For Whatever Reason, He's Back
Monday, February 25, 2008 Filed in: People
Just when you thought it was okay to head back into
the political waters, along comes another scary face.
Ralph Nader. He's back.
Someone needs to ask the question, "Why?" Who wants to vote for the man who singlehandedly defeated Al Gore in 2000? Some people mistakenly blame the war in Iraq on George W. Bush.
Isn't Ralph Nader the real cause for the Republican aristocracy from 2000 to 2008? After all, had Nader not been in the presidential race back when Gore and Bush met at the OK Corral in Florida, Gore would be President.
How so?
Gore won the popular vote against Bush but lost the election in the Electoral College, thanks to Florida, Ohio, and voter shenanigans. Without Nader to siphon votes from the Democrats back in 2000, Gore would have won a few more states and tipped the Electoral College balance away from Bush.
The 70-something Nader is back. Why?
Politics makes strange bedfellows and even Nader must realize that he has no chance to win, but Nader also must realize there's a chance to change the outcome. A paltry one percent of votes shifted from one major party or the other can sway an election from one party to the other.
Nader received over two-percent of the vote in 2000, which most political pundits agree cost Gore the election. Granted, Gore has done better personally than Bush. Gores is well liked, even endeared; he has a Nobel Prize, an Oscar, and an Emmy, while George W. is on the road to becoming the least liked U.S. President ever.
Is Ralph Nader something wicked this way comes again?
Someone needs to ask the question, "Why?" Who wants to vote for the man who singlehandedly defeated Al Gore in 2000? Some people mistakenly blame the war in Iraq on George W. Bush.
Isn't Ralph Nader the real cause for the Republican aristocracy from 2000 to 2008? After all, had Nader not been in the presidential race back when Gore and Bush met at the OK Corral in Florida, Gore would be President.
How so?
Gore won the popular vote against Bush but lost the election in the Electoral College, thanks to Florida, Ohio, and voter shenanigans. Without Nader to siphon votes from the Democrats back in 2000, Gore would have won a few more states and tipped the Electoral College balance away from Bush.
The 70-something Nader is back. Why?
Politics makes strange bedfellows and even Nader must realize that he has no chance to win, but Nader also must realize there's a chance to change the outcome. A paltry one percent of votes shifted from one major party or the other can sway an election from one party to the other.
Nader received over two-percent of the vote in 2000, which most political pundits agree cost Gore the election. Granted, Gore has done better personally than Bush. Gores is well liked, even endeared; he has a Nobel Prize, an Oscar, and an Emmy, while George W. is on the road to becoming the least liked U.S. President ever.
Is Ralph Nader something wicked this way comes again?
