2008 Woodie Awards
EDITORIAL
Nay for Nader
Date created: 3/10/04 Section: OPINION
- Page 1 of 2 next >
On March 2, 10 states voted in their Democratic presidential primaries, leaving Massachusetts senator John Kerry the man who will take on the president for the White House. Without a doubt, this will be one of the closest elections our nation will see for a long time. And as the 2000 presidential election was, this election holds the potential to be one of the more hotly contested no matter what the outcome.
Ralph Nader, long time political activist and Green Party member, announced in February his intention to run for the 2004 presidential seat, just as he did in 2000. For many Democrats, Nader isn't just a consumer rights advocate and environmentalist, he's the man that cost Al Gore his presidential bid.
While this can be seen as an endorsement for Kerry, The Skyline View feels that the more important issue at hand is Nader in the race. The View feels that, while it is important to vote for the candidate one truly believes will get the best job done, if you are liberally inclined, do not vote for Nader.
As the issues go, Nader sticks to many of the ideals in the Green party platform. For example, he believes in affordable health care for all, a cleaner environment, and higher education that everyone has access to. While these are things that our country desperately needs, Kerry also takes the exact same stance on these issues. While Kerry and Nader differ on issues of foreign policy, especially war, there are more similarities between the two than Nader would suggest.
Ultimately, what these similarities boil down to is voting on the lesser of two evils. According to the Green party, there is essentially no difference between the Republican and Democratic parties, suggesting that large corporations and private interests buy them out. This is not all true. If Al Gore had been elected, the likelihood of tax cuts to the rich, the erosion of civil liberties through the passing of the Patriot Act, and the economic recession happening would have greatly decreased.
Ralph Nader, long time political activist and Green Party member, announced in February his intention to run for the 2004 presidential seat, just as he did in 2000. For many Democrats, Nader isn't just a consumer rights advocate and environmentalist, he's the man that cost Al Gore his presidential bid.
While this can be seen as an endorsement for Kerry, The Skyline View feels that the more important issue at hand is Nader in the race. The View feels that, while it is important to vote for the candidate one truly believes will get the best job done, if you are liberally inclined, do not vote for Nader.
As the issues go, Nader sticks to many of the ideals in the Green party platform. For example, he believes in affordable health care for all, a cleaner environment, and higher education that everyone has access to. While these are things that our country desperately needs, Kerry also takes the exact same stance on these issues. While Kerry and Nader differ on issues of foreign policy, especially war, there are more similarities between the two than Nader would suggest.
Ultimately, what these similarities boil down to is voting on the lesser of two evils. According to the Green party, there is essentially no difference between the Republican and Democratic parties, suggesting that large corporations and private interests buy them out. This is not all true. If Al Gore had been elected, the likelihood of tax cuts to the rich, the erosion of civil liberties through the passing of the Patriot Act, and the economic recession happening would have greatly decreased.
