Gonzales formally leaves the Greens
Apparently Matt Gonzales, Nader’s Vice-presidential choice, has officially left the Green Party and re-registered as an independent.
From the Fog City Journal
Vice-presidential candidate Matt Gonzalez ended speculation about his political party affiliation, announcing today he has left the Green Party.
In a statement released to Fog City Journal, Gonzalez said he made the decision to change party affiliation “to increase ballot access for the Nader/Gonzalez ticket.”
According to Gonzalez, states including Delaware, Idaho and Oregon do not allow members of political parties to run as independents.
“I have enormous respect for the Greens but I don’t want to create additional hurdles for the campaign by remaining in the party,” Gonzalez wrote. “I expect to work in tandem with future Green campaigns, and remain committed to alternatives to the two-party system.”
Hansu Kim, a senior advisor to Gonzalez, stated, “As a prominent member of the Green Party, Gonzalez has been credited with helping recruit candidates and raise money for campaigns. He will remain committed to all progressive political efforts as an independent.”
Gonzalez currently serves as the treasurer of Green Party school board president Mark Sanchez’s bid for the District 9 Supervisorial seat being vacated by Tom Ammiano.
March 4th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Hope you enjoy political oblivion, Matt!
March 4th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Yep. He’ll crawl back to the Greens after Nader and him lose—-with a much less prestigious name and probably alot more enemies.
March 4th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
i think there is a good chance the greens will fold, particularly if mckinney exits the race. i wouldnt be oppose to a new party forming in the next couple years with a broader appeal to the left.
March 4th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
The Green Party will not fold. With dozens of ballot lines and hundreds of elected officials, as well as both a firm ideological base in the Ten Key Values and international recognition as the US component of the truly international Green Party, reports of the party’s demise may be a bit premature.
I also must say that, while I am very disappointed to see Gonzalez as Nader’s running mate instead of McKinney’s, there is a depth of support for what Gonzalez accomplished for the Green Party. I don’t think either he nor Nader will ever have to “crawl back” to the Green Party. Most of us are adults, and as such would welcome their active participation in the party, whenever or however that participation happens.
Nader was a great boon to the Green Party. So will McKinney. We have no intention of going gently into that good night.
March 4th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
In 2004, Ralph Nader’s V-P candidate was Peter Camejo, two time Green Party candidate for Governor of California (2002 & 2003). I never heard about Camejo leaving the Green Party. In fact, Peter Camejo spoke in favor of Nader at the Green Party national convention. So I don’t know why Matt Gonzalez is doing this.
March 4th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
In many states the state GP is very strong, and would survive the collapse of the 96/00 leadership core. They have so far. anyway.
Having Nader and the GP competing on the Left isn’t a great thing no matter how you spin it.
And if Nader is going to run for president, perhaps the national GP would benefit most by developing a slate of Congressional candidates, instead of focusing on a presidential campaign?
March 4th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Has the Nader campaign presented any rationale as to why they are not seeking the GP nomination? Its absurd.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:05 am
In 2004, the Nader/Camejo slate was faced with several utterly frivolous ballot access challenges. They had to spend money to defend themselves against all of them, and some of them were actually successful because many state judges owe their positions to partisan loyalty and are willing to accept frivolous arguments in order to protect their parties’ interests. So it makes some sense for Gonzalez to be more cautious.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Preston: One report (and this comes from within the Nader campaign) is that Ralph promised Cynthia McKinney not to seek the GP nomination if she were going to do so. My own feeling based on my own eight years mixed up in this stuff is that both Ralph and Matt simply don’t like the Green Party, particularly its internal politics and bickering, and want to control their own campaign without having to deal with a separate party structure. I know that that last part was a real problem for them in 2000. The Nader campaign and the Green Party did not “play well with each other” in 2000.
