votes when you earn them. How many are going to vote Nader just to spite your arogant asses.

I'll say it again, if you have policies that are popular enough to attract enough votes to win, then you will surely win. If you do not, then you will lose. Get it?

I will vote for Kerry in November. I like him alot.

[Old and In the Way]

31. So your arguments are total bullshit.

Thanks for clarifying!

[Touchdown]

38. Look, the "whining" bullshit stops now!

Nobody's "whining" here. I want a progressive government back as much as anyone here, but the fact of the matter is that we will NEVER get there if the liberals split the vote. I don't know how old you are, but I certainly hope you are older than 25 when Bush's draft comes through after Nader spoils the vote again. If not, my heart goes out to you as you are deployed to "liberate" Syria with an extension in Iran, but at least you "voted your conscience".

Bottom line about Nader is this...
Florida: 97,000 votes for Nader
Florida: 537 votes in favor of Bush.
97,000-537=96,463 in favor of Gore...or Gore would've won.

Those are the FACTS...No amount of spin about Lieberman, butterfly ballots, 4 county recounts, Repug attack squads, Baker, the Supreme Court, mis-labelled felons changes this simple fact that Nader spoiled Florida's 25 electoral votes.

Nader attacked Gore and the Democrats about 70% more than he attacked Republicans in 2000, and he shows the VERY SAME attitude Today.
His bullsit one-note campaign that "There's no difference" only gets ears from thoose who have not paid attention in the last 3 years...I assume you are included here.
Nader promised Gore that he would not campaign in battleground states, and RENEGGED on it.

If he was so interested in the causes he's harping on, The he would be a DEMOCRAT, an d working to influence the DEMOCRATIC party from within. Howard Dean did it right, Kucinich is still doing it right, so why can't Nader do it? Because...He's a belligerent opportunist with an ego that dwarfs all of Hollywood!

[bluestateguy]

5. Any Nader voter in a swing state gets what they deserve

from a second Bush term. They will have nobody to blame but themselves.

[bobbyboucher]

9. Sorry, but you're wrong.

If the Democratic candidate cannot win this election, it is their own fault. Nader voters vote for Nader because they believe in what he says. The Democrats have plenty of money to get their message out. Have plenty of people working for them. It's not that people don't hear what they are saying, it's that they aren't saying anything different.

[Woodstock]

13. THEY THEY THEY

Blame THEY. Not you.

[bobbyboucher]

17. Blame me, not YOU. Blame Nader, NOT YOU!

What a whiner. Get enough votes and your guy wins. If you cannot attract enough votes, you are a LOSER. If your message isn't attractive enough to garner the votes needed, you are a LOSER.

Derrrrrr.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

20. Listen very closely to Nader and then watch what he actually does....

...snake in the grass.

[absyntheNsugar]

28. Well Nader's BOLD FACED LIES kind of obscure the Dems message now

Who? Saint Nader? Lie?

How about NO DIFFERENCE between Kerry and Bush - total BOLD FACED LIE.

I can think of many others....

[kysrsoze]

33. That's a great statement. But nobody believes that crap anymore

Nader has no business running in this election. I don't like what Nader has to say because he says both Democratic and Republican nominees are the same. They are most certainly not. If he really cared about his country more than his ego, he would try to help get Satan's spawn out of the White House.

[Ruby Romaine]

6. What absolute BS!

i've asked dozens of Nader voters (last time)
who all say they won't go near him this time ala Michael Moore.

[Woodstock]

7. Ah, but there are more to take their place

He appeals to the novices. They'll be sorry, too, but too late. That's why I blame Nader the most. He's using them.

Naders followers are the ones who, if they were there for JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" speech, would have said, "Hell no. Please me or else."

[bobbyboucher]

10. Gawd,

I have never heard so much horseshit. If the Democrats had a better message, then maybe the millions of people who don't vote might get off their asses and vote. But, apparently, there just isn't enough motivation.

Gore lost because the Dems didn't have the balls to fight hard enough in FLA, or they thought it would be a fair fight, or whatever. They just didn't get enough votes to keep Bush from stealing it.

Your better off blaming the people who don't vote, they outnumber Nader voters 100 to 1.

