Will Nader Run? It Depends in Part, He Says, on 2 Others (NYT)

[Merlin]

WASHINGTON, July 10
...
Mr. Nader has run three times for president. He fared best in 2000, winning 2.7 percent of the vote nationally and 1.6 percent in Florida, where George W. Bush's 537-vote margin over Mr. Gore swung the election.

Speaking to reporters at a breakfast this morning, the 69-year-old Mr. Nader said his decision would depend in some measure on the fortunes of the two current Democratic contenders whose politics appear to most closely resemble his own: Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio and former Gov. Howard Dean of Vermont.

Mr. Nader said any growth in support for Mr. Kucinich, among the most liberal members of Congress, would give him "less reason to go into the election — not no, just less."
...
<<more>>
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/11/national/11NADE.html


Ralphie, it seems, enjoys breakfasting with the press.

[Aaron]

1. Very interesting

Thanks for posting this.

[Iverson]

2. a telling omission

I wonder if others noted, as I did, that Nader's speculation did not include other possible Green party candidates. He should not just assume that the nomination is his for the taking.

edited for smoothness

[Cheswick2.0]

5. Of course it is his for the asking

He is the face of the Green party. Take a poll and ask people to name a Green party politician. Ralphie would be the only guy mentioned by 99.99 percent of them.

The Green party would be crazy to run him because he will get a much smaller percentage of the vote in 2004 and that will be seen as the death throws of the party. On the other hand they would be crazy to run anyone else for two reasons. 1) because Ralph will just run as an independent and split the small bit of support there is for a third party candidate on the left. 2) anyone else who runs will command so little attention/respect, it will make the party seem like a huge joke.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the party has created a lose lose situation for itself.

[Iverson]

13. interesting assertion of authority

I had no idea that public name recognition was the way that the Greens were going to select a candidate. I had this crazy idea that it depended upon a convention that itself depended upon 50 state organizations.

Now tell me: do you really know more about the internal workings of the Greens than I do, or could you not pass up a chance to denigrate them?

[hayu_lol]

3. Ralph has...

an obsessive/compulsive need to be the center of attention no matter that he has nothing to say of interest to anyone other than a very small percentage of the electorate...he never has had much to say.

Ralph is a perpetual candidate in the same league as L. LaRouche and others who just enjoy a small piece of the limelight.

[Iverson]

4. piffle

This is loyalist dogma. You have some problem with the clean air act, clean water act, critique of corporate ownership of the major parties, etc.?

[Cheswick2.0]

6. piffle

I have no problem with the clean water and clean air act or critique of coporate influence in elections. However the Green party has never done passed or even voted on one bit of legislation to either pass clean air and water acts or to stop corporate influence. Any improvement in those area have come from democrats and a few like minded republicans.

[Trek234]

9. BS

Grass roots movements on the part of Greens got legislation to the dems to be voted on all across this nation.

[Cheswick2.0]

10. bullshit

Greens didn't do shit. The party is a tiny group of people, apparently willing to spoil every election they can when they don't get their approved democratic nominee. That is the only power the Green party has.

Any Progressive/liberal environmental advance we have made is because of the work of dedicated Democrats and the odd republican.

[Iverson]

14. incorrect again

You appear to have missed the historical point about activism being a precursor to mainstream embrace.

Do you really need examples?

[hayu_lol]

17. Iverson...

I am a left-Liberal Democratic activist. I know who fought for and passed the clear air and water acts...it wasnt greens. The freedom of information act was forced on an unwilling govt. by the kids of the 60's. It was those same 'kids' by the way that finally brought the Nam war to a close. Were they greens...not back then.
Are ye then a revisionist? So be it. All the Greens I have debated over the past couple of years are standing on the following:
Take all cars and trucks off the road.
Close all prisons.
Shut down our standing Armed Forces immediately.

Naw, I know it isn't in the green party platform, but that doesnt stop these supposed greens from saying this is what they want.
Ralph might be a candidate...but maybe he should run for dogcatcher first so that he has some demonstrably public service experience behind him.

Nader is first for Nader...then he is for Nader...and then he takes care of Nader. He underpays his staff. He refuses their efforts to organize. He made his black workers come in the back door...and prevented them from congregating in the lobby--even on their own time.

