The Dems need the Greens

[Ardee]

I just posted this article in a typical Nader bashing thread but understand that some of us have more civilised intent than to enterone of those threads. Considering that this article speaks to a subject I have long felt to be truth here it is:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/12/02/EDGCT3CQL51.DTL

Issues in the San Francisco Mayor's Race
Why the Democrats need Matt Gonzalez

Peter Gabel Tuesday, December 2, 2003


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Out of a misplaced desperation about a Green Party candidate becoming the mayor of San Francisco, the national Democratic Party leadership is apparently ready to pull out all the stops to defeat Matt Gonzalez in the Dec. 9 mayoral runoff against Gavin Newsom.

Many of us read with astonishment that even former Vice President Al Gore is coming to town today to insert himself into a race he knows nothing about, no doubt reflecting a generalized anxiety by the party's leadership that its base in California is being decisively weakened: first, by Arnold Schwarzenegger's victory over Gov. Gray Davis; and now, by Gonzalez's challenge to Newsom as the Democratic establishment's heir-apparent to Willie Brown. The Democrats still believe that but for Green candidate Ralph Nader, Gore would be president, and that a Gonzalez victory here will only further weaken the party's base.

As has so often been the case over the last 30 years, the Democrats have got it all wrong -- in fact, exactly backward. The reality is that the Greens have not been a threat to the Democrats, but have rather been their lifeline, re-energizing the progressive base that the Democrats have continued to mistakenly abandon in order to appeal -- or, to be more blunt, to pander -- to a nonexistent "mainstream" they wrongly imagine sits to their right.

Before Nader entered the race, Gore was headed for a landslide loss to George W. Bush, running a campaign that was so bland that I defy you, dear reader, to remember one thing that Gore stood for. Only Nader's entry stirred up enough hope in the progressive core of the majority of the population to get people to come out and vote in such large numbers between 5 and 8 p.m. on election night, some for Nader but many, many more for Gore as the projected incarnation of the Democrats' progressive heritage.

It was Nader who stirred voters to remember the progressive values at the core of the Democratic Party, precisely by criticizing the party from its left and with a Green hat on. Sometimes the emperor has to be told he's wearing no clothes in order to remember to get dressed. If Gore had grasped that it was Nader and the force of the progressive spirit that had released the genie that generated Gore's 600,000 majority in the popular vote, he could have mobilized that spirit nationwide to then win the battle for Florida, instead of handing it to Bush on a silver platter.

----cut-----

[liberalnurse]

1. Of course the Democrats need the Greens

as we have a common enemy....the *bush regime.

[NNadir]

17. Really?

When did this new idea become part of the Green Party agenda? It must have been some time after the last Presidential election, I'd wager.

We don't need the Greens. We need winners and thinkers.

[citizen snips]

25. We will get the greens.

Bush is more like our enemy when it comes to this stuff.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. I think that one works both ways

The sooner we all realize the interdependence of our visions the better.

[librechik]

3. I would like nothing more than a Dem-Green Coalition

to take on Bush, and then sweeping changes in the Dem Enviro positions to be inclusive of Green concerns. I so wish that would happen!

Everytime a Greenie comes to my door looking for contributions, I tell them. Result? Nader will run in 04. Sigh.

[whirlygigspin]

4. bang on

"Democrats have continued to mistakenly abandon in order to appeal -- or, to be more blunt, to pander -- to a nonexistent "mainstream"

[david_vincent]

5. He "handed it to Bush on a silver platter"?

Really? What an interesting viewpoint.

[plindner]

6. Greenie delusions

Whoa, "Nader reinvigorated the race?". On what planet.

The problem I have with Greens is that they are so idealogical that they cannot work within a large governing coalition. Too much ego -- "my way or no way" kind of logic..

Consider.. Maybe the reason the Democrats have drifted to the right is that our left-left-wing has deserted the party. A progressive caucus could really take hold if those folks really want it. Of course that means working within the system, plus getting pragmatic and accepting others viewpoints.

It's all waaa waaa, I don't get my purity, so I'm taking my ball and not playing with you.. Greens may get more attention as their own party. However if they really want to effect change they'd work within the two-party system and attempt to reform it from the inside.

Anyway, Gonzalez is such a Green. Very arrogant. He pushes his agenda even when SF voters have rejected it. Voters approved Care-not-Cash. He fights it. Voters voted down closing JFK drive in the park. He tries to get around it. Voters voted down public power, he keeps promoting it.

It's sad. He's got the artists and hipsters snowed. Little do they realise how much SF stands to lose if he gets elected.

rant off....

