It there's ANOTHER Nader-like candidacy in '08, here's what we SHOULDN'T do,

[Ken Burch]

1)We SHOULDN'T piss away millions of dollars on court challenges to that candidates ballot status. It just isn't worth it. And it made it a point of honor for Ralph himself to stay in the race. The money would be better spent on GOTV and highlighting the reasons why progressives should back OUR candidate.

2)We SHOULDN'T demonize that candidates' supporters. We should instead find someway to engage them. Also, we shouldn't use physical intimidation, like those union thugs used on Nader supporters when they were picketing outside the debates Nader was excluded from.

3)We SHOULDN'T refuse to make concessions to that candidates positions. We should, instead adopt a few of them.

In other words, knock off the money-wasting bullshit hardball bullying tactics. They don't work
and in fact they make it harder to get third-party progressives to support our candidate.

Try negotiation and compromise instead of arrogance and macho.

[Fierce]

1. I'm all for "union thugs" going after union-busting candidates like Nader.

And their supporters.

[Ken Burch]

3. I'm a union official myself, I only used that phrase

Because it's clearly inappropriate for union members to be using physical force to intimidate progressives. In fact, other than possibly against scabs, unions shouldn't be using violence against anyone(and only if the scabs themselves are violent, btw).

Those union members would've done far better withholding their ludicrously early endorsement of Gore until they could at least get him to break with NAFTA.

They got nothing from Al in exchange for their support. And they didn't have to settle for nothing.

[Fierce]

10. Interesting.

I see a lot of self-styled progressives -- including Nader -- give only lip service, if that, to unions. I agree about them withholding their endorsement power. But I think labor should always be ready to fight.

[Ken Burch]

11. Fight, yes. Physically rough up third-party progressive activists, no.

Nader wasn't the enemy. Corporate power was. And is.

Time to fight the REAL enemy.

[DaveinMD]

13. Nader is an enemy of progressives

he's the conservatives best friend.

[Ken Burch]

14. The answer isn't to condemn and attack, the answer is to listen

And it isn't even about Nader himself, really, because in all liklihood Ralph won't run again and will draw no significant vote total if he defies logic and does run.

It's about how to tread those who feel the party is disrespecting them and their principles.

You seem to be saying(and I hope I'm wrong here)that we should just go on telling these people "shut up and do what we tell you". What you don't understand is that THAT DOESN'T FREAKIN' WORK.

The way to deal with this is dialogue, humility and openness. Not hardball and blustering arrogant spite.

[DaveinMD]

15. this is reserved for Nader

himself. I understand frustration. But I don't like the threats that if we don't do X, I'm leaving the party.

[Ken Burch]

16. If you don't like people making those threats, then join in the effort

To prevent the party doing the kinds of things that make people feel they have no alternative but to make such threats.

The answer, once again, is dialogue, negotiation and listening. We must NEVER again dismiss progressives by saying "they have nowhere else to go". Got that?

As for Nader, at this point he's not really worth the energy. Ralph's no longer a factor.

[DaveinMD]

17. you brought his name up

and I reacted. The threats shouldn't take place. No one is saying they have no place to go. At least not here. But we can't expect ideological purity. That is just a recipe for disaster. I encourage everyone to get involved in primary campaigns. That is the best way to affect the type of candidate we put forward.

[Deja Q]

2. Like they say about vingegar and honey,

it's easier to catch flies with one than the other... :D

And that's not to call them flies, the phrase means "kill them with kindness".

[Ken Burch]

6. Illustrating my point exactly.

The people who went off and formed the Greens were mainly progressive Democrats who left the party because the party made it clear that they were no longer welcome.

We need to engage them to build a new, winning coalition.

And history has proved that bullying them, dissing them, and smugly saying things like "they have nowhere else to go" has never done our party any good.

[bdrube]

4. Here's a Fourth Thing: Don't Noiminate Hillary...

...and any 3rd party candidates won't have much appeal.

[Ken Burch]

12. That would definitely help.

Or at least find some way to cure her or her Chronic Inflammatory Triangulitis.

[napi21]

5. Agreed. I think all the emphasis on keeping Nader OFF the ballots

gave hima lot of free publicity, and made at least some people support himbecausethere are always some who will support the underdog no matter what.

So far I haven't seen anyone who looks like a potentialquasi Nader candidate, but I guess you never know.

[papau]

19. Carter's Ham Jordan is a sponsor of "unity08" that wants a GOP/Dem 3rd party ticket n/t

n/t

[mike_c]

7. absolutely right!

Thank you!

[Parisle]

8. And here's something we SHOULD do,....

--- Remind them what happened the LAST time a bunch of stubborn, starry-eyed idealists couldn't distinguish the greater of two principles.

[Ken Burch]

9. Your attitude is precisely what I'm talking about...

Yes, we should try to persuade those people into voting Democratic, but we also need to give them a good reason to do so. You seem to just think we should go on browbeating them.

What part of "hard ass hard sell doesn't work" do you not understand?

We need to listen to those people, not insult them.

(And, while it clearly would've been better for Gore to win than Bush, Gore wasn't exactly going out of his way to make a clear case that he was different than Bush. That campaign proved conclusively that trimming and triangulating are no longer effective strategies for Democratic candidates. Democratic campaign tacticians caused the 2000 result, not "stubborn, starry-eyed idealists".)

[dajoki]

21. I totally agree with you...

Despite the cheating, fraud, discrimination, attacks, etc., etc. If Nader wasn't on the ballot Gore would have won by enough that it couldn't have been stolen and we wouldn't be where we are today. These people MUST be reminded of that!! Whether you call it a protest vote or if they truly believe in what they are doing, it doesn't work. We can't let it happen again. But I do agree these people have to be brought back into the fold, by reminding them of the consequences. Maybe we have to sit down with them and their candidate and listen to their ideas and tell them ours, I don't think we are that far apart and some kind of agreement could be reached.

[PORKYPIG]

18. Nader

It was deplorable to see that ralph nader was attacked and destroyed by the democrats.They are no different than republicans trying to gain power at any cost.Our little democracy is a joke.

[Capn Sunshine]

20. First time for everything

But I like to think we've learned this hard lesson from '00 and '04:

If we have an actual message and stay true to our values, the election won't be close enough for a third party to make a difference.

Witness the midterms. The 50 state strategy is working; let's keep our focus on what WE are, not what we are NOT.

We stand or fall on our own.