Ralph Nader's real motive in 2000

[Rooktoven]

Village Voice article by Harry G. Levine

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0418/levine.php

Wow, I like Nader even less. (Michael Moore doesn't come off so hot either...)

[LoZoccolo]

1. He was trying to "spank the donkey".

Uh huh-huh-huh-huh uh huh-huh.

[Rooktoven]

2. To me this wipes out any good he ever did

A first class petulant a**h***.

[Zero Gravitas]

3. Nader = Asshole

...Martin explained Nader's motives as "a neat blend of his desire to go where the cameras and media are and his desire to make the Democrats pay."

"Why hasn't Nader been building the Green Party for the last four years?" he asked me. "Nader was more interested in beating Gore than beating Bush. And Nader has said he will not follow a safe-state strategy in 2004 either."

What does Nader want to do in the 2004 election? Does he again want to defeat the Democratic candidate by taking swing-state votes? "Absolutely," says Gary Sellers.

[AP]

5. But even this writer says the campaign was encouraging vote

swapping.

If they wanted Gore to LOSE, why would they do that?

There's a logical leap in this article which I'm not sure is supported by the article.

Nader's nephew says he wanted to make the democrats hurt, but he never says he wants them to lose. In fact, he says the campaign wanted to encourage vote swapping.

You make them hurt by making the vote close, and making people see the left as a coalition between greens and democrats.

The writer things they should have backed out of all but 40 states, but if they did, they wouldn't have had anything to swap.

[Zero Gravitas]

6. It doesn't say that

As Moore had, he claimed that Nader's campaign would encourage Web-based vote-swapping between progressives in safe and contested states. But when I suggested that Nader could gain substantial influence in a Democratic administration by focusing his campaign on the 40 safe states and encouraging his supporters elsewhere to vote Gore, Milleron leaned coolly toward me with extra steel in his voice and body. He did not disagree. He simply said, "We're not going to do that."

They told people that they would encourage it, not that they did encourage it. At best Nader's supporters are incredibly naive, the article is saying that Nader and those close to him deliberately duped them, his strategy WAS to defeat Gore, but they didn't admit it even to the campaign.

[AP]

11. From the article:

"As Moore had, {Milleron, Nader's closest advisor} claimed that Nader's campaign would encourage Web-based vote-swapping between progressives in safe and contested states. "

That's from the mouth of someone who knew, and judging from the tone of the article I'm going to guess that the use of the word "claimed" is the writer's spin in order to convey his editorial opinion. I suspect that Milleron actually told the interviewer that he was going to do it.

In fact, the campaign did encourage vote swapping. Many people did it.

Billy Bragg organized vote swapping in the 2001 British elections, and won two seats for the Lib Dems and Labor which traditionally went Tory, and that was in a year that did not see a huge Labor pick-up.

Another odd thing is that this article acts likd Moore was against pulling out of FL, whereas Moore was, very vocal in the last few weeks about crticizing Nader's campaigning in FL.

The pieces don't fit together in this article.

[LoZoccolo]

12. Billy Bragg was doing something that could actually work.

Billy Bragg organized vote swapping in the 2001 British elections, and won two seats for the Lib Dems and Labor which traditionally went Tory, and that was in a year that did not see a huge Labor pick-up.

This sort of thing is practical in a parliamentary system, which, you may have noticed, we don't have here.

[AP]

16. It works in congressional districts. And it works in states to increase

vote totals so that you can point to your poplular vote as indicating that your issues should be taken seriously, without actually jeopardizing the winner of the election.

In fact, in that context, it works extremely well in presidential elections.

It works especially well if, say, you have a state like NY with loads of liberals who might not vote at all, since Gore was the sure winner.

Vote swapping gives those votes a value. You can use theme to get FL nader supporters to the poll to vote for Gore when they, otherwise, wouldnt' do anything, seeing that their vote had no value in FL.

Jeez, I guees Democrats really don't understand how markets work. It's funny that the Greens had a better understanding.

[sangh0]

33. Umm, it was a presidential election

and while you can claim it works "extremely well" in presidential elections, it would help if you could point out an example of when it actually worked "extremely well"

It hasn't. Maybe you've noticed.

[cally]

35. It's also illegal..nt

[Tina H]

39. Maybe it should be made legal.

It seems like a voter freedom and autonomy issue to me.

[LoZoccolo]

13. Another odd thing about your post...

Another odd thing is that this article acts likd Moore was against pulling out of FL, whereas Moore was, very vocal in the last few weeks about crticizing Nader's campaigning in FL.

Another odd thing is that Michael Moore admits he didn't tell people not to vote for Nader in Florida and admits as such in his book Stupid White Men.

[AP]

17. I misremembered something I remember Moore writing, then.

I'm sure I read something about him falling out with Nader in the final two weeks, and criticizing Nader for campaigning in FL.

