Dean Debates Nader
By Karl-Thomas Musselman
From the AP...
Among the debate topics: Should Ralph run for president? The participants: Howard Dean and a candidate who always has an opinion on the subject — independent Ralph Nader.
Dean, the former Democratic presidential hopeful who attracted legions of liberal followers before his bid fizzled out, will debate Nader for 90 minutes on July 9 before a studio audience.
National Public Radio's weekly program "Justice Talking" is sponsoring the debate, and correspondent Margot Adler will moderate.
Dean has been urging his supporters not to back Nader, but to stay within the Democratic fold and vote for John Kerry (news - web sites),
"I am anxious to debate Ralph Nader in order to speak about why he wants to run for president," Dean said in a statement. "This is the most important election in my lifetime and a third party candidate could make a difference — this November and for years to come."
I hate to see Dean reduced to running interference against Nader, but then again, if there is anyone credible to do it, it's him. For a man like Nader, who is on not one state ballot, has been rejected by his old Green party, and may not even be able to use the Reform Party's endorsement (because their conference call didn't meet the FEC's rules for a Party Convention), it may take Dean to finally put the smack down to make him realize that he can serve much better purposes for Democracy without running.
Because right now, Nader the person, is running nowhere.
Posted by Karl-Thomas Musselman at June 30, 2004 08:30 PM
| TrackBack
I was happy to hear both Nader and Dean endorse Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), a method for fixing the "spoiler" problem. This system of voting is described at http://www.instantrunoff.com/faq_1.html . IRV allows a voter to vote for a third party candidate without the fear of throwing the election to the major party candidate that they like least. This would allow a qualified third party to steadily build support, something that is not currently possible.
I think that Nader could best publicize this issue by running his campaign to promote his positions but dropping out just before the election, stating that he is forced to do so by the current system so that he does not act as a spoiler. He could then recommend that his supporters vote for the candidate who has best taken up his positions or that he most supports. That, at least, would give him some political leverage and the major parties, as well as the people, might give a little more thought to addressing this issue. In any case, this would be much more responsible than acting as a spoiler.
Ironically, a spoiler is most likely to throw the election to the candidate who he is least like. During the debate, Nader asked the question (I'm paraphrasing): "If a voter does not vote with their conscience, what body part are they voting with?". I would propose that, in not facilitating Bush's election by voting for Nader, that voter is voting with their BRAIN. Nader likewise needs to exercise his brain along with his well-developed conscience.
