Truthdig
Don't Fall for It: The Nader Myth and Your 2016 Vote
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/dont_fall_for_it_the_nader_myth_and_your
_2016_vote_20160802/
AddThis Sharing Buttons
Share to FacebookShare to TwitterMore AddThis Share optionsShare to Email
Posted on Aug 2, 2016
By Kevin Zeese and Margaret Flowers
Ralph Nader's 2000 run for the presidency is often blamed for Al Gore's
loss to George W. Bush. (Sage Ross(https://www.flickr.com/photos/ragesoss/)
/ CC BY-SA 2.0(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/) )
Once again, fear is being ramped up to manipulate progressive voters into
voting for what they do not want, Hillary Clinton, instead of someone who
represents their values. The fear of Trump is the card being played this
year and to justify it people are being told that Gore lost to Bush in 2000
because of third party candidates. One of the most effective pieces of
political propaganda in this century has been the Nader Myth, which says
that Al Gore lost in 2000 because Ralph Nader ran for president.
This myth is repeated by many Democratic Party operatives and people in the
media, who are essentially serving as Democratic Party spokespersons. Since
the Democratic Party's method of convincing people to vote for Hillary
Clinton is fear of Trump, people should be prepared with the facts around
the 2000 election so they can dispel the Nader Myth.
Ben Jealous Calls for the Facts, Then Ignores Them
One recent example was Ben Jealous, the former Sanders' supporter who has
endorsed Hillary Clinton and, as a result, got a spot on the stage at the
Democratic National Convention. He debated Jill Stein, the Green Party
presidential candidate, on Democracy
Now(http://www.democracynow.org/2016/7/26/jill_stein_or_hillary_clinton_gree
n) and brought up the Nader Myth, saying:
"We can't deny the facts of the past. George W. Bush got into the White
House because Al Gore lost by about 900 votes in Florida. Ralph Nader got
90,000. The reports, the studies that went back and looked at those voters
said 60 percent of them would have gone for Gore if Nader wasn't on the
ballot there."
Since Jealous couched his claims in "facts," here are some additional facts
that turn Jealous' claims on their head and show the real truth - Gore lost
to Bush on election day with a little help from Supreme Court Justices
Scalia and Thomas who stopped the recount in Florida.
The key state to focus on is Florida, but it is important to remember that
Gore lost his home state, Tennessee, and lost Clinton's home state of
Arkansas. If he had won either of those, he would have been president.
In Florida, Bush won the votes of 308,000 Democrats, that is 12 times more
Democrats than Nader's mere 24,000. Gore also lost 191,000 self-described
liberals to Bush, compared to less than 34,000 who voted for Nader. In
addition, half of all registered Democrats did not even bother voting. For
about one million Florida Democrats it was: Vote Bush or don't vote. If one
percent of any of those categories had voted for Gore he would have easily
won Florida.
CNN's exit polling showed Nader received the same amount of votes from both
Republicans and Democrats: 1 percent. Nader also took 4 percent of the
independent vote. Had Nader not run, Bush would have won by more in Florida.
CNN's exit poll showed Bush at 49 percent and Gore at 47 percent, with 2
percent not voting in a hypothetical Nader-less Florida race. (See articles
at end of article for more details.)
A media review one year after the
election(http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2001-05-10-recountmain
.htm#more) found that a full recount would have resulted in a narrow Gore
win and that the biggest problems were unclear ballots (remember the Palm
Springs Butterfly
Ballot(http://www.asktog.com/columns/042ButterflyBallot.html) ) and voting
errors by Democrats, which cost Gore 15,000 to 25,000 votes, which would
have been an easy win for Gore.
Can't Vote Green because it Could Lead to War
In the interview, Jealous went on to play the war card. He claimed the cause
of the Iraq War was voting for Nader, a third party peace candidate:
"And the reality is that we cannot afford to end up with having an Iraq War
because we narrowly lose the White House to somebody who should not be in
there, as we did with Bush."
Jealous' forgets Clinton voted for the Iraq War by stumping on behalf of
Hillary Clinton he negates his concerns about war. Clinton has never met a
war she didn't support and she is responsible for coups in Honduras and the
Ukraine and the devastation of Libya.
He may not know that before the 2003 invasion, in February 2002, Al Gore
gave a speech to the Council on Foreign
Relations(http://www.cfr.org/terrorism/commentary-war-against-terror-our-lar
ger-tasks/p4343) where he gave all-out support to President Bush's war
policy. Among the things he said:
"President Bush deserves tremendous credit for the way he has led the nation
in a highly successful opening counter-attack in the war against terror."
"Since the State of the Union, there has been much discussion of whether
Iraq, Iran and North Korea truly constitute an 'Axis of Evil.' As far as I'm
concerned, there really is something to be said for occasionally putting
diplomacy aside and laying one's cards on the table. There is value in
calling evil by its name."
