Misplaced Pages

Ralph Nader 2000 presidential campaign: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 06:47, 20 October 2011 view sourceMystylplx (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers1,715 editsm Reverted edits by 99.12.181.124 (talk) to last version by Mystylplx← Previous edit Revision as of 06:56, 20 October 2011 view source 99.12.181.124 (talk) Undid revision 456477242 by Mystylplx (talk) Revert VandalismNext edit →
Line 77: Line 77:


There was the debate within the Nader campaign over where to travel in the waning days of the campaign. Some Nader advisers urged him to spend his time in uncontested states such as New York and California. These states – where liberals and leftists could entertain the thought of voting Nader without fear of aiding Bush – offered the richest harvest of potential votes. But, Martin writes, Nader – who emerges from this account as the house radical of his own campaign – insisted on spending the final days of the campaign on a whirlwind tour of battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Florida. In other words, he chose to go where the votes were scarcest, jeopardizing his own chances of winning 5 percent of the vote, which he needed to gain federal funds in 2004.<ref name="prospect1">{{cite web|url=http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=books_in_review_110402 |title=Books in Review: &#124; The American Prospect |publisher=Prospect.org |date= |accessdate=2011-01-01}}</ref></blockquote> There was the debate within the Nader campaign over where to travel in the waning days of the campaign. Some Nader advisers urged him to spend his time in uncontested states such as New York and California. These states – where liberals and leftists could entertain the thought of voting Nader without fear of aiding Bush – offered the richest harvest of potential votes. But, Martin writes, Nader – who emerges from this account as the house radical of his own campaign – insisted on spending the final days of the campaign on a whirlwind tour of battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Florida. In other words, he chose to go where the votes were scarcest, jeopardizing his own chances of winning 5 percent of the vote, which he needed to gain federal funds in 2004.<ref name="prospect1">{{cite web|url=http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=books_in_review_110402 |title=Books in Review: &#124; The American Prospect |publisher=Prospect.org |date= |accessdate=2011-01-01}}</ref></blockquote>

An analysis and study by Neal Allen and Brian J. Brox titled "The Roots of Third Party Voting" draw similar conclusions to B.C. Burden, comparing Ralph Nader's 2000 presidential campaign to that of third parties throughout U.S. history.<ref>http://www.tulane.edu/~bbrox/Allen&Brox.pdf</ref>


==Endorsements== ==Endorsements==

Revision as of 06:56, 20 October 2011

Ralph Nader speaks out against the presidential debates at Washington University in St. Louis from which he was excluded on Oct 17, 2000.

Ralph Nader ran in the 2000 United States presidential election as the nominee of the Green Party. He was also nominated by the Vermont Progressive Party and the United Citizens Party of South Carolina. It was Nader's second presidential bid as the Green nominee, and his third overall, as he ran a write-in campaign in 1992 and a passive campaign on the Green ballot line in 1996.

Nader's vice presidential running mate was Winona LaDuke, an environmental activist and member of the Ojibwe tribe of Minnesota.

Nader appeared on the ballot in 44 states, up from 22 in 1996 He received 2,882,995, or 2.74 percent of the popular vote, missing the 5 percent needed to qualify the Green Party for federally distributed public funding in the next election, yet qualifying the Greens for ballot status in many new states.

Some people claim that Nader acted as a third-party spoiler in the 2000 U.S. presidential election, while others, including Nader, dispute this claim.

Nomination Process

Ralph Nader presented his acceptance statement for the Association of State Green Parties in response to nomination for President of the United States in Denver, Colorado, on June 25, 2000.

Campaign issues

Nader campaigned against the pervasiveness of corporate power and spoke on the need for campaign finance reform, problems with the two party system, voter fraud, environmental justice, universal healthcare, affordable housing, free education including college, workers' rights and increasing the minimum wage to a living wage, the three-strikes rule and exoneration for prisoners for drug related non-violent crimes, legalization of commercial hemp and a shift in tax policies to place the burden more heavily on corporations than on the middle and lower classes. He opposed pollution credits and giveaways of publicly owned assets. The campaign staged a series of large political super rallies which each drew over 10,000 paying attendees (12,000 in Boston and Minneapolis ).

