Nader's presidential bid good for election

Breeze Reader's View

Ralph Nader, Green Party candidate in the 1996 and 2000 presidential elections, officially announced his candidacy for the 2004 election. Nader will be running as an independent candidate and is running in order "to take our country back from corporate interests that dominate both parties," according to his Web site www.votenader.org.

Nader was sharply criticized after the 2000 election by Democrats, who blamed him for taking away votes that would have gone to Democratic candidate Al Gore. According to his Web site, however, he claims to have attracted members of both parties, as well as many people who would not have voted otherwise.

Nader received 3 percent of the national vote in 2000 and, while he may have hurt Gore's campaign — exit polls published by Nader say that 38 percent of his voters were Democrats while 25 percent were Republicans — his entry into the race in 2004 is an important and necessary move that will ensure that both parties address issues and not only each other.

Nader's candidacy will serve as a control to the Democratic campaign; the Democratic candidate not only will be prevented from making a campaign based solely on removing President George W. Bush from office, but he will be forced to address dissatisfied liberal-leaning voters. Liberal voters who previously had united under Howard Dean before his campaign floundered now will have to be won back by the Democratic candidate who no longer can count on broad partisan support. The Democrats will be forced to address Nader's criticisms of them; that they enjoy the same corporate ties as the Republicans, and that they failed to stand up to the Bush administration.

The Republican party agenda also will be influenced by Nader. Rather than being able to focus on the Democratic candidate, the Bush campaign will have to address the 25 percent of Nader voters in 2000 who identified themselves as Republicans. Nader claimed that Republicans are angry with Bush for challenging the traditional conservative agenda.

"The conservatives are furious with Bush over corporate subsidies and the energy and Medicare bill. Now, I agree with that. They're furious with him over the PATRIOT Act and Big Brother and surveillance. I agree with that," he said.

Though his views generally are liberal, Nader may be able to reach dissatisfied conservatives through his stances on Medicare, fiscal responsibility, foreign policy and the war on terrorism — issues where the Bush administration has departed from traditional conservative and Republican views.

Nader's candidacy and his inclusion in the national debates, something that he failed to achieve in 1996 or 2000, would force both parties' candidates to address these issues and appeal to more than the voters who both parties took for granted before Nader entered. Both parties appear unconcerned about Nader running, however, "If Ralph Nader runs, President Bush is going to be reelected, and if Ralph Nader doesn't run, President Bush is going to be re-elected," according to Ed Gillespie, Republican National Committee Chairman.

Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic frontrunner, said Feb. 21 in Atlanta, "I think I'm going to have a campaign that will speak to those people who supported him last time."

Kerry's confidence is not misplaced if his campaign reflects his words; party members of the party out of power tend to reunite, and if his message does speak to "repentant" Nader voters, Nader's campaign will be successful in bringing his views on the issues to the national spotlight.

Nader's run for president has implications beyond the 2004 election, or even the policies and agenda of this year's winner. If a third party is ever to become a significant political force in the United States, there must be individuals willing to run in that capacity and work to build support gradually, until they are able to make legitimate runs for the presidency — not just driving debate discussion.

A third party challenge that reaches into both Democratic and Republican constituencies is beneficial to the country and voters by providing a fresh, different perspective that forces the candidates to focus on issues that Americans care about, rather than simply attempting to discredit the opposing party. The actual votes Nader receives on election day are secondary to the dialogue and debate he will spark during the campaign.

Alex Sirney is a freshman anthropology/ pre-SMAD major.