Link here
Ralph Nader said Sunday he will meet with John Kerry next month to discuss the effort to defeat President Bush in the November election.
While stressing that he is still a competitor in the race, the independent presidential hopeful said he views his candidacy as a "second front against Bush, however small."
Memo to both candidates: please form a coalition.
There is a suggestion in this story that some of the Democrats' concerns about Nader pulling votes from Kerry has sunk in with Ralph. It still is troubling to hear Nader say things like this:
Nader said Sunday he believes if anything he will take away votes that were meant for Bush because more people are fed up with high budget deficits and Bush's economic policies.
However, that he views his candidacy as a "second front against Bush, however small" is a positive sign. My sincere hope is that he really will make his campaign about helping defeat Bush.
What Kerry needs to do: listen to Nader's concerns and make an effort to address them within his own campaign. Ultimately, we all want the same thing, which is to defeat Bush. Kerry has made strides in wooing ex-Deaniacs. Now, he needs to focus on building a coalition that includes Nader-leaners. These people need to feel that Kerry will run a progressive administration. It's up to Kerry to demonstrate that he will.
What Nader needs to do: realize that he has the power to do both good and ill in this election cycle. He can play spoiler again by repeating the charge that the two major parties are the same. Or he can work with Kerry to build a progressive coalition that casts a big tent around everyone. If Nader makes an issue out of everything Kerry has ever done that the far left didn't like, that's trouble. If he makes overtures to his support base that stresses our many agreements about key issues and the importance of uniting together in the common goal, then everybody wins. Even those who are uncomfortable with Kerry get an administration that is far more sympathetic to their views.
Here's hoping that they work on stressing the things that unite them, rather than those that divide them. There are so many of the former that focusing on the latter would ultimately prove destructive to both.