Long time progressive, Ralph Nader, made it clear which candidate he feels very good about this election cycle. John Edwards.
Nader, the longtime advocate of economic justice, human and civil rights, and environmental protection was unqualified in his praise for Senator Edwards.
He also had some things to say about 2000, where we are now, and Barack Obama.
Nader, no matter what anyone here feels about him, has been the strongest voice on Progressive issues in our lifetime. He approves few politicians as truly "progressive' and when he does, it means something.
Many will argue about what happened in 2000. Some will revile him. But one thing is uncontestable...his desire for great change in this nation has been his life's work.
Chris Matthews asked Nader what he thought of the different candidates and whether or not he would support any of them should they receive the nomination. Nader was crystal clear in issuing his opinion.
On Edwards: "Edwards has the most progressive message....of any leading candidate I've seen in years."
"The key phrase is when he says he doesn't want to replace a corporate Republican with a corporate Democrat, it's very key. He raises the issue of the concentration of power and wealth in a few hands that are working against the interests of the vast majority of the American people."
Matthews: "People aren't used to this discussion of structural change. It's unusual in American politics to be this clear and stark."
It's a great, dynamic interview. Matthews talks to Nader about the anger Democrats feel toward his run in 2000. Nader successfully breaks down the myth (citing studies) that pins the failure of a democratic win on his back.
Matthews asks Nader if he'll join the "Democratic coalition" after the primaries. If there is a candidate he can get behind. Nader replies that, and I'm paraphrasing, he will support Democrats if Edwards wins the primary, provided he doesn't soften his message.
Chris then asks him in his rapid-fire style if he could get behind Obama. Nader's answer was unqualified.
"No. Because he doesn't have the agenda."
Matthews: "You have now excluded Barack Obama from the progressive coalition."
Nader: "He's excluded himself, unfortunately, by the statements he's made...He's a lot smarter than his public statements which are extremely concilliatory to concentrated power and big business."
It's a rare day when Ralph Nader sees a political candidate as a protector of the same causes he's long championed...labor, stopping the tide of rampant corporatism, health care. I heard him twice in 2004 talking about John Edwards. On NPR he was discussing Tort Reform, and on that matter said, "John Edwards would be very strong on the issue. He'd be good for America." Edwards, of course, has received the wrath of the Chamber of Commerce for his anti-tort reform positions.
On another occasion Nader said that on election night in Ohio, "John Edwards had a knock-down drag out fight with John Kerry." This was over Kerry's willingness to concede and call it a day. Edwards wanted to fight for as long as it took and dispute the final tally. He felt something was rotten in the vote.
Nader also wrote a letter to John Kerry asking him to choose John Edwards as his running mate because he'd help the 'little guy'.
Nader, though, doesn't give his support blindly and without qualification. He is always scrutinizing the candidate and makes it clear that if Edwards veers off his progressive message, he will make his feelings known.
Obama's campaign has tried to cast doubt on Edwards committment in taking on the corporate power structure. They imply a kind of "Where did this come from?'
Apparently, since at least 2003, Ralph Nader hasn't had this question. He has repeatedly looked to John Edwards as a light in an otherwise dark political world. He's undoubtedly vetted the Senator from North Carolina and watched him closely over the years.
I'll take Nader's opinion of Barack Obama's and his campaign, anytime.
In one day, two influential progressives, Paul Krugman and Ralph Nader, have singled John Edwards out as the candidate who is willing to fight the huge powers that have strangled this country. They join Thom Hartmann, and David Sirota, both longtime progressives.
If you haven't already watched the interview, please do. It's a fascinating study into the thinking of a man who has done brave, great work on behalf of all of us. Yes, he's a controversial figure, but few have lain themselves on the line in the pursuit of justice, fairness, and safety for America.