Quite plainly, this is ridiculous. The whole concept of costing or stealing
the election implies a certain ownership of votes by Gore. Nobody
"owns" any votes in a democracy, and nobody is entitled to votes
simply because he is from a major party. You have to earn the votes. They want
you to think Ralph is actually reaching over and stealing votes like they were
Lego blocks from Al Gore's toy chest. Rather than trying to woo Nader-supporters
with ideas and policies, hardcore Democrats castigated Ralph for being a
"spoiler," which was hardly an effective way to win votes. Gore did
not make a compelling case to earn the votes of those 3% of progressives who
voted for Nader. They are people the Democrats took for granted and whom they
tried to win back only by highlighting a fear of a Bush presidency.
Nader decided to run for president on a host of progressive issues that are
close to his heart. He has spent his life fighting for the public interest, so
people who are surprised at his entry to the political arena should get a clue
(are you listening Alec Baldwin?). He had enough of seeing our government's
decisions being made in corporate corridors and decided to run.
How is deciding to run for President an evil thing? There was a vacuum on the
progressive front, a mass of disaffected liberals who had no one to champion
their issues, and he filled it. If it hadn't been him, it would have been
somebody else (he did have competition for the Green Party nomination).
At this time, I should disclose what is probably apparent. I am a Nader
supporter. Now that you are frothing at the mouth, allow me to explain. First, I
am what most conservatives would call a left-wing nut job. I have been liberal
since before it was a dirty word, and am all for the progressive agenda -
reducing influence of corporate power in society and in political process,
universal health care, public financing of elections, end of the racist death
penalty, pro-choice, pro-affirmative action, banning of logging in national
forests, endorsing a war on poverty instead of a war on drugs etc. There is only
one candidate who supports this agenda, and his name is Ralph Nader. Al Gore
doesn't support these things.
I also think Gore is the biggest phony this side of Principal Thurmer from Catcher
in the Rye. Aside from him not supporting any of these issues, here's a
quick (unexplained) list of reasons why I cannot stand Al Gore: PMRC, pop
cultural policeman Joe Lieberman, a range of celebrity endorsements from highly
annoying people like Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Streisand (do these people
really think that anyone will vote for Al Gore because Ben Affleck said so?),
funding a civil war in Columbia, pandering to Miami Cubans on the Elian Gonzalez
case, endorsing 1996 welfare reform act, endorsing defense of marriage act and
because he is a processed candidate who rolls up his sleeves and puts on earth
tones only because a political consultant tells him to.
Although Nader helped put the Greens on the map, and energized liberal
political activists around the country, he didn't get that magical 5%. In the
end, Nader ended up all the way down at 3%, not at the 7% he was polling prior
to the election. So congratulations Gore-folks, you scared more than half the
liberals back into voting for everyone's favorite wooden man (never mind how the
threats the Gore camp made about a Bush Presidency were ridiculous. Bush may be
dumb, but even dumb people with smart handlers wouldn't start appointing avowed
abortion foes to courts and start drilling in the Alaskan wilderness without
realizing that it would ruin any re-election hopes).
Little is written about how the Nader factor and the vote-wrangling in
Florida would have been moot if Al had won his home state of Tennessee (provided
he ends up carrying just one of the narrowly leaning Democratic states of Oregon
or New Mexico). If you can't win on your home court, then you don't deserve to
be President. Gore also had the economy, a dimwitted opponent, and a
post-convention lead of 18 percentage points and still couldn't win. The only
reason Al Gore will lose this election is because of Al Gore.
What I'm really looking forward to is the discussion that will take place if
Al Gore does manage to win the election. Specifically, I'm dying to read about
how Pat Buchanan "stole" votes from George W. Bush and
"cost" him the election.