[Ardee]

7. Im sorry but you post nonsense

Why are you blind to the fact that the democrats have abandoned that which made them distinctly different from the GOP? What you call ego I call principles, what you decry as an unwillingness to work within a larger coalition led to that Rose Garden photo of Daschle and Gephardt smiling while they signed the death warrants of 300 (and counting American youths and ten thousand or so Iraqis.

You speak like a child (sorry but I do not know how else to characterise your assassination of good folks who seek that which the democratic party USED TO believe in). There are those who see ,with clarity in my opinion, that the democrats have sold their birthright for a mess of pottage in the form of twenty pieces of silver from corporate donors. These folks did not abandon the democrats the party abandoned them!

These folks began a third party in order to keep alive the principles they strongly believe in and it is a pity that you do not have such strong principles as well. Your party is a sham and a joke, how many elections will it take before you see it as well? It is run by neoconservatives who easily adopt the tactics of the far right. It is easily seen here at DU where these same neocons lie to you and you suck it up like ambrosia.. how then do you differ from the freepers?

Matt Gonzales was overwhelmingly elected to the board of supervisors in SF, that does not sound like a rejection from the voters but you state more lies from the right wing of the democratic party. Care not Cash is a fraud plain and simple, and anyone who is knowledgeable on the subject knows that , like Bush's education bill it is a phony empty bill that has no money to enact it.

There is a fraud here Im afraid but it is not matt Gonzales, it is you and those who have sold you this bill of goods.

[Skittles]

8. and YOU are blind to the fact

that people like NADER are NOT THE F***ING ANSWER.

[Ardee]

9. Thank you for the in depth and erudite response

NOT

again and again I see posters here who sound and act like freepers. Are you so freaking immature that you cannot handle a differing opinion? Are you so robotic that you cannot respond in kind? I post a several paragraph explanation of my position and you hold your hands over your ears and shut your eyes saying nyaaah nyaaah nyaaaah so you cannot possibly hear....how mature.

[Skittles]

12. what needs to be said

NADER WILL NEVER BE PRESIDENT; you know it, I know it, HE KNOWS IT. He's a big waste of time.

[Ardee]

14. You are not THAT dumb

why do you post as if you were. Nader is not campaigning to become President and you know it. He is campaigning to bring the message to the people. That is the very reason why neocons within the democratic party are demonizing him as they fear his message and know it to be the truth.

[Terwilliger]

10. and who is, Skitty?

who is the answer? "UNNAMED DEMOCRAT"?

[Skittles]

11. I don't PRETEND to know the answer

what I do know is who is NOT the answer - most certainly NADER.

[Ardee]

13. not who but what

The answer is the involvement of the electorate in the process.We see a clear dichotomy in that the right wing of the democratic party fears the electorate much as does the GOP, odd isnt it? For years we saw the GOP use every device to keep the turnouts low and now we see the democrats fearful of telling the electorate the truth.

Again and again we see so-called democrats here and in real life proclaim that we must not move to the left, never mind that the truth is actually over there. We hear that the people will not accept the leftist agenda as if it were so very unrealistic. Education for all children, what a fearful statement. Health care for all, my gosh its too radical.Care for our elderly, well hell, who wants that, let grandma disappear into the woods. Internationally we espouse an end to unilateralism and espouse the use of coalitions and joint efforts to solve problems, throw the commies out!

We need to energise the voters because, unlike McAuliffe and From, and the neocons here at DU, I have faith in my fellow americans.

edited because I named names here.....

[Tinoire]

19. 20 posts.... what did you expect? Educated wisdom?

We have lounge lizards with 5000+ who can't hold an intelligent conversation about these primaries so how fair is it to expect Mr 20 posts to... out-do them?

[pscot]

15. Democrats need the Greens like a dog needs a flea

In particular a flea that thinks it is absolutely necessary to the well-being of the dog. The problem with fleas is they always think the circus is about them.

[Ardee]

16. way to go

Ill bet you didnt even read the damned article now did you? After all a closed mind needs no reinforcement and a brain unused for so long would hurt to activate......

[eridani]

18. Greens support Dems more often than vice versa

http://www.madison.com/captimes/opinion/column/nichols/62590.php

When Dave Cieslewicz was campaigning for mayor of Madison earlier this year, the veteran environmental activist received valuable support from leading local Greens.

Cieslewicz is a Democrat, but his record as director of the 1,000 Friends of Wisconsin environmental group, his very progressive stances on economic and social issues, and his freewheeling style made him attractive to a number of committed Green activists and elected officials in Madison.

Arguably, Cieslewicz's appeal to the core Green voting bloc, and to the broader bloc of Green-leaning voters in the city, made the difference in his narrow win over Paul Soglin in the April vote.

