August 19, 2004 4:52 AM

A Republican wolf in sheep's clothing

Liberal angst: Can Nader tip scales again? What about Ralph Nader? Among South Florida progressives, presidential elections have rarely posed such a touchy question.

There was a time not so very long ago when I was a huge supporter of the ideals supported by Ralph Nader. No, I didn't vote for him in 2000...why, I reasoned, should I throw my vote away on a third-party candidate who had little hope of being anything but a "spoiler"? Of course, one could argue that his presence on the ballot here in Florida is the single biggest reason that George W. Bush "won" the 2000 Presidential election.

Now Ralph Nader has become a construct of and a memorial to his own ego. At some level, Nader must understand that he is the single biggest reason that George W. Bush was awarded the Presidency in 2000 by his friends on the Supreme Court. His presence in this year's election may have a similar effect on John Kerry.

Seldom has a presidential election left progressive voters so divided. Al Gore lost the 2000 election in Florida by just 537 votes. Democrats blamed Nader, the third-party candidate, reasoning that his supporters would otherwise have voted for Gore.

Four years later, Nader supporters in South Florida feel like pariahs: scorned by Democrats, cast out by the Green Party that once endorsed Nader, and at odds with virtually everyone else in the ''anyone-but-Bush'' camp.

Of course, no one with a grip on reality would lay the Democratic "defeat" in 2000 solely at the feet of Ralph Nader. If Al Gore had been able to carry his home state of Tennessee, this would be a dead issue, and President Gore would be campaigning for re-election. Of course, the Cubs and Red Sox would have each won a World Series, and Britney Spears would still be a virgin...if indeed she ever was

What enrages Kerry supporters -- and Bush-fatigued progressives in particular -- is the notion that Nader almost single-handedly torpedoed Gore in 2000. Even a few of Nader's 97,488 votes in Florida that November would have meant victory for the Democrat.

Seven other third-party candidates, including socialist David McReynolds and Workers World Party candidate Monica Moorehead, also garnered more than 537 votes in Florida, Gore's margin of defeat.

No, it's not all Ralph Nader's fault. It's just easy to focus on him as the most responsible and available target. Still, you would hope that someone as Progressive as Nader would be conscious enough to recognize that his campaign to massage his ego just may cost the Democrats another election. Can he not see that something is horribly wrong when Republicans are working to collect signatures for him?

People may rail against the "Anybody But Bush" mindset, but for Progressives that is Job One. Anything that works against that mission may ultimately result in George W. Bush spending four more years in the White House. Is Ralph Nader so oblivious to political reality that he is willing to run the risk of restoring Bush to the Presidency? Apparently so.

This is why I have lost all of the considerable respect I used to have for Ralph Nader. It's not about your ego, Ralph; it's about removing George W. Bush. Of course, if you really cared about anything but your own self-aggrandizement, you'd bow out gracefully and work to elect John Kerry. No, he may not champion all of your causes, but you can bet he would be a better fit than four more years of George W. Bush.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on August 19, 2004 4:52 AM.

All the news that's fit to...well, basically ignore was the previous entry in this blog.

Catching up with the rest of the civilized world is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.12