We all know what Nader brought to the table. He did not bring a Party or a movement. No need to beat that into the ground. From an election perspective it was: do you vote for anyone? Nader, McKinney, Obama, McCain, Barr….? I voted for Nader. Why because of the choices Nader was not only on my ballot, but he reflects and speaks to an unequivocal understanding of the issues and what must desparately be addressed. McKinney was a very close second. She wasn’t on my ballot nor were any of the other “3rd” Party Presidential candidates.

I voted FOR someone. I didn’t vote because I feared McCain, or because I’m a (D) rather than an (R) or because the financial market collapsed, or because one candidate was a white male and the other a black male (or female for that matter); I didn’t vote as a lessor evil calcuation, I didn’t vote for the guy I thought would be the winner, I didn’t vote for one of the two guys allowed in the national debates, I didn’t vote for more war, I didn’t vote for the one with the most/best 30 second ads, I didn’t vote for capital punishment, I didn’t vote for Israel over Palestinians, I didn’t vote for continued privatized /employer based health care, I didn’t vote for nuclear energy or “clean coal”, I didn’t vote for off-shore drilling; I didn’t vote to demonize Hugo Chavez or continue the Cuban embargo, I didn’t vote for a nice Obama t-shirt, I didn’t vote for the young guy with the wonderful smile, I didn’t vote for the guy who gives the best speech, I didn’t vote for the guy who got millions from corporate donars…

But, Deadbeat, NOW, we can move on and discuss our future plans. Let’s not let Nader, the guy who gave us a shot at voting FOR something a poke in the eye because he didn’t create our movement for us or our Party for us. What the hell do you want out of one 72 year old man, who must have felt the pain of Obama’s disdainful neglect when he had no remorse for the Lebanese people who must daily live with splinter bombs from US made / Israel deployed unleashing war crimes. Nader is as you know of Lebanese heritage.

Nader’s a man of peace. He’s not perfect. He’s obstinant and sometime stubborn – he’s a flesh and blood human being. He won’t probably run again. You coulda voted for him. You could have voted FOR something!! That’s my point.

Max

The vote for Nader was a vote for an independent “charismatic” candidate without any institutional base. Such a candidate is NOT a viable candidate. The last such candidate was Ross Perot however Perot possessed the resources to construct the Reform Party that was able to institutionally harness his base. Unfortunately, Nader possesses no such resources thus he was NEVER a viable candidate.

Max, you can semantically term it anyway you want for emotional effect but it doesn’t do anything to alter the reality of Nader’s run in 2008. He had much stronger support during the interim after 2000 going into the 2004 election. Nader, had he been able to run as a Green in 2004, WAS a viable candidate who needed only to get on the ballot in all 50 states and obtain 5% of the vote after coming off of his 2.5% in 2000.

Therefore Max for some strange reason you don’t see the difference between Nader’s potential in 2004 from his lack of potential in 2008.

This it is not me doing the “belittling” Max. I have been keeping it real by focusing that the real problem which lies within the ranks of the Left.
Unfortunately, the belittling has been your rhetoric and a lot of rhetoric coming from the Left belittling the common voters many of whom voted PRAGMATICALLY.

And Max today we see once again how Zionism engulfs U.S. political economy with Obama selection of Rham Emmanuel as his Chief of Staff. Remember Max it has been YOU who has denied and obscured that Zionism is NOT a factor in U.S. politics rather than confront this problem. So if we want to talk about “boots” Max you need to take yours off.

A little courage is what this is about. Not playing mind games by demonizing one side vs the other. In ‘04 the Repubs succeeded at this game. In ‘08 it was the Dems who succeeded in it. And those who believe in something else – they lost regardless of who they felt they needed to vote for.

George Bush was clearly beatable in 2004. However Max I am not talking about “mindgames”. I’m talking about REAL POLITICS and REAL EVENTS that caused the Left to fail in 2008 due to their collapse and self destruction in 2004. Because the Left was so weak it was clearly not prepared to challenge the Obama Campaign.

Perhaps Max YOU choose not to want to analyze, examine or reevaluate those failures that help weaken the Left and thereby create the void filled by the Obama campaign. However the election results bears this out. Nader only received, I haven’t seen the final tally, ~1% of the vote and McKinney came in last among the major third party candidates which doesn’t bode well for the Green Party and the Left.

In fact because turnout was so huge the results could be considered a “rejection” of the Left. This is why analysis and assessment of the Left are important.

It is obvious that Obama will clearly disappoint his base. That’s a no-brainer. But will you engage his massive support with enmity and disdain or with empathy and nuance. From some of the remarks I’ve seen here it’s going to be the former which IMO will be counterproductive and keeping the Left alienated from the masses needed to build a grassroots movement.

The Obama election should be seen as a call for REFLECTION and a call to construct strategies that can build commonality and solidarity. Unfortunately from what I’ve seen over the past 12 years with the Left, I’m beginning to think that the Left enjoys its marginalization.

Voting for Nader was an expression of voting FOR. You can belittle that as somehow not dealing with reality. When the boot is on your head you can lay there and say, well, it’s just reality on my head; or you can do something (anything) to remove it.

If there are people who voted FOR Obama well then they voted their conscience (even if based on ignorance). But to calculate a “lessor evil” you only perpetuate the very principle that this country and its political system has cyncially put in place for people who while disagreeing with nearly every position the candidates make, still vote for what’s on the ballot as a major, corporate, media sanctified candidate.

A little courage is what this is about. Not playing mind games by demonizing one side vs the other. In ’04 the Repubs succeeded at this game. In ’08 it was the Dems who succeeded in it. And those who believe in something else – they lost regardless of who they felt they needed to vote for.

Only if you’re in a swing state, solid state’s are free to help build up third party or alternative candidates, which would be pragmatic given that’s how third parties have influenced politics in American history.

This youtube video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFSDOrEo4Q0 puts it best. Want a better Obama presidency? Don’t vote for him!

Why not deal in reality and state the obvious that voting for Obama at best is a “lesser evil” vote to keep McCain out of the White House.

I really don’t understand why anyone thinks that there are viable alternatives in the 2008 election. I would rather see writers suggest voting against Obama as a protest vote on principles.
At least that is more honest since voting against Obama, if this election is close, could tilt it towards McCain.

Once again I come back to 2004 where there was a REAL opportunity to make a difference toward a viable third party alternative. That opportunity was squandered and now in 2008 there is no such opportunity.

“1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars…Roll call 2”

“2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).”

“2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture… man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.”

“4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte’s prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107”

“4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 ”

“7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .”

“9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.”

“10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .”

“11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .”

“12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. ”

“5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .”

“5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .”

“6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .”

“6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .”

“6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought our troops home. Roll Call 181 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.”

“6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .

“9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 ”

“9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .”

“11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .”

“12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush’s policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 ”