Ralph Nader will endorse Green Party recall candidate Camejo in San Fran

[papau]

From ABCNOTE "2000 Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader will endorse Green Party recall candidate Peter Camejo in San Francisco today"

Why -

Nader really is just a GOP agent - He knows his actions help the GOP - but does not care - as long as he gets media attention.

[CMT]

1. I wonder if he will say vote no on recall but yes forCamejo?

eom.

[ShaneGR]

51. Of course he won't, he's a GOP agent PERIOD.

His 2.7% (Probably less next time around) has been paid in full with blood money.

[Iverson]

53. empty dogmatic assertion

Not only is your claim demonstrably false (see also note #42), your raising the question of blood money also raises uncomfortable facts about exactly who stands "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush and his pre-emptive invasion.

[John_H]

55. Are you saying that he'll urge voters to vote No on the recall?

If not, then the previous poster's assertion "of course he wont is absolutely demonstrably true.

You're also (purposely?) misinterpreting his point about "blood money"-- I think the point was that if Nader had done the patriotic thing in 2000, the Dems would be standing "shoulder to shoulder" with Al Gore. Nader's 2.7 percent is being paid for in actual blood rather than "blood money."

That's another point that has been proven "demonstrably true" numerous times, dispite the tragicomic contortions DU Greens perform to refute the obvious. No need to rehash this, unless you're in the mood to entertain us ironyphiles around here.

Does all of this mean Fidelity Ralph's a GOP agent? No, he's just another cynical opportunist, an agent for Ralph Nader and Ralph Nader only.

More irrefutable facts that seem to drive Green DUers nuts at: http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

[Iverson]

thanks

"Does all of this mean Fidelity Ralph's a GOP agent? No,..."

See, even you understand that that claim was worthless, even if you cannot help but couch it in aggression and diversion.

Have a nice day.

[AntiLempa]

2. or maybe. . .

or maybe he supports the Green Party Candidate. Of course that makes sense and there is no place for logic in partisan politics.

I guess that Joe Lieberman and Dick Gephardt are GOP agents for their performance in the Rose Garden in support of the Iraq invasion.

[RichM]

3. He isn't "just a GOP agent." He has valid objections to both parties.

He wouldn't have made his complimentary supportive remarks about Kucinich if he was "just a GOP agent."

[Terwilliger]

6. no, he's a GOP agent

remember...in the land of simple politics, anyone who isn't with you is against you, so the strategery must employ hatred of anyone who criticizes.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

21. If Arnie were not running I would agree with you

but this is now another life or death struggle against the GOP. The last thing we need is a victory photo-op of Arnie and Bush together on the stage.

[bearfartinthewoods]

77. victory photo-op of Arnie and Bush together on the stage.

oh gawd....just shoot me now. i try to stay up beat and confident but oh gawd...
nader ...
again.


run ross run

[RichM]

25. Oh yeah, you're right, I forgot. How silly of me!

Democratic Loyalists are so mature, so able to take constructive criticism. And of course, their party has so much to be proud of. I mean, it's not easy to roll over on your back as often as they do. It's tiring! It takes determination!

It's not like there's any good themes to run on, or anything. Aside from the prospect of never-ending war, not catching Osama or Saddam, a thousand bald-faced lies about Iraq, a few corporate corruption scandals, & losing a few million jobs, there's hardly anything the Dems could use as compelling campaign themes. No wonder they control zero branches of government.

What impresses me most about Democrats is their ability to become like their opponents. It's not bad enough that half the party votes with Bush on imperialist wars, or that "The Big Dog" himself chips in on Larry King Live to bail Shrubby out of some recent hot water. No, now you have little Dem Party militarists jumping up & down, rooting for a general to come in to save their electoral bacon. If that happens, we could have a choice between: a Democrat who IS a Republican (Holy Joe); a handful of Democrats who voted for the Iraq war but who now want to posture as critics of it; & a general (because Democrats are terrified of Repubs saying they're "soft on defense). In this way, almost the WHOLE PARTY is defined by what Republicans say, or what Democrats fear they might say. Gotta admit, that's a mighty impressive picture.

