Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Nader: I am Looking for Someone to Challenge Obama in 2012
Perennial third-party candidate Ralph Nader predicted on Wednesday that President Obama's tax deal with Republicans will earn him a primary challenge in 2012.
Consumer advocate, author, and Presidential candidate Ralph Nader in this file photo. Nader had harsh words for the president's approach to politics: "He has no fixed principles. He's opportunistic — he goes for expedience, like Clinton." (NBC News) Though he wouldn't rule out another presidential campaign himself, Nader, 76, said he hoped a new face would take up the progressive cause.
"I'm not foreclosing the possibility ... There are just other things to do," he said in an interview. "And it's time for someone else to continue. I've done it so many times. When I go around the country, I'm telling people they need to find somebody."
Nader, a consumer advocate, described the immense procedural difficulty - the "obstructions and litigations" - of appearing on the ballot in every state as a third-party candidate. He ran under the Green Party banner in 1996 and 2000 and as an independent in 2004 and 2008, and earned less than 3 percent of the overall vote each time.
He said Obama's decision to allow tax-cut extensions for the wealthy in the lame-duck deal betrays the progressives who supported his campaign in 2008 and called the president a "con man."
"There will be a primary," Nader said. "Just a question of how prominent a person [will run against Obama]. This deal is the last straw."
"Obama's position has been that the liberal, progressive wing has nowhere to go, therefore they can't turn their back on the administration. But a challenge will hold his feet to the fire and signal that we do have somewhere to go."
The tax deal, a blow to progressives, has prompted media speculation about such a challenge, although no names have been aired. Outgoing Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), one of the chamber's most reliably liberal voices, has said he's not interested.
"He [Obama] keeps one step away from the liberal progressive grasp," Nader said, describing the mood among on the left. "He's always just one step ahead from them grabbing his neck."
Nader had harsh words for the president's approach to politics: "He has no fixed principles. He's opportunistic - he goes for expedience, like Clinton. Some call him temperamentally conflict-averse. If you want to be harsher, you say he has no prlnciples and he's opportunistic."
"He's a con man. I have no use for him," Nader said.
In the 2000 election, Nader was criticized for contributing to Al Gore's defeat by taking votes from the left. He said then and again on Wednesday that the progressive agenda must be on the national ballot every four years.
"These are majoritarian positions. The polling shows that. Living wage, single payer, cracking down on corporate crime. ... It's time for someone to continue this."
258 Comments so far
Show AllI'm not particulary surprised that "The Hill published this piece. It's typical of "inside the Beltway" tripe that tends to marginalize progressive voices in general and Ralph Nader's in particular.
The author attributes strong quotes to Nader that are excellent, but uses thinly veiled derogatory phrases like "perennial third-party candidate" to minimalize his important voice on the political scene.
Everything that Nader has said during his long political career has been right on the money. We need him now more than ever.
Yes, Nader is one of a small group of successful challengers of corporate power during the past century, and is one of an even smaller group who lived to tell about it.
Without Nader's successful challenges to corporate power you and Iwould still be driving around in incindiary cars without seat belts.
Of course this rag has to state the following: "[Nader] ran under the Green Party banner in 1996 and 2000 and as an independent in 2004 and 2008, and earned less than 3 percent of the overall vote each time. "
It would have been more honest and balanced journalism to have noted that candidate Nader was frozen out of the national discussion, which is dominated by two corrupt parties that are virtual clones of each other.
Thank you.
I love Nader!!
Looks like Nader's been into the Botox! look so good you will not at 80!
>^^<
The anti-aging properties of a clean conscience are vastly underreported.
Love it -- and think you're absolutely right re Nader's conscience --!! --
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Well said, herdpoisoning!
That's right!
In these times of runaway corruption and criminality absent of any real prosecution or accountability Nader is head and shoulders above the competition in terms of credibility. Which is why the duo-political system despises him because he can't be bought off.
That's the tragedy here though, there are no more Naders around; the guy was and is freakishly incorruptible and honest. He makes the rest in D.C. look like moral and intellectual pygmies. Nader is casting around for an heir and who have we got? Glenn Greenwald? Remember Hedges getting booed off the podium at Rockford college? That's the mentality and gullibility of this electorate.
We need truth-tellers, period, but you can't tell the truth and win a major election in this country. That is not permitted and never will be.
Electoral politics are a dead end.
Paul Wellstone, Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold, Al Franken...I'm sure there are more. We lost Paul, under questionable circumstances, and Russ to Ignorance. We've got to build on what we've got and not throw in to despair. And Obama, had he not got sucked in to saving Capitalism, would have gotten single payer and, I suspect, a more eguitable tax bill. We must keep our focus on who the enemy really is, and not expect perfection from those who put their lives and families on the line to represent us. Those who do it for principle and the Common Good need to be revered. This current conflict is great. I'm seeing Democrat's spines for the first time since early Clinton. And for those die-hards who keep insisting that because both Democrats and Republicans are beholden to US Business that they are the same, does anyone still believe that there was no difference between Bush and Gore?
