The slightly-disheveled man standing in front of the San Rafael, California movie theater was on a mission. Holding a clipboard and a ball-point, he was attempting to collect signatures to put Ralph Nader on the California ballot. A few people signed. A few tried to argue with him. Most people just tried to ignore him as they walked past. You could tell that the man wasn’t happy with the response he was getting; after a particularly harsh reaction from a passerby, he couldn’t help but reply with a sarcastic “Democrats and Republicans uber alles!”. No one really paid attention.

Nader supporters like the movie theater man have a lot in common with their chosen candidate—the ability to believe that they are part of something bigger than it is, that sticking true to their beliefs is much more important than any consequences that may come from them. But there is another kind of Nader supporter, as well: Republicans who are funneling money into the Nader campaign in order to hurt the chances of Democratic candidate John Kerry.

Nearly one in 10 of Nader’s major donors — those writing checks of $1, 000 or more — have given in recent months to the Bush-Cheney campaign, the latest documents show. GOP fund-raisers also have “bundled” contributions — gathering hefty donations for maximum effect to help Nader, who has criticized the practice in the past.

Peter Camejo, the Green Party member currently chosen as Nader’s running mate, suggests that such donations should be returned. But Nader himself will have none of it, and suggests that any controversy is the result of a Democratic smear campaign:

Nader, in what has become a public disagreement with his vice presidential candidate, Peter Camejo, strongly denied the recent windfall of donations from deep-pocketed Republicans was part of a GOP effort to wound Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts.

(snip)

The consumer advocate, who has often been critical of the role of such deep-pocketed donors in the political arena, said wealthy contributors “are human beings too.’

Nader likes to think that his candidacy draws people from all sides of the political spectrum, that these contributions from wealthy Republicans show genuine support for his candidacy, and not some sort of cynical maneuvering against Kerry. It must be nice to live in such a fantasy world. But in the real world, a recent California poll indicates that Nader’s electroral support would come almost entirely at the expense of John Kerry, with “negligible” impact on the Bush campaign.

You have to wonder what Nader’s true motivations for his campaign really is. Is it righting the wrongs perpetuated by the Bush Administration? Or is he trying to “teach a lesson” to the Democrats and force them into taking him and his supporters more seriously? Based on what has transpired so far, the second option seems much more plausible.

As much as Nader insists that his campaign is based upon “freedom of conscience”, one would think that his own conscience would be screaming at the thought of four more years of the Bush Administration. But, as Nader and his supporters have repeatedly shown, idealism and ego get in the way of the big picture. In 2000, it was easy to say that there were no differences between the two parties. To say the same thing in 2004 is just foolishness…no matter what the guy at the movie theater might want you to believe.