[Vision2020] Romney drops out!?

[Ted Moffett]

On 2/8/08, Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net> wrote:


> Edwards would be good, as I like what he says, but my
> preference would be Ralph Nader, who may very well
> campaign for President.  Appealing to Progressives is
> good with me, despite whatever baggage Nader may have
> (and really, who doesn't have baggage?)
>
> Nader has a record of working on changing America for
> the better for 40 years.  He is well connected to the
> activist community, and engaging activists is key to
> changing our country from it's disastrous course.  An
> Obama/Nader ticket sounds sweet to me.
>
> gclev


Many progressives begged Nader to drop out of the 2000 presidential race,
due to the potential of splitting the Democratic vote harming Gore's
chances.  We all know the result.  Nader helped put Bush in the White House
in 2000.  Nader's Florida votes alone gave Florida's electoral votes to
Bush, as the vote count actually was counted, though we also know that
absent illegal voter disenfranchisement, deliberately pushed by Florida's
Secretary of State and Bush supporter Katherine Harris, Gore would have won
Florida, even with Nader's participation.

Republican operatives were running ads supporting Nader's 2000 candidacy,
knowing this would hurt Gore.  And Nader knew this.

Nader even argued that a Bush presidency might be good for the nation in the
long run, given that Bush would create such a back lash against his policies
that progressives in the long run would become more unified and motivated.

But as far as I am concerned, given the damage of the Bush administration,
Nader's 2000 presidential run was an irresponsible application of idealistic
principles over sensible practical politics, resulting in wounds that may
not heal for decades.  The pending US Supreme Court nominations in 2000
alone were enough of a reason for Nader to withdraw to allow Gore the best
chance of a win.  Nader and everyone knew there was zero chance of Nader
taking the White House.  His presidential run did not even result in a
stronger party base supporting Nader or those who support his policies. His
supporters are more off the radar now than in 2000.

I recall hearing from Nader supporters in 2000 how Gore and Bush both
represented corporate big money, and entrenched elitist Washington power,
and were not that different.  Well, we have seen that however much this was
true, there were substantial differences between Gore and Bush that would
have taken the USA in very different directions on critical issues, the
invasion of Iraq and climate change, for example.  I do not believe Gore
would have supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and he would have
began to address climate change while the Bush administration was in denial,
backing big oil and energy interests, who did not want to address climate
change for obvious financial reasons.

Nader would be a terrible choice for a VP candidate under Obama.  I lost
respect for him as a politician after his sabotage of the 2000 presidential
election.  This showed he is not willing to compromise when the overall good
of the nation is at stake.

Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080208/666621b5/attachment.html