dispelling the ignorance some harbor towards Ralph Nader

El_Kabong

'why doesn't he do anything to help 3rd parties on the local and state level?'

he does!!

b/c of the Nader/Gonzalez ticket received a certain number of votes:

-Independent Party of Maryland. Obtained ballot status and the party will be able to field candidates in 2010 without petitioning.

-Independent Party of New Mexico. Obtained ballot status, 2010 candidates without petitioning.

-Independent Party of Hawaii. Obtained ballot status. Because of low vote totals the party must petition candidates for two more elections to obtain a 10 year ballot access status. Chairman Shaun Stenshol pledges to keep party alive and field candidates in 2010.

-Peace Party of Oregon. Obtained ballot status and the party will be able to field candidates in 2010 without petitioning.

-Connecticut Independent Party. Obtained ballot status and the party will be able to field candidates in 2010 without petitioning.

-Preserved ballot status of the Natural Law Party in Michigan.

-Ballot status of Delaware Independent Party, California Peace and Freedom Party, and Florida Ecology Party continues because of criteria other than vote totals.

'why doesn't he do anything in between presidentail election cycles?'

he does!!

sorry, he doesn't love the spotlight as much as others. a good comparison would be nader is the producer who produces and other politicians are p diddy and want to be in front of the camera all the time

an easy search can find countless groups he's started and works w/ as well as
http://www.november5.org

we will have no allegiance to any political party. We want to create a non-partisan mechanism to get problems solved. Action will result when members of Congress hear loud and clear from their constituents back home. This will not be about raising big money for expensive television ads during the Super Bowl. It will involve using tried and true organizing techniques - and all the local creativity we can muster - to make sure that our Representatives respond to our voices, district by district, person by person.

We want to focus on the victories - big and small - that we can achieve. Too much citizen advocacy involves sending emails or letters to Washington, D.C. We need a return to raising our voices on the ground "back home," where Congressional elections are decided.

lalalalaaaaaaaa

A fine effort, but I'm not sure it'll do much good with the general American population. Most people have developed an extremely warped sense of what makes a good candidate, and why we should vote. People today somehow think personal qualities, saying the right thing all the time, sounding "relevant", and being a good politican have merit. It's sad. Nader is a great man, and a terrible politician.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

He appeals more to the intellectual factor rather than Joe public. He also needs more salesman/preacher factor to successfully capture the masses. A lot of it quite simply has to do with looks. Not good looking enough.

Most people look for movie star and celebrity like qualities in adorning favorable judgment whether they realise it or not.

It's actually takes effort not to fall into this perception category.

El_Kabong

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

He appeals more to the intellectual factor rather than Joe public. He also needs more salesman/preacher factor to successfully capture the masses. A lot of it quite simply has to do with looks. Not good looking enough.

Most people look for movie star and celebrity like qualities in adorning favorable judgment whether they realise it or not.

It's actually takes effort not to fall into this perception category.

the common response i would get when someone would ask who i was voting for and i would say nader was 'is he even running??' and the weekend before the election a coworker said he was voting for bob barr and no one else had even heard of him....

we should have open debates, not manufactured ones by the corporate duopoly

Igivesuchgoodparadym

...oops, thought this was about Ralph Cirella. Nevermind.

Anon

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

He appeals more to the intellectual factor rather than Joe public. He also needs more salesman/preacher factor to successfully capture the masses. A lot of it quite simply has to do with looks. Not good looking enough.

Most people look for movie star and celebrity like qualities in adorning favorable judgment whether they realise it or not.

It's actually takes effort not to fall into this perception category.

Really?
So how do you explain 8 years of bush? You think he is good looking.....
or was it the movie star and celebrity like qualities???

Anon

El_Kabong wrote:

sorry, he doesn't love the spotlight as much as others. a good comparison would be nader is the producer who produces and other politicians are p diddy and want to be in front of the camera all the time

If he wants to be our President one day, he's going to have to learn to like the spotlight a bit more don't you think? I thought the reason he wasn't prominent in the media was because he was largely ignored? So you are now saying it's his choice that his voice is not heard so much?

That's not what i've been hearing around here for 2 years.

gobrowns19

Pj_Gurl wrote:

Really?
So how do you explain 8 years of bush? You think he is good looking.....
or was it the movie star and celebrity like qualities???

Haha, well, how does anyone explain 8 years of bush?

Really though, I think people like Nader, Gravel, and Kucinich aren't afraid to get mad or raise their voices at times, and that's apparently not a quality people want in a president.

Anon

gobrowns19 wrote:

Haha, well, how does anyone explain 8 years of bush?

Well, if you believe Rolands theory, he's a hottie...

gobrowns19 wrote:

Really though, I think people like Nader, Gravel, and Kucinich aren't afraid to get mad or raise their voices at times, and that's apparently not a quality people want in a president.

I'd love me some Kucinich mixed in with Obama

g under p

Pj_Gurl wrote:

Well, if you believe Rolands theory, he's a hottie...


I'd love me some Kucinich mixed in with Obama

Love Kucinich, when he dropped out in the primaries I momentarily lost interest in this election. maybe Obama can appoint DK to a position in the new administration.

Peace.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Pj_Gurl wrote:

Really?
So how do you explain 8 years of bush? You think he is good looking.....
or was it the movie star and celebrity like qualities???

