✘ EP for Obama ✘
It makes sense to vote for alternative, progressive candidates. Except when it doesn't. Given today's political reality, in states where the race is close a vote for any candidate other than Obama effectively counts as a vote for McCain. And despite the "not a dime's worth of difference" rhetoric from the Left in 2000, or the anti-Obama rhetoric from the Left today, no reasonable person should doubt that an Obama presidency will be dramatically superior to a McCain one. So what about a voter in a state where Obama has a lock — California, for example, or Washington DC? Wouldn't a "conscience" vote there make sense? It might, but here are a few reasons why it wouldn't.
Ralph Nader may have good positions on almost all the issues (I reckon I'd agree with him about 95% of the time) but he's consistently shown over the past dozen or so years a positive disinterest in building organizations on the Left and, more importantly, an indifference to the impacts that his campaigns have had on the country.
I used to think that Florida in 2000 couldn't be blamed on Nader. But I've changed my mind. I was wrong. While it's true that Al Gore did a great many things that lost him the 2000 election it's also true he would have won if Nader hadn't made such a play in Florida. Which — to me in retrospect — it's now clear Nader shouldn't have done, but did anyway and with malicious intent. Although this time it won't matter for the win itself, he's doing the same thing in Missouri and elsewhere. But what Nader does matters in other ways because to the extent that Obama could roll up a huge win he has a stronger hand in shaping policy. Denying him that just exacerbates our problems. If Nader were truly not self-interested he would have concentrated only on solid blue states. He didn't. That makes him a conniving spoiler.
There are those on the Left who complain that the Democrats don't represent the people's interests, but that Nader does. Ironically, perhaps, in practice almost the exact opposite turns out to be true. And it's very much not in the interest of progressive reformers to tie themselves — blindly, for ideological reasons — to a spoiler, or to have faith in that spoiler despite repeated demonstrations that he doesn't deserve an honest voter's support.
For me, the icing on the cake is that Nader approaches politics with the mindset of a control freak: he's never tried to turn his sometimes substantial voter support into an organization with a life of its own because he knows he couldn't control it. He's not a "party" person, he's a "Nader movement" person. It's another terrible disservice to progressive voters who, perhaps more than anything else, need better political organization.
Which brings us to Cynthia McKinney and the Green Party of the United States. I like McKinney, I think she's genuine, and I don't think she's in any way double-dealing like Ralph Nader. Having said that I'm not enamored of the Green Party of the United States, which seems to me more or less dysfunctional. I really do consider myself a Green, just not a member of that party. Although I could imagine all sorts of situations where I'd be happy to vote for a GPUS candidate (I did, in fact, vote GPUS for the DC school board) I have ambivalent feelings about rewarding the organization as it currently exists and in an important race like this one the positives, in practical terms, mostly seem to be on the side of Obama and the Democrats.
Let's face it: this is an historic election. While we don't know how Obama will govern it's just possible that he'll move farther than expected to the Left. FDR did. And why? Because circumstances demanded it and FDR was smart enough to understand how to rise to the occasion. I'm sure Obama is smart enough, also, but for the rest we'll just have to wait and see.
I don't want to discount the things not to like about Obama's positions. And to be honest, I'll feel a lot better once he's won and I can go back to being critical of him. But right now, realistically, he's far and away the best choice.
For the future, the GPUS should work out a long-term strategic plan that clearly defines their relations with the Democrats. Pick off "Blue Dog" Democrat incumbents? Good. Support national Democratic tickets when necessary? Also good. And there's plenty to do regarding building an organization at the local level. Perhaps most important of all would be pushing for process reforms such as proportional voting, without which no third party has a chance in U.S. politics.
Lots to think about...
Posted by George Kenney on October 30, 2008 5:45 AM 
« A Small Brainstorm | Main | Let Them Eat Cake »
Comments
We've been falling for the lesser of two evils and "waiting to see" for how many decades?
It's over. That's why I left my homeland, as my ancestors left Europe in the 19th Century.
At some point we cash in the chips and move on.
Good luck America, and good night.
Posted by: 8isis8
|
October 30, 2008 7:12 AM
I, being a verifiable knee-jerk whatever, narrow my agreement with your take on Nader down to two things.
I have been thinking or hoping that the step to the left à la FDR would be great. And likely called for.
And that Nader is just outside our tent with a kit of good ideas. But, to paraphrase LBJ, he is outside our tent, pissing in.
I am very nervous and regret that I have but one vote to cast.
Thanks George.
Posted by: Peter | October 30, 2008 7:45 AM
Thinking about it some more, I wonder to what extent money motivates Ralph?
Posted by: George Kenney
|
October 31, 2008 5:59 AM
Would it be fair to judge his monetary motivation by checking into his standard of living? Presumably somewhere in his long career he has made good money and that is fine. But your curiosity about his campaign motivation is at least worthy of a poke.
Alternatively, if he gives it all away (any "ill"-gotten gains), it would not be so easy to condemn.
On the third hand, maybe he just needs a place to pee.
Posted by: Peter | October 31, 2008 7:42 AM
It's always the same with you guys. Blame somebody,...anybody..., when things don't go your way.
Suck it up. Nader had every right to participate in the political system, and Nader voters had every right to vote for him.
But this is not enough for you. You want people to exercise there freedom to vote by voting "the right way", which is to say by your definition of "the right way". That's not freedom. That's the tyranny or your notion of what's right.
"Unchaperoned" (ie authentic) freedom means the individual gets to choose — and here's the hard part — by whatever logic, deliberation, rationality, irrationality, impulse, notion, agenda, or intent he/she chooses to apply. The judgment or approval of any third person is pointedly irrelevant and antithetical to the idea of freedom.
If all this means the electorate chooses to take the country over a cliff, then over a cliff it is, with a great big "Hurray" for the wonderfulness of democracy.
Your freedom lies in seeing the disaster coming and baling in time to save yourself. Otherwise, in the name of patriotism, yet another form of irrationality, you get to crash and burn, and blame somebody else for your sad fate.
Gore ran the worst campaign in US history. He, the Dem party, and all their brain-damaged advisers get the full credit.
[Multiple misspellings corrected. g.]
Posted by: jrd1415 | November 9, 2008 9:37 PM
Yes, Nader did it for malicious intent in 2000. Because it needed to be done and still needs to be done today.
People just don't seem to understand that beyond the rhetoric and beyond religious vs. secular issues the parties are very much the same.
I agree that Democratic rule is superior to Republican. The aggressive stance the Republicans show against the scientific method alone is enough to convince me of that.
But the foundations of our monetary system, trade policies, system of taxation, and foreign policy seem to be treated in a very similar way by Republicans and Democrats.
Something has to be done sooner rather than later to restore sanity and sensibility to our system. The leading commodity of our country is federal reserve notes (they grow on trees) and our leading export is our own debt.
The Democratic and Republican parties are too tied up with corporate and special interests to do whats right for this country.
I am glad Obama beat McCain (if at least for the sake of the health of the scientific method).
Since I live in Illinois (where Obama was up at least 20 points) I was able to vote my conscience. I voted for Ron Paul and it felt every bit as good as voting for Ralph Nader in 2000.
I don't regret voting for Nader in 2000. And I don't like that it's considered a forgone conclusion that I would have voted for Gore if someone could have reduced my ability to make my own choice.
Oh, if only someone could have forced me to choose between a right-wing corporate fascist and a centrist corporate fascist. But, alas, we still have rights.
Posted by: Lee Yates | November 10, 2008 6:32 AM