At the very least, that much (if true) undermines the editorial slant of this article.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

22. it must have been a mild falling out

he appeared with him on politically incorrect two weeks after the inaugural and defended ralph to the death from maxine waters

[AP]

25. But not so mild that he didn't endorse Wesley Clark this year.

[Zero Gravitas]

15. Even if the campaign DID encourage swapping

it doesn't disprove that Nader's goal was to defeat Gore.

Vote swapping:

Dem in NY: "I'll vote for Nader if you'll vote for Gore"
Naderite in FL: "OK!"
Dem: "Woo-Hoo! thats two votes for Gore, go me!"
Naderite: "Thats two votes for Nader (chortle)"

No, I think the article is correct Nader wanted to beat Gore in 200 and he wants to beat Kerry in 2004. It explains his otherwise bizarre actions perfectly. His supporters are either being used, or they agree with him. Some at least have the courage to admit their twisted logic that things will be worse under another 4 years of Bush and, despite history showing otherwise, that they think that it will encourage people to come around to their point of view.

[AP]

18. Um, yes it does. Why would he swap votes if he wanted Gore to lose?

Your argument misses the point:

They weren't swapping ANY two states' votes. They were trying to swap Nader votes in states Gore was winning by miles (NY and CA) for votes where Gore was close.

For the winner, it only matters that you win the electoral college vote. Winning by 5 million votes in NY means you have 5 million votes that weren't worth anything to Gore.

Having Nader running gave those votes value. People could promise a vote for Nader where it wasn't going to hurt Gore for a promise of a vote for Gore where Gore needed the vote (and a vote for Nader would have hurt progress).

[Zero Gravitas]

20. vote swapping

I understand how the electoral college works, thanks. My point is that very few people will actually participate in vote swapping because there is no way to verify how the other person voted. IF they were really serious about vote swapping they would have campaigned in safe Gore states to convince people there that vote swapping with Naderites in close states was worthwhile, but they didn't Nader went to Florida and said "Vote For Me, not Gore". That has much more to do with the central argument of the piece than whether they encouraged a small number of people to (pretend to) swap votes.

If Nader's aim was to build the Green party and not to defeat Gore he would have pursued a very different strategy than the one that he did pursue.

[AP]

24. Those were all problems Billy Bragg had to confront, and LoZ. admitted

that it worked there.

Most people admitted it worked there.

Nader had to campaign to make votes have value for swapping.

Look, all I'm saying in this article doesn't seem to make sense. Here, the writer has said that he was told it was all about swapping (which may be true or not--if it isn't, he doesn't make an argument for it not being about swapping) and then he says they wanted Gore to lose.

I find that logically inconsistent. Why swap votes at all if you want Gore to lose? Don't swap votes at all if you want Gore to lose. Clearly, if they were swapping votes, it was about getting as many votes for Nader as possible nationally while allowing Gore to win the EV he needed.

Here he has central participants telling him that they were doing it for vote swapping in the final weeks of the election and the conlusion is that they wanted Gore to lose. This isn't even resionism -- he says this is what they believed with days to go. The conclusion of this article makes no sense to me.

[Zero Gravitas]

26. why do it

1) I think vote swapping is irrelevant. how many people did it? not many. I admitted nothing about Bragg, I don't know anything about that or what vote swapping in UK elections has to do with the US presidential elections.

2)Nader and his advisers were manipulating the Green party supporters, they were dishonest with them. They pretended not to want Gore to lose, even though that was Nader's real goal. If they came out and said we're trying to prevent Gore from winning they would have lost support so they said other wise, but to me campaigning against Gore in close states is the only relevant fact. He campaigned there because he didn't want Gore to win.

[AP]

27. If you're running for office, you HAVE to say that want to win, or

nobody will vote for you. You're wasting everyone's time.

Nader didn't want NO votes. He clearly wanted Gore to win, but wanted to get enough votes to send a message about the vitality of the left (which is important -- history tells us that third parties are the source of just about every progressive idea that has become law in America, and the fasicsts knew what they were doing when they destroyed third parties by outlawing cross-party endorsements and making it harder to get on the ballot in the first place).

If Nader didn't say he wanted to win, he couldn't trade votes or anything.

Furthermore, there are studies that show that Nader kept people interested who might have tuned out otherwise, and about 90% of them voted for Gore in the end.

[Zero Gravitas]

29. close states

He didn't have to campaign in close states in the last days of the campaign. He could have gone to safe states and said "Vote For Me Instead Of Gore" but he didn't he went to the close states and campaigned there because HE WANTED GORE TO LOSE. And the asshole is trying it again.

[AP]

30. I just need more evidence. This story SAYS they were interested in

swapping votes. Then it jumps to the conclusion that he wanted Gore to lose.

You don't advocate vote swapping if you want to win.

And you have no platform to ask for votes to be swapped if you don't run.

And furthermore, at least two studies show that Nader might have been increasing the turnout of a lot of voters who ended up voting for Gore.

