Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Darth Nader to Return - or to Rattle?
Apparently, Ralph Nader is scheduled to speak with Tim Russert this coming Sunday morning (2/24) on Meet The Press for who-knows-what announcement. He has that '08 exploratory committee going on and we can only imagine his plans, knowing him as well we do (at least those of us who reside on the dark side of 40)...
He can't stand the Clintons, of course, but I was mighty curious what he thought of Obama. I guess we'll find out Sunday, but I came across this YouTube clip of him interviewed on Democracy Now, and he sounds rather like he'd love to push Obama to speak more forcefully on matters versus push him out of the race (which, of course, would be a fat chance). Interesting, nonetheless:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyfSN7B4lYI




Comments (9)
I hope he runs. Now there's a candidate who will be able to deliver Change. Hell, he's been Changing things when Obama was having his diapers Changed.
So, what do you think Obama's reaction will be if Nader declares? Will he campaign to get Nader included in presidential debates, or will he collude with McCain to keep him out?
My money's on the latter.
February 22, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, maybe we can get Lyndon Larouche involved also.
February 22, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we note that Ralph Nader's great accomplishments were 1) some time ago, and 2) not from public office? The latter is especially important. He had standing to attack all monied interests, since he stood to gain nothing except respect (not that respect is nothing).
If Nader stood a chance in hell of getting elected we would already see him in the race. He's only trying to stay in the headlines.
February 22, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frankly, I think that Nader and Obama can actually agree on a whole bunch of things. If I were Obama, I would consider offering him some sort of position where he could play the role of a consumer advocate within the government, in order to win over his supporters.
The more publically reasonable and encouraging Obama is to Nader, the less strength Nader will have against him, should he run.
February 22, 2008 9:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frankly, I think that Nader and Obama can actually agree on a whole bunch of things. If I were Obama, I would consider offering him some sort of position where he could play the role of a consumer advocate within the government, in order to win over his supporters.
The more publically reasonable and encouraging Obama is to Nader, the less strength Nader will have against him, should he run. He should listen to Nader's interview below and start adjusting his policies appropriately.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyfSN7B4lYI
February 22, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nader needs to retire from the public sphere. He is nothing more than a running joke and it amazes me that people would be willing to vote for this clown yet again. What is he offering? Stomping his feet and threatening to play spoiler again? Pay attention to me or else you'll get St. McCain? I'm guessing 8 years of GWB didn't sate his thirst for regressive policies and illegal wars. Nader and his followers can go to hell.
February 22, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
I doubt Nader is into playing spoiler, rather, he wants to push Dem candidates into abandoning the corporatist agenda (an entirely laudable goal, IMO). Too bad so many of our leaders are too afraid to be labeled "liberal" to embrace him. This was one of Gore's failings in the 2000 campaign. Maybe Obama will do better.
February 22, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
While Nader's main accomplishments may have been long ago, that by itself is no disqualifier, and the fact he did the things he did without power associated with political office makes them all the more impressive. How many members of Congress can boast of a legislative agenda that impressive? Certainly neither of the two Dem frontrunners. He has my respect and admiration for having fought the good fight for many years, no matter how many enemies that made him. Can you say that of your chosen candidate? Will they be that principled and unbending?
And why exactly is Nader supposed to go away? To make senior Democrats less ashamed of having allowed their party to become a tool of corporate interests, abandoning the working class, and colluding in illegal wars, torture, infringements of civil liberties? Nader is about the only person on Earth for whom the old cliche "I did not abandon the Democratic Party, the Party abandoned me" holds true. May we live long enough to see the day folks like Nader represent Democratic Party mainstream, and are not ridiculed outcasts. Given the extent to which the Democratic Party acted as Bush's enablers, displacing your dissatisfaction onto Nader is highly ill-advised. Had they done their job as the party of opposition they are supposed to be, Bush would have been marginalized. But instead they chose to vote for the AUMF, confirm Alito and Roberts, continue funding the Iraq war, look the other way on torture, and so on. So don't you go around blaming Nader.
Make no mistake about it, I am about as committed a Democrat as they come. I'm an elected member of my county's Dem Party committee and a precinct captain. I voted for Gore in 2000, for Kerry in 2004. However, if Nader runs and Obama (or whoever holds the Dem banner come November) disrespects him, plays politics to keep him out of the debates, or engages in any other such shenanigans, I WILL VOTE FOR NADER even if I have to write his name onto the ballot with my own blood. I'd rather lose with the right candidate than win with the wrong one.
February 22, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are a committed Democrat yet if the campaigns don't massage Ralph's ego by allowing him into the debates you will vote for him? He's a fringe candidate who's had four chances to "keep 'em honest" (1992, 1996, 2000, 2004). He's still harping about how the two parties are too similar and without distinction. I don't know about you but, as a committed Democrat, I think there are plenty of distinctions to be made. Granted, there is a lot of housecleaning that needs to be done within the caucus but I'm not going to take advice from someone who's wisdom in 2000 consisted of saying there was no real difference between Bush and Gore.
February 23, 2008 12:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment