portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary portland metro

government selection 2004

How many of you are attending Nader Convention?

question for the masses
Do you plan on attending this free event, at least just to get the man on the ballot?
Do you think we will reach the 1,000 desired for this goal?

A simple survey after a day of canvassing the streets for the event & getting mixed reactions, as expected.
I'll be there 27.Mar.2004 19:52

a person


and 27.Mar.2004 19:57



Fuck Nader 27.Mar.2004 20:23


Look, I campaigned for Nader in 2000, but I think I learned my lesson. I'm curious--What exactly is it that you hope to accomplish? IS it anything more concrete than making some kind of vague statement about the corruption of the American electoral system? I'm not under any illusions about what John Kerry stands for, but can't we at least agree that voting Bush out of office will put the brakes on his agenda and give the progressive community some breathing room to figure out how we're going to respond to the next catastrophe? What do we gain by torpedoing the anti-Bush campaign?

Count me in 27.Mar.2004 21:09

not the DLC

I'll be there! I'm so tired of the demos bashing Nader! And now the metro-greens have caved with an anyone-but-bush theme. What's the point of a third party if it's not a third party???? Yeah, I'll be there for Nader!

with bells on 27.Mar.2004 22:25

undecided voter

I'll be there, and I expect it could easily reach 1000. I know many people who haven't decided who they are voting for, but who want the choice. Oregon seems to be a place where people really like having choices when it comes to elections and I like that.

I learned a few things from 2000 too. I learned that the democrats will ignore any and all evidence of electoral fraud so that they continue living in the illusion of a functioning democracy where a democrat president will come along and save us all. I ask people how they could support candidates who have supported almost every Bush policy and all I hear back is that they are somehow better than Bush. I ask how and I get the same tired rhetoric. I guess I've learned that republicans are right about one thing, a lot of Bush hatred is fundamentally irrational. And that's not a bad thing for an overly rational society and if people strongly feel that getting rid of Bush is the most important thing I wholeheartedly support their embracing of that emotion. But I don't feel that way.

"can't we at least agree that voting Bush out of office will put the brakes on his agenda and give the progressive community some breathing room"

Oh how I sincerely wish I could agree to that heimdallr. Maybe someday I'll talk myself into it. Check out Bush and Kerry's website side by side, I'd swear that Kerry is running on a more Bush than Bush platform, just as the DLC recommends. When are the democrats going to wake up and realize that the DLS and DNC are just republicans calling themselves democrats. That's one major win for Howard Dean, having the guts to admit that. I just wish more democrats were listening.

'heimdallr' 27.Mar.2004 23:16

simple math

"What do we gain by torpedoing the anti-Bush campaign?"

--that won't work, 'heimdallr' - until you or anyone else can provide hard numerical evidence of the totally unsubstantiated "Nader-spoiler" (great abundance of the contrary is posted all over this website  http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/03/284148.shtml in the past two weeks) conspiracy theory claim, the story of pResidential Selection 2000 remains:


"I'm curious--What exactly is it that you hope to accomplish? IS it anything more concrete than making some kind of vague statement about the corruption of the American electoral system?"

--good point. what exactly is it that **YOU** hope to accomplish, 'heimdallr'? ever thought about something like THIS:

All of us 28.Mar.2004 01:56

George Bender

We bit the head off the Democratic party in 2000 and we can do it again, thus sending a message to the Democrats. Last time they choose not to get the message. They got mad, but they didn't get it. If we do it again they'll have to get it. The message is: nominate a candidate for president that progressives don't like and you'll lose. This is real power that we can exercise with a very small amount of the total vote. As far as I can see, this is the only power progressives have at the national level, and we should use it.

The next task is to get Nader on the Oregon ballot. To do that we need to get 1,000 registered voters together in one place at the same time. Join us on April 5, 6 p.m., Roseland Theater, 8 NW 6th Ave. It's free. If you're not already registered to vote you can register there.


Like Nader? Be Ready for Four More Years of Dubya... 28.Mar.2004 10:49

Fool Me Once....

I voted for Nader in 2000. However, this year, the presence of Kucinich to press policy and a vigorous attack by Kerry on Shrub makes Nader's presence superfluous.

I hope Nader is using his campaign as a way to get progressive issues into play, and not a serious campaign. He can only do damage to the effort to unseat King George. That's why I'm not supporting him this year. I WAS at the Kucinich rally, and WILL vote for him May 18 - and want Kucinich and Dean to keep campaigning even after the Democratic Convention, to keep progessive ideas in play.

A Nader candidacy can only help Dubya.

What leverage to fight Bush? Or Kerry? 28.Mar.2004 12:32


Ok. Kucinich says he wants people to stay in the Democratic Party and fight for change. WHat leverage does Dennis have in making Kerry adopt anything he supports? None, in my view. Same for Dean. You have no evidence that Kucinich has had any impact on moving the Party left do you? Kerry just released his economic agenda, which was crafted by a team of ex-Clintonistas, and it's a corporate CEO's dream list of tax cuts and inexpensive diversions from the real problems facing workers and the poor.
On other issues, Democrats who choose to vote for Kerry and urge us Naderites to bury any opposition to Kerry are simply surrendering to a candidate who is in most respects a Bush-lite candidate. Those voting for Kerry because of the Supreme Court issue are advised to revisit the Democrats' repellant votes FOR Scalia and Thomas.
Come to Nader's PDX visit at the Roseland on April 5 and help us build a real opposition to Bush and the Republican troglodytes.

Resist 28.Mar.2004 13:52

George Bender

Democrats make good slaves.

Metro Greens 28.Mar.2004 14:40


"not the DLC" writes: "And now the metro-greens have caved with an anyone-but-bush theme. What's the point of a third party if it's not a third party????"

What are you talking about? The Metro Greens are definitely not on the "anyone-but-bush" bandwagon. We'll be nominating a Presidential Candidate in Milwaukee, Wisconsin at the end of June. However, we have made a conscious decision to focus on local candidates and local campaigns because that's where we can _win_. We can actually start making progressive change on the local level and building a viable third party to challenge the Dems and Republicans.

Sure, it's important to have people like Nader making a lot of noise and raising issues on the national level - but what does it _really_ accomplish? He's not going to win. He's not even going to get the 5% to achieve FEC matching funds. The Democratic Party has become so unified against Bush this time around that they'll completely marginalize Ralph rather than listen to him - and they'll even send their attack dogs like Howard Dean to bash Nader full-time. Nader will definitely wake a few people up to politics for the first time, and distract a lot of other people from achieving anything meaningful on the local level. I saw this clearly back in 2000 and his strategy this year is even _more_ focused on detracting from local grassroots movements. He'll run, he'll make a lot of noise and then the entire thing will just fade away. Again.

The Metro Greens would rather get people elected, win local campaigns and build that local grassroots movement. That's the only way to truly build a viable third party. Nader's made it clear that he's just not interested in that anymore. And, political movements propped up by celebrity politicians simply don't survive for long - look at happened to the Reform Party (whose ballot line Nader is appropriately trying to obtain in several states as well as running as an "independent" in others).

fooled me once, you've been fooled again 28.Mar.2004 15:54

pay attention

Dean isn't running and Nader is the only candidate who will criticize Bush in any meaningful way. How can Kerry attack Bush, he voted for all of his policies? That makes him a fundamentally weak candidate if any attack he launches instantly reveals his glaring hypocrisy (or incompetence, or spinelessness).

vote for bush because he's "electable" 29.Mar.2004 00:50

undecided but leaning toward bush

oh gosh, i read this above: "can't we at least agree that voting Bush out of office will put the brakes on his agenda and give the progressive community some breathing room"

whenever the progressive community has "breathing room" with a democratic president, it rolls over and does little to nothing because "everything is okay now". clinton's presidency was a republican wet dream, during which he passed shit the republicans NEVER could have, like "ending welfare as we know it", passing NAFTA, and getting in with the WTO. there wasn't enough resistance to these things (until seattle) to even get them on the radar screen, let alone actually try to stop them. why? because a democrat was president.

personally, four more years of bush would be a blessing for the progressive movement. breathing room is the last thing it needs. it seems like it doesn't really get rolling on anything unless it feels it's running out of air. there's no more REAL breathing room with democrats, but the progressives always ignore that. fuck 'em. i'm thinking of voting for bush for this reason.

The Metro Greens are building a party! 29.Mar.2004 07:53


Ralph Nader is an American hero.
Ralph Nader has done many great things.
Ralph Nader provided a critically needed voice on the American political scene!

But Ralph Nader's time in presidential campaigns has passed and he should put his confused agenda and his ego in the back seat!
Not because of the naive "anybody but Bush" logic, but because Ralph is no longer working toward building a viable third party.

Ralph Nader was using his "personna" to help build a viable third party with progressive values in his previous presidential bids. Ralph has chosen not only to ignore the work of people like Dennis Kucinich in the Democratic party, but he has also rejected and hurt the Green party with his dillusions of self importance.

If Ralph is not running to build a party and if Ralph's message is not different than the Green party candidate or people like Dennis Kucinich, what the hell is he doing?????
He certainly is not helping to build a viable third party (something he claimed for 8 years was essential if we were to recapture our democracy!

He certainly is not offering a message or a platform that is significantly different than the probable Green party nominee David Cobb or Democrats like Dennis Kucinich.

What's the point Ralph?
I guess it is all about you?

Another fading hero refusing to go out with dignity.

More Republicans than Nader supporters? 29.Mar.2004 08:37


Yep, it is most likely that there will be more Republicans at that meeting than Nader supporters.

Count on me 29.Mar.2004 11:50


'nother body for the mass.