Anybody But Evil (Lesser or Greater): Greens Expand Presidential Choices.

OPINION by Lansing Scott

June 30, 2004.

Progressive voters now have two alternatives to the dismal John Kerry in November.

The Green Party chose party activist and tireless campaigner, David Cobb, as its candidate for president at its national nominating convention in Milwaukee last weekend (see www.votecobb.org for more on the campaign). Unlike the showcase conventions of the major parties this summer, the GP convention was an actual contest in which the outcome was not known until the final vote Saturday afternoon.

The decision represented a major crossroads for the party: whether to nominate Cobb as a "homegrown" Green in a genuine Green Party bid for presidency, or whether to endorse the Ralph Nader's independent candidacy. Nader had selected Peter Camejo, former California Green gubernatorial candidate, as his running mate just days before the convention. Although Nader ran for president on the Green ticket in 1996 and 2000, he never actually joined the party and decided to run as an independent this year. Nevertheless, Nader sought the endorsement of the Greens; a major incentive was access to the party's ballot lines in more than 20 states.

In choosing Cobb, a majority of Greens decided that name recognition was less important than a dedication to building this progressive minor party into a true force in American politics. Many Greens who worked with the Nader campaign in 2000 had been disappointed at Nader's level of commitment to building the party as an institutional power. As Cobb notes, the party has been getting "larger, stronger, and better organized with every election cycle," and now has over 200 Greens in office across the country.

Cobb and Nader also represent different campaign strategies. Cobb embraces a "strategic states" approach, focusing resources in the roughly 40 states not considered "swing states" in the electoral college vote. This is the smart way to build support for a political alternative and also defeat Bush, he believes, and will not alienate those progressive voters who see beating Bush as the highest priority. Nader believes political leverage comes from the threat of being able to tip the balance of the election and so will campaign hard in all states.

By nominating Cobb, Greens are seeking to build a credible counterforce while joining in the effort to remove Bush from the White House. The message in the 40 or so "safe states" will be, "Don't waste your vote by supporting a corporatist, militarist Democrat in a state where it won't help defeat Bush; invest your vote in building a progressive alternative." In the states considered too close to call come November, the message will be, "Vote your conscience."

Although Cobb came out the winner, it was not by a large majority. Greens were almost evenly divided about the strategic questions involved, and some worry that the division will continue to hinder party unity and stability in the months to come. A "Greens for Nader" group has already vowed to continue to supporting Nader's campaign. Hopefully, most Greens will recognize that this is no time for intraparty squabbling.

David Cobb named Maine Green activist Pat LaMarche as his running mate. She ran for governor in 1998 and secured Green Party ballot status by receiving over 5% of the vote. Cobb's background is as legal counsel for the Green Party for many years; Nader's Texas campaign coordinator in 2000; candidate for Texas Attorney General in 2002; and advocate for corporate reform with Democracy Unlimited (www.duhc.com). His issues are almost identical to Nader's, with more emphasis on fighting racism, sexism, and homophobia. He is a fiery and articulate speaker who could certainly hold his own in any national presidential debates. He will use his campaign to support Green candidates at state and local levels throughout the country.

Lots of sensible people are mouthing the "Anybody But Bush" mantra this year. But is Kerry really an acceptable "anybody"? A man who supported the Iraq war and now wants to send more troops there, who voted for the Patriot Act, "No Child Left Behind," and has never met a free trade agreement he didn't like? Greens and Naderites could credibly claim that "a vote for Kerry is a vote for Bush" this year, at least for key
elements of Bush's agenda.

The good news is that this year progressives in most states can in good conscience spurn the dismal Democrat and vote for a candidate who truly represents our values. And that we have not just one option, but two.

--Lansing Scott, a longtime Green activist currently serving as Facilitator for the Green Party of Seattle.

-----------------

This article is the work of the author(s) only and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Green Party of the United States.  If you wish to send a message to the editors regarding this or any item on the website, please email us.