Why are the Democrats legitimizing Nader?

[eyesroll]

I got polled yesterday, by the closest thing to a machine a human phone bank can have...

"HellomayIspeaktothemaleregisteredvoterinthehouse?"

"He's not here."

"Wellareyouthefemaleregisteredvoterinthehouse?"

"Yup."

"AreyousupportingJohnKerryGeorgeBushorRalphNaderinthepresidentsrace?"

"What about David Cobb or Michael Badnarik?"

"AreyousupportingDavidCobbor....theotherguy?"

"No, I'm supporting Kerry, but by including Nader and not Cobb or Badnarik or any of the other third-party and independent candidates, you're elevating his candidacy above all of theirs and putting it in people's heads that there are only three choices."

And then, the kicker...

"Thank you for your time. This poll was authorized and paid for the Wisconsin Democratic Party."

OK. You know -- I do support the right of third parties and independents to exist and to run for office (including Nader). But...why is the Democratic Party polling like this? It puts Nader's name in people's heads...and the Libertarians are actually considered a major party here (based on a decent showing in the 2002 gubernatorial election) -- they get a primary and a ballot line and everything that the Democrats and Republicans do. Why weren't they mentioned? Why only Nader?

[BJ]

1. Nader's the only one with "name recognition"

He's the only one who'll pull enough votes away from Kerry to make a difference.

I've heard of David Cobb but who the hell's Badnarik?:kick:

[billbuckhead]

2. Badnarik is the Libertarian candidate and will probably get

more votes than Nadir.