TPMDC
CT Report: Green Party 'Picketing' Ralph Nader In Hopes He'll Run For Senate
Evan McMorris-Santoro | November 27, 2009, 11:27AM
Share
Send to a friend!
Ralph Nader, leader of countless protests during his decades of activism, is now reportedly himself facing "picketers" who want him to run for Senate. CTNewsJunkie.com reports that the Connecticut Green Party is trying to "woo" Nader into a race against Sen. Chris Dodd (D) by showing up at Nader's public appearances "with homemade signs."
From the report:
The group is expected to gather at the Noah Webster Library in West Hartford Friday where Nader is scheduled to speak about his new book 'Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!" ... The Connecticut Green Party has said they've been having trouble to get in touch with Nader, who has been busy with his book tour. Friday's book event in West Hartford presents them with the perfect opportunity.
The idea of a Nader senate run has excited Green Party members, who see the race as the party's best chance at getting a voice on Capitol Hill. The AP reports on the mood:
[Connecticut Green Party chair Tim] McKee said he hopes the Green Party can help turn the Connecticut Senate race into a national race and encourage people from across the country to contribute to Nader's campaign. He estimates they'll need to raise at least $3 million to $5 million."We could be extremely competitive, and we think we could win," he said.
Nader has not publicly addressed the idea of a run for Senate since rumors of a run started several weeks ago.
Other Stories Featured at TPMDC
Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
- At A Whole New Level
- Jon Stewart: Obama's Teleprompter Is No Match For Palin's 'Mavericky Notecard Hand-Scribbled Buzzwords' (VIDEO)
- Colbert: 'Sarah Palin Is A F--king Retard' (VIDEO)
- Backhanded Compliment
- Palin Advocates War With Iran After Apparently Misunderstanding Buchanan Column (VIDEO)
- Cheney, Ridge Pioneered Miranda Attack On Obama
- Gibbs Mocks Palin And Writes Shopping List On Hand (VIDEO)
- What's the Deal with The Ryan Budget?
- Is Ryan's Social Security Slashing Budget Like Contract With America?
- Is Ryan's Social Security Slashing Budget Like Contract With America?
- Gibbs Mocks Palin And Writes Shopping List On Hand (VIDEO)
- Palin Advocates War With Iran After Apparently Misunderstanding Buchanan Column (VIDEO)
- House GOP-ers: Start Over And We'll Come To The Table. White House: No.
- Bachmann: 'Wean Everybody Off' Social Security And Medicare
- Ben Nelson Helps GOP Block Obama NLRB Nominee
- Allegations Against Leader Cause Turmoil In CA GOP
- Jon Stewart: Obama's Teleprompter Is No Match For Palin's 'Mavericky Notecard Hand-Scribbled Buzzwords' (VIDEO)
- Deconstructing Rush Limbaugh
- Democrats: We're Excited To Debate GOP Shadow Budget...Why Aren't Republicans?
- Bachmann: 'If We Reject Israel, Then There Is A Curse That Comes Into Play'
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2009 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
holyhandgrenaid
November 27, 2009 12:17 PM
Even more excited than Green Party members? Simmons, McMahon, and Schiff (the remaining GOP contenders).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
VictorLH
November 27, 2009 12:37 PM
The Greens are doing what the do best yet again - that is, electing Republicans.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Icon
November 27, 2009 1:07 PM
All Nader running will do is help the Republicans win.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
November 27, 2009 1:36 PM
Nader will peel off 2% that will be enough to give the tight race to the Republicans.
Also I expect this picket is a Nader publicity ploy to get free publicity for an eventual run.
If the Greens wanted a shot at a senate seat, move to Wyoming. 500,000 residents there get two senators all the greenies move there and they`d take over the state.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
de TOQUEville
November 27, 2009 2:19 PM in reply to Walter Mitty
Publicity stunt? Nader? Pshaww!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dswx
November 27, 2009 1:39 PM
You can be sure Nader's friend Karl Rove is on the phone stoking Ralph's ego and telling Nader how wonderful he is.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael A
November 27, 2009 1:40 PM
NOOOOOOO. Will the egomaniacal buffoon please go away. He is the repukes dream candidate to run and give the senate seat to them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oleeb
November 27, 2009 2:20 PM
If the Greens want to win why don't they run Nader as a Democrat and knock Dodd off in the primary? There's no way he'd pull a Lieberman and run as a conservadem.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dr Lemming
November 27, 2009 2:35 PM
Running as a Democrat in the primary does make MUCH more sense. He could run as a "fusion" candidate, where the Greens voted as Democrats in the primary.
Alas, the Greens have not shown themselves to be politically savvy in most parts of the country. They could have made meaningful inroads into the Democratic Party by now if they hadn't put so much energy into vainly attempting to build a third party.
