![]() |
|
June 22, 2004
Will Voters Shop At Ralph's?
Not Ralph's groceries...but third party candidate Ralph Nader, who apparently has concluded The People aren't clamoring for him so he's going to try a sideward snare of his former vehicle, the Green Party. First the news report:Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader selected longtime Green Party activist Peter Camejo to be his running mate on Monday, a move sure to boost his chances of winning the Green Party's endorsement this week and its access to ballot lines in 22 states and the District of Columbia.Etc. etc. etc. Then there's this: Nader also has been endorsed by the national Reform Party, which gives him access to the ballot in at least seven states, including the battlegrounds of Florida and Michigan.So he'll be on the ballot -- and there could indeed be a re-run of 2004, when the Democrats basically patronized Nader, tolerated him and didn't bother to debate his ideas or his stupid claim that the two parties are the same (tell that to Republicans who didn't like Democratic environmental policy; tell that to Democrats who are flabbergasted at Bush environmental policy; tell that to proponents and opponents of abortion who worry about who will be on the courts; tell that to proponents and opponents of stem cell research; tell that to those who believe in the new pre-emptive strike security or the more traditional collective security). And his choice for Veep? Camejo has run unsuccessfully for California Governor and is as inspiring a stump speaker as Dan Quayle. Ezra Klein of Pandagon writes: Ralph has chosen his running mate -- Peter Camejo, the Green's perennial failure for Governor in California. Politically, the reasoning is clear. The Greens are holding their convention in a couple of days, Ralph wants their ballot access but not their constraints, so his VP choice proves his (unstated) loyalty. He'll get their endorsement and thus move up to orange on the "pain-in-the-ass advisory". The pick is kinda funny, though. Generally, VP's have achieved something, often an electoral something. Camejo has failed badly, often by spectacular margins. He was the Socialist's candidate for President in 1976 and lost that one, a streak that has continued to this day.... So congratulations Ralph, you did it. After looking high and low, you've found someone less successful electorally, and worse on the stump, than you. May voters flee from your oratorical path.But voters won't. Even though Democrats may ask them to "strike," some of their constituency will shop at Ralph's....... Posted By Joe Gandelman at June 22, 2004 02:12 AM | TrackBack Comments
Camejo deserves better than Ralph f'n Nader. Camejo is actually a pretty stand-up guy, who actually cares quite a bit about California -- both from an environmental and from an economic standpoint. It's too bad he got sucked into Nader's long-running joke. Posted by: x at June 22, 2004 11:59 AM Wait, wait... a former Socialist is chosen by Nader as running mate to suck up to the Green Party?
Posted by: TBox at June 23, 2004 05:32 AM Not agitprop. Well, actually the Green Party (at least in Europe, and I suspect in the US as well) got its start AS agitprop, shilling for the Soviet Union by demonstrating against US nukes (but not against good peace loving socialist nukes). The KGB actually called many of the shots for them.
Posted by: Bill at June 23, 2004 11:53 AM At least lefties are wiling to stand on principal. I can only dream of a conservative candidate to challenge the republiclans. Posted by: GPA at June 24, 2004 02:42 AM I'd like to ask you to join me in a nationwide campaign to open the upcoming presidential debates to include independent candidate Ralph Nader.
Posted by: gwen at June 24, 2004 03:30 AM Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.) As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent. We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view. If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post. |