Commentary: Nader's 4th Run For President
Although I have been active in volunteer liberal Democratic politics for over 40 years, for a time between 1997 and 2004, I was registered in the Green Party. The reason that I left the Democrats during that period, was because I was very disappointed at President Bill Clinton for his failure to deliver universal health care, his signing of the awful Welfare Reform legislation of 1996, NAFTA, his failure to stem corporate mergers resulting in worker layoffs, and other issues. Our Democratic Governor at the time, Gray Davis, was also a disappointment and incompetent, which is why we had the recall in 2003 and ended up with Schwarzenegger. During the past few years that I lived in San Francisco, Mayor Willie Brown who was a liberal Democrat in his earlier career, sold out to the landlords, developers, real estate interests, and other corporate interests. So, I became a Green. I voted for Ralph Nader for President in 1996 and 2000. Now, had I known that 'Dubya' Bush was going to be as bad a President as he is, and in fact much worse than his father, and had I resided in a state in 2000 where the election was close, I would have voted for Gore.
Having said this, while I certainly don't dispute the right of anyone to run for office I don't agree with Ralph Nader's decision to run this time, nor do I think he should have run in 2004. Nader says that there is virtually no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans or between the likely Democratic nominee Barack Obama and the likely Republican nominee John McCain on the issues. I don't know what planet Nader and his running mate former San Francisco Supervisor Matt Gonzalez are on, but certainly Obama's views on the issues are much closer to Nader and Gonzalez's expressed views than McCain's. Nader says that he's running because too many people are dissatisfied with the major party candidates. However, I notice that there are numerous people who are excited and getting involved in Barack Obama's campaign. Many are people who have never been involved in a political campaign before. They're certainly not flocking to Nader and Gonzalez. I heard Nader say that he's running to "raise the issues" that the other candidates are not raising. Again, Obama's views while not exactly the same as Nader's, are still closer to his views. In our communities and on the Internet, one can find all to numerous organizations that are fighting for liberal causes that many of us believe in where issues are raised. I'm not going to name every one, but in Butte County we have the Butte County Health Care Coalition that's working for Single Payer. While Barack Obama's plan is not Single Payer, you can be sure that if he's elected health care advocates like us will be pushing him to propose Single Payer or to at least work with Congress to pass a legislation that will benefit everybody. Certainly no decent health care legislation will be enacted if we get John McCain. We have the Peace & Justice Center. If one is interested in Fair Trade, the Peace & Justice Center is the place to go. Then there are the labor and environmental movements, and many other organizations that work on issues that transcend Ralph Nader. Nader said that nothing gets done in this country without movements, but what movement has he started that has flourished during the past 8 years? And for one to start a movement, one needs allies and certainly does not need to make more enemies.
Ralph Nader, rightfully or wrongfully is blamed for Bush's selection(notice I used the word "selection") in 2000. Yes, I also blame Al Gore's lackluster campaign and the faults of the Clinton-Gore administration mentioned above. I doubt very much that this time around that anyone who chooses to vote for Nader would vote for a Democrat anyway, if Nader would not be on the ballot. I also doubt that Nader's votes will make a difference this time as they did in 2000. But suppose my guess is wrong? Suppose Obama would lose a couple of states to John McCain by very small margins, with Nader's votes making the difference? With the appointments of more Roberts, Alitos, Scalias, and Thomases to the Supreme Court, the gutting of labor and environmental protections, more cuts to health education and welfare programs, more outsourcing of our jobs, more tax breaks for the super-rich, more war in Iraq and perhaps Iran, Ralph Nader would receive much of the blame. Very few people will remember him for the good that he did many years ago, such as the construction of safer cars, the establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency etc.
I don't doubt what Ralph Nader says he believes in, but his ego is much stronger than his beliefs.