If you are a green Iverson, then why are you here?

[Rich Hunt]

22. inaccurate

Whatever your opinion about Nader, you certainly cannot say he has no public service experience. His strategy can easily be criticized - but don't lie.

I'm not sure I like him as a person, but sheesh - you can make your point without the historical revisionism.

And seconded Iverson's points about activism. Maybe if some people actually studied activist movements of the past, they wouldn't be so quick to assign sole credit for those accomplishments to "Democrats".

This has nothing to do with loyalty or disloyalty to some or all Democrats. It's simply being frank about the real history of mass movements. If you're a Democrat and an activist, then you're really an activist who happens to be a Democrat. Be honest - if you're an activist, you're probably surrounded by reluctant Democrats, people who are registered Democrats but not active as Democrats, or people who are registered independents. You may even be working alongside people who don't vote.

[Tinoire]

32. Please refer to the rules

Rule number ONE

1. This is a message board for Democrats and other progressives.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

Nice going. Hope you won't have the audacity to demand Green votes next election and then wonder why we can't get them.

You want Greens to work with us? Well it takes dialog and this is one place where dialog begins.

If we Dems can't be concerned enough about Green Party positions to field a candidate acceptable to all those ex-Dems, then let's just drop the illusion of the BIG TENT and rename it the New Democratic Party, so that liberal Dems like me know that it's time to move on.

[CWebster]

7. Freedom of information act

Thanks to Ralph Nader.

And don't forget it.

[hayu_lol]

19. CWebster...The Freedom of Information Act...

What Green senator or representitive brought this act up in the congress...just asking. Nader certainly didnt.

[pansypoo53219]

21. ooh, piffle

one of my favorite words.
if only more people would say it when they hear Nadar speak. he lost ANY respect i had for him when he said Gore was as bad as Bush and we should elect him. AS IF.

[sangh0]

30. LOL!

The legislation you mentioned were passed with Dem votes. No Green member in Congress voted for them.

Oh, but I forgot - "THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE!!"

from http://www.damnedbigdifference.org/quotes

“The only difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is the velocities with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock on their door. That’s the only difference,” he said. “The two parties ... are becoming one corporate party, with two heads wearing different makeup, and that is not a good enough choice for the American people.”
In a speech at Amherst College, 10-04-00

In a recent Time magazine interview, when asked if he felt any regret about the 2000 election, Nader responded, "No, because it could have been worse. You could have had a Republican Congress with Gore and Lieberman." -- Time magazine, 8-05-02

Nader said that a Gore presidency "wouldn't have been any different in terms of military and foreign policy, soft on corporate crime. It wouldn't have been any different in ignoring the need to transfer our country to renewable energy and organic agriculture and protecting the small farmer. And it wouldn't have been any different on GATT and NAFTA and the increasing trade deficits and exporting American jobs." -- Green Party USA 1-14/02

"Let's see what really happens. Ashcroft is going to be a prisoner of bureaucracy." -- Common Dreams 4-03-2001

"I'm just amazed that people think I should be concerned about this stuff. It's absolutely amazing. Not a minute's sleep do I lose, about something like this - because I feel sorry for them. It's just so foolish, the way they have been behaving. Why should I worry?" -- Common Dreams 4-03-2001

[Tinoire]

34. Sigh... Do some research instead of regurgitating nonesense.

--------
Nader's accomplishments have become part of the fabric of American public life. You know that clause on plane tickets that says that if you're bumped, the airline has to reimburse you and put you up for the night? Nader got bumped from an overbooked flight and got angry, and that's why you get treated fairly now. Remember the days before seat belts and air bags? Nader wrote an article for the Nation in 1959 titled "The Safe Car You Can't Buy" and ranted as early as 1975 to Congress that all auto manufacturers should have to install air bags in their cars. People said Nader was a nut. Now car companies advertise that their air bags are the best.

And remember the march on Washington after the near-meltdown at Three Mile Island? Nader organized that and was a key player in changing this country's attitudes toward nuclear power.

http://www.salon.com/bc/1999/01/26bc.html
--------
Thank you Ralph Nader for:

seat belts, air bags, crash-worthy cars, better labeling on food, lower levels of lead in the environment.