Campaign developments

The Association of State Green Parties (ASGP) organized the national nominating convention that took place in Denver, Colorado, in June, 2000, at which Greens nominated Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke to be their parties` candidates for President and Vice President. On July 9, the Vermont Progressive Party nominated Nader, giving him ballot access in the state. On August 12, the United Citizens Party of South Carolina chose Ralph Nader as its presidential nominee, giving him a ballot line in the state.


Nader's supporters protest his exclusion from the debates

In October 2000, at the largest Super Rally of his campaign, in New York City's Madison Square Garden, 15,000 people paid $20 each to attend the rally at which Nader said that Al Gore and George W. Bush were "Tweedledee and Tweedledum -they look and act the same, so it doesn't matter which you get." Nader and many of his supporters believed that the Democratic Party had drifted too far to the right. Throughout the campaign, Nader noted he had no worries about taking votes from Al Gore; he said, "Isn't that what candidates try to do to one another--take votes?" He insisted that any failure to defeat Bush would be Gore's responsibility: "Al Gore thinks we're supposed to be helping him get elected. I've got news for Al Gore: If he can't beat the bumbling Texas governor with that terrible record, he ought to go back to Tennessee." The campaign also had some prominent union help. The California Nurses Association and the United Electrical Workers endorsed his candidacy and campaigned for him.

Nader received 97,421 votes in Florida, where Bush had defeated Gore by 537 votes amidst charges that Republicans had stolen the election. The highly contested outcome prompted some Gore supporters to accuse Nader of tilting the election in Bush's favor, a charge denied by Nader and his supporters.

Because Nader had been denied access to the ballot in some states, the Nader 2000 campaign launched an effort to challenge the inclusion criteria for the presidential debates sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The effort, however, failed.

The "spoiler" controversy prior to the election

As pre-election polls showed the race to be close, a group of activists who had formerly worked for Nader calling themselves "Nader's Raiders for Gore" took out advertisements in newspapers urging their former mentor to end his campaign. They wrote in an open letter to Nader dated 21 October 2000: "It is now clear that you might well give the White House to Bush. As a result, you would set back significantly the social progress to which you have devoted your entire, astonishing career."

When Nader, in a letter to environmentalists, attacked Gore for "his role as broker of environmental voters for corporate cash," and "the prototype for the bankable, Green corporate politician," and what he called a string of broken promises to the environmental movement, Sierra Club president Carl Pope sent an open letter to Nader, dated 27 October 2000, defending Al Gore's environmental record and calling Nader's strategy "irresponsible." He wrote:

You have also broken your word to your followers who signed the petitions that got you on the ballot in many states. You pledged you would not campaign as a spoiler and would avoid the swing states. Your recent campaign rhetoric and campaign schedule make it clear that you have broken this pledge... Please accept that I, and the overwhelming majority of the environmental movement in this country, genuinely believe that your strategy is flawed, dangerous and reckless.

Pope also protested Nader's suggestion that a "bumbling Texas governor would galvanize the environmental community as never before," and his statement that "The Sierra Club doubled its membership under James G. Watt." Wrote Pope in a letter to the New York Times dated 1 November 2000:

Our membership did rise, but Mr. Nader ignores the harmful consequences of the Reagan-Watt tenure. Logging in national forests doubled. Acid rain fell unchecked. Cities were choked with smog. Oil drilling, mining and grazing increased on public lands. A Bush administration promises more drilling and logging, and less oversight of polluters. It would be little solace if our membership grew while our health suffered and our natural resources were plundered.

On 26 October 2000, Eric Alterman wrote in The Nation, "Nader has been campaigning aggressively in Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin. If Gore loses even a few of those states, then Hello, President Bush. And if Bush does win, then Goodbye to so much of what Nader and his followers profess to cherish."

