Ralph Nader: American voters are in a two-part prison

“It is clear that the voters in this country are in a two-party prison,” said Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader at the National Press Club, Washington DC where he hosted a news conference on “the moral imperative of the left” in an attempt to call on progressive and liberal voters to stake out their position in the 2008 election. According to Nader, the progressive and liberal voters across the United States must organize themselves in order to be able to accomplish changes in public eye, saying “they’re lacking in both statics, strategy and conscience”.

In his speech Nader outlines what makes him different from Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. He highlighted Obama’s support of the occupation and colonization of the Palestinian people. Nader also stated that Obama does not mention or offer poor white people and Latin Americans better conditions in his desired position of President. “Obama has never been associated with any comprehensive program toward the bottom 100 million Americans who are poor”. “The records of the Republicans has been horrible, but the Democrats have been horrible and not stopping the record of the Republicans,” Nader said.

In conclusion, Nader focused on the American voting and government system, underlining he would rather see the United States have a parliamentary type of system and stop using the electoral college. “We do need some sort of proportional representation, certainly at the local and state levels,” Nader said.

Comments

[David]

I share Nader's critique of the Democratic Party leadership in general, and the Obama campaign specifically.

But what in the world is the strategy behind Naer's presidential campaign as an "Independent?" At least when he ran on the Green Party ticket he could argue that he was building an organized opposition party that advcated for a progressive agenda (including proportional representation).

But now it seems that this is just about his own ego. What a sad and pitiable ending to a lifetime spent in public service....

[Angelina Justice]

Any human being running for president has a large ego. It is probably logic more than ego than instigated his move to independent. Although I admire the ideals of the Green Party they are still a big pill for the average self-absorbed American to swallow.

Nader is logical if nothing else. Whatever his reason, I think he's had a bigger impact this time. By not being under any agenda (party affiliation) he is free of any hypocrisy when he talks about the self-serving agendas of the Democrats and Republicans.

I really think his goal is less about being President and more about helping our system evolve into something more representative of the broad variety of constituents in the U.S.

[Bob Marston]

David wrote: "But what in the world is the strategy behind Naer’s presidential campaign as an “Independent?” At least when he ran on the Green Party ticket he could argue that he was building an organized opposition party that advcated for a progressive agenda (including proportional representation)."

Nader's strategy is to organize and mobilize people. Ralph is working with a number of individual state parties which will become the nucleus of a national party. But that will not be the primary focus of his post 2008 Electoral Effort. Ralph and his staff will emphasize the formation of a Citizens Congressional Watch Organization.

Regarding the Greens they were through in 2004 when they refused to endorse Nader in 2004 and ran that 8-Ball David Cobb. Even with a 20 State head start they still could not qualify on more ballot lines than Nader. And Nader's effort was subjected to a massive blitz of lawsuits that knocked him off the ballot in a dozen states.

This year the Greens have picked another candidate that reflects their fringe tendencies. Cynthia McKinney receives her biggest claim to fame from punching a Capitol Hill Cop. She has also claimed the National Guard were given orders to kill 5000 residents of New Orleans in the wake Hurricane Katrina.

Nuttiness aside Ralph decided to disassociate his efforts from the Greens late in the 2000 Campaign because of the constant infighting in their ranks. Many of the hardworking people who worked to form the Green Party in the early and mid 90s have left the party and are now involved in Nader's current campaign. These are the people who did the work and don't bring the Counter-Culture Baggage that turns off the masses.

As to Proportional Representation the Greens are not now and never were involved in such efforts. Instant Runoff Voting is little more than a Half Baked Scheme concoction devised by Rob Ritchie and Steven Hill from the Center of Voting and Democracy. I believe they are calling themselves "Fair Vote" these Days. Also called "Ranked Choice Voting" this "system' allows a voter to cast multiple votes in ranked order. The aim of the system is to let the unsure voter cast a vote for a 3rd Party Candidate without fear of the voter's favorite Dominant Party Candidate losing. In essence what IRV does is pander to the "Absence of Conviction" Vote. What IRV does is keep the Dominant Parties entrenched. By contrast Proportional Representation allows minor Parties to submit a slate of candidates for consideration. If the voter disapproves of the Dominant Party Candidates he or she can cast their vote for the slate. If the slate receives a number of votes higher than a preselected trigger point the slate is awarded a Proportional Number of seats. THAT IS NOT IRV.

Nader's desire to represent himself as "independent" is to appeal to the public's sense of disgust with politics as usual while portraying his effort as open to all. Something the Greens do not do.