Should Nader receive anymore attention at all?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

He failed to make the ballot in California. Almost 15% of his votes came from there last time. He's finished. Period. It may come to the point where it'll be mathematically impossible for him to with the number of state ballots he's on even if he did have a chance at any state. I say dump him, quit giving the egomaniac media time and take his worthless ass off the polls.

[TommyC1776]

I think he should but that's a good point since he's not getting on ballots.

[IowaLibert]

The reason you're going to hear for keeping Nader in the polling is this - In a really close election he's still liable to be a factor. And people will want to know and measure that.

Now the above provides no reason at all to keep him in national polls since, as we all know, this is really 51 separate concurrent elections.  But reason doesn't always prevail.

The above obviously isn't a reason to include him in state polls where he's not on the ballot.  But polling organizations have shown some remarkable reluctance to tailor their polls to reflect the actual ballot status of candidates state-by-state.

There is a very decent rationale for the above reluctance: Who actually knows at this stage?  Some deadlines haven't yet passed.  Some situations are in court.  Some are just plain weird (Nader & the Reform Party's ballot spots in a handful of states).

So there are enough precieved "need to know" and enough uncertainties that pollsters can easily get away with sticking to what they've been doing.  And of course what they've been doing is self-fullfilling prophecy - who they choose to poll is de facto the media's annointed "alternative candidate".

[MODU]

Like it or not, he is still a candidate for President.  Just because he's not on many state ballots this time does not discount his message, just like all the other independent and third party candidates.  He has a right to campaign, and pollsters have the right to ask questions regarding him.

Now, a responsible pollster would do his homework to check to see if Nader is able to be on that states ballot or not before asking about him.  That wold be my only recommendation.

[Giant Saguaro]

Absolutely he should. There are certain states in which he could really be a factor, but as far as attention goes, sure. People have a right to hear from and about him. I think it's a shame he has a hard time getting on ballots; and I don't mean just Florida and Iowa and places like that. Heck, put him on the ballot in Utah - he wants on he should be on. Also, it's not totally unusual for a candidate to get a lot of attention after it becomes apparent that he won't win.

[cwelsch]

Nader isn't on enough ballots yet to even have a mathematical chance of winning.  He's on what, a dozen ballots?  He shouldn't be in national polls.

The standard shopuld be simple: if you're on enough ballots to win you should be included int he polls or debates.  Not necessarily all the polls and all the debates, but the majority of them at least.

[ColoradoPatriot]

Nadar has no money either. Its a nightmare situation for him because he was standing up for the little guy who tend to vote democrat.

If the election hadn`t been as close in 2000, i suspect that Nadar would have do much better than he will now. Its a shame whats happened as the country needs more alternatives to the two-party system.

[MODU]

YES!  Another enlightened soul.  Welcome to the forum.  

As I see it, the next smaller party to be created and join the ranks of the Libertarian party, Constitution party, and the remains of the Reform party will be the Christian Democrats (come up with whatever name you want for them).  It will be the group of Democrats who are Pro-life and Anti-gay marriage (key differences than the Democratic core).  They might possibly be pro-NRA as well.

As the Constitution and Libertarian parties continue to evolve (and possibly merge?), you might see a few more Republicans begin to drift over.  Hopefully in the next few elections we'll see a strong third-party candidate that can make a serious run for the White House.  The Libertarians could do it in 2008 if they would just follow my suggestions and advertise for the next 4 years (doubt they will) and pick a well known business person with name recognition as their candidate or VP candidate.

[ColoradoPatriot]

The Libertarians could be force even in 2004. Some polls despite them being suspect have Bardanik picking more than 2%. Had the democrats not gone all bitter over Florida, it would have been interesting to see what type of % total Bardanik and Nadar could have got together.

I hope that the Libertariasn do well in 2004 but the most important thing for third parties is to grow as a party. For instance in 2012 they should hope for 10% of the vote. The democrats made the country polarised to start with. Democrats love to forget that it was the Republicans that wanted every vote to be counted in Florida not the democrats. The democrats accuse Bush of using issues like gay marriage and abortion that has polarised the country. But why is it that 70% of Missouri voted against gay marriage thats not a polarised result.

Due to these distortions by the democrats, Bush has been unable to do his job affectively and the War on Terror has suffered too.

[MODU]

I want a third party to pull in 30%, not 2%.  2% means nothing in the grand scheme of things in relation to their seriousness as a party.  The sooner we can break up the Democratic and Republican bases, then better off we will be as a nation.

[ColoradoPatriot]

Totally agree. But its tough for people to leave candidates in swing states.

[phillies]

The Libertarian and Constitution Party merger makes rather little sense, as there is little that they agree upon.  THe Libertairna Party may or may not advance, and may or may not recruit new members, but it is unlikely to become its opposite.  It will do better with segments of the Green and Democratic parties, which share its antidraft, propeace, antiintervention antiwarondrugs, anticorporatewelfare stances.