This November, millions of people are going to exercise one of the many rights they have as an American. They are going to vote for the person that they feel is the most qualified to be the president of the United States.
We all know that as an American citizen you have the right to vote in elections as long as you fulfill the minimum age requirement. But how many of us are going to vote for the candidate we actually want? In a perfect world, that would include everyone; but, alas, that is not the case.
People have gotten themselves in a mindset where they will vote only for either the Republican or Democratic nominee. If they don’t like either nomination, they will simply vote for the lesser of two evils. I cannot wrap my mind around this concept. You don’t live in communist Russia.
You get to pick whom you want to be president and your voice actually counts. Why vote for the lesser of two evils when you don’t even have to vote for evil? Look what happened in 2004 (Bush got reelected).
Every time I hear about how bad Bush is doing in the polls I want to scream at the American public, you voted for him. Granted, John Kerry may not have been a good candidate, but that doesn’t mean you should have voted for Bush.
What if there was a politician who was willing to run for president when he did not like any of the major candidates, who was willing to risk his political image in order to give people a choice, who was willing to be honest about his policies even if he risked losing votes?
That is a type of politician I would vote for, and I’m here to tell you that there is a politician like that. There’s even a good chance you have heard of him. Probably even joked about him. His name is Ralph Nader.
Nader could be a legitimate presidential candidate. He is on the ballot as an independent in every state except Texas, Oklahoma, Indiana, North Carolina and Georgia. With legitimate support from Republicans and Democrats that don’t want to see either of their party nominees elected into the White House, Nader could win this election.
The Democrats and Republicans know this. It’s evident because they are unwilling to hold public debates with Nader. And who could blame them? I would not want to get any third-party candidate any publicity that could lead people to actually considering them.
But then that’s the difference between the mainstream candidates and Ralph Nader. Nader wants to open up the debates so the people will hear what other candidates have to say (and keep them open if elected).
Nader has christened himself the people’s candidate. He opposed the corporate bailout, calls for corporations to make their tax returns public information, and favors a public health insurance system that will cost $350 billion less then the one we have now and use the extra money to help provide health insurance for everyone.
The $350 billion would come from cutting overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments and executive pay. Every one of those things sounds unnecessary to me. This November you have a choice (besides Obama and McCain). Ralph Nader is one candidate who has fought to give you that choice.
Obama and McCain want you to think that you have only two options, I hope you don’t fall for it.