Patterico's Pontifications


Run, Ralph, Run!

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 9:43 pm

Could he be our only hope?

Only would Democrats really be stupid enough to vote for him again?

14 Responses to “Run, Ralph, Run!”

  1. Some might.

    Most of us won’t be.

    aphrael (db0b5a)

  2. That’s OK. We don’t need most of you to vote for him. Ten percent is all we ask.

    Xrlq (b65a72)

  3. In 2004, I collected a few hundred petition signatures to get Nader on the ballot. I urge GOP supporters to do the same this year, a few thousand Nader votes could swing a state away from the Dems. check the Nader exploratory web site.

    John Cunningham (5dc271)

  4. No, our only hope is that there are no SCOTUS vacancies in the next four years, and that McCain loses. Otherwise we have to hope for 8.

    Skip (ba6438)

  5. I’m guessing the Green Party is going to pass Ralph Nader over for former Georgia Congressperson Cynthia “Mad Dog” McKinney, who is apparently also running for the nomination, albiet under the radar.

    Sean P (e57269)

  6. The next most likely Supreme Court vacancies will be Ginsburg and Stevens. Worst case scenario, status quo.

    nk (398aa2)

  7. nk gets it. Things are bad, but they aren’t dire.

    Jem (9e390b)

  8. “The next most likely Supreme Court vacancies will be Ginsburg and Stevens. Worst case scenario, status quo.”

    – nk

    Yeah, I noticed that Bush was careful to fill the two Supreme Court vacancies with (relatively) strapping young conservatives.

    They’ll be around to… ahem… strictly interpret the Constitution… for a long time.

    Maybe Obama will one-up Bush by appointing a couple of 18 year-old College Democrats to fill the Ginsburg/Stevens vacancies. They may not know the law, but they know their place… and that’s what’s important, right?

    Leviticus (68e8c2)

  9. You are being unusually adolescent today, Leviticus. Which is not a bad thing at all. I like being an adolescent too. If you follow the dictum that “children should be seen and not heard”.

    nk (398aa2)

  10. I kinda noticed that I was. Whatever. I’m feeling petulant. Go ahead and tell me that Bush didn’t take Roberts’/Alitos’ age into account when he picked them.

    In re: your dictum –
    You haven’t “heard” what I’ve “said”. You’ve seen it. It’s written. Eyes, not ears. Loophole.

    Leviticus (68e8c2)

  11. Levi, I used the ventriloquism in my computer, and your voice came out….loophole closed…

    Yes, President Bush probably looked at age when he made nominations….so did Clinton, Reagan, Johnson, Eisenhower, Truman, Roosevelt….

    Nothing wrong with that, is there?

    reff (bff229)

  12. H. Ross Perot got 18.91% the first time he ran, and 8.4% the second time he ran. Nader got 2.73% running as a Green, but only .38% running again as an independent. Circumstances are different and they always depend, but one never knows.

    As far as putting ‘fairly young’ conservative judges onto the Supreme Court, that’s basic gamesmanship and should be commended. When you’re playing chess, taking the other guy’s queen is a good move if he can’t take yours back and it doesn’t give him a valuable position. When you’re putting people on the Supreme Court, you want an experienced judge with your point of view who has no known health defects and is in his or her early fifties (as that’s pretty much the earliest an appropriate judge would be ‘experienced’). You also want some assurances that he won’t ‘grow in office’ as he ages under the pressures of Washington, but how you do that is more difficult.

    luagha (954c41)

  13. “Only would Democrats really be stupid enough to vote for him again?”

    Given the polarizing nature of BOTH of their leading candidates, this is a rhetorical question, right?

    “Help me, Obi-ralph Ken-ader; you’re our only hope!”

    Not really, but it couldn’t hurt.

    Missed It By THAT Much (281c10)

  14. I don’t think you understand the mindset of a third-party voter. They know they aren’t going o win. They don’t care. Nor do they care that the nearer of the two parties could be hurt, because they would stay home if that was their only choice.

    The Dems always say they sould have got the Nder vote, and the Republicans always talk about the Libertarians stealing “their” votes.

    But the third party voter is thinking “A vote for something I don’t agree with is the truely wasted vote.” For them voting for a major party is wrong, as it just encourages them to do more of the same.

    Kevin Murphy (805c5b)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2261 secs.