"Feingold says Obama shouldn’t be primaried"

Sam Stein (HuffPo), via John Aravosis:

"I strongly disagree with Ralph Nader. As I've said many times before, I believe that re-electing President Obama is an absolute imperative for our economy, our judicial system, for progressives and for our country," said former Sen. Russ Feingold, who announced recently that he was not running for Wisconsin's open Senate seat. MORE...

"Former Miss USA Winner and Ralph Nader Partner to Fight Full Body Airport Scanners" (video)

democracynow, with video (16:07):

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has filed a lawsuit asking a federal judge to stop Transportation Security Administration's full body scanning procedures by granting an immediate injunction. The full body scans are not mandatory for all travelers, but those who object are subject to "enhanced" pat-downs, extremely invasive manual checks. Civil rights activists argue these initiatives are inappropriate, ineffective, violate the Constitution, pose health concerns related to radiation exposure, and are insensitive to religious practices. Democracy Now! interviews former Miss USA and actress Susie Castillo, who was recently subjected to an enhanced body pat-down and has become a vocal critic of such security procedures. Democracy Now! also talks with longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader and Amie Stepanovich of EPIC.

Damning with Faint Praise: "Why Obama Gets Four More Years in White House: Ralph Nader"

Ralph Nader (Bloomberg):

Obama is averse to conflict with corporate power and disarmingly expedient in compromising with Republicans, leaving the latter to argue largely among themselves. The political duopoly lets the tactical Obama use the Bully Pulpit to his political advantage, even if his principles perish. Obama can look forward to four more years in 2012. MORE...

Ralph Nader @ Evergeen State College on Health Care in the Corporatized USA (video)

TVW, video (82:00):

Consumer advocate and presidential candidate Ralph Nader speaks on the issue of health care on the campus of The Evergreen State College in Olympia.

QUOTE OF THE DAY

"Fuck Ralph Nader, and fuck his supporters. If the past eight years hasn't smacked any sense into their addled brains, then nothing will. This site caters to the reality-based community. No one else need apply."-Markos from his post, "Nader."

Howie P.S.: Let the record show that I take a position more in keeping with our President-elect: Let's try to seek common ground to work for the change we need.

Ralph's "in": Barack "not terribly concerned" (Updated)

UPDATE: Video from Nader's appearance on "Meet the Press" is now online (scroll down to "More video").

USA Today:

Ralph Nader is back for another White House campaign.

He made the announcement Sunday morning on NBC's Meet the Press. According to the Associated Press, Nader criticized the major parties' presidential contenders for failing to address corporate crime, Pentagon waste and labor rights.

The AP notes that some Democrats have blamed Nader for drawing Florida votes that might have otherwise gone to Al Gore in 2000. They're not likely to love him this time around either — Votenader.org is already characterizing Nader as "Mr. Frugal" compared to Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Washington Wire (Wall Street Journal):

Barack Obama said today during a visit at the Ohio State University Medical Center that he wasn’t terribly concerned about the prospect of a Nader campaign. “I think the job of the Democratic Party is to be so compelling that a few percentage [points] of the vote going to another candidate is not going to make any difference.”

Obama responded to criticism from Nader, who has suggested that the Democratic hopeful lacks substance, by noting that Nader has reached out to his campaign. “My sense is that Mr. Nader is somebody who if you don’t listen and adopt all of his policies thinks you’re not substantive,” Obama said, before praising Nader as a “heroic” and “singular figure in American politics.”

Barack Obama

He's baaaack...."Nader hints at an announcement"

Ben Smith:

Ralph Nader's exploratory committee just emailed his list: that he'll be on Meet the Press Sunday. Wonder what he's gong to talk about.

From the email:

As you know, we've been exploring the possibilities in recent weeks.

And here's one question that keeps coming up:

What's been pulled off the table by the corporatized political machines in this momentous election year?

Answer:

Cutting the huge, bloated and wasteful military budget, adopting a single payer Canadian-style national health insurance system, impeaching Bush/Cheney, opposing nuclear power - among many others.

