February 24, 2004
Well, Ralph Nader is running for president again, virtually guaranteeing that the 2004 presidential slate will be one of the ugliest in history. (The only hope is for John Edwards to mount a comeback against John Kerry, a man whose face looks like it partially melted on a freakishly warm Massachusetts day.)
Nader's candidacy also guarantees more than eight months of whining by the Democrats, who fear that Nader will hurt their nominee's chances -- much like he hurt Al Gore in 2000, thereby handing the White House to George W. Bush (with a massive assist from five U.S. Supreme Court justices). Tragically, this means there will also be more than eight months of bitching by Nader supporters that the Democrats' complaints are misguided, and that Al Gore, NOT Ralph Nader, cost Al Gore the 2000 election.
Note to both whiny Democrats and Ralph Nader supporters: Would both of you please admit that the other side is right, and shut the hell up? Yes, it's true that Al Gore blew it by not winning his home state and a number of other winnable states -- like, say, Nevada, which had a lot to lose by George W. Bush getting elected (two words: Yucca Mountain). But it's also true that if Ralph Nader had stayed out of the race, Gore would have without all the drama.
So there. Now that we've finally resolved that one ... back to Nader's 2004 candidacy, which I must admit, is really pissing me off.
With all due respect to citizen Ralph, he has no business running for president. He has no real platform, especially when it comes to domestic issues. And he has no charisma, no chance and nothing to gain but a whole lot of "look at me!" attention. His message, from what I can tell, boils down to this: The two parties are the same, and that needs to change.
Is Nader right? Are the two parties really basically two versions of the same damn thing? The partial answer: In some ways, yes.
The two parties these days have the singular goal, it often seems, of keeping each other in power -- i.e., maintaining the status quo. That's why campaign-finance laws are such an unbelievable joke. And that's why reapportionment of congressional seats and legislative districts is often done to create slam-dunk re-elections. Nevada's congressional seats are a prime example of this; Congressional Districts 1 (held by Shelley Berkley) and 2 (Jim Gibbons) will not be held by anyone other than a Democrat and a Republican, respectively, barring something very strange, because of the way they were designed. That sucks.
The parties also have a lot in common in their politics. Both Democrats and Republicans are beholden to special interests, demonstrated perfectly in Nevada by the juice the casino industry has. Both parties pander instead of taking strong stances. And many politicians these days are so middle-of-the-road and blah, that it would be impossible to tell what party they belonged to if we didn't already know (read: Kenny Guinn).
I said that "In some ways, yes" was a partial answer. Well, here's the rest of it: On the other hand, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are very, very different -- and for that reason, Ralph Nader needs to shut the hell up and go sit on a Corvair.
Look at the treatment of a number of groups and issues -- of employee unions, of gays and lesbians, of the environment, of energy policy, etc. -- and there are clear, defining differences between the Donkeys and the Elephants. Look at the 2003 Nevada Legislature, when the differences became clear: All of the Democrats went along with the tax plan, while a good chunk (but not all) of the Republicans did not. Whatever your feelings are on the 2003 Legislature, you must admit one thing: There was a definite difference between the parties there, right?
Yes, the system is broken and in need of fixing. Yes, third parties have a lot to add. No, I don't know what the answer is to solving these problems. But I sure as heck know one thing: The answer is not Ralph Nader. And he wouldn't be even if he were better looking.
Jimmy Boegle is a fifth-generation Nevadan in exile in Arizona. Jimmy's column appears here Tuesdays, and he can be reached via e-mail at jboegle@stanfordalumni.org.