Thank you Ralph Nader for:
the "silent revolutions," in America's smoking and eating habits that have occurred despite the pressures of the marketplace.

Thank you Ralph Nader for:
campaigning on the "crime issue" when for others that only meant talking about street crime, ignoring corporate crime "The looting of pension funds, the bank debacle, occupational hazards, consumer frauds — these are all taboo campaign issues."

[Trek234]

8. I hope he runs

I need someone I respect as the Green candidate to vote for if by some chance in hell any of the war dems get nominated.

I hope he chooses the same running mate as last election. It was an awesome pair.

[Cheswick2.0]

11. rofl

yeah right..... they will get and even smaller vote than before and it will kill the party

[number9]

29. I can think of no reason to vote for Nader

other than to screw this nation up for another 4 years. Talk about principles is hollow when the result of your principled action is the devastation of this country. Vote your concience, but I hope your concience tells you that voting for a candidate that will result in the destruction of the very ideals you probably treasure is not wise.

[kwolf68]

12. I believe the Greens are being used as whores

Remember when Senator Wellstone was running for his 2002 seat before his death?

He was getting a challenge from the Greens. Wellstone? The one guy (of all) who would champion most (or dare I say all) of the principles the Greens say they want to champion.

Now we have what is easily the most corrupt pro-corporate/government merging, anti-environment, anti-worker president in our modern times with a rabidly right-wing government in place to help him advance his (or their) agenda. (I don't think Bush has a real agenda. I think he's a boob who is doing the bidding of those with an agenda).

The best thing for the Republicans is for the Greens to run, siphon just enough votes to win an extra state (had the Greens not run, Al Gore would have won New Hampshire -assuming the greens would have voted Gore- and one other state I can't recall at this time).

I believe Republican money is finding its way to the Nadar camp. I don't trust the Green Party at all. Had I seen Nadar having press conferences every 2 weeks to denounce the Bush administration over the past 2 years maybe I could believe in them, but in my view they-like so many other so-called interest groups of just causes-are a front group that helps the right.

[Punkingal]

15. Oh boy!

So he's telling us to pick Kucinich or Dean, or else? I happen to like John Kerry, myself, who has an excellent voting record on issues important to Greens.

[FlashHarry]

16. Nader WANTS Bush to win in '04. It's part of the plan.

In Ralphie's twisted mind, the Bush admin. must be given 4 more years to complete its destruction of the federal govt. in order for people to "wake up" and vote Green in '08. Trouble is, how many people will lose their jobs in the meantime? How many forests will be cut down? How many Constitution-shredding laws will be passed? How many wars will we start?

No difference between Gore and Bush? Hah!

[robbedvoter]

18. If Greens want Kuchinich, they should support him -

send money, vote for him - the usual stuff. Blackmail sounds bad and adds one more negative in Kuchinich book - next to the burning flag vote and the anti-choice. (He's still a desirable nominee - only a bit less so)

[genius]

26. They are supporting Kucinich. They're re-registering to work

on his campaign. These same individuals will absolutely not support Dean, because they consider Dean the enemy of the environment and middle class America.

[robbedvoter]

28. Good! I don't get the Dean thing - but supporting DK is good thing.

OTOH, if people want Kuchinich to fare well in the primary, the "Nader's candidate or else" is not very helpful with Dems. So, as someone who is considering Kuchinich as a good candidate, could someone tell Ralphie to stop these maneuvers?

[Eloriel]

41. You forget. Nader doesn't speak for the Greens.

He was their candidate in 2000. He is NOT the spokesperson of the Green Party. Period.

Eloriel

[msanger]

20. greens for congress

why don't the greens run against "safe" republicans. With the help of moveon.org and other on-line organizations they could probably run respectable campaigns WHILE helping the democractic nominee for President.

this is what we call a WIN-WIN situation.

a few greens in congress - a dem in the white house.

[Iverson]

42. a fine idea

I have suggested something like this before, but most people would rather bicker. It need not even be a tradeoff for Prez. Senate seats and other races are plenty important too, as are not duplicating efforts and not splitting the progressive vote.

