WSJ: Nader the Spoiler? Unlikely If Dean Wins the Nomination
[I think the WSJ is spinning madly here… maybe as a way of backhandedly attacking Dean? Nader’s rationale for a campaign will be vastly more complicated than merely evaluating Dean’s ability to voice disagreement with Bush. Dean talks a big talk, but a lot of us are skeptical about him walking a big walk. -Thomas]
For all the gloominess Democrats may harbor about Howard Dean’s chances in the general election, here’s a bit of good news: Ralph Nader, whose third-party candidacy cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000, seems unlikely to mount a run against the former Vermont governor.
Mr. Nader says he will decide in the next few weeks whether to run. But in the meantime, his praise of Mr. Dean undercuts any rationale for another independent candidacy.
“Reading his position papers sounds eerily similar to what we’ve been saying,” the longtime consumer advocate notes in an interview with the Online Journal this week. “He speaks clearly … not in Senate-ese … and projects vigor. We need a macho Democrat.” The front-running Democratic candidate, Mr. Nader says, has an impressive “rope-a-dope ability.”
There are caveats. “Dean’s record as governor is nothing to shout about,” Mr. Nader says, noting that his preference would be Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich.
But Mr. Nader waxes on about how preferable Mr. Dean is to President Bush. In 2000 the consumer advocate suggested there was little difference between candidates Al Gore and Mr. Bush.
“Unlike most of the other candidates,” Mr. Nader says, the Vermont governor “is not compromised by votes for the Patriot Act or for the Iraqi war resolution.”
