Ralph Nader's War
Earlier this month Ralph Nader spoke at a protest rally outside the White House demanding an end to US occupation of Iraq. I know that Nader was an early and vocal opponent of the war. But I wonder if he ever considers his own responsibility for this tragic war. Without Nader, there'd have been no President George W. Without George W., no war in Iraq.
Nader has been hinting that he's considering another presidential run in 2008, especially if Sen. Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic Party nomination. You'd think that by now Nader would feel some remorse for helping elected George Bush in 2000 and wouldn't want to make that mistake again. But Nader doesn't seem to have learned much from that experience.
I am still angry at Ralph Nader for all the damage that George Bush has done to my country. This also makes me very sad, because for years I believed that Nader was one of the greatest Americans of the 20th century. In fact, it wasn't that long ago, in introducing Nader at a forum on my campus, that I called him one of the 10 most important Americans of the past 100 years. I put Nader in the same league as Jane Addams, Walter Reuther, Martin Luther King, and Cesar Chavez.
Beginning in 1965 with the publication of his expose of the auto industry, UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED, and for more than 30 years after that, Nader inspired, educated and mobilized millions of Americans to fight for a better environment, safer consumer products, safer workplaces, and a more accountable government. Thanks to Nader, our cars are safer, our air and water is cleaner, and our food is healthier.
We have Nader to thank for seat belts and air bags. He was a key player in changing America's attitude toward nuclear power -- and why we stopped building nuclear power plants. Nader is more responsible than any other figure for some of the most important changes in recent American history. These include the Freedom of Information Act, the Clean Air Act, the Safe Water Act, and the Superfund law that requires the cleanup of toxic waste sites. Political observes credit Nader with getting Congress to create the Environmental Protection Act, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Nader built a network of organizations to research and lobby against corporate abuse. These include Public Citizen, Globe Trade Watch, Congress Watch, the Health Research Group, the Center for Auto Safety, and the Center for Responsive Law. He also started a network of campus-based organizations called "PIRGS" -- Public Interest Research Groups -- that over the years has trained thousands of college students in the skills of citizen activism. He has also written dozens of books -- all focusing on how citizens can make America a more democratic society.
During the 1970s and 1980s, Nader topped most public opinion polls as the nation's most trusted person. Had Nader retired in the early 1990s, his reputation and legacy as one of American history's most effective leaders would have been secure.
But then Nader got the political bug and decided to run for president. He did so in 1996 and 2000 on the Green Party ticket, and in 2004 as an independent. Because Nader sees both the Democratic and Republican parties as essentially the same -- as tools of corporate America -- he chose to run as a third party candidate. He claimed that his campaigns would help build a permanent progressive third party that could contest for power. But it never happened, mostly because America's winner-take-all rules make it virtually impossible for third parties to gain traction, but also because Nader never devoted himself to the hard work of party-building. (Remember that billionaire Ross Perot, running as a third party candidate in 1992, didn't win a single electoral vote). Instead, Nader simply marginalized himself as a figure in American politics.
Nader could have adapted another strategy that would have been more effective. Had he run in the Democratic Party primaries, he would have helped shape the debate and gotten considerable TV and radio air time on the debates. He wouldn't have won the nomination, but he could have helped strengthen the progressive wing within the party. This is the role Jesse Jackson played in 1988 and 1992 and that Dennis Kucinich, who has much less name recognition than either Jackson or Nader, is playing this year. This is also the approach that MoveOn has adopted with considerable success. We might call this a "party within a party" strategy, much like the corporate-backed Democratic Leadership Council used to move the party to the business-friendly center.
During his 2000 campaign, Nader argued that there was virtually no difference between Democratic candidate Al Gore and Republican candidate George W. Bush. After the scandalous miscounting of votes in Florida, Bush "officially" beat Gore by 537 votes (out of more than 5.8 million cast), making it the closest presidential election in the state's history. This gave Bush Florida's 25 electoral college votes and, with the help of the Supreme Court, the presidency.
Nader garnered 97,488 votes in Florida. Some of Nader's supporters would have stayed home if he wasn't in the race, but most of them would otherwise have voted for Gore. A week before election day in November, when polls showed that Gore and Bush were running neck-and-neck, Nader should have announced that he was encouraging his supporters to vote for Gore in order to avoid a Bush victory. Had he done that, Gore would have beaten Bush by a significant margin.
Yes, I know the well-worn don't-blame-Nader arguments: Had Gore run a better campaign in Florida, or even won his home state of Tennessee, he wouldn't have needed the Nader voters to win. The Florida Republicans -- led by Gov. Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris -- purged many eligible African Americans from the voting rolls, diminishing many likely Gore voters. All this may be true. But its also true, and more important, that Nader could have singlehandedly changed the outcome of the race, and of US history, by "releasing" his supporters to vote for Gore.