Who will pick up these issues and put them back on the table?

Hope you get a chance to tune in to watch Ralph Nader this Sunday on Meet the Press.

"He’s baaaacccckkk…Nader forms presidential exploratory committee"

Reuters:

Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate who has been accused by Democrats of helping hand the White House to George W. Bush in 2000, has formed a committee to explore another presidential bid.

Sure to stir up a hornet’s nest, Nader launched an Internet site to recruit campaign workers, paid and unpaid, as well as to raise money for a possible White House run.

Donors who give $300 will receive three books and two DVDs, including Michael Moore’s Sicko movie about the state of health care in the United States.

He has run several times before, including in 2004 as an independent and in 2000 as the Green Party candidate. That year he was blamed by many for siphoning off votes from Al Gore and ultimately resulting in Bush securing the White House.

"Nader Backs Edwards"

Politics.com:

MUSCATINE, Iowa — Ralph Nader unleashed on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Monday — criticizing her for being soft on defense spending and a chum of big business — and expressed his strong support for John Edwards.

In an eleventh hour effort to encourage liberal Iowans to "recognize" the former North Carolina senator by "giving him a victory," the activist and former presidential contender said in an interview that Clinton will "pander to corporate interest groups" if elected.

Nader specifically accused Clinton of failing to challenge military spending because "she is a woman who doesn't want to be labeled as soft on defense, and she doesn't want to be shown as taking on big business."

As Clinton campaigned through a snowstorm in southeast Iowa, pledging to "bring about the changes we need," Nader accused the Democratic senator from New York of using empty rhetoric.

"[Clinton] has not led the way against the avalanche of military contracting, corporate crime, fraud and abuse," he said. "We want to inform the people of Iowa about Hillary Clinton because all the focus is on, do they have the experience and do they have the personal charisma, and can they cross the aisle" Nader said.

"The issue is corporate power and who controls our political system and it's not who has experience for six years or two years," he said, alluding to an ongoing debate over experience between Clinton and freshman Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

"She has experience in the Senate, and what that experience has meant is going soft on cracking down on corporate crime, fraud, and abuse, soft on cutting tens of millions in corporate subsidies," he continued.

The Clinton campaign declined to comment on Nader's criticism.

Nader, a four-time presidential candidate, called Edwards a Democratic "glimmer of hope." He has long criticized Democrats as indistinguishable from Republicans, chiding both parties as slaves to corporate financing and interests.

It was Nader who famously — or infamously to many Democrats — siphoned off enough liberal votes from Al Gore in 2000 to hand New Hampshire and Florida, and as a result, the presidency, to George W. Bush. Since 2004, however, Nader has been increasingly controversial within the political left. He was booed at a national conference of progressives earlier this year.

But he remains a popular figure among some liberals. Activists are particularly influential in the Iowa caucuses, if only because participation asks hours of voters' time. Only a small portion of Iowa Democrats caucused in 2004.

Clinton is currently locked in a heated three-way race with Obama and Edwards in Iowa, the first contest of the presidential primaries.

On Monday, Nader also issued a public statement criticizing Clinton as a "corporate Democrat," echoing the exact words Edwards uses to challenge Clinton. Nader said he has watched Edwards from afar and sees his more pugilistic brand of populism as an encouraging sign.

"It's the only time I've heard a Democrat talk that way in a long time," Nader said, acknowledging what was, for him, a rare moment of praise for a Democratic leader.

"Iowa should decide which candidate stands for us," he added. "Edwards is at least highlighting day after day that the issue is who controls our country: big business or the people?"

"Ralph Nader criticizes 'spineless, gutless' Democrats for not impeaching Bush" (with video)

RAW STORY. with video (10:41):

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader, who mounted failed bids for the White House in 2000 and 2004, excoriated the Bush administration for its post-9/11 policies that critics say trample on civil liberties and for its pursuit of war in Iraq, which he said distracts from fighting Osama bin Laden.

The onetime Green Party candidate appeared at an anti-war rally in Washington Saturday, where he chastised "spineless, gutless" Democrats in Congress for failing to boot Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney from office.

