Her Principle Motive? Supporting Nader

Hermine Bender knows the situation quite well, thank you.

She knows that either Al Gore or George W. Bush is going to be the next president. Of the two, she prefers Gore.

But she’s not going to vote for him.

Bender, a 25-year-old Costa Mesa mother and college student, supports Ralph Nader’s quixotic presidential bid and, perhaps more important, the Green Party philosophy that she believes will outlive Nader.

Still, there’s the matter of casting a meaningful vote on Nov. 7. So let us define “meaningful.”

It’s a definition over which Bender has labored in recent months, especially because the Gore-Bush race is close and Nader supporters know the vice president needs all the votes he can get. Every vote for Nader, the thinking goes, is one less for Gore and might hand Bush the presidency.

Recently, 12 former Nader supporters invoked that logic and asked him in a public letter to endorse Gore. Nader refused, saying there isn’t much difference between the candidates.

It’s one thing to vote Green or some other third party when your second choice likely will win without your vote. But what do you do when the candidate you’d least like to have elected might benefit from your third-party vote?

That prospect leaves Nader supporters with much soul-searching to do.

Let’s face it, none of us ever thinks we’re casting the vote that will actually determine a presidential election. Among tens of millions cast, it’s easy to think our vote is meaningless.

Still, we’d like to think we’re players in the game.

However, with national polls showing Nader drawing about 4%, are you really a player? If he has no chance of being elected, how meaningful is a vote for him?

Bender says she’s reviewed things from all angles.

“As far as my Nader vote is concerned, there has to be a time that people make that difference and make that transition,” she says. “With every election, there’s a feeling of should I or should I not [vote for a third-party candidate]. And this year, a lot of people are not. To me, the difference between Gore and Bush in reality is not enough to take away a vote from Nader.”

Agonizing Only Deepens Commitment

That said, Bender says she’d generally support a Democrat over a Republican.

She realizes that many Nader voters probably would vote for Gore if Nader weren’t running. Because of Gore’s reputation as an environmentalist--an issue near to Nader’s heart--the decision to stick with Nader might cause them even more concern.

Bender feels the pressure. “You get multiple-personality disorder,” she jokes, “and feel the pressure from within because you may be casting a vote making Bush the president.”

Oddly, all the agonizing has deepened her commitment. That is, it would be easy to throw her vote to Gore, if only to deter Bush, but she’s sticking with the Green Party because it best represents her thinking.

Bender says she’d be betraying herself if she voted for her second choice.

I disagree with Bender that there’s little difference between Gore and Bush, but I won’t spend a second trying to change her mind.

She knows the stakes. Why should anyone ask her to forfeit her claim to a candidate?

Ross Perot supporters thought for a time in 1992 he might win the presidency. Despite his herky-jerky campaign, the conservative still collected about 20% of the presidential vote, ensuring Democrat Bill Clinton’s victory.

In Orange County, registered voters not affiliated with either the Democratic or Republican parties now represent nearly 19% of the electorate. While third-party votes aren’t expected to cost Gore a California victory, the prospect of it happening nationally raises an interesting ironic twist. What if Nader’s third-party candidacy benefits George W. Bush’s chances in the same way that Perot’s may have torpedoed his father’s?

Bender has thought about all of that.

“There is the going back and forth,” she says of other Nader voters she knows. “The feeling of struggle within. You know your vote doesn’t mean a president, but you hope it means a movement for future elections. If there’s a wave, a movement of making people aware of what Nader stands for, then perhaps the future generation, the so-called new generation, will consider some of the thoughts he has. . . .”

Doesn’t sound like a wasted vote to me.

Sounds like an informed voter letting her conscience pull the lever.

That is the whole idea of election day, isn’t it?

*

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821 or by e-mail at dana.parsons@latimes.com.