The "spoiler" controversy after the election

In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore's defeat. Nader, both in his book Crashing the Party and on his website, states: "In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all." (which would net a 13%, 12,665 votes, advantage for Gore over Bush.) When asked about claims of being a spoiler, Nader typically points to the controversial Supreme Court ruling that halted a Florida recount, Gore's loss in his home state of Tennessee, and the "quarter million Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida."

A study in 2002 by the Progressive Review found no correlation in pre-election polling numbers for Nader when compared to those for Gore. In other words, most of the changes in pre-election polling reflect movement between Bush and Gore rather than Gore and Nader, and they conclude from this that Nader was not responsible for Gore's loss.

Harry G. Levine, in his essay Ralph Nader as Mad Bomber states that Tarek Milleron, Ralph Nader's nephew and advisor, when asked why Nader wouldn't agree to avoid swing states where his chances of getting votes were less, answered, "Because we want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them."

Syndicated columnist Marianne Means said of Nader's 2000 candidacy,

His candidacy was based on the self-serving argument that it would make no difference whether Gore or George W. Bush were elected. This was insane. Nobody, for instance, can imagine Gore picking as the nation's chief law enforcement officer a man of Ashcroft's anti-civil rights, antitrust, anti-abortion and anti-gay record. Or picking Bush's first choice to head the Labor Department, Linda Chavez, who opposes the minimum wage and affirmative action.

Jonathan Chait of the American Prospect said this of Nader's 2000 campaign--

So it particularly damning that Nader fails to clear even this low threshold (Honesty). His public appearances during the campaign, far from brutally honest, were larded with dissembling, prevarication and demagoguery, empty catchphrases and scripted one-liners. Perhaps you think this was an unavoidable response to the constraints of campaign sound-bite journalism. But when given more than 300 pages to explain his case in depth, Nader merely repeats his tired aphorisms.

An analysis conducted by Harvard Professor B.C. Burden in 2005 showed Nader did "play a pivotal role in determining who would become president following the 2000 election", but that:

"Contrary to Democrats’ complaints, Nader was not intentionally trying to throw the election. A spoiler strategy would have caused him to focus disproportionately on the most competitive states and markets with the hopes of being a key player in the outcome. There is no evidence that his appearances responded to closeness. He did, apparently, pursue voter support, however, in a quest to receive 5% of the popular vote."

However, Chait notes that Nader did indeed focus on swing states disproportionately during the waning days of the campaign, and by doing so jeopardized his own chances of achieving the 5% of the vote he was aiming for.

There was the debate within the Nader campaign over where to travel in the waning days of the campaign. Some Nader advisers urged him to spend his time in uncontested states such as New York and California. These states – where liberals and leftists could entertain the thought of voting Nader without fear of aiding Bush – offered the richest harvest of potential votes. But, Martin writes, Nader – who emerges from this account as the house radical of his own campaign – insisted on spending the final days of the campaign on a whirlwind tour of battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Florida. In other words, he chose to go where the votes were scarcest, jeopardizing his own chances of winning 5 percent of the vote, which he needed to gain federal funds in 2004.

An analysis and study by Neal Allen and Brian J. Brox titled "The Roots of Third Party Voting" draw similar conclusions to B.C. Burden, comparing Ralph Nader's 2000 presidential campaign to that of third parties throughout U.S. history.

Endorsements

Unions

Political figures

Celebrities

Newspapers

Political parties (organizations)

Political publications

Academics

Activists

Result

Best states

In order for the Green Party to qualify for federal funds in the next election, Ralph Nader would have needed 5% of the total popular vote. Nader did receive 5% or more of the vote in the following states/districts:

Campaign Staff

  • Theresa Amato - Campaign manager
  • Jim Davis - Campus coordinator for the campaign
  • Howie Hawkins - Field Coordinator for Upstate New York

