Election 2008: Ralph Nader in Athens, Georgia

On July 25th, 2008, my father, my thirteen-year-old brother, and I went to go see Ralph Nader, consumer advocate and 2008 Independent Presidential candidate, speak at “Master’s Hall” on the University of Georgia campus in Athens. I had been incredibly excited to see that Nader was coming to Georgia on his “Southern Tour”, and no more than forty miles away from my town, no less! My father, being the good open-minded fellow that he is, agreeably drove myself and my uninterested brother there and paid the $10 each to get in. We each received a free Nader/Gonzalez ‘08 pin for this payment. There was a long table set up just outside the hall for this practice of collecting money, and for collecting signatures on a petition to get Ralph Nader on the ballot in Georgia. The number of signatures necessary to get Nader, or any Independent candidate, on the ballot in Georgia is inane: 42,489 signatures by July 8th. Such ballot access laws are implemented so that independent candidates cannot make a significant challenge to the two major parties in power (who are the ones that make the laws, of course).

The event was at 5:30 in the afternoon; we three were situated in our seats by 5:00, and we watched as the hall filled up with likely about two hundred people. Since Ralph Nader had held an event in Columbia, South Carolina, at 12 o’clock that afternoon, and since he had run into some bad traffic on the way to Athens, he did not arrive at the hall until about 6 o’clock that evening.

After giving a brief press conference upstairs, Nader arrived, amidst a burst of applause. He walked down the aisle, right next to where I was sitting (close enough that I could have touched him, if I lacked judgement and prudence), towards the podium. Nader sat down and briefly rested from his busy schedule while a young African American campaign volunteer, a “concerned citizen”, gave an earnest introductory speech. In this speech, the young man affirmed how much he cared about the country and the issues at hand, and how important it is for everyone to care and be civically involved. And then he said, “And now I am proud to present a more-than-worthy 2008 presidential candidate, Mr. Ralph Nader.” The crowd erupted into applause. This was the moment that we had all been waiting for. We three were not disappointed.
Read more

Why not Gravel or Nader or both?

“I think the job of the Democratic Party is to be so compelling that a few percentage [points] of the vote going to another candidate is not going to make any difference.”
-Barack Obama

http://gravel08.us

A Plea for Independence

I am a great believer in the policies of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who stood up for those who could not stand up for themselves. I wholeheartedly agree with his statement that “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have little.” That is why I have been a member of the Democratic Party until just recently. But, now, I am afraid that the Democratic party of Franklin D. Roosevelt no longer exists. Changing times have necessitated that it be replaced.

The Democratic Party has traditionally been the “Party of the People”, while the Republican Party has traditionally been the “Party of Business”. Republican President Calvin Coolidge once said that “The business of America is business”. But, it seems, in recent years, the lines between the two parties have been blurred. The focus for the Democratic Party has shifted from standing up for the common man: their main goal today is winning elections, and obtaining and maintaining power, at any cost. This is the main goal of most politicians today. The raising of millions of dollars is absolutely essential in achieving this goal, because, I’m sorry to say, our political elections in the United States are all about money and money alone.

The Republicans usually raise more money than the Democrats during the election season, due in part to the donations that they receive from the business community. In order to compete with the Republicans in elections, the Democrats have found it necessary to become friendlier with businesses and the related special interests, such as the defense industry and the insurance companies. The Democrats have raised much, much more money than the Republicans during this 2008 presidential election season: how, how could they do that with no measure of support from businesses and special interests? The answer is that they could not.

But, honestly, who could blame the Democrats for becoming cozier with the business community? Representing and fighting for the common man does not pay. Average Americans alone cannot provide the millions and millions of dollars that is necessary in order to win an election. However, representing rich businesses and special interests pays very well. The Democrats had to establish an allegiance to those who could
fund them best, in order to win the most elections possible in the future.