[John_H]

62. More great political advice from Rich Lombardi

Losing isn't everything, it's the only thing.

The only people becoming Republicans, my self-centered friend, are those who make it electorally easier for them to retain power.

Most democrats (voters and electeds alike) are well left of center. A minority (the DLC and you, for example) are on one fringe or another.

But thanks for pointing out, however unwittingly, the obvious: that there are big differences between the parties (even on the war), that Lieberman can't win(too right wing to win a Dem primary), and that "preempting" your opponents attacks is part of winning elections (imagine!).

We'll have to excuse you for slinging the ol' miltarist / general=bad card, since the truth is a little less than obvious. But if your knowledge of the military ever transcended the bumper sticker version, you'd understand that until the trigger is pulled, most generals are usually far more "dovish" than their civilian masters.

Does not compute? Unlike you and Chimpy, they've seen the results projectiles hitting nineteen year old flesh, and they don't like the idea of causing it, among other reasons.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skinner]

4. Will he tell people to vote against the recall?

Anyone know?

[AP]

5. If they vote NO-Camejo, that could be a good thing

but if they vote Yes-Camejo, this could be a bad thing.

[Terwilliger]

7. Since the Dems endorsed YES, I dont know why Nader shouldn't

[Skinner]

8. "The Dems" endorsed Yes?

Did they?

Who are "The Dems" may I ask?

[Terwilliger]

11. Cruz Bustamante?

Once a Democrat put his name on the ballot, the party might as well have said "Well, we like Davis, but JUST IN CASE!" I think that's a tacit admission that they know they're likely going to lose the Recall. I agree with the sentiments of MANY on this board...Dems should have jumped the Davis ship, or not floated a candidate. Now, it's as if the party has left him twisting in the wind while they tell people about a better choice besides AHH-nold.

[Skinner]

13. Oh, I see.

So, when you said "the Dems" you actually meant "a Dem."

And when you said "endorsed yes" you actually meant "made a tacit admission that they know they're likely to lose the Recall"

[Terwilliger]

17. You disagree?

You think Bustamante just took a walk and decided to run? Come on! The state party dcided it was in their best interests to put a candidate on the ballot. Its an admission of weakness (at least under the present circumstances) and the people of the state will respond to that alone.

If the Dems are wise, Bustamante will fade out...all the others too...and they put their 100% energy into people voting NO. If not, then they should abandon the NO on Recall part, and say YES on Bustamante.

[molly]

19. The vote is not an either or situation

you can vote NO and vote for a candidate. It would be better if Davis lost the recall to have a DEM win. Don't ya think?

[Skinner]

20. It strikes me as smart politics, under the circumstances.

If Davis loses the recall, it seems reckless to have no candidate on the replacement ballot.

If we actually care about fighting the assholes who did this to us, then we shouldn't fight with one hand tied behind our back. We should give them absolutely no inch.

[Iverson]

22. partly right

It would have been smart politics if this was the position consistently elaborated from the beginning. However, this kind of hedging one's bet appears to be a response to the likelihood of this recall succeeding. What had been a consistent strategy of a simple "no" for easily understandable reasons now looks like waffling. That can't be helpful.

[Skinner]

27. True.

Straight "no" looked like a smart strategy one month ago. But circumstances have changed, and I think it makes sense for strategy to change too.

Bustamonte declared shortly after Arnold declared. Arnold's entry into the race changed the whole dynamic and made the straight-no strategy much less likely to be successful.

But Bustamonte made clear that he supports a "no" vote on the recall. It is just false to say that he -- or the party as a whole -- has endorsed voting yes on the recall.

[Iverson]

32. sure

It is not a cut-and-dried endorsement, as you say. However, the presence of a party's candidate implies (not asserts) an endorsement of a yes vote.

As to smart, we'll have to wait and see. Personally, I think that the Democrats are bedeviled by the appearance of reaction and inconsistency. But one man's principle is another man's intransigence, so my critique may be proved wrong.

[Skinner]

34. Not true at all.

It does not imply an endorsement of a yes vote. Everyone is out there saying "vote no".

The only thing implied is that they think there is a chance they won't win the recall vote.