References

  1. (2000-08-01) "Vermont Progressives Nominate Nader", Ballot Access News.
  2. (2000-08-01) United Citizens Party Picks Nader, Ballot Access News.
  3. Levine, Harry G. (May 2004).
  4. Burden, B. C. (September 2005). "Ralph Nader's Campaign Strategy" (PDF). American Politics Research: 673–699.
  5. "Michael Moore message". Michaelmoore.com. Retrieved 2010-05-24.
  6. Greenhouse, Steven (2004-07-28). "The Constituencies: Liberals; From Chicago '68 to Boston, The Left Comes Full Circle". New York Times. Retrieved 2010-05-24.
  7. Convictions Intact, Nader Soldiers On – New York Times
  8. Varadarajan, Tunku (2008-05-31). "Interview: Ralph Nader". Wall Street Journal.
  9. "Nader on the Record". Grist. 2008-03-19.
  10. http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/RalphNader/062500.html
  11. Boston Globe (Oct. 2, 2000) republished on CommomDreams.org. Nader 'Super Rally' Draws 12,000 To Boston's FleetCenter
  12. Green Party
  13. Common Dreams Progressive Newswire (July 11, 2001). Green Meeting Will Establish Greens as a National Party. Retrieved 8-28-2009.
  14. Nelson, Susan. Synthesis/Regeneration 26 (Fall 2001). The G/GPUSA Congress and the ASGP Conference: Authentic Grassroots Democracy vs. Packaged Public Relations. Retrieved 8-28-2009.
  15. Ballot Access News (Aug. 1, 2000). VERMONT PROGRESSIVES NOMINATE NADER
  16. Nader 'Super Rally' Draws 12,000 To Boston's FleetCenter
  17. Ralph Nader. Crashing the Party: Taking on the Corporate Government in an Age of Surrender. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2002.
  18. ave Umhoefer and Dennis Chaptman. "Nader: 'Forked-Tongued' Gore Must Fend For Himself." Milwaukee Journal, November 2, 2000.
  19. Socialist Worker."Nader, the Greens and 2008".
  20. PBS.org News hour. Third Parties in the U.S. Political Process
  21. CNN.com. Green Party: Nader mulling independent run. Dec. 23, 2003.
  22. NOW with Bill Moyers. Politics & Economy. Election 2004.The Third Parties.
  23. Green camp: Democrats turn on Nader in search of a scapegoat: Pundits split on man whose Florida votes led to chaos.
  24. Duncan Campbell. Green camp: Democrats turn on Nader in search of a scapegoat: Pundits split on man whose Florida votes led to chaos. The Guardian (London). November 15, 2000.
  25. SeeEditors (October 21, 2000) "The 2000 Campaign; Campaign Briefing." New York Times.
  26. knowthecandidates.org.The Nader Debate with the Sierra Club about Gore and the Environment
  27. Pope, Carl (October 27, 2000) "Ralph Nader Attack On Environmentalists Who Are Supporting Vice-President Gore." CommonDreams.org.
  28. "Nader Sees a Bright Side to Bush Victory." The New York Times, November 1, p. 29.
  29. Pope, Carl (November 1, 2000) "Nader's Green Logic (Letter to the Editor)." New York Times.
  30. Alterman, Eric (October 26, 2000 ) Note One Vote! The Nation.
  31. "Dear Conservatives Upset With the Policies of the Bush Administration". Nader for President 2004.
  32. Varadarajan, Tunku (2008-05-31). "Interview: Ralph Nader". Wall Street Journal.
  33. "Nader on the Record". Grist. 2008-03-19.
  34. "Poll Analysis: Nader not responsible for Gore's loss".
  35. http://www.hereinstead.com/Ralph-Nader-As-Mad-Bomber.html
  36. http://www.seattlepi.com/opinion/means4.shtml
  37. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=books_in_review_110402
  38. Burden, B. C. (September 2005). "Ralph Nader's Campaign Strategy" (PDF). American Politics Research: 673–699.
  39. "Books in Review: | The American Prospect". Prospect.org. Retrieved 2011-01-01.
  40. http://www.tulane.edu/~bbrox/Allen&Brox.pdf
  41. "latimes.com: Electrical workers' union backs Nader". CNN. August 31, 2000.
  42. ^ http://www.gwu.edu/~action/natendorse4.html
  43. http://www.afn.org/~iguana/archives/2000_09/20000908.html
  44. ^ "Autoworkers Ride With Gore". CBS News. August 6, 2000.
  45. http://books.google.com/books?id=h5djdO1hMEQC&pg=PA191&lpg=PA191&dq=Dan+McCarthy+president+of+UAW+Local+417+nader&source=bl&ots=ZER-aPnNx_&sig=MZApawQw-w8qG28MLNb7W20Fryg&hl=en&ei=Jj3hSY33CtvonQei0PCnCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA191,M1
