Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Friday, April 16,2004
Oregon Daily Emerald
COMMENTARY
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Travis Willse
Harding touts
Guinness, food
from Glenwood
"Quick Quacks" is the newest Emerald feature, a spontaneous
Q&A session aimed at giving readers an expedient look at campus
and community members' thoughts. "Quick Quacks" will run every
Friday this spring. Please send suggestions about possible intervie
wees to letters@dailyemerald.com.
University fifth-year senior Jesse Harding a journalism major, sits
down for our questions this week. Harding is an ASUO student senator,
co-chairman of the Student Conduct Code Committee, executive pro
ducer of "Duck U" and an active member of the greek community.
Emerald: What's the most rewarding thing you've done as a
member of the greek community?
Jesse Harding: 1 would say that working with other greek
leaders, even though we weren't successful, at developing some
sort of conversation around the issues of when fraternities were
forced to go diy, and maybe some of the issues we tried to bring
up regarding (Project) Saferide.
Emerald: Who's your favorite Duck athlete?
JH: I'd say in the past it'd definitely have to be Michael Fletcher.
He was, yeah, definitely my favorite And then, presendy, I'd have
to say Aaron Brooks just because he's a floor leader.
you hope to accomplish before your term is over?
JH: I hope to accomplish the fact that Senate comes to a re
alization that we don't have to spend all of the money just be
cause it's there.
Emerald: Quickly tell us why students' off-campus activities
should be punishable by the University.
JH: Because if one student hurts another student and they
miss class or they're not able to finish out school for whatever
reasons, then you've taken a piece of that person's future and it
makes only sense to me that they be punished. Plus, I think
there's a bigger idea of the fact that the University is a commu
nity and we look out for one another.
Emerald: Name the best restaurant in Eugene.
JH: For me, I'd say it's The Glenwood because of the prices.
Emerald: Sex, drugs or rock 'n' roll?
JH: All three. At once. While having a Guinness at Rennie's.
Emerald: What's been your most stressful extracurricular
activity?
JH: I think when I was president of Pikes that was definitely
the most difficult, the most stressful. Just because I couldn't get
away from it. I mean, you live there. So, it's not like you can go
someplace else and not be president — you always are.
Emerald: Name the best season of the Real World.
JH: The San Francisco Real World because you have the clas
sics. You have, you know, Puck and Pedro. I mean, all the other
ones kind of modeled after that one, I think.
Emerald: Which ticket will receive your vote for ASUO Exec
utive?
JH: Adam and Mena will.
Emerald: What happens after graduation?
JH: I head off to the Peace Corps and some French-speaking
African country and I teach junior highers how to speak English.
Emerald: Finally, where can we find Jesse Harding on a Fri
day night?
JH: Hopefully at Rennie's.
Emerald: Jesse Harding, you are done with "Quick Quacks."
Emerald: More likely to be seen at
Taylor's or Rennie's?
JH: Rennie's
Emerald: Drinking a... ?
JH: Guinness.
Emerald: As a senator, what do
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Strawn and Aguilar
committed to change
We need an ASUO Executive that is dedicated to creating
changes right here on campus. I give my endorsement to Ben
Strawn and Diana Aguilar for ASUO Executive because they are
committed to this principle.
General apathy on campus for student government has been
driven by previous ASUO Executive administrations that have
focused too much on off-campus issues. It is time for a change!
Ben and Diana will bring tangible results to students by in
creasing the availability of campus resources, improving com
munity relations with students and demanding not only af
fordable, but also quality education.
Good intentions are not enough — the Executive must truly
understand and represent the interests of their fellow students.
Ben and Diana will use their experience to do this for you. I
urge you to vote for Ben and Diana.
Mike Sherman
* junior
political science, economics
Independent influence
"What experience and history teach is
this — that people and governments never
have learned anything from history, or act
ed on principles deduced from it."
— Georg Hegel
Hegel would no doubt be little sur
prised to read that longtime consumer ad
vocate and Washington gadfly supreme
Ralph Nader announced in late February
that he'll run in this year's presidential
election as an Independent.
With few exceptions, third-party candi
dates are doomed to be the dust bunnies
behind the rococo armoire of the Ameri
can presidency — Ross Perot has all but
dropped out of the American political
consciousness. Heard of John Anderson?
Not unless you're a poli-sci wonk. He
scraped together 6.6 percent of the popu
lar vote in 1980's Ronald Reagan-Jimmy
Carter contest. Even Strom Thurmond's
1948 bid remained a long-forgotten foot
note until Trent Lott's 2002 endorsement
of the campaign landed him in hot water
with Republican and Democratic politi
cians alike.
