[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Nader/Gore Redux



At 07:14 PM 10/27/2000 +0000, you wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Isaac Elnecave <isaacmec@voyager.net>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've kept out of the debate so far.  But the effort to push Nader to get
off the ballot
is sadly misguided and undemocratic.

Since when is it is misguided and undemocratic to tell Ralph Naders'
campaign that it is reckless/risky to make it more likely with their efforts
that George Bush will be president, just so the Green Party
(which is more "anti-corporation" than "green") can engage in
some high profile "grant whoring" to get federal campaign
matching funds in four years?



Tthe assertion that Nader will tip the election over to Bush is
nonsense.  It is clearly based on polling data that shows the election
to be very close and that if you add Nader's supporters to Gore's, the
total would exceed Bushy's.

In other words, it assumes that Nader's supporters would vote for Gore
if Ralphie wasn't on the ballot.  There is no evidence to support that
assertion.  Nader has held steady at 3 to 4% for some time.  In that
time, we have seen Gore's lead shrink from about 8% after the convention
to a deficit and back to a tie.  In Wisconsin, Gore has suceeded in
turning a 5% lead into a 9% deficit over the last month(during the same
period Ralph picked up 1%).  It is those dorky undecided voters you saw
in focus groups after the debates who will  decide this election.

Just about every national political commentator out there is
saying that many/most of the Nader votes will come out of Gore's
base.  Take a look, for example at this Salon Feature, "Unsafe
in any State."

http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/10/28/nader/index.html

or

http://www.salon.com/news/col/cona/2000/10/24/nader/index.html


And then there is this passage from the above URL....

"Several months ago, Nader indignantly denied a quote attributed to him by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the environmental advocate and Gore                          supporter, to the effect that the Green maverick would actually
prefer a Bush victory. But the editors of Outside magazine
cited a transcript of an interview with Nader showing he had
said just that in an unguarded moment."


If it is risking the presidential election of George Bush
so Ralph Nader and the rest of the fundamentalist left can
go on an ego trip....I'd say that Nader should drop out if
he and his green party followers want to have any credibility
in the environmental movement in the future in the event of
a Bush win.