The new challenge for Kerry
Posted: 02.24.2004
Andrew Dugan
Staff Reporter
technicianonline.com
The Democratic Primary continues to slim itself down. Over the past few weeks, major candidates like Gen. Wesley Clark and Howard Dean have removed themselves from the race, and John Kerry has continued to solidify his position as the frontrunner. Tuesday, March 2, known as "Super Tuesday," may be the day that finally knocks the surprisingly resilient John Edwards out of the race, but if not, Democratic voters will be subjected to his trite political discourse about two Americas for at least another week.
But bad stump speeches aside, things are not as calm as they seem. The one word the media and political junkies have been repeating again and again over the course of this election season is "electability." This notion, which should be nothing new, espouses that Democratic voters choose a candidate not for more personal or emotional reasons but more for general motives that appeal to a larger group of people. Howard Dean was judged too liberal by many voters, even if he was a stirring politician. Joe Lieberman was too much of a latent Republican (I must admit I often wonder if Joe wouldn't fare better as a Republican senator); Wesley Clark had no political background.
John Kerry, then, benefited greatly not from his own fine-tuned credentials but from his opponent's failings. As the party begins to rally around the northern senator, storm clouds are drifting above the horizon. Ralph Nader, the once beloved consumer activist, has announced that he is running for the presidency as a third party candidate yet again.
Nader is a peculiar character. In the long histories of third party candidates- from Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose Party to Ross Perot's strong performance in 1992, Ralph Nader has a minor place. Ralph Nader received 2.78 million votes in the popular election but received no electoral votes. Nader failed to appear on the ballot in several states, including this one.
Had the 2000 election been drastically different, that is had it not been so close, Nader's fledgling campaign would have gone greatly unnoticed. But, alas, the 2000 election was no landslide, as we all can remember. In two states, Florida and New Hampshire, the number of people voting for Ralph Nader exceeded the electoral difference between votes cast for Bush versus votes cast for Gore. George W. Bush won both of these states, but not easily. Because the typical person who would waste their vote on Ralph Nader is of a more leftist political affiliation, it is reasonable to believe that had Ralph Nader not run in 2000 the voter would have had two choices - vote for Al Gore or not vote at all. Assuming most of the voters chose the first option, which is sensible, Al Gore would have won Florida and New Hampshire and, consequently, the presidency.
Once many people came to this frustrating conclusion, the Democrats quickly denounced Ralph Nader and exiled him from the party. Of course, Nader had already removed himself from the Democratic Party, calling both major parties the tool of corporate interest. As this election season began, many people in the party understood that Ralph Nader could not again run for the presidency. But despite imploring Nader, both publicly and privately, not to throw his hat in the ring, nothing could change the obstinate Nader's mind.
The Democrats must now be careful how they react, most especially John Kerry. Of course, the ultimate goal of Kerry and his party is to usurp Nader's votes by reminding the small electorate just how hopeless Nader's campaign truly is. But here is where Kerry will be walking a fine line, and his political credibility will be tested. First, Kerry cannot hope to win Nader's supporters by insulting Nader himself or by mitigating his political influence. If Kerry is careless enough to do this he will chase away voters permanently, and he will appear callous and bitter. Second, Kerry cannot be too overt in his pursuit of Nader voters. As described before, Nader supporters tend to be more liberal than most of this country and they place a heavy emphasis on environmental regulation and income redistribution. Neither idea has a mass appeal on a national level, a fact Kerry should keep in mind. If Kerry courts Nader's electorate too fiercely, Kerry may come off as being too liberal. No presidential candidate from New England wants to appear as a devout liberal or that candidate can kiss the Southern electoral votes good-bye.
So as Kerry accelerates to winning the Democratic nomination, he must prepare himself for the ensuing battle ahead. George W. Bush will be a strong candidate, as incumbents usually are, and Kerry must unify his party and attempt to pick some of the so-called swing voters. Kerry cannot be happy that his already delicate situation is now further complicated by Ralph Nader's return to the political scene. But if Kerry truly is the cunning politician that so |