This is why I say that the Democratic Party is the “Party of the People” no longer. No longer will it stand up for those whom society has forgotten. No longer will it think about what is best for those who are living in fear, poverty, ignorance, and despair when it is making all of its legislative decisions. The Democratic Party will instead stand up for the businesses and special interests. They will think of the businesses and special interests when it comes to making legislative decisions. And, of course, they will think about whether or not the decisions that they make will hurt them in the upcoming election. This is the Democratic Party of today and of the future. This Democratic Party is the one that had to slip a promised minimum wage increase into an Iraq War funding bill. This is not the Democratic Party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

This Democratic Party no longer represents me, and the Republicans represent me even less than the Democrats do. Neither the Republican Party nor the Democratic Party are truly the “Party of the People”. That is why I do not belong to either political party. And that is why I plan to vote for the Independent, or independent-minded, candidate in the future elections. And I suggest that you, my fellow citizens, do the same. Do not allow this corrupt two-party system to continue to control our elections and our government. It will only be to the detriment of our society if we continue to allow them to do so. It is as Theodore Roosevelt once said, “The death-knell of the republic has rung as soon as the active power becomes lodged in the hands of those who seek, not to do justice to all citizens, rich and poor alike, but to stand for one special class and for its interests as opposed to the interests of others.”

Thank you, and please consider my plea for independence.

Barack Obama crossing party lines

Most pundits would agree that the candidate that will win the 2008 Election can’t just appeal to the base, but needs to also be a top choice for Independents. This is one of the biggest fears about the Hillary campaign. Even if she can win the Democratic Primary, will she be able to appeal to those outside of the Democratic party? Read more

Green goes after Emanuels seat.

Green Party candidate Alan Augutson has dropped out of the presidental race and will go after Rahm Emanuel’s seat in the house.

Here was his press release.

GREEN CANDIDATE DROPS ‘08 PRESIDENTIAL BID

Augustson to Target Emanuel’s House Seat

—–

Dear Greens, Friends and Allies:

As the heading above should make somewhat obvious, as of the time of
this writing I will cease to actively pursue the 2008 Green Party
nomination for President of the United States.

This is not an action I take lightly. The conditions that, I felt,
forced me to run have not changed: Green Presidential candidates exist,
but they are not waging visible, effective, issue-based campaigns. Some
appear to be waiting for the endorsement of a bigger name; others for a
big-name candidate to enter the race. I charge these people to remember:
a big-name candidate may not endorse the whole Green Party platform.
S/he may not be willing to run without the aid of PAC or lobby money.

And, worst of all, s/he may not run to win. I have said from the very
beginning that a candidate who does not have an intention to win, nor a
plan to govern thereafter, is not helping the Green Party. The time for
symbolic campaigns is long past; there is simply too much at stake.
There is no hope in the Green message if we concede that it is a losing
message. The voters, the media, and your fellow Party members will not
respect, contribute to, or vote for a candidate without the intellect,
persuasive power or strength of will to win an election. I charge my
fellow candidates to consider their commitment to change, and redouble
their efforts as befits a Presidential candidate.

I may re-visit the possibility of a Presidential bid at some later time.
For now, I am turning my attention to the pursuit of a different target:
the Fifth Congressional District of Illinois. This, my home district, is
currently represented by Mr. Rahm Emanuel (D), who is scheduled to run
unopposed in 2008. Mr. Emanuel has also, unfortunately, failed to heed
and obey the mandate of the American people in the mid-term elections.
He has supported the reprehensible so-called “USA PATRIOT Act” through
which we are made less free, though not one bit safer, with each passing
day. He has also callously failed to support a timetable for withdrawal
from Iraq, and has not given Universal Healthcare the support it deserves.

This is a more manageable target, and a smarter, more efficient use of
my time and energy. I believe the people of Illinois will stand up for a
real alternative, and from this position I will be able to push the
Green point of view more visibly and effectively than as a
severely-underfunded presidential candidate.

I remain grateful for the friends I have made throughout this process,
and hope that they will stay tuned as the Green Party continues the
quest to heal America. You have all my best wishes.

Respectfully,

Alan Augustson, MPP

A Three Party System…

With Mike Bloomberg officially leaving the GOP yesterday, many see this as step forward to announcing his billion dollar quest for the White House. But if he does run, and as an independent, which party would he hurt worse. Could he hurt both parties? He could divide the vote into three parts and anyone would be able to get elected with 34% plus.

Some blame Ralph Nader for the loss of the 2004 election. He got many votes that John Kerry would have gotten had he not run.

Bloomberg could do the same, but like I said, for both Republicans and Democrats. It could cause the candidates to work even harder and it might even bring forward a real leader.

Read more