Ralph Nader on 2008

Many people (Democrats and independents) continue to blame Ralph Nader for Bush's elevation to the presidency in 2000 and then again in 2004. This seems to me an utterly absured line of reasoning.

First of all, in 2004 Al Gore won the popular vote and then a Supreme Court coup stole it for Bush. To blame Nader is to let those with the real power, those who totally disrespected the American people, those who chose to substitute power for democracy off the hook.

Secondly, the most important thing Nader did was to bring out people (particularly young people) who otherwise would have opted to sit out both elections. It continues to seem that to stifle Nader's voice is to stifle the essense of democracy.

When Amy Goodman asked Nader Monday morning on Democracy Now whether he would run for president again in 2008, this is what he said:

"Too early to say. I think we need more voices and choices. I think the speech by former Senator Mike Gravel indicates there’s going to be a wider debate in the primaries of the Democratic Party, along with Congressman Dennis Kucinich. There are lots of people in this country urging Bill Moyers to run in the Democratic primary. He would certainly give it more depth. And I hope more independent candidates and third-party candidates run. We’ve got to break this two-party elected dictatorship that’s being measured by how much money it raises."

Then when she asked him to expound on his comment to Wolf Blitzer on Sunday that if Hillary Clinton got the Democratic nomination he would be more likely to run, he answered:

"Well, there would be more need for a broader spectrum of views by more candidates. I don't think she has the fortitude to stand up to corporate power, whether it’s ripping off Washington by corporations or the bloated military budget or corporate crime, fraud, and abuse. It has a lot of roots right in her backyard, in Wall Street, Spitzer prosecution land. I don’t think she has it. And she has this increasingly distasteful habit of pandering and flattering in her public appearances. And she panders to special interest groups that need to be given the straight truth, and she flatters people in her audience. And I think that is a sign that she thinks she’s a frontrunner and she can play cautious."

I didn't vote for Nader in 2000 or in 2004 but I'm not at all sure what I will do in 2008. The lesser of two evils argument certainly holds less and less attraction for me. As I have said before here, the lesser of two evils is still evil. And I'm tired of holding my nose when I go into the voting booth.