Is there any evidence that Nader is actually interested in a senate run? Remember that he isn't a Green Party stalwart -- in fact, he has kept his distance from the party despite having been its nominee for president. Nader likes to run his own show.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
holyhandgrenaid
November 27, 2009 2:40 PM in reply to Dr Lemming
He hasn't really kept his distance by choice- they nominated someone else in 2004, so he treated that as an expulsion. Come to think of it, hes a lot like Lieberman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bruce Webb
November 28, 2009 11:56 AM in reply to holyhandgrenaid
Bullshit. Nader accepted the Green Party because it had a ballot line in a whole bunch of states saving him a bunch of time and effort getting on. He at no point embraced the Party itself or took any input from it, nor has he been in his career much of an environmentalist. After two election cycles he had dropped the Green Party percentage of the national vote so low that they lost automatic ballot access in most of those states so he walked away.
Nader didn't treat the Green Party as having expelled him, he treated the Green Party as if he had expelled his snot for as long as the kleenex would hold and then casually tossed it away. Nader has two issues: he hates corporate America and he loves Ralph. That's it. Greens simply projected some pro-environmental, progressive image on Ralph that doesn't really exist.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
11A7E
November 27, 2009 3:15 PM
Ralph Nader's actions in this decade have done immense damage to this nation by ensuring George W. Bush's election and permanently staining his legacy. He's being consistent if he runs in Connecticut.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stop7997
November 27, 2009 8:38 PM in reply to 11A7E
Had Al Gore been elected President, not one damn thing would be different.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
November 27, 2009 11:01 PM in reply to stop7997
And you know this how, exactly?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stop7997
November 28, 2009 12:26 AM in reply to brewmn61
As per my post: by the way our Dems supported the war and the PATRIOT Act; and have bowed down to pressure from Wall Street, the Telecoms, InsuranceCos, Big Pharma, and the Military Industrial Complex. They refused to hold the Bush administration accountable for war crimes (most likely because they were complicit) or Alberto Gonzalez's Justice Department for crimes against the Constitution. In light of all that, why on earth would you think things would have been any different?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
November 28, 2009 5:20 AM in reply to stop7997
I don't see any reason to assume that Al Gore would have waged war against Iraq in response to the 9/11 attacks. If you have any support for the opposite assumption, bring it. Otherwise, you are talking completely out of your ass.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 28, 2009 8:38 PM in reply to stop7997
Yeah, Gore would have nominated Roberts and Alito, invaded Iraq to avenge an assassination attempt on his father, allowed Dick Cheney to operate as the de facto president, and obviously, done nothing about climate change.
Apologists apologizin'!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Martskers
November 27, 2009 3:45 PM
20 or 30 years from now, when the Democratic lemmings who've shunned Nader (and his truly progressive agenda) regret that they kept putting "centrists" in office, they'll realize that Nader was the oracle of progressivism, a prophet in his own time.
Sadly, our country isn't good enough to deserve Ralph.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dr Lemming
November 27, 2009 4:14 PM in reply to Martskers
Recall FDR saying he agreed with a progressive policy proposal -- now folks needed to go out there and make him do it. Politicians can only get so far out ahead of the electorate. It's easy to complain about "centrist" elected officials but not terribly fair when progressives don't bring home the votes as consistently as the right wing.
I've always had great admiration for Nader's analysis. Given his sterling reputation as a citizen activist, if anyone had the standing to generate attention as a progressive presidential candidate, it was him. Yet his campaigns never really caught fire.
I think there are three reasons why. First, there isn't that large of a proportion of the electorate that actually agrees with his analysis. We can lament that fact and can blame it on any number of factors (such as a rightwing-leaning MSM), but building a progressive majority demands we cop to the small size of our initial base.
Second, third-party candidacies rarely are effective in the US -- particularly at the national level. I think the best strategy is an updated version of Jesse Jackson's Rainbow Coalition: Work primarily within the Democratic Party but reserve the right to field candidates outside of it when necessary.
Third, Nader is more an intellectual and an activist than he is a candidate. A viable progressive candidate for president is going to need to have considerably more electoral trade skills -- and experience in lower offices -- than Nader.
