Greens: Don't do it Ralph!

I looked a small report in Friday's newspaper that Ralph Nader is planning to run for president in 2004.

I do not blame Nader for Gore not getting the White House. That borders on the childish in my opinion. Al Gore ran a less than stellar campaign. I did vote for him however in the 11th hour. However, the way his campaign was run, choosing Joe Lieberman as VP, plus little bro Jeb Bush, Kathryn Harris, chads, and the U.S. Supreme Court all factored in why Gore did not get the White House. Not the Green Party.

The 2000 election is long over and here we are at the footstep of 2004. The economy is suppose to be doing good though that is bull, we are at war, the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, we are within a terrorist attack away from losing all our civil liberties. This is not the time to divide ourself. Those on the left and the left of center and center MUST come together to get our government and country back. It is simply foolish for the party I just joined to front a candidate for president right now. This is a very very critical period in the country and we could lose everything.

I am a Green but I am not keen on supporting a Green candidate for president right now. I think it would be unwise. I am supporting Howard Dean right now and I am convinced he will get the nomination in Boston next summer. I would advise that Greens support a Democrat and the Democratic nominee. The objective is to get Bush and his crime family out of Washington, D.C.

Please think fellow Greenies. It would be nice to have a green president one day but this is not the time. We should just focus on the local offices and issues for now. 2004 is going to be a crossroads for America. Let's not take the wrong direction.

John

last I heard he would only run if Kucinich didn't get the nomination; big load off my mind :mad:

i too voted green, but not in 2004 - NO WAY!

http://www.naderexplore04.org/survey/survey_start.php

Direct from the Nader 2004 Presidential Exploratory Committee, Inc. :

1. Would you support a Ralph Nader candidacy for President regardless of who the Democrats or Republicans nominate?
 
2. Is there any declared candidate for President that if they were to win the nomination would make you unlikely to support a Ralph Nader candidacy?

more

I just saw it on google, but I can't find the quote. It was in an interview.

This is the Green/Progressive Party line right now Dean or Nader..Your choice.

No wonder its free...Sorry about that...Oh well..It was overloading my site any way..

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The spyware it downloads is the ever-present gator.com.

The webspace is a freebee similer to Geocities. Figures..You get what you pay for..

I have a very strong objection in principle to any entity that tries to download to my computer without my explicit permission, especially when it's for "data mining" for their own purposes. Otherwise, I'd be very interested in looking at your site.

I hope Nader is right. Whatever they feel about Dean, the Green Party should grit their teeth and back Dean. He is only real hope to get Bush out of the White House now.

John

Its the only way out for bouth sides of this issue.

Although I'd feel much better if that compromise included Kerry and Clark as well.

now I think overall you are thinking good, but to say that:

"the way his campaign was run, choosing Joe Lieberman as VP, plus little bro Jeb Bush, Kathryn Harris, chads, and the U.S. Supreme Court all factored in why Gore did not get the White House. Not the Green Party."

Is really silly. Everything contributed, but the greens didnt? Why not just admit that had the greens not run or not run the way they did, it would have helped gore, thus, like all the things you listed and more, it could have meant the difference. It is the truth and doesnt make the greens anymore villians.

Edit: and gore did run a campaign that got him a majority of the popular vote. That is better than alot of people have done. I wasnt a huge fan of his campaign but it is silly to write it off. He should have won even with that campaign.

There are those who seem to use the Greens as the blame as opposed to seeing the other factors that contributed. That's all.

Many of the people that voted for Nader (I was not one of them BTW.) were liberal or progressive Democrats angry with the direction the Democratic Party was heading. Any other time I would not blame them for their decision. I did vote for Nader in 1996. Now nobody can afford to be divided. Not even the Communists should front a candidate. We all need to stand together and get Bush's butt out of D.C. We can talk about our differences later. Why can't we put them aside for now?

John

The Green/Progressives have been runing Nader Sence 1992.

I voted for Nader in 96. Not the fact Nader was running in 92. You got that all wrong.


John

in 1992.. When The Party was first formed.. Ofcouse nobody but us Greens Knew that then..

we agree. My big problem with the greens is, this isnt europe. Our system cannot really support more than two viable parties. Even three gets really messy. In the US the compromise needs to happen at the party level, not at the elected office level like proportional representive governments. Unless the green party really thinks it has a chance to supplant the democratic party at some point in the near future, and i certainly dont think they do, they should be working within the party.

But only Under our conditions.

I understand you wanting to merge with the Democratic Party but saying it should be on the Green Party's terms will not work. It is counter-productive. We should at least work with the Democrats and find some common ground. Listen to each other. You cannot force them to play by our rules.

John

Thats why we formed the Green Party in 1992.. Were not about to give up what little influance we have..If they are not willing to pay attention then Bush will Get the Election in 04.

Thats why we formed the Green Party in 1992.. Were not about to give up what little influance we have..If they are not willing to pay attention then Bush will Get the Election in 04.

