portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

corporate dominance | government

The Push to Make Sanders the Green Party's Candidate

Sanders and his ardent supporters, in other words, have a unique historic opportunity to shatter the asphyxiating two-party duopoly of two pro-corporate parties that has been the Bermuda Triangle of progressive politics for over a century.
Will he give up on the self-defeating, nonsensical notion of backing Hillary Clinton if she wins the Democratic Party's nomination for president?
to read Dave Lindorff's article published on Counterpunch April 29, 2016, click on
 link to www.counterpunch.org

Will Sanders seize this opportunity to continue the fight? If he is serious about inspiring a political revolution, he must. He has said he does not want to be a spoiler "like Ralph Nader" and help elect Donald Trump or some other Republican. But would that be the result of a three-way race with Sanders running as a Green? Not necessarily. In the first place, the claim that votes for Nader led to George W. Bush's 2000 victory over Al Gore is bogus. Gore lost because he embarrassingly failed to win his own state of Tennessee. As well, it is clear that it was a corrupt Republican Supreme Court that by a 5-4 vote halted the count in Florida that handed that state's electoral votes to Bush. It has been shown that continued counting and challenges to improperly rejected ballots would clearly have given Florida to Gore.

More importantly, 2016 is not 2000. The public this year is clearly sick of the two major parties, and disgusted by the undemocratic nature of the primaries. Incredibly, both Trump and Clinton, the likely winners of those primaries, represent the two most unpopular and disliked candidates in memory, with some 65 percent of Americans saying they dislike Trump and another 56 percent saying they dislike Clinton.

homepage: homepage: http://www.freembtranslations.net
address: address: www.therealnews.com

Maybe not looking at this the right way 04.May.2016 06:04

Mike Novack

Since I am not a member of the Green Party, this can only be a suggestion. But you may be looking at this the wrong way.

a) Deciding to put Sanders on your ballot line might not be a bad idea << but keep reading >>

b) That might be true with whether or not Sanders (as you put it) actively campaigns for HIS continuing candidacy, because there are a lot of Sanders supporters out there who would in that case vote Green.

c) This might be combined with a decision to be selective in where to put serious efforts down ticket. No, I am NOT suggesting not trying to be on the ballot everywhere. Just suggesting that the SERIOUS down ticket efforts be in places where the Democrats choose to run a "yellow god" down ticket candidate (for the House and Senate)

d) The point I am making is that THIS fight (the Sanders campaign) within the Democratic Party had to be fought and lost before much chance of growing the Green Party << we have to know that Democrats would not be willing to shift leftward to take most of the wind from your sails >>

Have you been listening to Sanders at all? He hasn't really been talking about HIS candidacy so much as the need for a democratic revolution, a change in direction, all the way down ticket.

I will repeat something which anybody who has studied the history of American political parties must take into account. They change slowly but they do change, and USUALLY they are able to change (readjust what they stand for, what interests they represent in exchange for votes) fast enough to quell the growth of political parties outside of them. An effort like the Green Party can succeed EITHER by continuing to grow support for the outside interests OR force a party (in this case the Democrats) to readjust their coalition. But that choice
THEIRS (ball in their court)

Dont elbow out those who already were in the right line 05.May.2016 11:26

Ben Waiting

Jill Stein is already running  http://www.jill2016.com/

5-4 vote myth 05.May.2016 14:08


This is a silly myth that somehow the supreme court gave the election to Bush. SCOTUS forced the the Florida supreme court to follow the law. Afterwards 3 newspapers who hated Bush tried their best to recount the votes so Gore would end up with more votes. they failed. So how did SCOTUS "hand" the presidency to Bush?

I do believe that more people intended to vote for Bush in Florida than actually accomplished it because of the butterfly ballot issue. Also thousands of bush supporters got out of line or turned around and went home (in the panhandle Central time zone) after hearing that Gore had won Florida on the radio (NBC blew it., on purpose?), which was their own faults for believing the MSM.

As to Sanders. The Superdelgates were put in place after the 1972 McGovern disaster to keep another one from happening. They will switch sides when its in their own best interest like they did in 2008. At this point all Sanders can do by running third party is insure a Trump victory, which may not be a bad thing. He is to the left of Clinton on war, trade, and foreign policy.

mistake - more people intended to vote for Gore 05.May.2016 14:12


Sorry about that.