The short answer is, it really does seem probable ... even likely. I just got back from Reading, PA where I attended the Green Party's Annual Convention, "Green For a Change". It was a great recharging of the batteries. It was wonderful to see so many of my fellow national delegates. We email each other and debate and discuss and argue all types of things endlessly all year long and the convention is a great opportunity to actually talk face to face, mend some fences, set some limits or just plain wrassle.
I know that my posts in our various email battles usually become more pointed and more civil after attending such gatherings.
A short rundown is easy. I arrived on Thursday. Many others who had come from as far away as Hawaii, were already attending workshops on Dismantling Racism, Running For Office, Peace Actions, Green Strategy, Fundraising and many other various and sundry topics.
Friday morning, I attended a workshop given by NY state's own Mike Seller (Cobleskill's 23 yr. old Green Mayor) and Rebecca Rotzler, New Paltz's outgoing Green Deputy Mayor. They had lots of insight about the nuts and bolts of governance and were very direct in speaking to the issues of limited resource within the party for aiding officeholders with campaigns and problem resolution.
Plenary sessions began Friday afternoon and, finding that we had, in fact, achieved a quorum, we watched several presentations on next year's possible convention sites (Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis and Oakland/Berkeley). We spent some time that evening listening to a number of presidential candidates, Green and otherwise, who had come seeking our nomination. I especially liked Jared ball, a young man from the DC Statehood Greens who was extremely poised and articulate and strong in his presentation.
On Saturday, we voted for our secretary and new steering committee and spent some time speaking (a minute each) about what we thought should happen with electoral/presidential politics in 2008. Four people, myself being one of them, got up to speak in support of a Ralph Nader/Green candidacy. Three of us were applauded enthusiastically, one massively. Only one of the other 50 or so Greens who spoke mentioned David Cobb and Pat LaMarche and how proud they were of them both. There was massive silence. Only two Maine Greens twinkled. One speaker advocated for a Cynthia McKinney Green candidacy. A few people clapped and some people twinkled.
That same night, Ralph came to speak. There were a little over 300 people there (mostly national delegates). There was a standing ovation and the crowd chanted loudly, "Run, Ralph. Run!" for about two minutes. Ralph was very inspirational and there was a feeling in the air of such great possibility.
I should explain that there are "paper state" Greens in our party. Basically, these are Greens
from states without ballot status or any real mechanism for measuring party support in their state who have somehow been assessed delegates anyway (we like to call them Democrats and
obstructionists). These people are often suspiciously anti-Nader but they are also a very small minority within the party. The other group of anti-Nader or anti-presidential run Greens are those concerned about ballot access for their state parties in places like Texas or Illinois or Pennsylvania itself. These people want to make sure that they get an unknown to run who will spend a lot of time working on party building in their states, unlike Ralph, who always makes an honest effort to go to every state at least once and only hits the bigger states multiple times.
My sense of things is that 2004 is clearly over. ABB is dead and a vast majority of us are just champing at the bit to run a presidential candidate. If the respective Green reaction to Nader and then McKinney on Sunday was any indication, we all really want Ralph to run but if he won't do it, we want to keep the McKinney "door" open a crack.
I organized a private discussion with Ralph and a hadnful of other Greens after his appearance and it certainly was my feeling that, collectively, we are all just dying to finish off what we all so happily undertook in 2000.
McKinney, appearing Sunday afternoon, looked great in her movie, American Blackout, that was screened before she spoke. I was somewhat dissappointed with her ability to inspire. She seems so capable and fearless and articulate and direct on C-Span and in her film but not so much when she is at the podium live. She is someone we all should respect and appreciate but it was also obvious from the smaller, slightly less enthusiastic crowd that she is not going to be our candidate. Many of her own advocates amongst us were talking (rudely) throughout her allotted time.
McKinney dropped a lot of hints about 2008 that left no room for guessing but it is my prediction that Ralph is going to run and he's going to run with us again and that this action will help make the Green Party whole so we can start building again.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I hope that if Nader runs, it's with the Greens. His participation in 2000 really brought a lot of new people into the party and energized many of those who were already there. Whoever the Greens nominate, I hope it's NOT someone who pushes the assinine 'safe states' strategy.' 2004 was a big step backward for the party and killed any momentum that Nader inspired. Specifically it was harmful in that it implicitly accepted the duopoly's paradigm that smaller parties should only participate precisely on those places where they WON'T make a difference. I won't say I'll never forgive the party for this because at present, it's the only realistic progressive political party vehicle out there. But they better not make that mistake again.
Post a Comment