About a month ago, longtime consumer activist and advocate Ralph Nader threw his hat into the political arena. He announced that he once again would seek the Presidency of the United States. This of course sent shockwaves thru Democratic camps and I think I heard a few champagne corks go off over at GOP headquarters. Nader's entry into the 2004 Presidential race was a small surprise to many who felt that he essentially cost Al Gore the 2000 election. I admit I was a little taken aback myself. But after a little careful thought and hearing some of the banter around the subject, I have altered my view slightly and I believe there is much more here than meets the eye.
1st off, I voted for Nader in 2000. It was my protest vote. I already knew going in that Al Gore was going to take my state (he did) and my 1 vote would do more good in supporting a man who I felt and still feel is "one of the good guys." And that's a list that stems the political spectrum. That list includes guys on the left, like Nader and Dean and both JFK and RFK as well as FDR. It includes centrists like Clinton, John McCain, Chuck Hagel and Sam Nunn. And it includes conservatives like Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp. No, I don't agree with all the ideologies or decisions that those men made, and there are many others, but they are all guys who I always felt did the right thing when it counted. They are people I would consider voting for regardless of any party affiliation.
I also voted for Nader to try to help the greens get their needed percentages to get Federal Matching Funds and guaranteed debate participation. Of course, they failed on that note, but not by much. And in my mind, it was a shame. I do believe Nader is right in pointing out that all sides deserved to be heard from. At first, I believed that Nader's running was indeed a bad thing for the Democrats. And after hearing even Jimmy Carter blast him, I might be inclined to agree. And Jimmy is a good friend of Ralph's, although they probably aren't hanging out much together lately. And I think it goes without saying that Carter's charachter and honesty are beyond reproach. But again, I think there is more here than meets the eye.
Ralph Nader is a brilliant man. He's a little goofy, and about as exciting as watching paint dry sometimes, but he is brilliant. He is also a champion of the people. There is not one person in this country who probably doesn't owe their life or health to something that Nader's Raiders haven't had a big hand in. Whether it be a safety feature, a warning label or one of the scores of consumer friendly legislative or regulartory measures, they have fought on behalf of all of us. And most people don't even realize how much they have done to improve all of our lives. To call Nader a humanitarian and someone who just plain cares, would be a massive understatement.
And except for the Corvair, and seemingly in judging his popularity in this contest, Nader hasn't missed the mark many times. Few people realize that him and his organizations have accounted for more consumer protections and legislative passages of such mandates than any member of Congress ever.
Still, why would such a guy who is seemingly so aware of things, so adamant to buck the system and campaign for President.I think Ralph has a plan. I may be wrong, but, I think he will shown to be brilliant in the end.
Ralph turned down the offer to run on the Green ticket, citing that their convention was too late, and even tho he still supported many of their efforts, he decided to go as a true independent. I started thinking about that in light of the fact that a convention in the future hasn't stopped either major party from a full on campaign here in March. And indeed, there would be nothing to stop Nader from campaigning as a candidate before the Green convention. The party affiliation would also ensure Nader's being on the ballot in 50 states. Something that is very much in doubt as an independent. But perhaps he has no intention on anyone actually voting for him. what if Ralph has a bigger plan. One that both advaces his agenda and helps bring change to the White House.
I think if you pinned Ralph down, which shouldn't be hard at his advanced age, he would confess that overall, he would rather work with a Democrat than a Republican on issues of consumer advocacy and regulation. The Republicans have traditionally been a little less friendly from being forced or forcing businesses into spending money just to protect some people,,,maybe. Although Ralph has been spoken well of by some "of the good guys" who realize that Ralph is an overall force for good rather than just trying to be a pain in the ass, it has generally been the Democrats, and mainly the the more liberal or progressive wing of the party that has been more friendly to him. With that being said, let me share what I think Mr. Nader has in mind.
I think deep down that Ralph Nader wants to see a democrat in the White House. He also knows that they will need to bring along as many of the progressives and 3rd party people as possible to do that. When Dean went down as the nominee, Ralph stepped up to basically replace him. But not to be President. But to keep the issues of the progressives on the forefront. To keep the people who would fall off the Dean wagon and go back to 3rd party candidates otherwise. Ralph Nader has a better shot to get the issues of the progressives and the greens and other left wing groups on the table in the debates. Ralph Nader knows that the debates are monumental in taking a candidate from a 2 or 3% margin to the teens, where federal matching funds can be had, usually. But Ralph knows the political climate of polarization as well as anyone and knows that this election winning is everything. Even in debate appearances, Ralph knows the only thing he could do is hurt the Democrats.
But if Ralph could get in the debates. And his ability to get in front of a camera and demand it for the 3rd election cycle may just work. After all, the republicans might even encourage it in an attempt to damage the left and appear more "open minded" than them. In fact, Ralph may be counting on it. He actually may be trying to dupe the republicans into letting him in. Why "dupe?" Here's why...
I don't think Ralph Nader has any intention of staying in the race thru November if he gets in the debates. If he gets in, he gets to make his cases to the American people, and hold the 3rd party people and more progressive wings together and energized. No, they won't sway many votes that they may have in 2000 if Nader had been allowed to participate. After all, both parties are more fixated on winning than ever, and the Democratic counter offensive to Nader has been effective in keeping most everyone united and energized.
But if Nader gets in the debates and gets to bring issues and viewpoints he and the people whom he represent, most of which won't be voting for him, regardless, he will have achieved his goal. Then, he will be able to turn around at the last minute and endorse John Kerry and send all his people to the polls which may be the difference.
In doing this as an independent candidate, Ralph leaves himself this very viable option. If he were to accept the green candidacy, he would be under obligation to strive to get the party's matching funds for the next cycle. He also would basically do big harm to the party if he were to drop out at the last minute. In taking the strategy I have outlined, Nader will not only have helped advance progressive agendas and bring them up in the headlines, but he would help the Greens and other minor parties for the future in a heightened awareness. And that goes for more left "3rd parties" as the Greens and Workers parties as well as more right wing groups like the Reform party. Running as an Independent allows Ralph to further a more long term vision, as no party is going to get the votes required to get those funds this cycle.
I don't know if this is his plan, but I hope it is. Not because I think Nader's votes will necessarily tip the scales. All is not lost with him in the race. But if Ralph does as badly as I think he will in November, that would damage his reputation and further egomaniacal charges against him from his detractors.