There was a difference between Bush and Gore. People opposed Bush's policies once elected.
We would not have seen resistance to Gore carrying forward the same policies, in fact, we may have believed they were not carried out.
Gore did select Lieberman as his running mate. Pretty telling...
Gore's selection of Lieb..... was just the 1st indication that he didn't want to be President and had a list of how to lose. He didn't add anything to the ticket and may have taken away from it. Selecting Florida as the key state when he would have won with New Hampshire or Tennessee where he hardly campaigned. In Sept., 2000 Bush declared their was no way he would lose in Florida, his brother was Gov., and his State campaign manager counted the votes. I could go on, but you get the picture.
Bless the peacemakers! Thank them. Their honesty is respected.
Why is it so hard to serve the American people? We need more Paul Wellstone. A lot more..
Lets see, Michigan has Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow. What can they do for us?
Glenn Greenwald. That sounds like a great idea. Nader would probably rally behind him. What do other think?
The Israel lobby would eat the guy alive.
Yes, because we Jews control the world, right? Nice code word usage.
Nader's a perennial loser, like the Washington Generals. His ideas border on and cross over into crazy, but all lie solidly on the side of unrealistic. He also lost Gore's election, leading to 8 years of Bush. Thank him for that, the monster.
"Nader's a perennial loser"
You can't call someone a "perennial loser" if they are forced to lose every time despite their efforts to run for office. Winning isn't the issue. The issue is will people listen to what he has to say. We the sheeple mostly voted not to and chose to make ourselves the perennial losers.
"He also lost Gore's election, leading to 8 years of Bush. "
That has already been disproven. Need I explain?
Voting; that hour of my life I'm gonna enjoy much more "Not wasting my time @ the voting booth" Unless your a fanatic player in the party games, or brain dead and SEIU has brought you by short bus, it's a waste of perfictly good time. Democracy is only fun if you have a team on the field, otherwise it's like kissing grandma.
>^^<
Crazy my ass. Here's a code word for you: integrity. You'll never be able to decipher its meaning because you're so steeped in your own bullshit you'll never dig your way out.
Lost Gore's election? Take that DailyKos drivel back to the mothership you looney jerkoff. You Democratic dead-enders make me want to puke with your party of sellout frauds and mealy-mouthed flim-flam artists. The only monsters around of note belong to your party of blue dog scumbags like Gore, his beloved running mate Lieberman, the Clintons and Obama. These principle-free hacks can't sell out the working people of this country fast enough to please their corporate masters.
Washington Generals? Project much? The Democrats will always play the Washington Generals to the Republicans' Globetrotters, it's their purpose in American politics.
A tisket a tasket watch Boehner, Limbaugh, Coulter, Gingrich, Palin and Romney put it in the basket!
Harsh, but spot on. Recycling nonsense about Nader makes this poster think he has a clue, but your response shows him otherwise. Thanks.
Because like any other nation and any other people, Israel and Jews can
do no wrong?
We are all losers for permitting this war mongering and warmaking by Israel
to go on with the encouragement of the US -- in fact with Biden pushing
Israel to attack Iran!
Pretty much nothing but a sliver of Palestine left now -- and in Gaza we're
surely headed for genocide. But if that's something Israel brings about...
it doesn't count?
Israel is a nuclear nation conducting full scale war on a country without
a military. America's support should be withdrawn -- but guess we're going
to have to work to change our own warmongering "terrorist" nation before
that happens!
And we have our own wars of aggression we need to rid ourselves of, as well.
"Illegal" and "immoral" wars of aggression.
.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Gore needed no help to lose the election, he just didn't want to be President.
You're full of it, camcam, repeating this lie of the "mainstain" media. The Bush Crime family and five criminals on the Supreme Court cost Gore the election. It's that simple. Nader had nothing to do with it. YOU are a perennial loser, that you are still so clueless all these years later.
And what a growing concern Israel has been - and continues to
be -- heavily financed and weaponized by US -- with a full wink
and plea for more war mongering and warmaking.
Biden has been after Israel for a year now to attack Iran ...
his line has been, "Israel would be justified in attacking Iran" --
and, of course, it is to Biden's deviousness and deceptions that we
owe Clarence Thomas' presence on the Supreme Court.
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Exactly -- and I objected to that -- poisoning the opening of the article.
Not something that anyone who understands the sacrifices Nader has made to
wake us all up would do.
But always happy to hear what Nader thinks and he's right where I think most
of us are -- in fact, imo, Obama should be announcing he's standing down in
2012.
IMO, any liberal Democrat could run and win against Obama --
but if they don't hurry up, Obama will not only have destroyed himself but
the Democratic Party, as well.
