WTF Ralph Nader?
Today I read that Ralph Nader has thrown his metaphorical hat into the ring for the 2008 Presidential race. I hope that SOME of my fellow liberals will join me as I throw up my hands in exasperation. So dismayed am I by this news that it has prompted me to start this blog. There has to be other people out there like me who are the most radical of liberals in their heart of hearts but who recognize the dire need for even the slightest move in the right direction.
You might like Ralph Nader. You might identify with what he’s saying. But he’s not going to get elected- not this time and not even close. We all know this. Sure… I agree that if we all withhold our vote from candidates who don’t have a chance then they will never have a chance because they never gets votes and it becomes a viscious cycle where we are constantly left with the same disappointing options. I DO get that. However, given that Ralph Nader WILL NOT win, I have two choices: throw my support to Nader over the Democratic nominee and congratulate myself for being so highly principled regardless of the consequences (like a John McCain victory) or devote my efforts to helping a candidate who CAN potentially win- who I do not wholeheartedly agree with and sometimes straight-up oppose, but who I believe will still be a leap forward in the right direction for the country. This might not be popular with my fellow progressives but I choose the latter of those options. At this moment in history immediate change is too important to put energy or give a vote to someone who won’t win. It’s a choice between moving forward or remaining in the same dire position. And while I’d rather stay in the same place than move backwards as we’ve steadily been doing the past 8 years, call me crazy but I’d like to see some positive change. Even if it’s not that dramatic a change.
Once we’re not in war; when there’s a democrat in office; when we have a better global position and improved healthcare and social programs, etc. THAT will be the time to start heavily supporting candidates on the fringes. Then I will say, “Ok Democrats, I like what you’ve done, but you haven’t gone nearly far enough…” When I’m confident that the third party candidate in question will not upset a democratic victory over a HORRIBLE Republican opponent I will enthusastically support that candidate (if their ideas are along the lines with my own of course).
And is that so terrible? Am I less of a liberal or a progressive because I opt for the change that I can get rather than the change that I’d prefer in a perfect world? I’m going to go ahead and say it- the whole problems with liberals in generals is that we vote with our hearts rather than our heads. We let far-reaching principles trump strategy. Is it that we’re attracted to someone on the fringes? Could it be that if someone has a shot at victory they become mainstream, hence less radical and less appealing? If, against all odds, Nader became the front runner tomorrow would he retain his far-left core or would they suddenly find flaws in his policies? If your former-cheerleader-now-a-soccer-mom-from-the-suburbs coworker supported Nader and he had EXACTLY the same positions as he had now would you still want to vote for him? Or would there be a quest for someone even more radical. I think that’s part of the problem.
http://digg.com/submit?url=http://liberalrealist.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/wtf-ralph-nader/