[Iverson]

37. hmmm

Considering that the current strategy is a shift away from a principled no-only stance, the implications are of greater tolerance (or less intolerance) for a yes vote. Obviously, Democrats will be (or should be) solidly against the recall.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

78. Right

Bustamante is insurance.

Pray for the best

Prepare for the worst

Any other strategy is criminally negligent.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

49. Iverson you are usually an advocate of logic

YOur suggestion that the party recommends a recall by putting a candidate on the ballot is akin to saying I endorse another car hitting me by purchasing auto insurance.

[Iverson]

50. thank you

I would not consider making that argument if it were not immediately preceded by a no-only position. Context is everything; to me the shift is meaningful.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

52. The shift was the reality of the situation

While the unity would have fared well, but if Davis keeps polling as LOW as he has it jeopardizes the opportunity for a remedy. The fact that A Democrat with less appeal was going to break ranks meant the Democrat with MOST appeal HAD to.

edited for clarity

[Terwilliger]

68. the reality of the situation?

then who was it that kept everyone from running until AHH-nold decided to announce? Why were there big fights about it if you think this No/Cruz was the right decision? They thought it was the right decision to vote YES on the war resoloution. Were they right to do that?

ONCE AGAIN, the Democratic party back on their heels and on the defensive.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

74. Ter honey smoke a little less before you post. Tha California legislature

had nothing to do with the war resolution.

Teh California Dems are not the national Dems. They put forth a number of liberal and progrssive candidates including Bustamante and won.

[Terwilliger]

81. honey, havent smoked anything today

but California Democrats are on the big bong

The question was about what Democrats believe in. Obviously, if it was OK for Democrats to vote NO and YES on the war resolution, then its ok to assume that Bustamante may have voted YES on it. Do you think Democrats act independently of each other? Of course not. So, during the days when the Dems couldnt figure out what to do in terms of the recall, they were having the same discussions (fights) that we were here at DU...talking about how you couldnt run anybody else, as that was a straightforward affront to Davis.

Now that it's a NO/Cruz ticket, now you act like it was the most sensible decision :eyes:

Tell me something, would Davis have lost in anything less than a landslide if Dick Riordan had gone up against him last year? Yes, and you know it. Davis doesn't have any power to make anything happen on October 7th. Either the state party has to convince everyone to vote NO, or they have to go full bore behind Bustamante. Time's a wastin'.

[tinanator]

86. the sequence of events

Interesting little rube goldberg device went off when Ahnold said yes. Issa was dissed Garamendi was pissed and now you have a two horse race between the likely winner Cruz Bustamante and the low budget science fiction cliche ridden candidacy of near Billionaire celebrity Steroid Man. This unfortunately leaves Camejo in a poorer position than before Bustamante acceded, when it could be momentarily fantasied he would win with no Democratic choices on the ballot. It also leaves us in a bad bind as California voters, if we assume the recall may or will be successful while trying to select a possible replacement from a diminshed menu. With no primary or instant runoff in effect, this is a perfect example of two party electoral kidnapping, and should be the main complaint against this circus/"process". By eliminating other well known and very willing candidates through political arm twisting, they have once again chosen the two choices. Now, when Greens continue to offer the most progressive choice, naturally Nader will show support. And now, when the two parties have stacked the table, it will be Nader/Camejo/Green voters who take the blame for any Democratic/Bustamante defeat, which if it happens would be a very bad sign on a very deep level.

[Terwilliger]

26. ok, then why not prop up Bustamante?

we should abandon this NO on Recall part, because that's not important anymore. If it's a given (and I'm not saying I'm sure, but I'd bet NO fails) then why not put all your eggs into Bustamante basket?

If the election is being run on personalities, then Davis loses (he's just too unpopular) Then you need to concentrate on Cruz. Dems could encourage all the other Dem candidates (25 or so?) to throw their weight behind Cruz, then he'll be the person that's going to win. As opposed to the "safety valve" he's being characterized as now.

[Skinner]

29. I don't see why you think we need to pick one or the other.

In this election we've got TWO chances to stop our opponents. First on the recall vote, and second on the replacement vote. You are arguing that we should simply choose one of the two chances and ignore the other. It makes no sense.