In fact, many big Republican donors also contributed to Nader's campaign in order to help Nader divert votes away from Gore and tip the election to Bush. Their strategy worked. And it dramatically changed the direction of American politics.
Had Gore won, progressives would no doubt have had reason to complain that he was compromising too much on a variety of economic, social, and environmental justice issues. We might even had to resort to protests outside the White House. But, with Gore as president, we would not have invaded Iraq, which has cost more than 3,795 American and over one million Iraqi lives, and undermined America's reputation around the world. In addition, the scandals and misdeeds that have surrounded the Bush White House -- the tax cuts for the rich, the rollback of environmental regulations, the attack on science on issues like stem cells and global warming, the overwhelming influence of the energy industrial complex, the evisceration of consumer and workplace safety laws, the failure to respond to the victims of Katrina, and the appointment of Supreme Court justices that created a majority that opposes reproductive choice, affirmative action, and workers rights -- would not have occurred.
I don't know whether Nader, now 73, feels any regret for this serious error in judgment in 2000. Surely he must, on occasion, worry that when he dies, the opening paragraph of his obituary will be more likely to mention his role in electing George Bush than his decades-long crusades for economic and environmental justice. Although Nader seems unwilling to acknowledge his error, voters learned the right lesson. In 2000, Nader received 2,883,105 votes -- 2.74% of the popular vote nationwide. Four years later, he received 463,653 votes -- only 0.38% of the popular vote.
I lament that Nader, once a hero to millions of Americans and a mentor to many activists, is now better-known for his political blunders. On my list of the worst contemporary Americans, I reserve most of my outrage for the political bullies like Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, James Baker, and Trent Lott, and the corporate titans from Enron, Halliburton, Wal-Mart, Eli Lilly, and their ilk who abuse workers, consumers, and the environment and wield their political influence to enhance their own power and greed. But I have some anger left over for Ralph Nader, whose lifetime of citizen activism is now overshadowed by the blood of Americans and Iraqis on his hands.
Peter Dreier teaches politics and public policy at Occidental College in Los Angeles.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
All you really need to know about Naderites is that they continue to insist that there is no difference between Al Gore and George Bush.
Yeah right, Nader is a traitor like Bush is a patriot.
If anyone voted for anyone besides Nader THEY are the traitors. OK, more like lemmings.
Lemming think is taking over again with HC. If you think that Hill is gonna be a significant change from W, I got a Corvair I'd like to sell you for the price of a Ferrari.
What must the rest of the world think about our country. Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. The devolution is alive in Amerika.
Run, Ralph, Run!
Nader should run for office but not for President.
Even if he colud get elected he would be a lame duck.
Politics are not winner take all.
Bush can play at being a dictator because he represents the power of the Republican Party, all it's financiers, the backing of the top military commanders, and now the world"s largest private mercinary army behind him. It doesn't matter he is seen as a brainless thug on the world stage. In fact it is a blessing to the one who,"Does tears" that he is a fool.
The Democrats have a slim majority but do not march in lock step as the Republicans have done for almost 30 years.
A Democratic President would have a difficult time.
Nader would make nice speaches and get virtually nothing from Congress.
I love his ideas.
So far he has avoided dirtying his hands by never participating in the real world of political life.
He has never had to compromise to get what he wants, as politicians do. Though now he seems just pontificates to his chior. He has done good lobying work in the past and has a good mind.
People have a right to throw their vote away in protest or sophmoric defiance.
If it feels good do it. Two year olds tend to smash toys that no longer please them. Pouty teenagers often just refuse to cooperate it they can't get their way.
People used to ask and wonder why there isn't some sort of third party political revolution. The answer is that the right Americans, the neuvo-rich are not financially screwed up enough...yet. The status quo is working well for many of those who are politically involved.
I would like to see Nader run for Rep. or Senator.
I'd send him a donation if he would run against Sen.Liberman!
Blaming Nader does not seem particularly productive. Additionally, he's quite right about the sameness of the two major parties. But mostly, if Al Gore hadn't caved in regarding the Florida recount and priorly had not caved into the sugar interests and supported the environmental preservation of the Everglades the Florida vote would not have been particularly close. He probably would have one by 50 - 49.
Some will bring up the canard about Gore's inability to carry his home state (being soundly trounced, in fact). I'm inclined to believe that he never thought Tennessee was ever in play for him. Gore botched Florida. It wasn't Nader, it wasn't Katherine Harris, and with bold legal work it needn't have been the Supreme Court.
Stop blaming Nader and start blaming the Democratic Party. They could have stood up to the the republicans on many occasions and much like last week during the Moveon fiasco they didnt. I blame the cowards such as Harry Reid and Pelosi for not having any spine to take a moral stand. Stop playing politics with these lying cheaters on the other side and start fighting just as down and dirty as they do. For goodness sakes they need to show some guts for once!