These examples of Greens providing essential support to progressive Democrats running in nonpartisan elections are worth noting because they serve as a reminder that the overwhelming majority of Greens and Green-leaning voters are motivated by their concern about issues, as opposed to simple partisanship.

So why are top national Democrats like Al Gore going out of their way to fly to San Francisco to campaign for Newsom? Why is the Democratic National Committee working to beat Gonzalez?

Because, despite his corporate and Republican ties, Newsom proclaims himself to be a Democrat and Gonzalez does not. Forget about the fact that this is a nonpartisan race. Forget about the fact that Gonzalez has far more potential than Newsom to emerge as a national leader on urban issues. Gore and national and local Democratic insiders are choosing partisanship over progressivism.

But many others will ask why top Democrats always seem to demand concessions in the name of electing the more progressive major candidate at the national level but are not willing to make concessions in the name of electing the most progressive major candidate at the local level.

[whirlygigspin]

20. If Greens got involved and took over the democratic party

then Nader would be President. Nader can try highjacking the party
all he wants, but until greens take over at other levels he's just
helping the other side.

[Ardee]

23. attaway to support a false meme

Ill bet you even believe that someone who attracted only 2.7% of the vote actually influenced the election. Ill bet you dont even give a stray thought to the fact that Gore failed to carry his own state, which cost him dearly.

The Green Party used Nader because of his name recognition, they are trying to build a national party and I hope to Gaia that they do!

[depakid]

21. Gore made a mistake interjecting himself into this one

All he did was validate what a lot of Greens were thinking when they supported Nader. Even Greens who held their nose and voted for Gore last election (because they voted in swing states like Oregon) can't help but look at this and shake their heads. If Newsome wins the election, it will be because of a Republican & center/right Dem coalition. Gore's not stupid. He knows that- and since this election doesn't mean doodly squat to him, for a lot of us it's simply confirmation of Gore's (and the pander wing Dem's) true colors.

Something else to remember- Gore was WAY behind in the polls until he started turning up the populist heat. Whether he did that in response to Nader packing stadiums or the crowds at the shadow conventions or his myriad consultants is irrelevant. The bottom line is that center/right Dems don't have a message that resonates and a lot of people perceive them as little better than Republicans... the sooner they wake up to that fact, the sooner they'll attract new voters and get most of us Greens wholeheartedly get back on board.

[Ardee]

22. excellent point,Kid

I am reminded of the mid term election and the campaign of Mary Landreau (sic)which ran counter to the advise of the DLC. She won as an underdog while those who adhered to the DLC line and were considered shoo ins lost! Every time we get a candidate who speaks the mantra of progressive politics we see an oputpouring of support at the polls yet we repeatedly see a retreat from this succesful strategy. Nader was spot on, something is definitely fishy in democratic central!

[library_max]

24. Nice fairy tale.

How Nader and the Progressive Spirit Almost (But Not Quite) Revived the Dying Gore Campaign and Almost (But Not Quite) Kept Bush Out of the White House. As narrated by Edward Everett Horton.

The article is one long tract of Green self-justification without a scrap of fact or honest analysis in it anywhere. You have to really want to believe that Nader actually helped Gore in the 2000 election and that it was Gore's fault that Nader running against him wasn't enough of a help. :crazy: The only significant effect of Nader's run that you can document by fact is that 97,000 Greens voted for Nader in Florida, and if even 5% of those had voted for Gore instead it'd be President Gore.

Fortunately, more and more Greens are rejecting this fairy tale as the need to unseat Bush takes precedence over the desire for happy and self-justifying fantasies.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[library_max]

27. Nice tantrum.

There wasn't anything in the nature of a rebuttal, but it was a pretty extensive personal attack, including all the classics such as mischaracterizing my position, making wild unsupported accusations, and putting words in my mouth.

So Gore lost Tennessee. He was more liberal than his state, especially after the tobacco lawsuits. Tennessee went for Nixon both times, for Reagan both times, and for the elder Bush in 1988. I guess that means Gore could have won it if he'd only gone more progressive or done it sooner. :crazy:

Nobody said Greens weren't free to vote for Nader. What I said was that it's a fairy tale that Nader's run helped Gore in the 2000 election. So your response is just a bit of a leap. By the way, a factoid is a fact that exists only because somebody asked a question, like "30% of the studio audience likes Britney better than Christina." It's not just a synonym for "fact."

As for the crystal ball, the way I "know the minds of so many Greens" is that I read their posts on DU. A lot of them have been saying that removing Bush in 2004 is too important for them to vote for anyone but the Democratic nominee. Some Greens of my personal acquaintance have told me the same thing.

So calm down, take a pill, and wipe the spittle off your mouth, please.