As to “political oblivion” for Matt Gonzalez, that’s exactly where he was the day before Nader chose him. The day after, his face was in newspapers and websites around the world. He’s still a hero to many on the left, both within and outside of the Green Party. No matter what happens in November he now has a national profile and that’s permanent. I don’t see why, as long as he stays publically active, he will remain a known and respected figure on the far left and particularly within the 3rd party world. And that world is growing, not shrinking.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:54 am
P.S. – What everyone either doesn’t realize or keeps forgetting is that the Nader campaign and the McKinney campaign have very different appeals, emphasize different issues, and are attracting a different set of supporters. McKinney’s emphasis on Katrina/New Orleans, minority rights, and immigration differs rather dramatically from Nader’s anti-corporate message, as anyone who has heard both of them speak knows. Of course there is overlap, particularly regarding the Iraq war. But my point is that Ralph Nader’s observation that these two campaigns can exist synergistically, on parallel tracks, is not far fetched. It may well turn out to be the case, particularly if the McKinney campaign/Green Party calm down, wise up, and sharpen their focus towards the people to whom Cynthia McKinney is very attractive—people for whom Ralph Nader is not very attractive.
March 5th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Correction to the post before last: “he will remain” should read “he won’t remain.”
March 5th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Ah, the perpetual conundrum: the third parties and tickets must remain distinct from the big two by not engaging in coalitions, yet none of them can hope to challenge the big two without consolidation and creating coalitions. If the Greens/anti-corporate/anti-war/left-but-not-socialist groups continue to compete with each other, how could they possibly hope to replace or defeat the Democrats?
March 5th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
If Nader and Gonzalez don’t like the Green Party, then they ought to either 1) try to reform the Green Party or 2) form another third party that could attract major support.
No one is going to pay attention to third parties unless they actually poll well and play a real role in the campaign and political education. Right now, as long as Nader and McKinney are disunified, chances are slim that organization will get off the ground in even the most liberal parts of America. Especially if Obama is the candidate—chances of a 2004 repeat (for Nader and the Greens) are strong. Historically, significant third parties runs required broad unity across the left—take Debs in 1912 or La Follette in 1924—a wide variety of political parties and institutions came together in those instances to put the fear into the major parties.
I can understand it if Nader and Gonzalez don’t see eye to eye with the Green party leadership. But if the Green party is that bad, then perhaps these guys ought to focus on reforming the Green party to make its appeal more mainstream.
The only way to force the Democratic Party to incorporate electoral reform into their platform (and thus open up the system to third parties) is to create a strong force on the Left that actually threatens them and takes away seats in the most progressive districts. The Nader/Gonzalez campaign seems determined to leave leftist third parties divided—they decline to contest the nomination of the strongest 3rd party and they make no attempt to convince other left third parties to form an alliance.
David, you can rationalize it all you want, but the bottom line is Nader’s strategy doesn’t make any sense and never will. Consequently he will be justly hated among Democrats and Greens, regardless of how correct his political positions happen to be. Nader’s candidacy distracts attention from building parties or other institutions to politically educate the American people and give them choices in the long run.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
In my opinion, being Nader’s running mate is HUGE for Matt Gonzalez. He is young and has a promising future ahead.
As for leaving the Green Party, as someone mentioned above the Nader campaign has one entire front on defending itself from Democratic Party law suits. Gonzalez has a legal background, he knows what he is doing.
As for Gonzalez being on a ticket with McKinney – He can’t. Both are California residents. The Prez-VP ticket MUST (per the US Constitution) consist of individuals who do not live in the same state.
I believe that Nader did the Green Party a favor in 2000, and the Green Party needs to grow and evolve and not lean on Nader, who has always been an Independent first. The Green Party may face some significant changes following this, but should come out stronger institutionally if not in vote results.
One thing the Green Party could do is look at the fact that it has a 200 member National Committee overseeing a party with 240 elected greens. This is WAY too much bureaucracy for a Party of this size.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
One other thought – in 2004 there was an attempt to get the Green Party to endorse Nader by nominating Camejo. I would not be surprised if there were talks about doing the same in 2008 with Gonzalez BUT since he has withdrawn from the party, that sends a clear signal to the Green Party that the 2004 strategy (nominate Nader’s VP) is NOT an option in 2008.
The Nader-Gonzalez Campaign has made it very clear that they do not want the Green Party nomination. However there are still Greens who want to figure out someway of giving it to them anyway. The Green Party needs to let it go and nominate our own candidate and start getting to work.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez are entitled to do it whatever way that they wish to. That is what freedom is all about. I will say though (once again) that California is going to be a real big problem. It would be logical for them to begin a brand new party and if the party does not make it on the Golden State ballot in 2008, it can continue to organize and most likely make it on in 2012!