Cowboy, stop blaming the Democratic "party". There are some who lack courage, some who side with republicans, but overall they are "us". We elect them, and we need to elect more. If you throw a bucket of water on the fire and it doesn't go out, you don't blame the water. You go get some more.
Ralph Nader - and that damned butterfly that flapped its wings in Japan! Son of a bitch: if not for them, none of this mess would have happened! Because it's just as silly blaming the mess we're in on Nader as blaming it on a Japanese butterfly. Why? Because no one involved in the 2000 election was clairvoyant, that's why. Who knew "911" would happen (unless, of course, you're a conspiracy buff)? Who knew that a Bush presidency would be anything other than a completely non-descript one-term non-event? Who knew there was oil in Iraq (oops, getting carried away here)? Besides which, Gore's very public opposition to the Iraq War - as a man OUTSIDE the government - did not guarantee that he would not have done exactly as Bush did had he been president. Don't forget: a vice-president Lieberman would have been to Gore's president very much as vice-president Cheney has been to Bush's president. The simple fact is, no one could have known any of this. Yet, somehow, Nader should have?
Nader ran for president as was his right. I voted for him as was my right. No one anywhere on this planet is obligated to vote for Democrats. Democrats suck. The Democratic Party will find itself under constant and withering attack from the left. It will be reformed or destroyed.
SOLIDARITY
Ralph Nader will always be a hero to me. It wasn't he who ruined your chances of another president instead of Bushie. I beg to say we need more people like Ralph Nader who are decent, honest and intellectually competent. What we don't need is a totally antiquated and corrupt voting system of caucuses. We need campaign financing reform. We didn't need Kerry, and we certainly didn't need George Bush but quit your complaining. Nader has accomplished more in his little pinkie than you will do in your lifetime to demonstrate integrity and honesty. It's just too bad more of you didn't listen to him.
Nader/Dobbs '08
thats the rub if we get HC foisted on us by the DLC
This is tiresome. Gore gave us nothing to vote for.
History doesn't work the way you've described it. There's no way ordinary citizens who voted in the 2000 election could have predicted either the unfolding of events during the Bush Administration nor the Bush Administration's, and Congress's, reaction to them. The only people who could have predicted the Bush Administration's reaction to these events is the Bush Administration. Ralph Nader is not responsible for all of that. There is more than sufficient blame to go around for the outcomes we've suffered and endured, the lion's share belonging to the Bush Administration itself, Congress, the media.
Would things have been different had Nader dropped out of the race? Duh. But this is a silly game. Things would have been different all up and down the spectrum of events and actions, had other people either not done or did something differently than what they did. We all see through a glass darkly.
And while I'm in agreement with most of Nader's message, I always thought he was the wrong messenger. And while I certainly hope that Ralph Nader does not run again, to blame him solely for all of the mess that has transpired since November 2000 is a really big stretch.
Woody, you are saying that because there were other straws on the camel's back, the one you tossed on is unimportant?
The real point is, it was apparent that this particular straw, in Florida, as the polls at the time clearly showed, played a key role in breaking the camel's back.
Nader and the Naderites knew it, the Bothsiders knew it, the Democritics knew it, and that is the point of the post. They did nothing to help stop it, and they continue to insist to this day that Al Gore and George Bush are one and the same.
Nader and his two percent sliver of votes was but one of many fringe elements capitalized upon by Karl Rove during the 2000 election. A little here, a little there, with some really bad luck in Florida, yielded the President we have today.
Ralph Nader discredited the voting process itself--most Nader voters thought that Gore was going to win regardless of their vote so they essentially opted out of the election by following Nader's call to "make a statement."
Dubya and his crew took it from there, stealing the election from the majority who voted for Gore. Nader helped them along by reducing the numbers just enough in a close election.
Nader's denial of his mistake is characteristic of Dubya's own behavioral pattern, a stubborn and self-righteous refusal to analyze or accept any viewpoint that differs from their own. Ironically, Nader is closer to Bush than Gore ever was.
Ralph Nader is History and the last few years of his once interesting and productive life is over. Hearing him interviewed without feeling any guilt for the influence he had on G Bush being elected to the Presidency, and thereby contributing to the war in Iraq, should send him for a long visit to Shrink. His stupid ego that demanded the limelight when had no chance win and could only take votes from the Dems.makes his opinions and his new book should be distributed along with OJs story. He never literally killed anyone but whatever guilt he has for Iraq is like murder...
Nader needs to fuck off already. Who does he think he's kidding. He'll never be president. All he does is take votes away from legitimate candidates. Remember assholes, a vote for Nader is a vote for the Repuglican'ts
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
