Nader’s nadir

Nader’s nadir

Los Angeles Times: Hey, America, want to hear some secrets the mainstream media and political parties have been keeping from you? There’s a war going on in Iraq; President Bush passed some tax cuts a while back that, combined with undisciplined spending, have contributed to a ballooning national debt; and apparently the price of oil has really started to degrade the nation’s energy situation.

These are some of the obscure issues that Ralph Nader, announcing his presidential candidacy on Sunday, promised to drag out of the shadows. It’s an interesting demonstration of why he’ll have a tough time mounting even a message-sending campaign this year, but also of why he’s a welcome addition to the race.

Ralph who?

Among Democrats, many of whom still blame Nader for allegedly tilting the 2000 election to Bush, tempers have grown so cool that neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Rodham Clinton bothered to attack the 73-year-old activist turned three-time candidate. Obama graciously alluded to Nader’s “outstanding work” as a consumer advocate. Clinton merely objected that his candidacy would not be “helpful to whomever our Democratic nominee is.” Among non-candidates, reactions were considerably less measured. Journalist James Fallows called Nader’s 2000 campaign a “tragedy” that has evolved into a “farce” in 2008.

That’s a lot of condemnation for a candidate whose total vote take dropped about 85 percent between 2000 and 2004, and whose chances of playing even a spoiler role in 2008 are exceedingly slim. But Nader’s run would be worth applauding even if his odds of making a difference were good. The Democrats and Republicans may believe your vote belongs to one or the other of them before it belongs to you, but they are wrong. More choices among candidates mean more opportunities for you to make your views known in an election.