[Platform] Nader/Gonzalez - no other choice I am afraid

[Walsh, John]

Hi Bill et al,
This is not a choice that was made lightly - believe me.  But after the blocking of the compromise apportionment resolution, #324, by a 34% minority - and after the abject failure of the national party to put any infrastructure in place for ballot access or fundraisng, I reluctantly conclude that the GPUS - unlike the GP of CA or GRP here in MA is a corpse.  It cannot mount a serious campaign at the national level - unless Nader/Gonzalez becomes a sufficient threat to the Dems that they pour money into the GPUS.

So what to do?  Well there could have been an alliance with the resources Nader and the GPUS could have brought to the table - but that was ruled out by the DemoGreens and others in key positions at the national level.  Not to mention the apparently racist action taken by the same group against former Black Panther, Elaine Brown.  You have seen the undemocratic actions of a small clique since the state convention who defy the co-chairs and use their possession of party resources to decide things.  Same thing happens one hundred fold at the national level. The idea of one Green- one vote has been trashed to eliminate the influence of CA and NY and others.  Nine months ago I did not believe how bad it was  and I even defended the GPUS in a CounterPunch article.  Boy, was I wrong! Talk about egg on one's face.

So what to do?  Stand by and chant "Om" while another million Iraqis are slaughtered at the hands of the government to which I pay taxes and against which I can help run candidates?  Not for me.  I have only one ethical course I am afraid.  So I will stick with the GRP but I will work for Nader/Gonzalez.  

And I hope the GPUS candidate (which might NOT be Cynthia in the end since she may be entering law school in September and I do not know how she can do that and run a campaign) will be as civil to Ralph as he has been to Cynthia and the GPUS.  We can run synergistic campaigns here.  Elections are not a zero sum game.

It is time to move on at the national level.

John V. Walsh


-----Original Message-----
From: BillCunningham [mailto:etwee at earthlink.net]
Sent: Tue 3/11/2008 11:50 AM
To: Walsh, John
Cc: Merelice; Platform Committee; candidate development
Subject: Re: [Platform] Fwd: New Mexico
 
So that means Gonzalez quits the GPUS and an effort is underway to split people away nationwide.

To my thinking, neither Nader or the current GPUS has any plan to build the kind of movement party that will be needed in the years-prhaps even months-ahead. The only thing more chimerical in the U.S. than a purely electoral opposition party, is internecine fighting over which one has the correct line.

Can you say IMPLOSION? 

-----Original Message-----
>From: John Walsh <john.walsh at umassmed.edu>
>Sent: Mar 11, 2008 11:15 AM
>To: BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net>
>Cc: Merelice <merelice at gmail.com>, Platform Committee <platform at green-rainbow.org>, candidate development <candidate-development at green-rainbow.org>
>Subject: Re: [Platform] Fwd: New Mexico
>
>Wherever possible Nader/Gonzalez will seek a ballot line NOT as  
>individuals but as a new party - name undecided.  That is my  
>understanding.
>That party can then work to put folks on the ballot in the next  
>campaign.  I think that the better GP parties (I include MA and CA)  
>will in one way or other make an alliance or join with this new  
>political entity.  Ralph does not want to use his last hurrah just to  
>run a campaign.  It is to be part of a new movement just as was 2000  
>but unfortunately the GPUS was hijacked and remains so.  Sad.
>john walsh
>
>On Mar 11, 2008, at 10:11 AM, BillCunningham wrote:
>
>> Hi Merelice,
>>
>> No, what I mean is this. If Nader (say) ran in November on the line  
>> of a party (say GPUS/GRP) and received 3 percent of the MA vote,  
>> that would thereby secure the party's 2010 ballot line and official  
>> status. But if Nader (say) gets 3 percent as an independent, that  
>> doesn't secure anybody's future ballot line or status. Is that  
>> right? That's why the phrase "money down the drain" made me think  
>> of this question.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Merelice <merelice at gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Mar 10, 2008 6:52 PM
>>> To: BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net>
>>> Cc: John Walsh <john.walsh at umassmed.edu>, Platform Committee  
>>> <platform at green-rainbow.org>, candidate development <candidate- 
>>> development at green-rainbow.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Platform] Fwd: New Mexico
>>>
>>> (Forward to Need-to-know if of interest.)
>>>
>>> Hi Bill,
>>>
>>> Not sure I understand your question, especially your use of the term
>>> "votes." But here are some points that might be relevant.
>>>
>>> Assuming the GRP offers Nader the convention delegates he earned in
>>> the GRP presidential primary, he could either decide to use them to
>>> seek the Green Party nomination (pretty unlikely from the sounds of
>>> things) or he could release them. The primary was the only time that
>>> public "votes" are involved.
>>>
>>> Whoever wins the nomination at the Green Party's national nominating
>>> convention in July (by winning over enough delegates) will then  
>>> become
>>> the Green Party's presidential candidate in the November general
>>> presidential election.
>>>
>>> Should anyone (including Nader) wish to run as an independent
>>> candidate in November, they will need to follow each state's
>>> requirements (generally collecting sigs) for running in that capacity
>>> -- as Nader is now doing in New Mexico. In other words, he has his
>>> work cut out for him. The GRP primary votes have no bearing on an
>>> independent candidacy. Nader apparently thinks he has a stronger  
>>> field
>>> operation for getting on state ballots than the Green Party can offer
>>> -- and stronger than he had in 2004 when he did not make it on the
>>> Mass. ballot.
>>>
>>> Merelice
>>>
>>> On 3/10/08, BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> Speaking of money down the drain, if Nader as a non-party  
>>>> candidate gets enough votes to qualify for state ballot lines,  
>>>> who gets to exercise that option?
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> Bill Cunningham
>>
>
>John V. Walsh, MD
>Professor of Physiology
>University of Massachusetts Medical School
>508-856-3360 (Office)
>508-868-1653 (Cell)
>john.walsh at umassmed.edu
>
>
>


Bill Cunningham