Nader has played an important role in elevating progressive thinking. However, he strikes me as having peaked in the electoral realm. It may very well be time for him to step back and let a new generation with more electoral potential develop the visibility needed to run for higher office.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stop7997
November 27, 2009 8:43 PM in reply to Dr Lemming
The current occupant of the White House is no FDR. In fact, he’s beginning to look more like Hoover every day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 28, 2009 8:43 PM in reply to stop7997
Because FDR had solved the Great Depression after ten months in office. Obviously, if he were president today, we wouldn't be hearing the same refrain from pathological malcontents.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
oleeb
November 27, 2009 9:43 PM in reply to Dr Lemming
I think the excuse of being too far out ahead of the electorate doesn't hold water at all. It is a lame attempt to avoid responsibility for doing what is right. Many Democrats who are in a position to lead decline to do so because it is much easier and far more profitable for them personally to go along/get along with the corporate power and wealth that runs the table in America.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dr Lemming
November 28, 2009 10:52 AM in reply to oleeb
I'm not going to excuse every bad vote by a Democrat. My point is that's not enough to sit in coffee houses and complain about politicians. So, for example, if your district or state doesn't have a solid progressive bloc that reliably donates and votes, then why would you reasonably expect your congressperson or senator to risk reelection by supporting your pet issues?
I've worked for a congresswoman who voted for a bill hotly opposed by the NRA. In the next election she came very close to losing because of the NRA's superb ground game. The gun-control folks weren't there for her. I'm not happy to say that she subsequently moved to the right on gun issues, but she also survived in a politically challenging district.
This problem is compounded by the PTSD still felt by many Democratic politicians in swing districts and states who lived through the GW Bush era, where it was legitimately difficult to challenge the prevailing political winds. Those winds may have shifted, but the right-wing noise machine is still loud and fierce.
Not everyone who doesn't vote your way is in a pact with the devil. Your elected officials need to know that if they walk the plank, you'll be there with them. Are you?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed- ley
November 27, 2009 4:15 PM in reply to Martskers
Any country that re-elected George W. Bush after the first 4 years of absolute disaster deserves Nadir (misspelling intended).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kash79
November 27, 2009 4:24 PM
I don't mind a real progressive running even from outside the Democratic party, someone who isn't self-loving, shrill ego maniac. Someone who actually can bring progressive ideas back into the mainstream. But the entire state of CT is too small to fit Ralph's ego.
My gut feeling, he will not run. He doesn't like to piss on anything smaller than the presidency.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JohnW1141
November 27, 2009 5:52 PM
Nader would be a good alternative to Democrats who are pissed off at Dodd for his connections to Wall Street and Corporate America.
I'm as pissed off at Nader as the next guy, and actually, I thought he aimed too high in 2000, I felt he should run for the Senate or House then. Democratic voters need to kick out some of the old time corporate friendly Dems to send a message to the rest of them.
I'd rather have Nader in the Senate than Dodd, and I can name many more Dems I'd like to see replaced with Nader like candidates.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
November 27, 2009 8:07 PM
Why not? It's not as if Connecticut totally hasn't already filled its quota when it comes to sending pious, self-absorbed, self-rightous pricks to its Senate seats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stop7997
November 27, 2009 8:30 PM
We have a Democrat as president, a Democratic House, and the much ballyhooed "super-majority" in the Senate (woo-hoo!). And still Congress and the White House are controlled by Wall Street, the Insurance and Pharmaceutical companies, and the military-industrial complex. Democrats abetted Bush in his rush to war and shredding of the Constitution. If anything, Nader has been proven right: Democrats and Republicans, at least in Washington, are all the same.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 28, 2009 8:39 PM in reply to stop7997
Yes, things are exactly the same for upper middle-class academics and career activists like Nader. Shocking.
Te teachers, construction workers, and police officers who have had their jobs saved by a stimulus that would never have passed under a Republican president, on the other hand...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TaylorB1
November 28, 2009 1:13 AM
This is the man who told us that there was "no difference" between Bush and Gore...perhaps the biggest lie ever told in any Presidential campaign. He is as evil and destructive in his own way as are Palin, Limbaugh, Cheney and the rest of the right-wing pack...I wouldn't be surprised if he's in league with them to harm the Democrats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
stop7997
November 28, 2009 1:45 AM in reply to TaylorB1
I certainly see no difference. Nader is probably responsible, directly or indirectly, for more pro-consumer legislation than all of the Dems in both houses of Congress combined. They've all sold out to the corporations. I will gladly give of my time and money for his campaign. Not one more penny, not one more minute, not one more ounce of breath to the do-nothing corporate lackeys in the Democratic party.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Minne sconsin
November 28, 2009 5:12 PM in reply to stop7997
You go, dude. See ya. Let us know how it works out.
But given your delusional comment above, I'm not putting too much faith in your political wisdom.
stop7997:
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stroszek
November 28, 2009 8:41 PM in reply to stop7997
The funny thing is that you'd pretty much be saying the same thing if Nader were president.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
brewmn61
November 28, 2009 5:23 AM
How many pennies, minutes, and breaths did you give before now, purity troll?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
warbaby
November 28, 2009 9:54 AM
What we need now is a Green Tea Party.
/sarcasm
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?