[Terwilliger]

33. well, I see your position

We'll see how NO/Cruz Bustamante works.

Personally, I think that we will have AHH-nold Schwarznegger for governor in early October with that strategy. I hope I'm wrong.

[Skinner]

35. Well, there's a good chance we'd have Arnold under the old strategy too.

So whether or not Arnold wins won't really prove the efficacy of one approach versus the other.

[Terwilliger]

38. well...time will tell?

I think my approach is better. MUCH better. I don't think we can play the same old politics in this circus and expect the desired outcome. If you want people to vote for Bustamante, you ought to at least stress him over voting NO to Recall, because Recall == Davis, and nobody really wants Davis as much as they want a liberal or Democrat in the governor's mansion.

[Iverson]

10. You know the answer to that.

The conclusion may (or may not) be right, but using the Democratic position to discover what either Nader or the Greens should do does not make sense. They are outside the formal structure of the Democratic Party.

[proud patriot]

23. Dems are stating Vote No on the recall, then vote for Cruz B.

at least that's what I've heard from the Dems on Talking
Head shows .

I'm not sure about the Green plan . I haven't heard
if they want a yes or no vote on the recall .

[Terwilliger]

28. I would hope they'll endorse NO

but I can't be sure...bunch of leftist pinkos! ;-)

I don't think Democrats will retain power in this state unless they''re a lot smarter about the electorate. I don't know that they are :shrug:

[Uzybone]

73. Yes why not

after there is no difference between Nader and the Democrats. Nader should take his GOP supporting ass and get the fuck out of politics. let him do something better with his time, like whine about the officiating of NBA playoff games.

[Iverson]

15. likely to see both

Here's the skinny on the ground:

"Like all Californians, Greens are divided. In a recent speech, Camejo expressed what appears to be the consensus view. Though Davis is utterly incompetent and corrupt, Camejo disapproves of the Republican attempt to manipulate the process. Still, it is important that the Green voice be heard."

http://www.sfbg.com/37/44/x_oped.html

[Iverson]

9. idea

Let's have a thread started for the purpose of reflexive Green-bashing, regardless of whether the thesis actually makes sense.

Darn, came in late again!

[Terwilliger]

12. oh nevermind

the Dems have to have their opinions :)

so do I :freak:

[papau]

14. Nader is screwing the Dems - again - discuss.....

and some folks read the Dem party position of a vote No on recall, and the Dem Cruz on the 195 name replacement ballot, as an invitation to Nader to endorse a Green party person.

this thesis actually makes sense?

good question.

[Terwilliger]

18. no, the excuses for you to bitch and complain about how inadequate Dems R

You posted this so you'd get the Nader-hating sympathies that permeate this board and get everybody to go "Ohhhhhh YEAH...that Nader...he's an asshole" And people say *I* make trouble ;-)

[maha]

16. Ralph Nader will drop his pants and whistle Dixie

and I will still not care.

[buddhamama]

24. if Ralph is a GOP plant, how should we label Huffington?

won't she also draw votes from the more progressive CA voters?

[Terwilliger]

31. nice site

and she's got a FAQ!

http://www.ariannaforgov.com/

[SEAburb]

36. Arianna is the left, right, middle, inside, outside candidate.

She's red,green, and blue.

[buddhamama]

80. the point is, she too will most likely draw votes from Bustamante

Arianna had encouraging words for Camejo last week on DemocracyNow.
so why isn't she being labeled a GOP plant?

[Terwilliger]

82. because she's not?

and Dems only look like Freepers when they call everyone GOP plants? :shrug:

[buddhamama]

83. i'm not saying she is, Terwilliger

i respect and agree with Arianna on just about everything. i'm trying to make a point here though, there is a double standard going on here.

Greens are GOP plants but Independents aren't. :crazy:

[SEAburb]

84. a couple of weeks ago I called her a neo-con Trojan horse

I didn't get much of a reponse, so I thought I'd try something different. Something that attacks her ever changing political position.

[mike_c]

30. I'm one Californian who agrees with Nader on this one...

I'll vote NO on the recall, but I'll vote for Peter Camejo on the second part of the ballot. I can't imagine any better way to rub the repigs nose in the sh*t-storm they've created than to elect a genuine progressive liberal! Besides, Cruz Bustamante is too conservative for my taste.