If you're asking me if I think Bush was more photogenic than his opponents at the time.... well yes... I do. Bush is actually very photogenic. More photogenic than Nader, Kucinich, Paul, Giuliani, Barr, Huckabee, Kerry, Gore, Hillary, McCain ...and many more.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Pj_Gurl wrote:

Well, if you believe Rolands theory, he's a hottie...

Yeah, he's hot all right.

he's on fire.

Anon

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If you're asking me if I think Bush was more photogenic than his opponents at the time.... well yes... I do. Bush is actually very photogenic. More photogenic than Nader, Kucinich, Paul, Giuliani, Barr, Huckabee, Kerry, Gore, Hillary, McCain ...and many more.

Picking a candidate based on their looks is not really my thing. But whatever floats your boat Roland, it's never been something i've really considered before. I disagree with your statement that a 'lot of it has got to do with looks', because if that were so, Matt Gonzalez would be sitting in the VP position right about now. Or Sarah Palin. Right?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Pj_Gurl wrote:

Picking a candidate based on their looks is not really my thing. But whatever floats your boat Roland, it's never been something i've really considered before. I disagree with your statement that a 'lot of it has got to do with looks', because if that were so, Matt Gonzalez would be sitting in the VP position right about now. Or Sarah Palin. Right?

Nonsense, you do it whether you realise it or not. Everyone does. It's a genetically hardwired condition pre programmed into the brains of pretty much all (if not all) mammals.

Kann

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Nonsense, you do it whether you realise it or not. Everyone does. It's a genetically hardwired condition pre programmed into the brains of pretty much all (if not all) mammals.

What?

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Nonsense

As for Nader, I for one would like to know the reasons of him not offering collaboration with Obama's future government. Is it because he did and was ignored, or he counts on doing it one of these days or he just thinks "fuck it, they don't deserve me"?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Kann wrote:

What?

You don't perceive other human beings on a scale on how they appear physically and react accordingly? Really? You sure? Children do this by default, as they automatically think better looking teachers are smarter. This association with favoring symmetry in nature applies to pretty much everything with eyes.

Kann wrote:

As for Nader, I for one would like to know the reasons of him not offering collaboration with Obama's future government. Is it because he did and was ignored, or he counts on doing it one of these days or he just thinks "fuck it, they don't deserve me"?

Why would Nader offer collaboration to Obama's future govt? Do you know of Nader's thoughts and position on the political apparatus Obama is a part of? He sees it as part of the problem, not a solution.

Kann

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

You don't perceive other human beings on a scale on how they appear physically and react accordingly? Really? You sure? Children do this by default, as they automatically think better looking teachers are smarter. This association with favoring symmetry in nature applies to pretty much everything with eyes.

First of all, what is this nonsense of it being hard wired in most (if not all) mammals? Where did you read that? Where are the studies?
Second of all, if you say I react toward other humans as they appear physically I'll agree with you. If you say it has something to do with "good looks" or face symmetry I'll disagree. I know (thanks to an old poster) I'm unconsciously prejudiced towards black and fat people for instance. But believe me ugly unsymmetrical people with charisma can be powerful leaders.

Why would Nader offer collaboration to Obama's future govt? Do you know of Nader's thoughts and position on the political apparatus Obama is a part of? He sees it as part of the problem, not a solution.

I read somewhere on here (on of the 2500000 threads on Nader before the election) that he aknowledged that Obama would win. And that when he did, Nader and his supporters had to make sure Obama would act politically "left", be it by collaboration or lobbying (if you're not looking for solutions you are part of the problem and all that sort of thing). I thought it was pretty smart at the time.

freindlyfired

Pj_Gurl wrote:

If he wants to be our President one day, he's going to have to learn to like the spotlight a bit more don't you think? I thought the reason he wasn't prominent in the media was because he was largely ignored? So you are now saying it's his choice that his voice is not heard so much?

That's not what i've been hearing around here for 2 years.

He gets no media attention because he speaks truth to power. You think that some network exec is going to put him on in primetime reminding americans about the concentration of media, shareholders rights vs board of directors, corporate welfare, living wage and so on and so on?

Igivesuchgoodparadym

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Yeah, he's hot all right.

he's on fire.

fire, fire.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Kann wrote:

First of all, what is this nonsense of it being hard wired in most (if not all) mammals? Where did you read that? Where are the studies?
Second of all, if you say I react toward other humans as they appear physically I'll agree with you. If you say it has something to do with "good looks" or face symmetry I'll disagree. I know (thanks to an old poster) I'm unconsciously prejudiced towards black and fat people for instance. But believe me ugly unsymmetrical people with charisma can be powerful leaders.

Darwin, and information picked up over the years. Ugly, unsymmetrical people can be excellent leaders. The exact same personality with better symmetry makes a better (perceived) leader though. If we do it automatically without realizing as kids, you can bet adults do it as well, (and we all do)....especially men.

kann wrote:

I read somewhere on here (on of the 2500000 threads on Nader before the election) that he aknowledged that Obama would win. And that when he did, Nader and his supporters had to make sure Obama would act politically "left", be it by collaboration or lobbying (if you're not looking for solutions you are part of the problem and all that sort of thing). I thought it was pretty smart at the time.

Nader is a very smart guy with fantastic ideas, in a boring package with rough edges.

Urban Hiker

Thanks for your OP El_Kabong.

We'll have to save the link to your post for every time the same people ask the same questions ad nauseum.