"The impeachable offenses of Bush outnumber any other list of impeachable offenses of any US president," Nader said. "Not only did he and Cheney violate their oath of office to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land, but they proceeded to impose a practice of torture, to arrest thousands of Americans without charges and throw them in prisons without lawyers.... They spied on millions of Americans randomly without judicial approval. How many more impeachable offenses do those spineless, gutless, hapless Democrats need in the Congress."

Nader, who encouraged attendees to visit the anti-war Web site DemocracyRising.us, said the presidential elections in 2000 and 2004 were "stolen" from Democrats, but he did not mention his own candidacy in either of those races.

Because Democrats control Congress -- after a power shift following the 2006 midterm elections -- they can cut off funding for the war, hold hearings on Bush administration policies and begin impeachment proceedings. Beyond failing to do any of that, though, there have not been vocal calls for Bush's resignation, Nader said, which makes Democrats now weaker than those in Congress when former-President Richard Nixon was forced to resign in the wake of Watergate.

Speaking about the Iraq war, Nader mentioned Gen. David Petraeus's testimony on Capitol Hill last week, during which he was asked whether the war in Iraq was making America safer. "I don't know," was the US troop commander's reply, and that was unacceptable, Nader said.

"It's making the oil companies richer," he said. "It's making the corporations more profiteering. It's making our domination of the Middle East more likely to boomerang against our national security, isn't it?"

Howie P.S.: My past disagreements with Mr. Nader are public knowledge. My "Bush-Nader 2004" bumper sticker said it all. I gave Howard Dean one that he held up and the photograph appeared in the Tacoma News Tribune.

"Bloomberg could have a shot, Nader believes" (with video)

MSNBC, with video:

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg could be the first modern independent candidate to break the stranglehold the two major parties have on the White House, two-time candidate Ralph Nader said Thursday.

Nader predicted in an interview on MSNBC’s “Hardball” that Bloomberg would join the race and would immediately start out with the support of at least 15 percent of voters.

“He’s running,” Nader told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, but he said Bloomberg, a billionaire media magnate, probably wouldn’t announce for several months because “when you have that kind of money, you can start late.”

But even for a candidate as well-financed as Bloomberg — whose personal fortune has been estimated at more than $5 billion — ballot eligibility rules and the difficulty of qualifying for debates can make it almost impossible to gain traction, said Nader, who knows firsthand about the legal and political obstacles faced by third-party candidates.

“We’ve got a two-party elected dictatorship,” Nader said. “They’ve got the whole thing stacked in one state after another.”

Bloomberg could open up the system
At first blush, Nader said, Bloomberg looks pretty good, marrying traditional Democratic positions with hard-headed Republican-style problem-solving.

“I think he’s offering a case-by-case judgment,” Nader said. “That’s the one thing about Bloomberg I like. He doesn’t prejudge everything ideologically. He’s very problem-oriented. Post-Katrina I don’t think would have happened if he was in charge.”

But Bloomberg isn’t sensitive enough to free speech and economic justice, said Nader, who said that if no candidate emerged to address his progressive, labor-first ideals, he would jump into the race himself. He said he would make a decision “in the fall.”

The real appeal of a Bloomberg campaign, he said, was the prospect that it could forever transform American politics by smashing the major parties’ monopoly, even if he doesn’t win.

It all depends on whether Bloomberg can demonstrate enough support to force his way into the general election debates organized by a private commission, which has been loath to include independent candidates, including Nader in 2000 and 2004, he said.

“He’ll turn it into a three-way race,” Nader predicted. “He can really highlight these discriminations against third-party candidates.”

Click for related coverage

Newsweek: What Bloomberg means to the race
Can Bloomberg beat anti-New York bias?

Bloomberg plays coy
Speculation that he would run reached fever pitch this week when Bloomberg, a lifelong Democrat who switched to the Republican Party to run for mayor in 2001, renounced his Republican affiliation and said he was now an independent.