Mainly, I'd like to see Sen. Bernie Sanders run -- that would be a thrill!!
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
Yep, we need a third party candidate from the left to insure we split our vote and end up with a Republican President, again. Think about it in a reverse horror listing: President Palin. President Hucklebee. President Romney. President Guiliani. Vice President Newt Gingrich.
Yes, there is nothing to express our outrage like a hopeless third party candidate handing the White House to a Republican.
We currently have a republican in the White House , or haven't you been paying close enough attention? Further, my vote is mine to cast, not yours to play a stupid and phony blame game with. These last two years should have made a dent in your arrogant and (sorry) ignorant appraisal of imaginary differences between the outcome of a republican administration and a democratic one. We torture still, we slaughter still, we hold people without charge or even evidence, we see the middle class continuing to shrink and the wealth continuing to migrate to fewer each year. Whether democrat or republican is in charge it is the CEO's who runs this nation. You should awaken from your slumber.
Your blind loyalty is simply an untenable position and your argument completely full of that which can be found in large quantities in cow pastures..
CD Editor,
Could you please revise your link-headline to corectly reflect this articles content? Mr. Nader savages Obama as an opportunist without principles, and calls for a primary challenge. This hardly putting "heat" on Obama, it is a call to electorally oust him altogether!
That's more precise and the CD editors should listen and pick up on it.
Indeed.
Absolutely,
I hope Common Dreams will take note. In many newspapers you can see the civil war between reactionary headlines written by editors, and the more liberal stories written by reporters. I hope that won't be happening here.
I'll repeat it: Common Dreams editors, change the headline, give this issue it's due!
Agree -- make clear what Nader is saying -- and I certainly agree with
him!!
"According to all myth, the female - not the male -- gives life"
ObomberBush should be impeached and the Democrat should initiate the proceeding. 1st, the Repubicans would vote against impeachment because they cannot destroy the Democrats any better than ObomberBush is and it would make it easier to nominate someone else. The shock and awe of doing this is beyond words.
I predict that you won't get any real challenge to Obama in '12 from inside the Dem. party - as crummy as it is, it still has a hold on those who depend on it for their campaigns, and of course there would be the raising of the "race" issue which would be pulled out and played upon by his supporters in a myriad of ways, which, i suspect, most Dems would choose to avoid.
The only way to challenge him is from the "outside". If enough disaffected Dems would have the "guts" to go outside the party to support "real" dem/liberal/progressive/left positions and policy we could make it happen.
I, for one, would support Nader again - he has been consistent and consistently right, as in correct, since at least '96 when i first voted for him. The fact that the majority of folks who have gone to the polls haven't is hardly, to my way of thinking, convinced me I have chosen badly. If most of my neighbors chose to jump of a cliff, I wouldn't consider that sufficient reason to follow them ....
It would be nice if someone new would follow in his footsteps - in fact it is ultimately necessary for a number of reasons, not he least of which is that he won't be around forever .....
"He's a con man. I have no use for him,"
Amen Ralph, thanx for finally spitting it out ......
For some time now I have been looking for signs that the two party system is failing from within. We all are aware that it is failing us all. The dissatisfaction now being expressed from within the Democratic Party at the actions, or lack thereof, of the leadership may be an initial sign that the Democrats are splintering.
Add to that the silent Republican moderates, who ,while silent and undoubtedly pressured to be such, must be rather disaffected themselves. I cannot know whether this will lead somewhere, but speculation is part of what we do here after all.
Lets think this through, pull 3% of the vote from Obama in 2012 and help elect President Sara Palin and vice president Glenn Beck. Sounds like 2000 all over again!
I can without hesitation say that I will not vote for Obama in 2012 whether or not Nader runs.
Considering the analysis of the midterm election voting patterns, I would say it is pretty obvious that I am not alone in this.
Can you bring your conscience to allow you to vote for a continuation of the Bush regime even if it has a donkey label?
My vote goes to that candidate whose platform and message appeals to me. Yours may simply go into the trash, that is both your own problem and the nation's as well. As long as unthinking voters believe they have no choice they ( you) will continue to drag us all down.
it's not the progressives that need to go somewhere - it's obama that needs to go - straight to hell on a shitboat!
and homeland security - that's a saying from a song - not a threat - don't send me to gitmo!
Your behind the times... it's "Don't tase me bro!" but they will anyway. Then but the hood over your face and you'll end up somewhere the former soviet union, item # 47890 on the white Houe black budget book!
Becides most humans consider Washington DC as hell, thats why they put it there. No one, before air-condining wanted to be there during the summer. The founding fathers hoped the weather would act as a manditory Part-Time Government.
>^^<
nader is right on
Mr. Nader, meet Mr. Kucinich.
Please, no.
OK. Who else? Really. I'll keep an open mind.
I hear Al Grayson is going to have some spare time on his hands next year...
How about Bill Moyers?