In 2004, Ralph Nader was on the ballot in jurisdictions containing 50.8% of the national presidential vote cast that year. In those jurisdictions, he polled .67% of the total presidential vote cast in those places.
In 2008, Nader was on the ballot in jurisdictions containing 84.4% of the national presidential vote cast that year. In those jurisdictions, he received .66% of the total presidential vote cast in those places.
His popular vote in 2008 of 738,622 is considerably better than his 2004 vote of 465,650. But, one can say that the improvement was entirely due to his more successful ballot access efforts in 2008, compared to 2004. When one controls for that, his support was virtually unchanged.
Nader’s best state in 2004 was Alaska. In 2008 his best state was Maine.
But have you compared individual states? That should tell you a lot about where he would have lost support. For instance, he got 100,000 votes in New York in 2004 but only 40,000 in 2008.
PASS THE FREAKING TORCH RALPH!
There’s no torch to be passed. Run if you want to run. You ought to thank Ralph and others for making that possible in face of the obstacles so thoroughly documented on this site.
Ross,
Alot of the New York difference for Nader came because of his ballot placement. In 2004, he won the helpful Independence Party ballot line, putting him near the top, above the fold of the ballot and easy to see. In 2004, he got about 80% of his votes from that line, as opposed to his own independent line.
This year he was at the bottom of the ballot and was much harder to see since he wasn’t part of a slate of candidates.
Richard has mentioned this a number of times. Because of Ralph and his lawsuits, it’s now a lot easier for people to run after him. Had he not run in 2008, there wouldn’t have been a prominent progressive challenger to Obama.
(and I say this because McKinney and the various socialist parties ran largely under the radar campaigns, barely worked at all, barely raised any money and got zero press)
Ralph Nader’s run for president in 2008 accomplished many things. One of those things is that he gave the Democratic National Committee a chance to redeem itself. And it did redeem itself. In 2008 it took no action to keep either Nader, or any other presidential candidate, off any state’s ballot. I hope the message is remembered…when Democrats acted against voting rights (in 2004) they lost. When they were good (as in 2008, in the presidential election) they won.
Also, the Democrats were very bad in the Maine US Senate race in 2008, and they lost that race. They kept a peace independent candidate off and the Republican was still re-elected overwhelmingly. All they did was spoil their own image as “democrats”.
Perhaps it is time for Nader to yeild to Frank MacKay. After all MacKay is legendary, just look at his internet My Space Page and if that does not impress you, arrange a in person meeting and he will provide you with a portfolio that he carries with him at all times that contains numerous “Love me Frank” articles from various NY tabloids, ranging from his marriage at NY City Hall to the bogus connections to millionaires.
Certainly a man like MacKay that is a legend in his own mind will do far better in 2012 than a man of real accomplishment like Ralph Nader.
You also got to look at percentage of total vote:
In 2004, Independent Candidate, Ralph Nader earned .38% of the total vote and in 2008 he earned .56% of the total vote .
Nader had his 2nd best showing out of his 5 tries.
Thanks. A release from an unknown DC source wrongly reported .33 percent for Nader this week. My piece in Counterpunch on Nader Country gives readers a sense of higher percentages in individual states and counties. As to Alaska, in 2004 this was the single state where a challenge to his ballot access was not mounted by Republican law firms and Democratic operatives. In 2008 his ability to win votes in Alaska from McCain was neutralized by Governor Palin’s involvement-the “native daughter” phenomenom. Check out “Where is Nader Country?” in Counterpunch.
Since this is a thoughful website with most comments intelligent contributions, I want to add something for the record. Nader’s campaign involves visiting 50 states. It allows a national campaign on issues avoided by the major party candidates- like universal health care. The counties where he did well mean that his issues did well. Issue-focused progressives would do well to follow the Nader vote since these same voters could influence both congressional delegations and Obama appointees. Another valuable contribution by Nader’s campaign, along with training up his workers for the fights ahead.
Gene Says:
December 19th, 2008 at 10:21 am
There’s no torch to be passed. Run if you want to run. You ought to thank Ralph and others for making that possible in face of the obstacles so thoroughly documented on this site.
Phil Sawyer adds:
What is needed is not the passing of the torch from one independent presidential candidate to another independent presidential candidate. What is necessary is the birth of a new, leftist, party of the people – or, at least, a new coalition that represents most (if not all) of the leftist parties that currently exist. I have been saying and writing that since 1974.
Phil Sawyer, California Elector for:
Eugene McCarthy for President in 1976;
Eugene McCarthy for President in 1988;
Ralph Nader for President in 2008.
I’m glad to see that some people (Steve Conn here) realize what the method to Nader’s madness is. Any average American who has taken the abuse that Nader has–not only at the hands of Wall Street,Hollywood, mass media, various corporate interests, wriggling masses of lawyers, the Democratic party, and uninformed voters–would have told Americans to pack sand a long time ago and quit trying.
Nader’s continued runs for president have accomplished many good things for people–as was his intent. Nader himself never entertained any illusions about being elected to the presidency; rather he used the opportunity to bring issues that needed to be addressed to the attention of the nation, as well as to catch the Democratic party out at playing dirty in 2004.
The fact that he keeps slogging away for the the people and the constitution makes him eligible for sainthood, in my opinion.
I see that even on this site, where one would expect to hear from those who have a better idea of what’s going on, there’s still gotta be one ignorant schmoe saying “pass the torch”…ugh. Ralph’s a saint, alright.