[Tinoire]

39. Make that 2 Californians

I was going to post the same thing til I saw your post.

Bustamante is too conservative for me.

No on the recall, yes for Peter Camejo.

And may Camejo win so that I never ever again have to hear the black-mailing "Bogeyman around the corner" crowd tell me that the Green platform is so dead that they don't hold any important offices.

That will be my first vote where I officially break the strangle-hold the 2 party system has over me.

The Democratic Leadership let me down seriously with this one but this is not the first time so why feign surprise?

I had no problems with Davis and would vote for him again but I can't vote for Bustamante.

NO to recalling Davis! And all the Dems supporting Davis' recall should be ASHAMED of themselves!

[David__77]

43. On Bustamante...

He supports the nation's only paid family leave law, supports civil unions for lesbians and gays, higher taxes on the wealthy, and much much less beholden to corporate interests than Davis.

When he was representing Fresno was a different day. He really has a lot of potential. I really, really hope people come around to his candidacy.

[Tinoire]

54. Maybe you should post a thread in Campaign/Politics

about Bustamante's positions if you want to reach more people because here in the middle of this thread your information will just get buried forever.

I noticed a trend in world politics a few years ago; noticed that all over the world people were being presented with either the choice of a Centrist and a True Right Winger or an absolute vile candidate and a Right-Winger. This really bothers me. The Liberal Left is being shut up everywhere and not just in America.

Have you noticed how all of a sudden everyone is "fiscally conservative but socially liberal"? Well you can't be socially liberal if you won't collect or spend the money! To me this is nonesense. Tax the rich and tax them fairly- there is plenty of money out there and I see no reason to all of a sudden have to turn our party into one that will make do with whatever bread-crumbs the wealthy are willing to share.

But back to Bustamante... Post something in Campaign/Politics and maybe you will dispel enough myths, address enough concerns that some of us might change our mind.

Peace

[David__77]

58. I'll work on that...

I think it's interesting that Davis has called himself a "progressive governor" recently. Of course, those of us who have always considered ourselves progressives all--like me--probably took a double take on that.

My vision is of moving the CA "political spectrum" as a whole leftward. If someone like Arnie becomes standard GOP fare, the fundies and the Milton Friedman lovers are way out of the political ballpark. If we get more good bills from the Democrats like paid family leave, then I think we'll have a true progressive party here.

The CA Democratic Party is the party of Gray Davis, but also of Barbara Lee, Tom Hayden, Sheila Kuehl, Carole Migden, Antonio Villaraigosa and so on. We've got a lot of progressive talent. I think that Bustamante has definitely linked up with this. You should have heard him speak at the CA Democratic gathering in March 2002--he was very passionate and clear about the issues: no mealy-mouthed stuff.

I'll try to get something concise in that forum. Thanks.

[ButterflyBlood]

63. How can you think Davis is OK...

and think Bustamante is too conservative? Bustamante is way more liberal than Davis, who's DLC to the core. I would vote no on the recall but I'd much rather vote for Bustamante than Davis.

[David__77]

66. Thing about him...

Being from Fresno, a citadel of obscurantism, Bustamante has always said "I'm a moderate, I'm a moderate!" And, guess what? People think he's a "moderate." But his policies are actions are good and progressive. That's all I care about...

[shanti]

61. the problem is...

that camajo will NEVER be elected, so why waste your vote?

[dolstein]

40. This really shouldn't surprise anyone

After all, Ralph Nader has been out to destroy the Democratic Party for years. First he kept Gore out of the White House, and now he's backing a candidate who has no chance of getting elected governor, but could siphon crucial votes away from Bustamente. Nader won't stop until the Republicans occupy every elective office in the land.

[Iverson]

42. You know that that is false.

Nader's criticisms of the Republicans often come in the vacuum of Democratic silence or, worse still, agreement with them.

You need not like Nader, but confine yourself to accuracy, please.

There are way too many examples that refute your assertion, but here is a sample.

"The group Black Voices for Peace organized the rally to bring people together on the holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr., who spoke out against the Vietnam war before his assassination in 1968.

