Do Doug and Eric want Ralph Nader to receive only votes of those who would otherwise vote for Kerry, stay home, or vote for small left-wing parties, rather than also attract votes of those who would otherwise vote for Bush, stay home, or vote for small right-wing parties? Would US politics be in better shape if the latter all voted for Bush?
Nader writes: "The first basic sign of a platform fissure between the conservative base and the big business Republicans came with the 2002 Texas state Republican Party platform which requires candidates to read every page and initial that it has been read. In an October 2, 2003 letter I asked President Bush whether he supports this platform. This defiant document announces over twenty domestic and foreign policies diametrically opposed to what the Bush Administration is doing or not doing"; "Already, around 30 conservative Republicans in the House of Representatives are in near revolt, despite the iron grip of Rep. Tom Delay (Rep. Texas), having voted against the Medicare-drug bill and its enormous subsidies to the drug industry and other companies"; "Many conservatives believe that the Patriot Act is too extreme a law and is a threat, as the Texas Republican Party implied, to our domestic liberty under the 'guise of preventing terrorism.' Big Government surveillance, unannounced sneak and peak searches of citizens' homes and businesses, and the rise of legions of government snoopers rub genuine conservatives the wrong way"; "Our country's local, state and national sovereignties are important to conservative Republicans. These sovereignties are being undermined by NAFTA, the World Trade Organization, and large U.S. corporations who are turning their back on America. The Texas Republican Party platform demands withdrawal from these autocratic systems of international governance that pull America down and 'outsourcing' the jobs of American workers who often are required to train their substitutes before being laid off by the multinational corporation" ("Dear Conservatives Upset With the Policies of the Bush Administration," <http://www.votenader.com/why_ralph/?cid=14>).
If potential Bush voters vote for Nader on the grounds that their opposition to Bush's support for the Patriot Act, the Medicare drug bill and its enormous subsidies to the drug industry, and NAFTA, the WTO, and outsourcing is more decisively important than their opinions about Nader's support for gay marriage, reproductive freedom, universal health care, "an employee bill of rights" which repeals the Taft-Hartley Act, "a fair tax where the wealthiest and corporations pay their fair share" and "tax wealth more than work," "electoral reform that creates a vibrant, active, participatory Democracy," etc., why shouldn't Kerry supporters welcome that?
As Howie Hawkins reminds us, "Contrary to conventional wisdom, a substantial proportion of Nader supporters thought Bush was the lesser evil. While 54% of the people who thought Nader was the best candidate voted for Gore in order to defeat Bush, 37% of the people who preferred Nader voted for Bush in order to defeat Gore. Nader's populist anti-corporate, clean politics, environmentalist issues clearly appealed to substantial sections of the bases of both major parties as well as independents" ("There Never Were Any 'Good Old Days' In The Democratic Party," March 1, 2004, <http://www.swans.com/library/art10/hhawk01.html>).
You two might take a look at W. E. B. DuBois' _John Brown_ (NY: International Publishers, 1962 [first published in 1909]). The free state settlers in Kansas "found themselves in three parties: a few who hated slavery, more who hated Negroes, and many who hated slaves. Easily the political _finesse_ . . . might . . . have pitted the parties against one another in such irreconcilable differences as would slip even slavery through" (137). And yet, over the course of four years of battle from 1854 until 1858, free state settlers withstood the attacks of the pro-slavery party and fought back -- "So Kansas was free. . . . Free because strong men had suffered and fought not against slavery but against slaves in Kansas" (143). If only the morally correct were to be enlisted in the struggle against slavery, slavery might never have become abolished. -- Yoshie
* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/> * Calendars of Events in Columbus: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>, <http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/> * Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>