Since then, Bloomberg has spent his time issuing the standard non-denial denial of interest that nearly all prospective presidential candidates rely on while they consider their options. He told NBC News’ Brian Williams that he had “no intention” of running, adding: “I’ve got a job. I just want to be a good mayor.”

But as Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., proved, saying that doesn’t mean he can’t, or won’t, change his mind.

Asked in January 2006 on NBC’s “Meet the Press” whether he would run for president in 2008, Obama replied, “I will not.” Today, he is running second on most Democratic presidential polls.

Bloomberg himself is doing nothing to discourage speculation. In a news conference Wednesday, he told reporters: “The more people that run for office, the better.”

And he is seizing every opportunity to grab a toehold on national issues.

“I feel very strongly that we are in danger of losing our lead in many parts of science and medicine and education,” he said. “I think there’s a great challenge ahead. We have international challenges; we have domestic challenges. And as I said out in California two nights ago, I don’t think that we are addressing those issues.

“I’m particularly upset that the big issues of the time keep getting pushed to the back and we focus on small things that probably only inside the Beltway are important.”

Poor track record for outsiders
History is not on Bloomberg’s side, however, as Nader learned in 2000, when he won less than 3 percent of the vote across the country. Many Democrats believe most of his votes in Florida would otherwise have gone to Vice President Al Gore, giving Gore a victory in Florida over George W. Bush and handing Gore the White House.

In 1968, former Democratic Gov. George Wallace of Alabama formed his own party with the mission to be a spoiler, hoping to throw the election to the Electoral College and expand his political clout. He won five Southern states, siphoning Southern Democratic votes from Vice President Hubert Humphrey, giving Richard Nixon a small but decisive win.

As an independent in 1992, businessman H. Ross Perot won almost 20 percent of the vote — not enough to win the presidency, but more than enough to allow Bill Clinton to oust President George H.W. Bush in a three-way race.

In 1996, Perot ran again, as the nominee of the Reform Party, picking up less than half as many votes but allowing Clinton to win reelection without a majority.

Ed Rollins, who managed Perot’s 1992 campaign, said Bloomberg had special advantages: name recognition and billions of dollars. Associates told MSNBC that Bloomberg would be prepared to spend at least a half-billion dollars if he decides to press forward with a campaign.

“With his kind of resources and his ability and willingness to spend, he can sort of set an agenda that other candidates may have to deal with,” Rollins said Wednesday on “Hardball.”
Moreover, he added, “Bloomberg has built a gigantic media outlet, and he understands the game better than anybody.”

Bloomberg has said he is not interested in being a spoiler, telling associates that if he runs, it will be only because he expects to have a solid chance to win. But the political stars would have to line up just right for him to have even a sliver of a chance, said Larry Sabato, a presidential scholar at the University of Virginia.

“Bloomberg has to be willing to spend a half-billion, probably a billion, dollars of his own money, and the two parties have to nominate candidates who are probably polarizing and unacceptable to millions of Americans,” Sabato told NBC News’ David Gregory.

Nader loyalist welcomes Bloomberg
Nader’s campaign manager in 2000 and 2004, Theresa Amato, encouraged Bloomberg to join the race, saying the more the merrier.

“We’re not a two-party system. The word ‘party’ doesn’t show up in the Constitution,” she said Wednesday on “Hardball.” “Everybody should be able to run for president in the United States.”

But she agreed that Bloomberg would have a tough time of it, saying the deck was stacked against independent and thirf-party candidates.

“The problem here is not with third parties. The problem is that two parties have made it difficult the for third parties to compete,” said Amato, who is now executive director of the Citizen Advocacy Center, a nonprofit political reform group.

“There are structural barriers to entry, from the ballot access laws [to] the commission on presidential debates,” which she said “makes it very hard for anybody else, except for the two parties, because it is a private corporation that allows the Democrats and Republicans to talk to tens of millions of voters.”

Howie P.S.: For some reason, every time I hear his name, "Nader" sounds more like "Newman," but the way Jerry Seinfeld says it. He does make a few good points, however, particularly the one about Hillary.