[Woodstock]

11. I see you're familiar with that river in Egypt

Amazing the powers of denial among Nader supporters. Even in the face of powerful evidence. Hope you enjoy the next 4 years of Bush.

Another thing, apart from denial that's constant among Nader supporters, is the THEY syndrome. Democrats are THEY. It never occurs to them they might actually get involved with the party and shape its direction. THEY let me down. THEY need to please me. OR ELSE.

[bobbyboucher]

15. Get enough votes and

get your guy into the White House. If your message doesn't attract enough voters it's YOUR GODDAMN FAULT, not Ralph Nader's.

You're the one in denial.

[Woodstock]

36. Again, the THEY, never the YOU

Why is it MY guy? MY message? MY fault?

Why not YOUR message? What are YOU doing to make sure Democrats attract enough voters? What are YOU doing to make sure the Democratic party is responsive to your views? What can YOU do for the party?

Ralph Nader has ZERO chance to win this election. The only thing he can win is votes from John Kerry - and that means votes for George Bush. So his running will either do nothing, or help Bush win. Helping Bush win is more than enough reason to me for us, as Randi Rhodes puts it, to not afford the luxury of having a third party with a liberal orientation run.

[kysrsoze]

34. Gore lost Florida because the Supreme Court stopped the re-count,

because minority voters were intimidated at the polls and because the Repubs disqualified a number of Florida voters because their names were similar to convicted felons. Nice try.

Oh, BTW - Nader can blow me.

[elperromagico]

12. Nader's 2000 percentages (Gallup)

It seems to me that these figures indicate that Nader's
support is really rather shallow. If Nader's "no
difference between the two parties" argument is negated
between now and November, his support will become shallower
still. 

I could be wrong, of course, but check out the numbers:

4/28-30:          4%
6/6-7:            6%
7/25-26:          4%
8/4-5:            4%
8/11-12:          2%
8/18-19:          3%
9/5-7:            3%
9/18-20:          3%
10/1-3:           2%
10/5-7:           4%
10/8-10:          2%
10/13-15:         3%
10/18-20:         4%
10/22-24:         3%
11/1-3:           5%
11/5-6:           4%
Average:          3.5%
General election: 2.73%

[kysrsoze]

35. I agree. I think he'll fade fast.

n/t

[Michael Costello]

18. How comes the Democrats don't care about unregistered voters?

The reality is, nationwide, Nader only "took" 0.7% of Gore's vote. On the other hand, 48.7% of eligible voters did not vote. Amd as a group, the half of eligible voters who do not vote are less well off than the voters. By a BIG margin.

Why are there SO MANY threads about Nader, and so few threads like - "how can the Democratic party CHANGE so that these unregistered left-sympathetic voters will come in. How can we make it so that they can RUN THE PARTY, and also make it so that the quarter of Americans who vote Democratic run the party except in a very indirect way?"

It says something to me. This obsession with killing off a 0.7% or so (probably less now) candidate who is against Taft-Hartley, wants to pull out of Iraq, and is not a DLC, NAFTA-voting, Iraq war resolution voting candidate like Kerry. And the Democrats don't even want people to have the choice except to vote for the Republicrats - they want it like the old Soviet system where only a very narrow spectrum of decision could be made by voters.

[absyntheNsugar]

29. Excuse me? Did Howard Dean DO NOTHING?

Or is he not a Democrat?

[Woodstock]

37. Link for your dubious figures, please

[Media_Lies_Daily]

19. If Nader gets 4% he will be extremely lucky...more likely 3%.

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

21. He has to get on the swing state ballots

75,000 petitions i believe, but I'm sure the republicans will make sure it happens.

If Kerry gets across a good message, I don't think Nader will be factor.

[Zinfandel]

30. Nader doesn't have the backing this time, no party, too much

negative press, no money and no real argument or platform. If Nader gets more than 1.5% nationally I'll pop for drinks for everyone on DU.

The only thing that can change the above would be if the republicans start indirectly funneling money into Nader (as before) and the corporate media gives him massive air time and exposure to help Bush.
Then yes, he could get 4% and really hurt Kerry.