[demigoddess]

23. I have a problem with someone who runs for president who has never

done anything else. Nader hasn't really started a new party or been part of one and he has never been elected to any kind of office so we don't know what kind of official he would be. Kind of like W. He would be an amateur. You need some kind of record to judge a guy on before you can vote for him. Nader wrote a book and won a lawsuit. not much more than that. Hillary and many women have longer records and better resumes. He is beginning to remind me of Lyndon Larouche.

[FlaGranny]

24. One thing everyone seems to forget

is that if Ralph Nader were elected president somehow, he would be the most powerless president in US History. NO ONE in the House or Senate to back him up on anything.

I recently came out on that test we were taking the other day as a Green. I agree, in that I want to protect the environment, stop corporate corruption, and all the rest. But the Green party is not using it's brains if they think they can accomplish anything by first concentrating on the presidential election.

[Merlin]

25. BINGO! You said it. Nader is a political moron. .

A lot of us in the Democratic party support nearly everything the Greens call for, formally at least. But we realize there are practical limits to what can be accomplished in a given period of time in a Democratic system. We realize that if we divide up our side of the Democracy that we all lose. We realize, as Ben said, either we all hang together or we will hang separately. We understand that you can't force a philosophy on a populace top-down -- particularly a populace that's as right wing as the American public. We know that our party has a real opportunity to govern, and therefore that the position it takes must be realistic and responsible.

If Nader runs, it will be the most despicable insult to liberals in the history of the nation.

I knew Nader. Once had lunch with the guy. Did a research product for him. I otherwise admire him. But if he goes ahead with this, he will target himself for historical infamy as not only a total loser, but a willing saboteur of everything he says he stands for.

One last note. I guarantee he is raking in millions of bucks from the right wing to make his run. Guaranteed.

[qandnotq]

27. too late

"But if he goes ahead with this, he will target himself for historical infamy as not only a total loser, but a willing saboteur of everything he says he stands for."

He has already accomplished this. If campaigning in Florida the last day before the election wasn't willing sabotage, I can't imagine what is.

[Tinoire]

31. Good.

Let the Democrats start worrying about ONCE AGAIN losing the progressive vote. Hopefully last time will have taught us a lesson about alienating 10% of the progressive vote to pick up 2% of the centrist, swing vote.

Very happy to see Nader endorsing Kucinich. I know he's been touring/campaigning WITH him.

All the Green bashing at DU is disgusting, childish and reeks of DLC tactics to get progressives out of the 'New' Democratic party.

If people can't be gracious and tolerant of Greens and other progressives then don't bitch when they don't want to play according to your intolerant rules.

[sangh0]

33. Practice what you preach.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=19165&mesg_id=19165&page=#19541

OUT. OUT! Out of our party you fascist, PNAC-enabling SCUM! Back to the Republican hell-hole from which you came

If you think other people should practice tolerance, you might consider providing an example with your own behavior. Your intolerance for moderate Dems, and DLCers, is disgusting, childish and reeks of Nazi tactics to purge the party of all Dems who are not Green.

If you can't be tolerant of DLCers and other moderate Dems, then don't bitch when they don't want to play according to your intolerant rules.

[Tinoire]

35. Oh Puke

Let me buy you a calculator and maybe you'll be able to put 2 and 2 together. The rightward drift is over! This is precisely why Dean and Kucinich are the forerunners for the nomination. PNAC enabling DLC is out. Read the writing on the floor because it's there, in big bold letters. We are taking our party BACK. Back and away from any and all PNAC enablers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=7344&mesg_id=7344&page=


Maybe say by the time you get to 75, 100, 150 posts, you'll realize that the DLC is pretty much a 4-letter word around here.

On edit: Now a word of advice. If you're going to repost something written by another poster, then you should at least have the integrity to post the ENTIRE post otherwise you risk looking foolish. If you have a problem with my post, you should go back to the original thread and try to respond intelligently there- or did all of the posts in agreement make you too uncomfortable?

Since you didn't have the courtesy to quote my entire post, I'll do it for you.

In response to a DLC article posted and discussed here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=19165&mesg_id=19165&page=#19541

Those on the Left who want to veer away from that formula have every right to their opinion, and there's nothing wrong -- much less "divisive" -- about debating how progressives pursue their common values and reflect their common tradition in current political circumstances. ((Do they seriously think anyone believes they're progressives??))

