Nader's quest

[iamthewalrus109]

With most polls showing a tight election it's been constantly mentioned that the electoral college is going to have to decide this election as in 2000. With neither candadite tightening up their numbers to ensure victory, third party candidate Ralph Nader is still an issue in this campaign. Although Ralph got thrown off the ballot in a few key states, he still has a presence on others. All this being said, Kerry stands a big chance of loosing an electoral battle with GW Bush. So Nader still gets interviewed by the NYT and others.

His latest interview, seen in today's NYT, shows a man unconcerned with his effect on the election this year. His closing quote clearly states his intention, to unseat the 2 party system's hold on this Republic. He sees his ballot fight as research on state ballot practices, and nothing more. To him either candidate is just another corporate lackey, and he's right. I certainly agree with him and some hard line conservatives like Pat Buchanan that both candadites are free trade zealots who worship at the altar of global trade and dominance, as well as corporate governance. That being said, Nader's research is at best a high handed pursuit, trolling off the existing system. His attempts at trying to reform party politics is trite and weak. Mounting legal cases and examing state ballot systems for loop holes to get in at the next election is just futile flailings of a 20th century style consumer advocate. The only way out of this system is some sort of violent refudiation of what now exisits. I think Nader underestimates the power of consumerisim and the effects and manipulation of mass communication. Put simply he's a outdated interloper, not a galvanizing force for the dissaffected, by no means.

I admire Nader's tenacity and respect his fight against the corporate infastructure that now runs this country, but the message is too meek, too weak to stand against powerful and pernicious forces that for the time being are wetting the proper appetities in this country. I tend to think that his "survey" work and "research" will help ensure another four years of GW Bush. Now he sees no difference whether its GW or JFK running things, but there are those who do. Personally I've never voted for a Dem in my life, but I find what I knew as the Republican party no longer exists. I do find myself in a quandry, but vote for Nader, why? Maybe it's because I simply can't vote for either candidate. I keep envisioning myself at the polls, having a coniption fit trying to vote, it could be a write in year for me, I don't know. But, one thing I do know is that Nader's approach to this dominance is issue is as self-rigtegous as it is watered down. The only way to counter these forces is by equal force, period. The two party systems players, play for keeps, and have rigged the system, no amount of research, no amount studying is going to fix that. By the time Ralphie figures out the system, I will have changed to thwart such issues. The bottom line: You have to learn to play hardball and consolidate support. A symposium on balloting tecniques is a futile and laughable attempt at tring to use a corrupted system to your advantage. I toast the man at the same time I question the legitmacy of his efforts. There needs to be a stonger 3rd party voice, one that is rested on a buecratic pseudo-intellectual like R. Nader. I think that moderate Republicans, dissaffected by GW Bush's policies stand the best chance of ceceding from the party and creating a formidable opposition to the current paradigm. Just like the whigs in the 19th century, I belive that the 2 party system can be changed, but only from remnants or coaltiions out of an existing party. Aside from that, the entire system needs to be ripped out, the only way to reform is out of one of the parties, other than that its a complete removal of the current electoral system in this country in lieu of something better.

-Walrus