I have been thinking about Ralph Nader's independent campaign a bit but haven't posted anything of late. I've just been thinking about it. Thinking about how many state ballots he will get on. Thinking about the fact that - so far - he has only been campaigning in safe Republican states i.e. "the red states." Thinking about the possibilities for mischief of it all. The other day while I was driving to work, I was thinking that it was odd that Nader hasn't announced a running mate yet. In the last two election cycles, Nader had Native American activist Winona LaDuke as his running mate. She is an amazing person if you ever get to meet her [although I would contend that in 2000 she was relatively ineffective because of her duties taking care of her newborn].
Then, on Monday, Jesse Ventura, who is at Harvard's JFK School of Government this spring, announced at the State House that he was supportive of gay marriage: ["Tough guys Ventura and DeNucci support gay marriage"]. This was a bit of a surprise - but actually not - for people who have watched Ventura over the years. He is a social libertarian and he speaks his mind. But he is also a fiscal conservative and his rejection of some of Nader's more liberal policy positions kept Ventura from endorsing Nader in 2000. The two did meet and at the time Ventura said he always voted for independents.
But here is the interesting point of the story:
Ventura, 52, a Reform Party member in Minnesota, made no secret of his desire to one day consider running for president, perhaps in 2008. His running mate, he said, would be the former Philadelphia basketball star Charles Barkley, raising the possibility of a ticket dubbed The Body and The Round Mound.Now, Ventura is a member of Minnesota's Independent Party, a former offshoot of the Reform Party. However, the party is no longer affliated with the Reform Party. As well, Barkley is a registered Republican and was even thinking about running for governor in Alabama. A Ventura/Barkley ticket might be too conservative for liberals and independents who might want to bolt the major parties in 2008. But how about now? Would a Nader/Ventura ticket pull enough support from both sides to get the 10 to 15 percent to get into the debates? Could they galvanize a nation of voters that is mostly independent, not Democrat or Republican? Could they win?
Sure, the Democratic Party and the American people seem "united" in the sense that they want to get rid of Bush. The Democratic Party structure will be united behind nominee John Kerry. But will the people? So far, we haven't seen that.
But imagine for a minute a Nader/Ventura administration: Peace, prosperity, regulation on things that should be regulated, fair income taxes, universal health care coverage, fair trade deals, treating veterans fairly and with respect, coalition government in the sense that Nader and Ventura political positions aren't one-sided. Nader would get support from conservatives on issues of corporate welfare and Ventura will get support from liberals on social matters. Imagine Ventura "reinventing government" like Al Gore was supposed to do in 1993! It would be leaner, more humane and less expensive, we know that much.
In the end, this probably won't happen. But Nader should consider talking to Ventura - now. If the two of them lost the election in 2004, it would help Ventura set himself up for a serious run in 2008.
Sure, I'm daydreaming a bit here but if it happens remember that you read it here first. :-)