But it's important to remember that energy and excitement and all the other subjective factors in politics are no more than means to an end: obtaining the power to govern ((we the voters' job)), and then governing well (the DLC's job)). And the Democratic Party's only recently successful formula for doing either one remains that of President Bill Clinton. (read- that of the DLC, no not of Bill Clinton and his charisma or his intelligence but of the DLC! )


OUT. OUT! Out of our party you fascist, PNAC-enabling SCUM! Back to the Republican hell-hole from which you came!

[sangh0]

38. Your assumption is doing it's fabled job

You might be the only DUer who hasnt realized that I've been on DU for over two years and have several thousand posts to my credit. Your attempt to smear me on the basis of a low post count is as childish, and incorrect, as your desire to purge the Democratic Party of all who disagree with your intolerant views.

It's also against DU rules.

[Tinoire]

46. Ah yes Sangha

The one who freaked out over a picture of slaughtered sheep and caused quite a little ruckus at DU because you didn't like the way people were attacking the DLC for selling the Dems down the river.

Maybe I can find those posts, that picture and trail you around with them. Wouldn't that be fun?

[number9]

43. The rightward drift may be over on the internet

but Dean and Kucinich are still fighting a longshot battle in the wider world.

Not trying to be argumentative - just what I think from what I see and hear and read.

[Tinoire]

45. You have a point with that but

I've watched and heard of Kucinich drawing crowds everywhere he goes and igniting them. From what I've heard about Dean, from his supporters, he's doing the same and both are raising a lot of money from grass-roots people like you and me- especially Kucinich who's not accepting corporate donations.


I prefer to remain optimistic and will do what I can to support Kucinich. If he doesn't get it, I'll probably switch over to Dean.

Crossing my fingers and praying the entire time :)

[Rich Hunt]

36. unbelievable

First of all, "Nazis" is deeply offensive.

Secondly, some people have the power to "purge", and some don't.

When you allege that a relatively powerless group has the power to "purge" a much more powerful group, you are scapegoating.

And bringing posts from other threads into this one is in bad form. Are you closely monitoring tinoire or something?

[Tinoire]

37. Yeah but I'm flattered. It's the second time he/she's done this

Yeah but I'm flattered. It's the second time he/she's done this with the same post.


Thanks :)

[sangh0]

40. And Hitler

was flattered by the "gifts" he received from Jews.

[Rich Hunt]

44. Godwin's Law

...other than that, I'm speechless. Nazis and Hitler - really. And I personally don't believe in the "ignore" function.

[Forkboy]

48. Wow...thats deep Sangha

Tinoire = Hitler now...riiiiiiiiiiiight. :crazy:

By the way...I STILL haven't seen you offer a single bit of proof to back up your insinuation that Dean dodged Vietnam :shrug: I just thought I'd ask again seeing as though facts are so important to you and all.

No...dont thank me.

[sangh0]

39. Too bad

If you don't like the Nazi allusion, or my style, put me on ignore.

ANd there's no need to monitor tinoire. His/Her hypocrisy is galringly obvious, which is why I suppose you have nothing to say in defense of desire to purge a party s/he doesn't even belong to.

[Forkboy]

49. Oh the irony

of Sangha bitching about hypocrisy :silly:

Most of us remember you running away when asked to back up your Dean charge.It's funny how you managed to post all over that thread and others while missing my repeated requests that you show info that would back up your hinting that Dean dodged Vietnam.

I would say your hypocrisy is just as "galringy" obvious as anyones.

[poppabear36]

47. Where has Nader been?

For someone who was so eager to tar Gore with the sellout brush in 2000, Nader has been surprisingly quiet through the travesty that is Bush's presidency.
Nader's silence speaks volumes.
Few Democrats would have any problem with any part of the Green's agenda.
Since the New Deal, the Democrats have been the vehicle of Progressivism in America.
In 2000 the Greens became the vehicle of Ralph Nader. And he made you all a vehicle unsafe at any speed.
Progressives don't need the Greens and they don't need Nader.
Take your ball and go home.
Your threats are empty.
Nader and the Greens are nobody's savior.