Centerfield

I think Ralph Nader genuinely believes he's doing what he's doing for why he says he's doing it...but he will only hurt the Democrats. The question is: will the former Nader voters bite the bait on the hook this time? I know a LOT of folks who are environmentalists and they have been absolutely sick over the Bush administration's record. It's hard to believe they will drink the electoral Kool Aide this time. The bottom line is this: if they agree with the intellectual argument that it's wrong for the two parties to have a hammerlock on the electoral process, they'll vote for Nader. If they are Dean supporters who feel their man got a raw deal from Kerry, they may vote for Nader. But at this point unless someone is from Mars (which would include Dennis Kucinich) they know that the impact of a vote for Nader is to cast a non-Bush vote for Bush. Don't forget, too, that Ross Perot II was not as effective as Ross Perot I....so maybe he will be marginalized this time. And there's also this: having Nader lurking around out there denouncing Kerry as a tool of the big corporate interests just may make the Democrats work hard in swing precincts. So unless there is some huge groundswell for Ralph Nader I personally don't think 2004 will be 2000...but the activation of a wedge issue like gay marriage could change this calculation leading to an extremely right race (again) where every single vote counts. So, in the end, no matter what, his being in the race is the answer to Karl Rove's prayers; Santa remembered him early this year.........

Exit polls in 2000 did show that about 1/3 of the Nader vote came from right-of-center voters. I think it's a safe assumption that a significant chunk of those were McCainiacs.

That said... Nader's smokin' something illicit if he seriously thinks that he'd attract more annoyed GOPers than Dems in the 2004 political climate.

My take on dissatisfied conservatives is the same as your's - they're more likely to stay home than anything. That or vote Constitution Party or something like that just to register a protest.

What effect do I think Nader will have this time around? Significantly less than he did in 2000, that's for sure. I think he has seriously misjudged the poltics in play this election cycle if his NPR comments reflect his sincere opinions. A whole lot of people are seriously POed at Bush and want him out ASAP. That is a strikingly different climate than the one Nader faced in 2000.

I will grant Nader that the Dems nominating Kerry (which I think is what will happen) leaves a lot of disaffected voters out there come November. But, they still have Bush to focus their ire on. And nobody believes that Nader has even a remote chance of getting Bush out of the White House. That being the case, I think Kerry will get the lion's share of the votes Nader thinks he can get.

Joe - speaking as a Deaniac... I know that there are some who are saying that they'll vote for Nader. But, many others want Bush voted out of office more than they dislike Kerry. They'll suck it up and do whatever necessary to get Bush out of the White House, IMHO.

I was a POed McCainiac in 2000 and voted for Nader, along with a sizable chunk of other non-liberals, because I didn't see Gore as a reasonable alternative (with the understanding that Nader had no chance of actually winning, mind you!). But, from where I sit, this election and what is at stake is nothing at all like the 2000 election.

I think Nader's gonna be in for a rude surprise come November.

The rule is that the sequel is never even half as good as the original. I think this sequel will be a flop. There is a much larger anti-Bush vote out there this time.

So even moreso than in 2000, the only people who will vote for Nader will be those who are sure that their vote is a safe "protest" vote. In the states where one candidate is polling safely ahead, Nader will garner a few votes. But in the too close to call states, I don't think he'll get much support, if any.

I sure hope Nader doesn't target one of these "close call" states for special attention, but given that his stated goal is to subvert the process, you never know. But I think that if he were to try this, the electorate would reject him strongly anyway.

Nader is very likely to target a couple of contested states - Oregon and Washington. Both states harbored some of his strongest support in 2000 and both are being targeted by the GOP as states that they feel were close enough in 2000 to be worth fighting for this year.

I live in Oregon and I don't foresee Nader getting the kind of vote that he did last time. And the fact of the matter is that the Nader vote is what made both states close in terms of Gore v. Bush. Take away most of the Nader votes and the GOP has a harder fight on their hands than perhaps they might wanna admit to.