As a member of the Green Party, I proudly supported Nader in both 1996 and 2000 - You can still read my coverage of the last race, and my endorsement of Nader, here on Suite 101. So, why am I greeting this run with not much more than a yawn?
Welcome to the Party
Ralph Nader has been pointing out the shortfalls of the two corporate party system for years, and when he accepted the nomination of the Green Party in 1996 he said it was to help build a viable third party. In 2000 he built on that theme, and he and the Greens worked together to build a framework for future successes, and helped get many Greens elected to local offices.
This year, by taking his name out of consideration for the Green Party nomination, and going it alone, what are we to make of his calls for a viable third party? Has he changed his mind about that? Is his ego really bigger than the needs of our democracy? Possibly so.
This move has angered many Greens who worked hard on his earlier campaigns and may well cost him their vote. Moreover, it will cause other Greens to choose between the man they've supported as their standard bearer for nearly a decade, or the official Green candidate. (At the time of this writing it looks like David Cobb will be the Green nominee, but it's not yet final.)
But, Nader will not be entirely without party backing. The Reform party has quietly voted to endorse the independent candidacy of Ralph Nader, rather than field a candidate of their own in 2004. In their endorsement statement, the Reform party points out that "80 out of every 100 registered voters did not vote for Democratic or Republican candidates in the 2004 Primaries. . . and with the help of every citizen who did not vote in the primaries, [Nader] can win the November presidential election."
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Ken Goldstein's Third Party U.S. Politics topic, please visit the Discussions page.