Gang Green - The Democrats can cure their Ralph Nader problem by attacking

[Composed Thinker]

Gang Green
The Democrats can cure their Ralph Nader problem by attacking him -- immediately and ferociously.

By Michael Tomasky
Web Exclusive: 7.23.03
Print Friendly | Email Article

Here they come again. As if the last two and a half years have been some sort of game show with no real consequences for America and the world, the Greens signaled at their national committee meeting this weekend that they have every intention of running a presidential candidate in 2004.

It might be Ralph Nader, they say, or it could be Cynthia McKinney, the former congresswoman from Georgia. But short of a megalomaniac whose tenuous purchase on present-day reality threatens to cancel out every good thing he's done in his life, or a discredited anti-Semite, they'll settle for someone less distinguished. The point is to siphon off Democratic votes unless the Democrats prove themselves pure enough to nominate Dennis Kucinich. This development, as I'll show later, presents a wonderful opportunity for a gutsy Democrat to ferociously and immediately attack Nader. But first some background.

During the 2000 campaign, I used to go to bed wishing that the Christian Coalition were as strategically feebleminded, and as psychologically bent on disruption at any price, as the Greens. That way the CCers would have backed Gary Bauer, the laughably unelectable hard-right family values candidate. Then, once Bauer had been winnowed out of the nominating process, they would have claimed that his defeat showed just how corrupt the Republican Party had become from its incurable need to placate the secular humanists and "banking interests." Then they would have run some nut of their own who'd have made Bauer look like Arthur Vandenburg. Finally, with a few million misguided souls behind them, including at least a couple thousand in Florida, they would have cost George W. Bush the election, no asterisks or question marks. What a wonderful world this would be.

But the Christians are far smarter than these left-wing lions of ideological chastity, and so we are where we are. I'm assuming for the sake of argument that, of Nader's 2.8 million voters in 2000, about half are lost causes -- devoted dialecticians who won't allow facts to pass through the doors of their little theoretical straw huts. But I'm hoping that the other, more rational half exists, and I address my arguments to it.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/07/tomasky-m-07-23.html

[Capn Sunshine]

1. AND ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU, MR.ROVE

FOR THOSE EXCELLENT TALKING POINTS
:nuke:

[lcordero]

2. This is very bad advice

Giving the Greens "bad publicity" is still giving them publicity.

[FreedomReload]

3. Read The DK Open Letter Topic.

And kindly close this junk thread.

[Gman]

4. The Greens have officially made theirselves the enemy

and should be treated as such. The time for persuading is over. The Greens have no intention of coming over to unite with the Dems to defeat Bush. All the talk about being nice and persuading them is nothing but stalling tactics that I've had enough of. They're either for us and defeating Bush, or they are for defeating the Democratic Party and if Bush gets (re)elected, so be it. That makes the Green Party no different than the GOP as the enemy and should be treated as such. If they want to escape this fate, they better get on board now.

--on edit--
and this is NOT a junk thread. Removing this thread only aids and gives great comfort to the enemy.

[mikeysnot]

7. Link please!

Whoops wrong thread to respond too..

[MisterP]

12. Not particularly;

there was a debate over whether to support the D nominee. That that was even countenanced shows quite a bit of internal dissension.
They're another party--but its members need not be. ;)

[Starpass]

5. There's one thing I would like to ask--I haven't seen it here at DU

(and I do agree with everything you have said). Several weeks ago I read an article (NY Times..maybe??--forgot) that Ralphie threatened the Greens that if they did not nominate him as their presidential candidate, he would "run as a republican"..........I kid you not. Now, 1) go for it Ralph, I'm sure the repukes will dump Bush and make you the nominee. 2) what's with the threat at all since it makes positively no sense----It's like saying, "if you don't give me all your money, I'm going to bake a cake"---huh???? Apparently, there is something upside ag in Green heaven and Ralphie is upset. But I'm wondering if we should take this "threat" as an indication of his mental condition?? Please, anyone explain....perhaps I missed a real, real subtle message somewhere.

[mikeysnot]

8. Link please!

Sounds like BS to me...

[LiberalLibra]

19. Yes, Ralphie threated to run against Bush BUT I didn't believe it.......

....then and certainly don't believe it now either. Regardless of what he claims/threatens, Nader will run against Dems Nader don't dare run against rethugs, they are the only ones who will do photo ops with him or provide for those all important political ads.

[lazarus]

6. Please edit this

It's in violation of DU copyright rules. Thank you.

lazarus, DU moderator

[KG]

9. dems could cure their republican problem by attacking them

'immediately and ferociously'

wow, what a novel concept. think they'll try it?

[enki23]

10. it looks hypocritical to attack someone so similar to yourself

best stick to green bashing.

[Terwilliger]

11. heh!

[JVS]

13. And it wouldn't go over well with moderates.

It might make people feel bad about current policies.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

14. Horrible advice.

Don't piss off the greens. We need them to win.

[Classical_Liberal]

16. The people who don't want any concequences applied to sharon

want to marginalize the greens. Greens are no worse than any other indempendent voters, but as you can see Tomasky thinks that people who don't want to give Sharon foriegn aid should be a marginalized position, he also repeats the smear about McKinney being antisemitic. Probably because McKinney advocated that policy.

[KG]

17. there are those here that will tell you loudly that isn't true.

they believe dems. can win by getting repooks to vote for them.

[Classical_Liberal]

15. This is a dupe

. It was already posted in this forum today.

[lazarus]

18. Dupe

Plus it's in violation of our copyright laws.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=71429&mesg_id=71429&listing_type=search