Nader went on to call Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General John Ashcroft and conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh "draft dodgers" who avoided military service"

(from "Nader Criticizes President's Handling of Iraq," http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0121-02.htm)

"Lessons for the future? Don't give your major political opponents a free ride between and before elections. Challenge the corporate takeover of elections, including the sudden surge of political television advertising paid directly by industries like the big price-gouging drug companies. And get down to the neighborhood level with visible stands for the people."

(from "The Mid-Term Elections," http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1108-04.htm)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

60. There hasn't been a vacuum of Dem silence in California which undermines

your defense of him. California's AG and governor have been very forceful about the energy crisi, the tax cuts, service cuts etc. IF Nader cared for CONSUMERS as he once did he certainly wouldn't split their vote at such a critical time.

[Iverson]

69. not at all

Our colleague was engaging in reflexive Green-bashing that was not confined to the state level. I provided counterargument and sources which were germane to his assertions, which we all knew were just venting anyway.

I gather that you aren't persuaded by my rebuttal, and that's fine, but it doesn't make the initial bad argument any good.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

75. Only as concerns the state level not the national level

just to clarify my lack of persuasion. Peace, pal. :D

[Terwilliger]

70. Hmm...yet everyone is ready to lynch Davis

so as vocal as Cali dems are, Davis is just so unpopular that that won't work.

You don't suppose Davis could promise progressive and liberal reforms do ya? Yeah, I didn't think so.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

76. So what was the farm union bill he signed, the family leave bill or the

coverage to those living together...conservative tripe?

[Terwilliger]

79. will that win him the state?

will that stop the recall or keep AHH-nold from being elected?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

85. It might. Lots of families in the central valley affected by that

legislation. Lots of union workers. Who knows :shrug: It will help.

[sujan]

57. intellectually dishonest

Green movement is bigger than your Democrat establishment.

Also, they have a much larger influence in shaping worldwide politics than Democrats do right now.

[StandWatie]

41. Camejo took 11% last election

in a field with a few hundred candidates it's the best shot the Greens have ever had at taking a governership.

[David__77]

44. Actually, less than 6%

He didn't take nearly 11%. Third party candidates taken together certainly did, however. But there were AIP and Libertarian candidates as well...

[StandWatie]

46. you are right..

I went looking for what he took in 2002 and the first thing I saw was a county result instead of a state result.

[David__77]

56. Must've been Alameda!

That would indeed make sense. He was in second place in SF.

[David__77]

45. Camejo previously indicated possible support for Bustamante.

We have a real potential for the first election of a Latino governor, and one espousing a progressive agenda. I hope Camejo decides differently between now and the election...

[Trek234]

47. Actually...

The greens could win this. I hope they do, but if they don't I hope the dems defeat any repub.

[StandWatie]

48. anyone could win this

republicans are going to schism over Arnold vs. Simon and any of them with libertarian leanings will know it and jump ship for Copeland, the rights vote is way more split than the left and I don't see the likely democratic voters being too energetic to get to the polls one way or another.

[Julien Sorel]

65. Arnold is a mortal lock for at least 25 - 30% of the vote as things

stand. That would be Republicans and his name recognition alone. Anyone who's going to beat him will have to be able to poll at least that much, and this Camejo guy isn't going to do it. He can, though, help the Greens pull off another Nadir.

[dolstein]

64. The only way the Greens could win this

would be if no other candidate gets more than ten percent of the vote. And even ten percent might be a bit generous, since I expect that Huffington will probably end up siphoning away a fair number of Green votes.

[Terwilliger]

71. The only way Dems can win

is on TOTAL wing and a prayer

NO probably won't win because noone likes Davis

Bustamante probably won't win because Democrats cant energize their base, and a Lieberman Democrat would never inspire the California Dem base anyway.

The only hope Dems have is Camejo or Huffington.

[robbedvoter]

59. Ha!ha! I was right about the Newshax article! "Greens plan

W reselection in DC" - it was a parody that some took seriously. My response was: why would Greens be in DC now, when there's an election to be stolen in California? They are soo predictable!

[Terwilliger]

72. yes, they act like Democrats!

the bastards