It's over for the democrats, Nader is running!!!!!!

That's all she wrote folks! Order your Bush victory hats now.
LOL.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,112049,00.html

Nader to Jump in Presidential Race

Friday, February 20, 2004
By Liza Porteus

NEW YORK — Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate who ran for president in 2000 as a Green Party candidate, will enter the 2004 race for the White House as an independent candidate, advisers told Fox News on Friday.

A formal announcement by Nader is expected this weekend.

"He's going to be discussing his role in the presidential election," Linda Schade, a spokeswoman for Nader's presidential exploratory committee, said of the man whose 2000 run is blamed by many Democrats for tilting a close election in favor of George W. Bush (search). "He's felt there is a role for an independent candidate to play."

The relationship between Nader and the Green Party (search) has not been smooth in recent years. Money and ballot access continue to be Nader's main concerns as he's mulled a run this year.

Nader's move came as John Edwards (search) threw down the gauntlet.

While spending Friday campaigning in states where he has a chance at beating John Kerry (search) for the Democratic nomination, the North Carolina senator awaited a response to his proposal to take on the front-runner in four one-on-one debates.

In addition to wanting to debate in Los Angeles, the former trial lawyer sent a letter to the Kerry campaign Friday, saying, "I ask that we also give people in places like New York and Ohio the chance to see where we stand on the issues."

Edwards has called for debates in New York and Georgia while campaigning in those states. Kerry has already committed to the Los Angeles debate so long as Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich and the Rev. Al Sharpton (search) are involved.

In New York Thursday, Edwards told reporters he would meet Kerry anytime, anyplace.

"If you can get Senator Kerry to come, I'll be there," he said.

In Savannah, Ga., on Friday, Edwards tried to court black voters, arguing that as a Southern politician he has a special responsibility to lead the nation on civil rights.

"I have, as many of you have, seen the ugliest face of segregation and discrimination," he said. "That responsibility, by the way, is to lead, not follow, when it comes to issues of civil rights."

For more on the campaign, click to view Foxnews.com's You Decide 2004 page.

Edwards is heading to Maryland later Friday for a rally to boost his campaign in states where he thinks he has a fighting chance. He'll later kick off his upstate New York campaign in Buffalo, N.Y., where he says manufacturing jobs have been lost to free-trade agreements.

Kerry will spend Friday in Boston to take a breather from public events.

Edwards won't be on the ballot in Vermont's March 2 primary, which means he won't have a chance to capture the state's 15 delegates.

Back in January, it was assumed former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (search) — the former front-runner in the race until the Iowa caucuses — would easily win that state. Edwards and several other candidates decided in January not to file to get on the primary ballot in Dean's home state.

Don't Duck the Debate

Edwards used his solid debate performance in Iowa and Wisconsin to catapult him to contention. While Kerry has thus far remained mum on whether he wants to get into a public face-off with his No. 1 rival, experts say it wouldn't be smart to ignore the challenge.

"John Kerry is positioning himself as a leader," said Democratic adviser Richard Goodstein. "I think that Kerry would be fine in debates against Edward but I think the appearance of trying to duck them would be very harmful to him."

Edwards' upbeat, relaxed style plays well on the debate stage and in states like New York and California — where campaign advertising costs an arm and a leg — debates will provide Edwards with free access to thousands of potential voters.

"Debates are important to John Edwards because he needs the opportunity to stand side by side with Senator Kerry and have people take the measure of them in that way," said David Axelrod, a media consultant for Edwards.

But the Massachusetts senator likely wants to make Edwards earn support with endorsements, paid media and big crowds — a greater challenge to a candidate with less money and a thinner national political organization who has been cherry-picking states in which to campaign.

Taking on Trade

Edwards has been using the trade issue to highlight the main — and thus far, only — difference between himself and the Massachusetts senator as the clock ticks toward Super Tuesday and the two candidates campaign hard in the 10 states that hold primaries then.

"When it comes to bad trade agreements, I know what they do to people," Edwards said. "I have seen it with my own eyes what happens when the mill shuts down."