But, as even casual political observers
know, 2000 was different. After officials
tallied results, the current presidency
hinged on Florida's 25 electoral votes. Af
ter the Supreme Court settled the recount
challenges, Texas Gov. George W. Bush
bested Vice President Al Gore by a mar
gin of 537 votes in a state where nearly
six million had visited the polls. The left
leaning Nader had drawn over 97,000
votes in the state.
Mainstream leftists were up in arms. In a
futile challenge to the political duopoly
that critics have lambasted as "self-right
eous" and "egomaniacal," this outsider —
who had culled only 0.7 percent of the
1996 popular vote — managed to draw
enough votes away from their just-left-of
center candidate, returning the White
House to the Republicans for the first time
since 1993.
In a November 2000 letter to
Salon.com, reader Stephanie Richmond
wrote, "I hope all you Naderites are sat
isfied now. While I admired Ralph Nad
er's work in the past, now I only have
contempt for him for handing over the
presidency to George W. Bush. I hope
Nader never gets funding to run in 2004
or ever again after this irresponsible, un
thinking, self-serving campaign which
has set our country back more than he
could ever imagine."
Nader naturally rejects the responsibili
ty for Bush's victory that many Dem pun
dits readily assigned him. Properly speak
ing, he's not responsible. The electorates in
key swing states are. Florida is a case in
point; in New Hampshire, Bush defeated
Gore by a margin of 7,211 votes; there were
22,198 Nader votes.
Travis Willse
Rivaiiess wit
Left voters played a dangerous game in
other states, too. In Iowa, Gore topped
Bush by 4,144 votes, and there were
29,374 Nader votes; in Wisconsin, Gore
won by margin of 5,708, and there were
94,070 Nader votes; in New Mexico, he
won by the paper-thin margin of366 votes
in a state with 21,251 Nader votes. And yes,
Gore took Oregon by a margin of 6,765
votes, in a state where 77,357 turned out
for Nader.
But Nader dismisses responsibility, too,
in the more general sense in which he is
very much culpable: That if he hadn't run
in 2000, Gore certainly would have won
the election. Nader appeals instead, even
today, to the tired claim that a politicized
Supreme Court ruled in favor of its favorite
candidate, staining democratic integrity in
the process.
"After careful thought and desire to re
tire our supremely elected president," he
began his announcement on NBC, "I've
decided to mn as an Independent candi
date for president."
While grumblings of philosophically
mangled Supreme jurisprudence will.no,
doubt linger on college campuses for
years, Nader's appeal misses the point, in
stead offering a non sequitur that could
prove cosdy for the left-of-center. At best,
his bid will make the presidency margin
ally more difficult for the Dems to grab; at
worst, Democrats fear they'll see a repeat
of2000.
Even Terry McAuliffe, the usually sunny
Democratic National Committee chair
man, lamented Nader's bid as "very unfor
tunate" on CBS' "Face the Nation," but
added that Nader's 2004 candidacy will be
"very different" from his last go-round.
As if Nader's electoral myopia wasn't
troubling enough, he doesn't worry about
wooing left votes away, arguing in inter
views that he'll instead mostly appeal to
disillusioned Republicans. But this fanta
sy is about as likely as the 2000 proposi
tion that Democrats disenchanted by Clin
tonian sexual improprieties would vote en
masse for the socially super-conservative
Pat Buchanan. Indeed, according to a poll
in Newsweek conducted April 8-9, if vot
ers had to choose between Bush and Sen.
John Kerry, D-Mass., 50 percent would
vote for Kerry and 43 would vote for Bush.
If Nader joins the fray, Kerry's lead drops
to 46-42, a margin equal to the survey's 4
percent margin of error.
The Dems might have some reason for
optimism, though. In 1992, Perot won
18.9 percent of the popular vote; in 1996,
major candidates mined the no-chance
votes and Perot managed less than half
that. But Nader isn't just a fading improba
bility like Perot was — in some circles, he's
openly resented.
Still, Nader altered the outcome of the
2000 election by winning only 2.7 percent
of the popular vote; and this year's election
is shaping up to be so close, half that fig
ure might just tips the scales again. If
you're a Nader fan and live in a swing state
like Oregon, consider your vote this fall
carefully — it counts.
Contact the editorial editor
at traviswillse@dailyemerald.com.
His opinions do not necessarily
representthose of the Emerald., , , ,