Who Were The 'Ralph Naders' of 2008?

A question from Coleman Travelstead of Albuquerque, N.M.:

In North Carolina, Bob Barr, the Libertarian presidential candidate, got more than the vote difference between Barack Obama [who won the state] and John McCain. Were there any other states where votes going to a third-party candidate could have changed the results from that state?

No one can say for certain that votes going to Barr would have gone to McCain. We had a similar argument in 2000, when many Democrats insist that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the presidency. And it's true that Nader's vote totals in Florida (97,488) and New Hampshire (22,198) surpassed the difference between Gore and George W. Bush, who won both states that year.

Nader and others argued that there were plenty of other reasons Gore lost in 2000, such as the fact that Gore failed to win his home state, or that 500,000 or so Democrats voted for Bush in Florida.

But for the most part, Nader is often thought of (by Democrats at least) as the reason Bush was elected president.

Brian Mann, a reporter for North Country Public Radio in upstate New York who writes a blog (My God, does everyone write blogs???), had this to say about Nader a few days after this year's election when it was clear that Nader received more votes in Missouri than the difference between McCain (who won the state) and Obama:

Ralph Nader continued his personal and political disintegration this week.

He suggested in interviews with Fox News that America's first black president, Barack Obama, could turn out to be an "Uncle Tom."

Most pundits have observed that Nader has already slouched into irrelevancy, following his dramatic spoiler role in the 2000 elections.

But it now appears that Nader did manage to give some very real aid and comfort on Tuesday — once again to the Republican ticket.

In the key battleground state of Missouri, John McCain won 1,442,673 votes, a scant 5,800 more than Barack Obama.

Ralph Nader's role? He stripped away 17,769 votes from the Democrat, apparently costing Obama the state. (Missouri hasn't been officially called yet.)

Of course, it turns out that this is a bit of election night trivia.

Obama won the electoral college vote by a wide margin.

But imagine a different (and entirely plausible) scenario, where Missouri had turned out to be the Ohio of 2008.

If Obama had needed the Show-Me State's 11 electoral votes to put him over the top, then Nader would have emerged as the spoiler once again.

Well played, Ralph — well played.

It's pretty much a given that more people seem to get worked up about Nader's proving (or seeming) to be a spoiler for the Republicans than they do about Bob Barr for the Democrats; Barr not only may have cost McCain North Carolina but Indiana too. Here are the final tallies in the three states:

INDIANA

Obama: 1,374,039
McCain: 1,345,648
Barr: 29,257
Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party): 1,024
Obama winning margin in state: 28,391

NORTH CAROLINA

Obama: 2,142,651
McCain: 2,128,474
Barr: 25,722
Obama winning margin in state: 14,177

MISSOURI

McCain: 1,445,814
Obama: 1,441,911
Nader: 17,813
McCain winning margin in state: 3,903

IN THE SENATE:

Conservative third-party candidates may have cost two Republicans their seats in the Senate as well. Ted Stevens lost his Alaska seat to Democrat Mark Begich by about 3,000 votes; Bob Bird of the Alaska Independence Party received 13,000 votes. In Oregon, Gordon Smith lost his seat by 50,000 to Democrat Jeff Merkley. Dave Brownlow of the Constitution Party won 87,000 votes.

In the House, there were several examples where the presence on the ballot of third-party or independent candidates may have thrown the race to one party or the other. The most notable was in Louisiana's 6th District, where the 36,000 votes won by Michael Jackson, an African-American independent, may have cost Democratic freshman Don Cazayoux his seat.