  46. ^ http://www.politics1.com/greens.htm
  47. http://www.thevoicenews.com/news/2002-06-21/Features/E3.html
  48. http://www.feinstein.org/greenparty/votefornader.html
  49. http://articles.latimes.com/2004/mar/13/entertainment/et-letters13
  50. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines/062600-01.htm
  51. http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063158/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_political.html
  52. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001107054340/http://votenader.com/celebrity.html
  53. ^ Chen, David W. (October 15, 2000). "THE 2000 CAMPAIGN: THE GREEN PARTY; In Nader Supporters' Math, Gore Equals Bush". The New York Times.
  54. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/04/us/political-briefing-lighter-nader-grows-heavier-in-polls.html?src=pm
  55. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/04/us/political-briefing-lighter-nader-grows-heavier-in-polls.html?src=pm
  56. http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0914-20.htm
  57. ^ http://www.freezerbox.com/archive/article.php?id=88
  58. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063539/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_musicians.html
  59. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/04/us/political-briefing-lighter-nader-grows-heavier-in-polls.html?src=pm
  60. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/04/us/political-briefing-lighter-nader-grows-heavier-in-polls.html?src=pm
  61. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/04/us/political-briefing-lighter-nader-grows-heavier-in-polls.html?src=pm
  62. http://www.vh1.com/artists/news/1437074/20001107/vaughan_jimmie.jhtml
  63. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001021063222/http://www.votenader.com/press/001018beats.html
  64. http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/nader/nader2000ke091404.html
  65. http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063446/http://votenader.com/press/0001006chicago.html
  66. ^ http://www.gwu.edu/~action/natendorse5.html
  67. http://www.metrotimes.com/editorial/story.asp?id=796
  68. http://www.villagevoice.com/2000-10-31/news/a-green-light-for-nader/1
  69. http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A79225
  70. http://web.archive.org/web/20021022183249/http://ballot-access.org/2000/0801.html#26
  71. http://web.archive.org/web/20020820004727/http://ballot-access.org/2000/0901.html#17
  72. http://www.prodane.org/elections/past_elections/
  73. http://www.isreview.org/issues/14/election_2000.shtml
  74. ^ http://www.democracynow.org/2004/10/26/nader_vs_anybody_but_bush_a
  75. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063540/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_ngo.html
  76. http://lists.village.virginia.edu/lists_archive/sixties-l/2062.html
  77. http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063207/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_cochairs.html
  78. Crashing the Party: Taking on the Corporate Government in an Age of Surrender by Ralph Nader
  79. American social leaders and activists by Neil A. Hamilton
  80. http://www.kafourymcdougal.com/about/greg-kafoury/
  81. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063542/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_business.html
  82. ^ http://webarchives.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001207080206/http://www.votenader.com/press/1030farmersendorse.html
  83. http://webarchive.loc.gov/collections/lcwa0007/20001031063540/http://votenader.com/press/citizens_ngo.html
  84. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0876793.html
  85. http://www.iop.harvard.edu/Programs/Fellows-Study-Groups/Former-Fellows/Theresa_Amato
  86. Chen, David W. (October 15, 2000). "THE 2000 CAMPAIGN: THE GREEN PARTY; In Nader Supporters' Math, Gore Equals Bush". The New York Times.
Ralph Nader
Family
Books authored
Presidential campaigns
Organizations
Other
Media
State and district results of the 2000 United States presidential election
Electoral map, 2000 election
Categories: