Green Party Weighs Endorsing Nader

[kskiska]

By JR ROSS
The Associated Press

MADISON, Wis. - Delegates to next month's Green Party convention face a unique choice: opt against nominating a candidate for president or formally endorse Ralph Nader, who is running for the White House as an independent after shunning the party that nominated him in 1996 and 2000.

Still, Nader's Green supporters believe an endorsement will be enough to help him get on the ballot in many of the 22 states and Washington, D.C., where the party has ballot access.

Delegates to the convention June 23-28 in Milwaukee are not required to nominate anyone for president. They will cast a series of ballots until either a candidate or the choice "no nominee" receives a majority of the votes.

If "no nominee" wins, delegates can then ask for a vote to endorse a candidate, who most likely would be Nader. The implications of such a move and how it might influence the race remain unclear.

Democrats still blame Nader for Al Gore's loss four years ago, believing he helped elect Republican George W. Bush by siphoning away votes in key states like Florida and New Hampshire.

more…
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/32-05272004-307517.html

[lastknowngood]

1. The greens don't count they don't vote for our guys and have no

influence on either party. They are of no consequence in this election. If they vote for their party they will reap the same whirlwind as the rest of America.

[styersc]

15. I vote Green and Dem -as a matter of fact I am running as a Green.

I count on Dem votes and work for Dem candidates.

The arrogance of this comment is what has driven so many Greens away from the Democratic party.

This time around Nader's success or failure will have nothing to do with the Green Party as he has alienated most Greens.

Greens who refuse to vote Dem- and I am not one- all cite egotists like this for their vote.

[catmandu57]

2. After the last 3 1/2 years

I just can't see how anyone could do anything but vote to expell the physcopaths from the goverment. People have every right to vote for whom they want. responsible people though won't or can't throw their vote away. Not this year we just don't have that luxury.

[demnan]

3. They should endorse Kerry

I think his environmental record is as good as it gets.

[rogerashton]

6. I concur!

And if they do so, I for one will vote for Kerry on the Green Party line, to send the message and to help keep the Greenery on the ballot.

Other than that, I 'spect to vote a straight Demo ticket.

[robbedvoter]

13. What was wrong with Gore's environmental record? Was Ralph's better?

This has nothing to do with the environment. It's a power grab. they endorse nader - they see some GOP cash.

[kysrsoze]

4. Stupid is as stupid does. You'd figure they would have learned something

Screw 'em.

[annak110]

5. Well, no, it looks like Democrats would have learned something,

that was the whole idea in the first place but it does look like they haven't learned at all.

[Bridget Burke]

7. Explain, please.

What should the Democrats have learned?

Many parts of the Green platform appeal to me. In a more perfect world, I'd consider voting for their candidates in local elections.
However, they let themselves be used by Nader in 2000 & helped install Bush as President. Apparently, they haven't learned their lesson.

I wouldn't vote for a Green for Dog Catcher.

[depakid]

11. OK- I'll explain

Democrats continue to either give in to the right wing agenda (i.e. fail to use parliamentary procedures that the Republicans would use to block abhorrent legislation) or they simply sell out. Democrats voted for (or declined to block) Bush's tax cut, they voted in substantial numbers for the bankruptcy bill- a giveaway to the credit card industry that guess what? overwhelmingly contributes to Republicans. In terms of ANY sort of progressive values (like not making life even worse for single moms) that was as bad as legislation gets- yet even Hillary voted for it (Kerry to his credit did not).

My Democratic senator and representative helped to provide the margin for passage of the Medicare bill (which the Dems could ave stopped). The only response I got to my letter was a form mailing. Think they'll get my vote again? Think again

I could go on and on.

Over the past 10 years, the Democratic party has pandered to the right in an ill conceived effort effort at "triangulation." Over and over, they have voted in favor of corrupt corporate interests or in the case of Bill Clinton, signed legislation or set (or failed to set) regulatory policies at the executive level that's clearly not in the public interest- or even in their own interests, as in the case of the radio oligopolies brought about by the Telecommunications Act.

Collectively of course, all of these actions have been a profound FAILURE. Republicans now control all 3 branches of government plus damn near all of the broadcast media and most of the newspaper publishers.

Not only has the DLC strategy been a failure, but it has predictably alienated much of its base and made the party seem unattractive to its natural constituency of idealistic young people. It shouldn't be any surprise then that independent registration is way up over the past decade and that the little Green party is seen as a threat.

The best way for the Democratic party deal with this is to start acting like Democrats again- stop pointing fingers and whining about Nader. Grow a backbone, get assertive, do the right thing and the "problem" with the Greens will take care of itself.

[annak110]

17. Excellent explanation!

And, the DLC really has sucked for years. I believe that they pushed Kerry to the fore because he will follow their lead and make no changes...Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich are staying in the race so they can talk about building a real party, one that will understand that it is a separate party and that will follow the advice in your last paragraph.

I guess I'm an idealistic old person but I just can't see making the same mistakes over and over again thus continuing to advance the right wing agenda.

[paulk]

8. Like, if you don't kiss Green ass

we'll make sure Bush gets elected?

What a brilliant strategy.

[John_H]

16. If the Greens pick Nader, we'll learn exactly who to completely shut out

of any input into the Kerry Administration.

[struggle4progress]

9. I know Kermit the Frog once said, "It's not easy being Green."

But let's put our thinking caps on, Green Brothers and Sisters! Rule number one in politics is WIN THE FRIGGIN ELECTION. After we have followed rule number one, we can follow rule number two: DO GOOD THINGS WHENEVER POSSIBLE. We really agree on many issues. :)

[KewDistLine936]

10. If only more Greens had your good sense

Then we wouldn't be as divided. And a lot more could be accomplished.

[newyawker99]

14. Hi KewDistLine936!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Woodstock]

12. Howard Dean said this about Nader & the election

The perfect becomes the enemy of the good. Striving for perfection can screw up the lives of a LOT of people. Here's Howard:

http://www.progressive.org/june04/intv0604.html

Sometimes from the point of view of the activist, the perfect becomes the enemy of the good, and I think there would be a huge price to be paid by America's working people and by small children and by minorities if George Bush is reelected for a second term. The only person who can be President other than George Bush is John Kerry, so it makes no sense to vote for Ralph Nader. This is one election where a vote for Ralph Nader is essentially a vote for George Bush.