[sangh0]

34. No, it does NOT

It says that they SAID they were interested in it. It does not say they actually did it.

[AP]

36. It did happen. It got a lot of press. The Republicans were going to

sue over it.

And the article doesn't give any evidence that they didn't mean what they said.

[Rooktoven]

37. Nader himself _didn't_ advocate vote swapping

The point of the article is not about the motives of his rank and file supporters, but rather about Ralph himself and his inner circle (willing to destroy America for vanity...).

[AP]

38. Neither did the politicians who benefitted from it in the UK.

Do you see, for vote swapping to work the candidate has to act like he or she wants to win.

So, in the UK, Billy Bragg promoted the effort, the candidates (IIRC) said nothing about it, and it worked.

[AP]

40. Polls were showing Gore winning FL by 300,000 votes.

If he wasn't down in FL, getting FL'ians interested, why would FL Nader voters feel compelled to trade votes with New Yorkers?

Furthermore, that's where the media cicrus moved. All Gore (and Bush?) did was fly back and forth between FL and NH for the last two weeks. That's where the media was. Had Nader NOT gone to FL, he wouldn't have gotten any coverage.

I'm not saying his campaign strategy was smart, but there's a huge difference between wanting Gore to lose, and being a useful but unwitting tool for the thieving Republican party.

[LoZoccolo]

28. I didn't "admit" that it worked there.

I really don't know. I just don't have any reason to doubt it. It's not the same as like I really know anything about it.

[LoZoccolo]

7. All but 40 states ha!

That's an interesting way of putting it. All but a vast majority of the states! How about "they should have backed out of ten states"?

[AP]

19. I think I misquoted the article -- drop out in 10 states, I believe.

There are 17 battleground states this year. I presume that the authore is claiming that he advocated Nader drop out in 10 close states.

[Rooktoven]

32. Yeah, but Nader HIMSELF was campaigning in swing states

His aims were way different than the rank and file who voted for him. In the end he'll be placed on the same moral level as Bush. He didn't care about the environment, didn't care about choisce, didn't care about fairness-- alll he was concerned with was making his vindictive point and dragging america down the toliet.

The hell with him.

[tom_paine]

9. "Nader = Asshole" Yep.

Now Nader reminds me of the "Useful Idiots" Lenin spoke of.

Of course, that presupposes he doesn't have utter contempt for those he is "helping", you know, Filthy Little Nobodies like us.

And I am no longer sure of that.

[Bluebear]

4. What a vindictive shit. n/t

[seabeyond]

8. this is what i see as i have watched this man

gosh is he really going to sucker the people in that believe he is the savior. the same way bush is using christianity to win the votes for the joe schmoes who are getting screwed by bush policy, the rebels are going to vote in their hero against establishment and he is thoroughly of ego.

wow

[Killarney]

10. what an asshole

at least michael moore has apologized to gore for supporting nader

[Hubert Flottz]

14. To save the Spotted Fucking Owl!

And Kill Off the United States Of America by starvation!

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

21. at least you're consistant

in criticizing moore.

it always amazes me that so many here dispise nader for his 2000 run yet still love evryone who backed him (moore, garofalo, sarandon, robbins, hihtower, chomsky, smith, etc)

and don't give me that 'they're not backing him this year" excuse. this has been the prevailing attitude for 2, now going on 3 years. this sentiment predates his 2004 decision.

nader is an easy target for those naive folks living in denial who still think al gore is an environmentalist, hillary clinton is a feminist, and bill clinton is on our side.

people were fed up with NAFTA, GATT, and corporatism in 2000. that's what he ran against. that's why so many prominant progressives backed him. and that's why i voted for him.

and as for gary sellers who the article cites. this character has arather dubious history as ralph explains in 'crashing the party' and is often trotted out by democrats as the gop puts up zell miller.

[Zero Gravitas]

23. 2004

are moore, garofalo, sarandon, robbins, hihtower, chomsky, smith, etc
supporting Nader in 2004? Many of his prior supporters are not. I for one do blame Nader for what happened in 2000 but I truly despise him for trying to be the spoiler again this year. In 2000 people could be forgiven by being fooled by Nader and Bush, but there is no excuse this time around.

[peacetalksforall]

31. I believe his single motivation for everything is his 'connection' to

the very same corporations he criticizes and it's all about money in his pocket.

I believe he is a first class shill. A greedy, money hungry first class shill.

And here is a guy whose autograph I collected. His mid-life crisis involved a total reversal of values instead of divorcing a wife - oh that's right, he doesn't have one - probably thinks they are too expensive.

He has money invested in the very companies he castigates.

Hope he's happy with the killing spree and the economic collapse in this country.

Sorry to rant. This is my last one about him for the month.

[UNIXcock]

41. Nader is out to ...

... tank our Democratic nominee. You absolutely must vote Kerry