ASHINGTON - It was not your typical election night party.
There was no talk of winning, or at least none that concerned the candidate for whom everyone had gathered. Supporters stood spellbound around a television, though the anchors barely mentioned their man until after 10 p.m.
No hours of suspense as results came down and everyone waited for the candidate to take the podium. As ever, he needed little encouragement to speak, at length, and well before all the polls had closed.
No outbursts of patriotic fervor or waving of flags. Instead, an Andean band played the theme from ''Titanic.'' One supporter hoped that was just a coincidence.
Never mind about getting a majority. Just 5 percent was all they needed.
That was the number needed for the party to become eligible for federal election matching funds for the 2004 presidential election.
In some ways, Ralph Nader's victory party was as atypical as his campaign had been. The longtime consumer activist and Green Party nominee for president had managed to move from insignificant itch to thorn in Vice President Al Gore's side in recent days.
Just how sharp a thorn didn't come clear as the evening dragged on, however.
Nader supporters had heard the television newspeople saying he was at just 2 percent nationally, but they had their suspicions. After all, his strongest states hadn't been counted yet - Oregon, Washington, and California were sure to come out big for
him, they believed.
And at one point, a Nader staff member read off results to about 1,000 supporters gathered in a ballroom of the Washington Press Club, to deafening cheers. Five percent so far in DC and Wisconsin, 7 in Maine and Vermont, a whole 9 in Michigan.
Staff members were convinced Democrats were disseminating misleading exit poll information to discourage Nader fans from casting their ballots out west.
The last straw was Gore campaign manager Donna Brazile's televised comments that Nader's showing amounted to ''a lot of hype, and not a lot of votes.'' That brought loud jeers of disgust from the faithful.
In recent weeks, a riveting subplot had begun to unfold in this year's presidential race. A new battlefront had opened, between Democrats and Greens, as it became clearer that Nader might siphon off votes from Gore in some states.
Nader had spent the last few months of his no-frills campaign playing to thousands of fans in some liberal strongholds, and to tens in others, proclaiming a message that won him so many devotees that Democrats seemed surprised by his strength late in the campaign.
Nader had come out swinging in March. The graying, stoop-shouldered, bookish man became a catchphrase-flinging, wonkish firebrand at the podium, and he had two clear targets in sight.
''If you vote for the lesser of two evils,'' he often said, ''you end up with the evil of two lessers.'' By October, that phrase was on many a Nader supporter's lips.
Get corporate contributions, and therefore special interests, out of politics, Nader argued again and again, and all other reforms would follow: solutions to poverty and homelessness, prison reform, universal health care, higher working wages, and a slew of other progressive goals.
Nader's call for the overhaul of the electoral system resonated with voters uninspired by either major party candidate. His share in national polls edged over 5 percent some weeks, a 5 percent that loomed large this election year. And in Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin, he was getting so much support that it looked like he could tip victory Bush's way.
Nader wasn't focused on the presidency. Instead, he wanted two things: to garner 5 percent in the polls, establishing the Green Party as a force and making it eligible for the federal matching funds; and to put Democrats in the hot seat, so that the party would be forced to reconnect with its liberal roots.
From the very start, at every campaign stop, he fielded questions about his spoiler role. Wasn't he worried he was siphoning support from Gore, he was always asked. What if his showing handed some states to Bush?
The questions became so repetitive that he was tempted to record his response, he told his delighted audience last night, but then thought that would be too corporate an approach.
Instead, every time, he replied that Gore did not deserve to be president, that he had failed the electorate, that he was not different enough from Bush to make Nader feel guilty about going up against him, and that he had no obligation to help the vice president get elected.
Not all of the revelers last night were as dismissive of Gore. When CNN announced that Gore had won Pennsylvania, a cheer went up in some corners. Even those who said they didn't feel an ounce of guilt about giving their vote to Nader said they were glad Gore seemed to be doing well early on.
Whatever the final tally, Nader and his supporters last night were claiming a victory of sorts.
''We have reached the takeoff stage,'' Nader told the crowd. ''We've built the third-largest party in America, replacing the Reform Party, and building a long-term progressive reform movement. We had the agenda and the rallies and the record.''
Several Nader supporters said they couldn't be happier, even if Nader didn't attain his 5 percent.
''I'm happy with what's been going on already,'' said Mica Scalin, of Richmond, Va. ''It's energizing a lot of people. To me, that's where it's at.''
''I'm a first-time voter,'' said Anyah Lee Suderman, 23. ''This is the first time I've been able to relate to politics. This campaign has been successful already, because I'm turned on.''
''This is the beginning,'' said campaign worker Andrew Hinkel, who was doing a brisk trade in 25-cent, almond-scented ''Corporate Influence Clean-Up Soap.''
''The work starts again tomorrow.''
