another perspective on the Green Party, the 2000 election...

[mike_c]

...and the SF mayoral race. From Peter Gabel, in today's SF Chronicle:

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



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.

more....

[mzmolly]

1. PU

Plugging my nose. What a crock...

[el_gato]

2. that "mainstream" referred to in the middle paragraph

is the corporate gravy train, it is not comprised of voters

[La_Serpiente]

3. I don't see how a Green victory in San Fran

can hurt Democrats. I really don't. If will finally give the progressive, liberal left a foundation.

[lifelong_Dem]

4. It will give the Greens a foundation...

...a foundation from which to attack and further weaken the Democratic party, thereby handing even more power to the Republicans and the radical right.

[GainesT1958]

5. I recall what Al Gore stood for...

And I recall that, unlike Ralphie Boy, it was NOT merely the aggrandisement of his own image through a run for the White House! x(

B-)

[lifelong_Dem]

6. This article is the biggest crock of **** I've ever seen

On Labor day, Gore was leading Bush* 49% to 39%. Headed for a landslide loss? Please.

[texastoast]

7. What States Would Have Gone Gore . . .

with Ralph's votes? I don't recall.

I naturally planned to vote for Gore. When I realized there were a number of swing states which Gore could lose due to the Nader votes, I voted for Nader in Texas to get someone to vote for Gore in swing Pennsylvania.

And in defense of Mr. Nader, I can't recall that he has ever publicly lied. I have been watching Ralph since the 1960s. Never was I more proud of anyone than when he stood up in Congress in the 1970s and declared that the world was "drowning in oil" (the oil companies told us there was a worldwide shortage of oil; therefore, we would have to pay double). Too bad his public persona is that of of the quintessential dweeb and thus not handsome enough to win the presidency (we are a shallow culture). We owe him a LOT in bringing the party back toward its progressive roots. The Clinton years looked a lot like moderate Repugnicanism (shitty NAFTA, Enron loopholes, etc.), and a lot of Democrats were right there sucking up to the special interest groups to put bad laws into place.

And as a man, that one has integrity. He has devoted his entire life to the betterment of this country and its consuming, consuming public. And he has put his money where his mouth is, living a frugal life, not driving an SUV, working to make medical devices and military equipment safe and not just profitable, protecting our water supplies and animal habitat, and the list goes way on.

[Cheswick2.0]

9. he lied when he said he would not campaign in swing states

it was a lie told to get people to sign his ballot petition.

[texastoast]

12. I wasn't aware of that . . .

And he shouldn't have done that if he said he wouldn't.

Now, which states would Gore have won with Nader's votes?

[Cheswick2.0]

8. OMG, such bullshit

this guy has got to be kidding.

[Terwilliger]

10. or not

[Terwilliger]

11. I definitely think this guy has it right

especially with this gem:

In a variation on the same theme, Schwarzenegger defeated the candidates in the gubernatorial election not because a majority of Californians didn't support the Democratic Party, but because Gov. Gray Davis didn't stand for anything strongly enough to mobilize the party's progressive constituencies to save him from being recalled.

I agree with that 300%

[texastoast]

14. Yup

"Gov. Gray Davis didn't stand for anything strongly enough . . . ."

That says a lot about many Democrats. It's time we stand For the People, By the People, and Of the People. Wishy-washy "I'll-tell-you-anything-to-get-elected" POLITICIANS who take money from the bad guys to get in office make me sick. Ptooey.

But none of this will ever change until the buck stops at a bottom line that is no longer the bottom dollar.

[mike_c]

13. lots of knee-jerk reactions to this post, little thoughtfulness....

Sad to see this happening on DU.

[texastoast]

15. Explain

That was a bit of a blanket observation. A few details, please?