By
Sheila Bapat
He's the Ross Perot of Election 2000, except his presence helps the Bush boy this time instead of hurting him. He doesn't have an annoying Texan drawl and he doesn't have unnaturally big ears. Instead he boasts a three-piece suit and a cult-like following. His presence is making waves.
Say hello to Ralph Nader.
Nader has certainly been screaming greetings to liberals all around, attempting to gain leverage in this critical presidential race. But Americans who support Nader seem to be missing one important point. Nader is not campaigning for Election 2000. He is campaigning for Election 2004.
Nader's game plan is to get five percent of the vote so that he can get federal funding in 2004. The Green Party mission is clear: it wants to elevate its voice within the national political process.
The two-party system doesn't cut it for these activists. And they're appealing to Americans (sort of) by being the anti-establishment ticket, the too-cool-to-be-two-party ticket.
If there weren't so much at stake in this election on Nov. 7, perhaps the Green message and mission would actually make sense.
Clearly, third parties are critical within the American political process. They represent the fringe right or left, and they can help shape what is considered "moderate."
But they do not get elected. Pure and simple.
People who support Nader are those who believe the two major parties have left them behind. What they tend to forget is that in order to bring about change, they need to make the party what they want it to be.
Nader supporters also seem to believe that voting for the underdog is an honorable statement. And that may very well be. But in making a statement, and essentially campaigning against Al Gore, they could be sacrificing critical things (like Supreme Court justices that support a woman's right to choose) that liberals ought to be fighting for.
The next President of the United States of America will be appointing up to three Supreme Court Justices. While Roe v. Wade won't immediately overturn if an anti-choice candidate wins, the new justices he appoints can make decisions that can weaken a woman's right to choose. A justice's gig lasts for life-and it influences a generation of American court cases.
Nader, strangely, has even stated that it would not matter if Roe v. Wade were overturned and made a state's rights issue. For the next President of the United States will have the power to raise minimum wage, protect a woman's right to choose, fight for the rights of homosexuals, enhance gun control laws, and be activist in a slew of other important issues.
Ralph Nader is running his race not because he believes he can have an impact on the above issues, but because it is a part of a larger political movement: to raise the level of influence of himself and the Green Party, the stage which he picked to stand on. His race will not achieve the goals that all liberals have.
Though it's an important statement, it's a detriment to the liberal movement as a whole.
And especially for Election 2000.
Nader has done an excellent job trying to reach out to people who are jaded by the two-party system. But working within this system is critical in order to bring about change. He greets America as a noble, anti-establishment figure. But in reality, he'll never get the nod.