Edwards, whose father worked at a mill, says he has a better understanding than Kerry of blue-collar issues. He says his disagreements with Kerry extended well beyond the North American Free Trade Agreement (search), which Kerry supporters but which Edwards said he would not have had he been in the Senate at the time.

"Those trade deals were wrong," Edwards said, adding that the loss of American jobs is a "moral issue."

Kerry insists he and Edwards see pretty much eye-to-eye on trade issues. The AFL-CIO formally threw its support behind Kerry on Thursday, which may help him deflect some NAFTA criticism coming his way and further his job-creation message.

"Today we stand united in a common cause and that common cause is not just to defeat George Bush, but it is to put our country back on track, on the road of prosperity, the road of fairness, the road of jobs," Kerry said after the huge union endorsement.

Edwards says he's winning the battle for rank-and-file members who face the daily pressures of jobs losses.

Although Edwards has been trying to make trade the line-in-the-sand issue, some experts say that won't resonate well with voters.

"The fact of the matter is, there's not all that much daylight between their positions on trade when all is said and done," Goodstein said, noting that NAFTA dealt with trade between the United States, Mexico and Canada and more people are worried about jobs being outsourced to countries like China and India.

"If Edwards thinks he's going close the gap on one issue, I don't think that's going to be it," Goodstein added.

Edwards also tried to play up his charisma two days after the Yankees announced they had acquired MVP slugger Alex Rodriguez (search) from the Texas Rangers.

"My staff tells me that the whole town is excited about the fresh new face who just arrived from the South to compete in the Big Apple," Edwards said at the Columbia appearance. "I told them I was flattered. They told me they meant A-Rod."

New York is one of the slew of delegate-rich states that will vote on March 2.

And the Polls Say ...

A Fox News poll released Friday shows that 58 percent of voters favor Kerry over Edwards. Only 21 percent of voters would back Edwards if an election were held today. There was a 5 percentage-point margin of error.

And when asked who would do a better job as a wartime president, 50 percent said Bush, according to the poll, while 38 percent said Kerry. Kerry beat Bush when it came to who voters thought would handle the economy better, 47 percent to 40 percent.

With Nader now in the race, 43 percent said they would vote for Bush, 42 percent for Kerry and 4 percent for Nader.

A poll just released by Marist College's Institute for Public Opinion shows that Kerry is leading Edwards 66 percent to 14 percent among likely Democratic voters. Ten percent were undecided.

The Public Policy Institute of California found that Democrats have jumped on the Kerry bandwagon, taking him from fourth to first among contenders in the Democratic presidential primary.

Kerry leads the Democratic pack with 55 percent of his party's vote, according to the poll. Trailing far behind is Dean — who dropped out of the race Wednesday — at 11 percent. Edwards is at 10 percent.

If the election were held today, the poll found, likely California voters would favor the Democratic nominee over President Bush by 17 percentage points.

Fox News' Carl Cameron, Major Garrett, Steve Centanni and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

Wow, this is pretty big news. I am now hearing that Dean might possibly endorse Nader and all the Dean supporters might get behind Nader. This would be huge for Nader considering he has never gotten more then 2% to 4% of the vote in a general election. With Dean supporters behind him, he might actually pull in 10% plus. Nader could pull in the highest number of 3rd party votes since Perot.

 

If Dean endorses Nader it will be a big blow to the Democratic party (will ensure that Nader undermines the Democrat vote)- but I wouldn't count on that endorsement - if Dean wishes to remain a Democrat and have any chance of running for President again (as a major candidate). I'm sure there is a flurry of activity behind the scenes at the DNC. Time will tell.

 

That's the thing, Dean feels betrayed by the democrats. The party establishment hates him. Dean tried to hijack the party and they won't let that happen again. Dean will never be a serious candidate again for the democrats. However, Nader and Dean have a lot of areas of common interest. This would make Nader's career. He will do everything he can to get Dean on board.

