Tuesday | June 03, 2003
Nader considers another run
As reported last week, there has been some serious discussion within the Green Party of forgoing a presidential run, and putting its support behind the Democratic Party nominee.
Like anything else, the Greens are split amongst competing factions -- the fundamentalists, who cling to the fiction that there is little difference between the GOP and Dems, and the realists, who can no longer make that argument with a straight face.
There are some practical concerns -- if the Greens don't run a candidate, it could lose its ballot spot in several states. The clear solution, however, is to nominate a silent "candidate" -- perhaps an obscure professor at an isolated Midwest college (away from the media centers).
Nader now confirms that the intra-Green Party debate is raging nationwide. And while Nader is coy about whether he'll seek the Green Party nomination (and given he's never officially joined the party, beats me why they would continue to run him), he seems to almost get it:
"I think the future of the Green Party has to be built on local and state candidates," Nader said, adding, "although presidential candidates can give a small third party more visibility."I say "almost" because it seems 2000 did more harm than good to the Greens. Nader may have helped give them more visibility, but in the process he earned the ire of the vast majority of progressives in this country.
p.s. Careful with what you post. We need to unite to defeat Bush next year. Blasting Greens for helping elect Bush in 2000 won't get us anywhere. We need to discuss ways we can encourage Greens to back the Democratic candidate, not hurl more bile their way.
I will shut down this thread if it gets out of control.Posted June 03, 2003 09:32 AM | Comments (274)