I am as radical and progressive as they come, but I realize that we cant just expect to reform our entire society in one fell swoop. Looking at the greens numbers, if they were working within the party, they would already be a powerful force in creating party policy, rather than making themselves an opposition party and forcing the dems to destinguish themselves from you.

That would be like chasing shadows. There is some compromise that is needed. I do agree with you K-W.


John

we will start co-operateing.

as long as you are running opposition candidates, they have to treat you like opposition. I realize that the green party is a result of the democratic parties movement and lack of movement, but I dont see how it can effectively accomplish anything except getting conservatives elected.

It has taken awhile, politics always do, for the dem party to start to erupt in turmoil in the face of the new polical landscape. It is now time for all progressives to jump back into the democratic party so that when it finally settles down it settles down closer to fully progressive ideals. If progressives refuse to be a part of the party, it will settle down centrist and we will continue to have a split left side of the spectrum giving the right, which should be losing elections like crazy, an advantage.

Were not willing to wait any longer.

Now is the time that progressives can take a major role in the democratic party, and you want to pass it up because you are bitter that the process takes so long?

"If not us, who? If not now, when?"

-- Robert F. Kennedy, Democrat.

This is not the time for displaying our differences be it green or democrat. There should be one objective only. Get Bush out!


John

But it dosnt do us any good to Have A democrat in office if we dont agree with them any more then we agree with Bush..

You might be aiding the enemy and you don't realize it. Just a thought!

John




http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=948782&mesg_id=948949&page=

Were not going to swallow that line any more.

Man.. If I have to wait any longer I will be to old for it to matter..

The group with power accuses Greens of destroying the country. If I recall, it was Clinton who turned his back on Kyoto. That act alone could ruin the planet.

It is holding the opposition (Republicans) as a model for yourself and creating the conditions for an economic monoculture that can't take criticism seriously which has been greatly responsible for ruining this country.

To this Gore supporter the Nader campaign gave many people who otherwise couldn't stand to vote someone to root for.

Your not just haveing to fight Bush Here..Your looking at haveing to go up against the entire Republican Party that has been over run by the Far right.The Dems need to get tought real quick or end up exstict.

pish-posh

but were large enough to make the Democrats a Minor party if we leave..Leaveing only the republican with Majority status. If we dont get what we want..

That is the funniest thing I believe I had heard all year! Thanks for the Laugh!

They defected from the core values of the party and they lost many of the liberal wing of the party.

Gore may have had a majority of the popular vote but clearly not enough to make it a decisive victory because the Dem party no longer energized the significant portion of the electorate that fails to turn out to vote. Why should they? The centrist to right Dems do what they want to do anyway without considering them.

Hence, a new party evolves when the old one veers from its history of social reform.

they didnt defect from anything. This is politics. The democratic party is a construct. What it does is a result of the actions of many groups which are the result of the actions of many of the people. In the end the people who decide everything in our system are the people who vote. The fact that people vote based on advertising, advertising costs money, and the wealthy have money isnt the fault of the democrats. The political landscape of America changed and the democratic party has been trying to cope and it only hurts them when people leave because they cant seem to understand that the world isnt black and white and that the democratic party cannott be the same as it was before and win elections.

Gore had a majority. I dont know what more you want. Go get a history book and look at the margins of presidential victories throughout history. I think it is extremely silly of you to demand more of any candidate than getting enough votes to win.

A new party isnt evolving. The polical landscape has shifted resulting in an upheaval. The green party shows no signs of being anything more than a temporary holding area for people who feel alienated from the current two parties. We are aleady seeing the democratic party turning to turmoil that progressives could take a much bigger part in if they werent wasting time on the green party.

You have a tinted concept of the history of political parties and social reform. There has never ever been a radical reformist party that could compete in US politics.

but he did only squeak by. That points to a failure and the choice to vote for the lesser of two evils given the numbers that failed to turn out to vote at all.

When was the last time the Dem leadership really stood up and hard went to bat for social reform? It certainly wasn't NAFTA. They have been busily standing against the Republicans than standing for something. That lost the 2000 and 2002 elections. Plain and simple.

Thats a one way road to America being destroyed. There will never be a radicaly progressive political party at the forefront of US politics ever. We will always have two moderate broker parties competing for sides of a moderate coin. The question is where those parties sit and which wins elections.

Our job as progressives is to get the dem party as close to our ideals as politically feasible and then to get them to win elections. That is the only way to actually create reform, and I think now is the time to do that.

Think about it. The whole left and center divided up like this? Any of you who won't set aside all differences are just doing the devil's work. Just a thought.


John

Why do you think Buchanan is all over the air waves? He is a hero and his party's effect on the Republican Party is tacitly acknowledged by the media.