 

Nice try. When Dean was getting out of the race he called on his followers explicitely and unambiguously to support whoever the democratic nominee is going to be. He may be pissed at the democratic establishment and he may have every reason to be, but he cannot possibly back away from his stated primary goal - unseating Bush.

Come to think about it you guys on the right seem to be in a pretty bad shape. A few months ago you were absolutely positive that your guy will get reelected. Now you are happy to get any indirect and immoral help from Nader and fantasize that he'll get endorsed by Dean. You sound desperate.

 

Actually, you are wrong. I have friends that volunteer for Dean's campaign and all of them are throwing their support behind Nader. Although nobody has said it publicly, it seems that the Dean people are very subtly telling supporters to support Nader. This is what I am hearing from inside various Dean support groups.

Yes, Dean wants to beat bush and yes, Dean has to give the image that he is supporting whoever the democratic nominee is, however, Dean really does not have much in common with the democrats and you know that. He has no loyalty to them and they have no loyalty to him. This might just be the revenge Dean is looking for, basically saying, you guys should have supported me, now it's going to cost you the election. Will he go on Larry King and say this? Of course not. But is this the reality of the situation? Maybe, time will tell.

Oh, and I'm not worried one bit about Bush. Why? Because if Kerry is the nominee, the right is going to have a field day with his voting record. Once everyone in this country knows how far to the left he is, he doesn't stand a chance. The reason he is high in the polls is because nobody knows who the hell he is. He is a good looking rich guy that speaks very well, sure I'll vote for him. That's what people say today. We'll see what they say on election day after they examine his voting record.

 

Agree absolutely. His standings in the primaries and caucuses was more than a hard landing, he crashed and burned.

He'll never be able to draw the support he had going into this thing. His best bet would be to become an Independent. Even at that he's more than a long shot.

It is possible also that Dean, through his higher echelon campaign staff, have been talking to Nader. They know Nader can't win, but maybe he can garner enough votes away from Kerry to make this anything but a shoe in.

Why? Because its likely Kerry will ask Hillary to be his VP. There is clearly a division within the Demo party. Those who are followers of Clinton, and those who are not. This is a tug of war I haven't seen since the McGovern days.

If Nader can draw enough votes from Kerry, putting Edwards in a very strong second place, the powers that be could call for a compromise, Edwards as VP (although that's extremely rare) instead of Hillary.

Despite everything you've heard, voters would not warm up to a Kerry/Clinton ticket. Both have far to much baggage. A Kerry/Edwards ticket would unite both sides in the party.

 

Gee Mav, I am almost (but not quite) sorry that I have to go to dinner with my family and can't respond to this latest bit of absurd cheerleading and wishful thinking.

For now, I will just say that you really DO sound pretty desperate. You must be very worried. As I guess you should be.

But still, I think your campaigning efforts are laudable. Just completely ineffective here on ET.

You really need to do what you can to get the illiterates in your precinct registered and to the polling booths. Maybe you should travel out of your precinct too. Time to start thinking about handing out $5 bills to the homeless on the South Side. It is obvious that anyone with a brain and/or a full stomach is going to be looking for a change of administration. Bush is a failure plain and simple.

It would not surprise me at all to start hearing a bit of opposition from within the Rep party between now and the convention. Cheney is almost certainly off the ticket. Why not make it a clean sweep and get someone who is capable of being President on the Republican side of the ballot?

BTW, Bush "victory hats" will be collector's items like the Stevenson "hole in the shoe" pins, and "Billy Beer". So stock up.

Peace,
RS

 

There is a flaw in this logic though. If revenge is what Dean wanted it would make so much more sense for him to run as independent himself. He already had organizations and supporters all over the country - in New York in N Dakota in S. Dakota in California, in Oklahoma, in Texas.....

His supporters were begging him to run. He would undoubtedly attract significantly higher number of democratic voters and kill any chances of any democrat to be elected. In this scenario he'd also have a much better leverage to negotiate with democrats if he wanted to. Supporting Nader even indirectly is a complete lose-lose for him. But as you said - time will tell.