Well I’m not voting for John McCain.
So maybe I’ll vote Nadar ‘08. :D
Actually, if you live in a Republican safe state, it makes sense. If Ralphie can get 5% of the vote, he is eligible for public funding. He can be the Republican's Ross Perot for years!
Then you have the Green-Rainbow Party.. You don't have to be registered Green-Rainbow to take a Green-Rainbow ballot. (Every Massachusetts voter who is registered as Unenrolled (also known as “independent”) can vote in the Green-Rainbow Party presidential primary instead of the Democratic or Republican party primaries."
Green Party Presidential Primaries February 6th, 2008: California: with 96% of the precincts reporting (but many uncounted absentee and provisional ballots), the results are: Ralph Nader 16,835; Cynthia McKinney 7,124; Elaine Brown 1,259; Kat Swift 843; Kent Mesplay 564; Jesse Johnson 506; Jared Ball 444.--Cynthia McKinney vs. Nader comments by Greens for presidential nominee.
"Occasionally, a third party effort such as Ross Perot’s in 1992 will tempt the politically alienated small government constituency. But the result of all third party efforts is to undermine the major party closest to it ideologically, often delivering victory to the greater threat from its own point of view. Thus, Ralph Nader’s quixotic campaigns only had the effect of helping George W. Bush—certainly a greater danger from Nader’s perspective on the issues than either Al Gore or John Kerry...Theoretically, a third party could supplant one of the major parties, as the Republicans did with the Whigs. While this sort of thing happens fairly often in other countries such as Canada, it has only happened in the U.S. when one party found itself incapable of dealing with an issue of overriding importance, such as slavery, which is what doomed the Whigs.."-- cato-unbound, by Bruce Bartlett Reaction Essay May 2nd, 2006