C'mon people, Think! That man could more easily and honestly point out a social-democrat than 75% of the people in DU or the DNC.

has been pushing away from the Progressive Left for sometime now. The are more center to right than they have ever been and the leadership is too cowardly to really take a stand on much of anything. They cower before the Republican majority and hope for scraps.

The Dem party lost it's momentum when we lost the fire in the gut that brought about the civil rights movement and the end to the Vietnam War. Now we're so far away from our core values of social justice and reform, we actually have to go backwards to move forward again. Really, really sad but true after decades of people chasing individual dreams and losing focus on the goals the party once held.

in a Hemp Festaval In Harrisburg Orgon in 1994..I know I said 92 but I Just rememberd what year it was.

Wasn't Nader a Pacific Green Party candidate in '92?

...not follow in the form of a Republican Lite.

It's been said time and again on this board that Americans largely disagree with the neocons. The problem is how to take a pattern of silence and rejection and being brow-beaten with half-truths, and give shape to a progressive movement in a 2003 context. Clue: You can't do it without a backbone, or by endlessly mincing words, or by 'following' a population of apolitcal victims who've been brainwashed by your opponents.

Someone must throw down the guantlet and hang in there while people recover their senses.

If we dont get our way..

and he said he wanted to run to show the Democrats how to beat Bush. We've lost the trail, according to Ralph.

You are pining for the votes of people (a certain minority of Greens) who wouldn't otherwise vote at all, or would vote for another 3rd-party.

Most Green voters are supporting Democrats for president anyway. Having Nader run did not get them to switch.

You make a lot of sense, Cascadian.

The good fight has become global, and the Green Party is poised to become THE progressive universal political body.

First things first, though... Dump Bush!

Can you really see the green party supplanting one of the two current parties as a broker party representing roughly half the electorate?

Making it impossible for the Democrats to get anyone into Office unless we get our way?

I suppose if you are a republican that is a great plan.

But if there willing to start takeing us sereously and start takeing actions on our issues we wiil start supporting them.

Might as well revisit the "Nader cost us the election" cop-out.

Vote a Green/Progressive into office..

Once again, the Bay area leads the way. Greens came very close there.

It's only a matter of time...

What is childish is that the greens take no responsibility for the out come of the election. They might as well be republicans. Fuck Nader and Fuck the morons who backed his egoed ass.

eom


John

Neophyte-- (noun) A tyro; a novice, any beginner.

-------------------------

Yep... It's all Nader's fault. :rolls eyes:

to be smart enought to realize that they couldnt win with out us.. We were wrong..

when you acknowledge the serious problems the Democratic party (and therefore the left) has, give me a ring

Will hell freeze over first?

Tell me, how's that voting your conscience thing working out for you? For us all?

Democrats lost the 2000 election...stop trying to blame it on other things.

Oh, wait a second. I'm not. That was just more childish invective that resembles the Republicanism that it pretends to decry.

I'm not here to kiss green ass. But that is all that the greens want. Kiss our ass or else. Or else what? Or else you'll help bush get elected and continue to screw the little people that Nader and gang supposedly represent?

Give me a fucking break with this Nader green bullshit. It's so tiredsome. You people are so damn naive.

I wish you all the best of luck in determining the difference between rudimentary civility and "kiss(ing) green ass." You'll find the skill useful later in life.

What a great word, and especially, what a great word to describe the politically naive Green party members. As for "Ralph" -- that egomaniacal prick can kiss my ass.

Name calling... What a wonderful rebuttal.

I really am! We have Democrats and Greens name calling each other and still arguing over 2000!! It is apparent to me that the left so damned fragmented and hard-headed and somewhat arrogant attitudes abound that I am almost convinced nobody wants to win in 2004. They all want to have their own way or no way at all! That's great!

So in opposition to the Republicans, we have squabbling Democrats and Greens and other left so-called fringe groups and on the other hand, we have an apathetic group of people in this country that seems more interested in rich girl Paris Hilton bailing hay in a barn than what goes on in the political system in America. Geezus! If that's the case, then we might as well all give up!

All I know is if that is the case and Bush wins, I am out of here! If there is no unity then it's done. Game over!

John

The internet provides a lot of anonymity. Not everyone may be who or what they say they are. Cheers.

but I mean it when I say I am ABB. Any Dem'll do. Just reverse Bu$h's atrocious policies and give me some election reform.

ABB is a losing, and rather dangerous, proposition.

the motion to officially back the (D) nominee was quashed by a rather narrow margin and with vociferous opposition; (G)s are often also well-informed, and many will likely vote (D). Nader's very contemplation of not running against Dean seems to indicate more flexibility, both for Ralph and the (G)s.

JOHN

We of the Pacific Green Party were unaware of the Formation Of A National Green Party. Sence we can only speak for ourselves nad not he National Party all Bets are off.. Looks like 4 more years of Bush.
Or a split in the Green party.. You did say that the vote was 49 51..
If you vote deen you could atleast get half of us.

kick!


John