". . . there are still governments that could bring us great harm. And there
is a clear case that one of these governments in particular represents a
virulent threat in a class by itself: Iraq. As far as I am concerned, a
final reckoning with that government should be on the table. To my way of
thinking, the real question is not the principle of the thing, but of making
sure that this time we will finish the matter on our terms."
"In 1991, I crossed party lines and supported the use of force against
Saddam Hussein, but he was allowed to survive his defeat as the result of a
calculation we all had reason to deeply regret for the ensuing decade. And
we still do."
"The question remains - what next? Is Iran under the hard-liners less of a
proliferation threat than Iraq? Or less involved with terrorism? If
anything, Iran is at this moment a much more dangerous challenge in each
area than Iraq."
From his own words, it is evident that Gore supported George W. Bush post
9/11 war on terror of, including an attack on Iraq, and may have gone
further and attacked Iran. So, no Mr. Jealous, it was not the election of
President Bush that caused the war, it is the ideology of two political
parties that favor militarism as a response to international issues.
If Not Nader, Why Did Gore Lose to Bush?
The reality is that Gore lost hundreds of thousands of votes to Bush in
Florida that he should have won. The Democrats needed to make Nader into a
scapegoat because they did not want to admit the real reasons that Gore lost
to Bush.
The real reasons would have challenged Democratic Party orthodoxy of Wall
Street and war that still dominates the party today. Al Gore was one of the
founders of the corporate Democratic Leadership Council. He, along with Bill
Clinton and other corporate Democrats, believed that taking funding from big
business interests and doing their bidding was the path to defeating the
Republicans.
The Democrats, unlike the Republicans, couch their corporate policies in
language that sounds Populist. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama did this
for healthcare reform. Their plans protected the insurance, pharmaceutical
and for profit hospitals from a single payer, improved Medicare for all
system that would have put people, not profits, first. They claimed their
plans were best for the people, when they were really best for their
corporate donors.
Al Gore also had a long record as a supporter of a large military budget and
US wars. He even joined the Vietnam War voluntarily to show his support for
that war. The military industrial complex is a major donor to the Democratic
Party and selling weapons has been a good business for Democratic presidents
to pursue. The Obama Administration has sold more
weapons(https://www.thenation.com/article/the-obama-administration-has-sold-
more-weapons-than-any-other-administration-since-world-war-ii/) than any
president since World War II.
Gore compounded his corporate-militarist image by selecting Sen. Joe
Lieberman as his vice president. Lieberman was about the most hawkish
Democrat in the US Senate and an avid supporter of Israel. He was also
essentially the Senator representing the insurance industry.
If the Democrats admitted that their selection of a corporate-militarist
ticket is what cost them the election, it would turn their big business
funding base against them. Rather than move away from selecting those kinds
of candidates, the Democrats blamed Nader for Gore's defeat and continue to
this day to nominate similar candidates.
The Real Reason for Gore's Defeat is Why this Election is Not a Landslide
The Democrats should be land sliding the incredibly weak Republican ticket
but they are neck and neck in national polls because Clinton has a similar
big business, pro-war record as does her vice president, Tim Kaine.
Clinton-Kaine are still likely to win but they need to instill Trump fear to
drive voter turnout. Trump fear is a fraud. The electoral college
map(http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/31/us/politics/donald-trump-presidential-
race.html) , the demographic
shifts(http://www.wsj.com/articles/changing-u-s-demographics-favor-democrats
-in-election-report-says-1456376460) in the country and Trump's hateful
campaign, turning off major groups of
voters(http://www.inquisitr.com/2956478/donald-trump-polls-rapidly-growing-u
npopularity-with-key-groups-could-create-impossible-electoral-map-for-trump-
in-november/) , ensure that Hillary Clinton will be the next president.
There is no reason to vote in
fear(http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/donald_trump_frees_us_to_vote_as_we
_wish_20160626) . Don't fall for the Nader Myth, now you have the facts.
More:
Tim Wise, Why Nader is Not to
Blame(http://www.alternet.org/story/10065/why_nader_is_not_to_blame) ,
AlterNet, November 7, 2000
Irene Dieter, Dispelling the Myth of the 2000
Election(http://www.cagreens.org/alameda/city/0803myth/myth.html) ,
California Greens, May 2003
gjohnsit(http://www.dailykos.com/user/gjohnsit) ,The Ralph Nader
Myth(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/12/6/1260721/-The-Nader-Myth) ,
Daily Kos, December 6, 2013
Kevin Zeese co-directs Popular Resistance(http://www.popularresistance.org/)
and served as Ralph Nader's spokesperson and press secretary in 2004.
Can Jill Stein Carry Sanders' Baton? A Look at the Green Candidate's Radical
Funding Solution
Israeli Journalist Posits That Although Israel Is Not a Nazi State, It
Certainly Is Evil
The U.S. Military Pivots to Africa and That Continent Goes Down the Drain
Energy-Efficient Buildings Can Cut Gas Imports
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
C 2016 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.
Signup for Truthdig's newsletter
