Obama Vs Nader (Debate)

MrBrian

All Obama supporters i'm sure would be up for it right? I'd love to see Obama shut Nader down in a debate. All that 'hope' will crush Nader!

But sadly Obama who said earlier that he will debate anyone who's running against him has changed his mind :( He now only wants to debate McCain.

But just imagine, Obama beating Nader in a debate could pretty much end a Nader run. So why is Obama backing down? I guess it's easier to just tell Nader not to run than to go out and beat him in an open debate.

jimed14

MrBrian wrote:

All Obama supporters i'm sure would be up for it right? I'd love to see Obama shut Nader down in a debate. All that 'hope' will crush Nader!

But sadly Obama who said earlier that he will debate anyone who's running against him has changed his mind :( He now only wants to debate McCain.

But just imagine, Obama beating Nader in a debate could pretty much end a Nader run. So why is Obama backing down? I guess it's easier to just tell Nader not to run than to go out and beat him in an open debate.

hoenstly, Obama has very, very little to gain with this ... I'm not saying it's right Nadar and Barr aren't included in the debates, just saying they have little to gain by going against them.

I saw Nadar on CNN last week ... when pressed on military issues, he seemed a little out of his league ... his solution was seemingly "Bring everyone home now", isolationist ... sounded very terse, and just neglecting the fact we do have to do some recovery we're responsible for with all the mess that has been made.

If he's got other views on these and I'm reading it wrong, I welcome them

ladygooddiva

maybe bec. his office told him to conentrate on mccain
the problem is you have a two party system

MrBrian

The lou dobbs 5 min Nader interview? I thought he was right on point, he made sense. More sense than Obama and McCain on that issue.

I'll try and post a vid of it.

anyway, my point is, why not have an open debate. If Obama really cares about america and democracy as much as he say's. An open debate with Nader could only help american politics. Of course the truth (as you said) is that Obama himself has nothing to really to gain. All Obama needs to do (and is doing) is ignore Nader. That's the sad part of American politics, to get ahead in it, you just need to be ignorant. Forget the facts, the truth, none of that matters.

jimed14

MrBrian wrote:

The lou dobbs 5 min Nader interview? I thought he was right on point, he made sense. More sense than Obama and McCain on that issue.

I'll try and post a vid of it.

anyway, my point is, why not have an open debate. If Obama really cares about america and democracy as much as he say's. An open debate with Nader could only help american politics. Of course the truth (as you said) is that Obama himself has nothing to really to gain. All Obama needs to do (and is doing) is ignore Nader. That's the sad part of American politics, to get ahead in it, you just need to be ignorant. Forget the facts, the truth, none of that matters.

ok, you had me for a while ... but ... I don't think Obama is "forgetting the facts, the truth and none of that matters"

sadly, you can put this SAME ISSUE on McCain .. why wont he debate Bob Barr? or Let Ron Paul speak at the convention?

I agree ... more voices is a good thing ....

MrBrian

jimed14 wrote:

ok, you had me for a while ... but ... I don't think Obama is "forgetting the facts, the truth and none of that matters"

sadly, you can put this SAME ISSUE on McCain .. why wont he debate Bob Barr? or Let Ron Paul speak at the convention?

I agree ... more voices is a good thing ....

I tend to go after Obama more, even if the same thing can be said for McCain. I do that because to me it seems like many of the people who support Obama, really believe in him, really falling for his lines of 'hope' and whatever else.

His supporters seem to be forgetting the issues, they are not demanding anything from him. They just 'hope'. To me that's very dangerous.

Like they will say that Obama is for peace, how he's so different from everyone else. Yet you hear Obama speak about Iran? He sounds like McCain or Bush. Or the way he goes on about his love for Israel, does not even mention what causes the hardships for the people of Palestine.

Sludge Factory

jimed14 wrote:

hoenstly, Obama has very, very little to gain with this ... I'm not saying it's right Nadar and Barr aren't included in the debates, just saying they have little to gain by going against them.

I saw Nadar on CNN last week ... when pressed on military issues, he seemed a little out of his league ... his solution was seemingly "Bring everyone home now", isolationist ... sounded very terse, and just neglecting the fact we do have to do some recovery we're responsible for with all the mess that has been made.

If he's got other views on these and I'm reading it wrong, I welcome them

Let's get one thing straight, having our troops brought home is not isolationist in the least bit.

rebornFixer

MrBrian wrote:

I tend to go after Obama more, even if the same thing can be said for McCain. I do that because to me it seems like many of the people who support Obama, really believe in him, really falling for his lines of 'hope' and whatever else.

His supporters seem to be forgetting the issues, they are not demanding anything from him. They just 'hope'. To me that's very dangerous.

Like they will say that Obama is for peace, how he's so different from everyone else. Yet you hear Obama speak about Iran? He sounds like McCain or Bush. Or the way he goes on about his love for Israel, does not even mention what causes the hardships for the people of Palestine.

I find it hard to disagree with this ... What is the real, honest-to-gosh basis of all this "hope"? It can hardly be Obama's policy statements.

ledvedderman

MrBrian wrote:

Like they will say that Obama is for peace, how he's so different from everyone else. Yet you hear Obama speak about Iran? He sounds like McCain or Bush.

Yeah that whole "talk to those who we disagree with" approach is right in line with Bush and McCain.

jimed14

MrBrian wrote:

I tend to go after Obama more, even if the same thing can be said for McCain. I do that because to me it seems like many of the people who support Obama, really believe in him, really falling for his lines of 'hope' and whatever else.

His supporters seem to be forgetting the issues, they are not demanding anything from him. They just 'hope'. To me that's very dangerous.

Like they will say that Obama is for peace, how he's so different from everyone else. Yet you hear Obama speak about Iran? He sounds like McCain or Bush. Or the way he goes on about his love for Israel, does not even mention what causes the hardships for the people of Palestine.

ok, again, you're not really showing any difference between the two ...

I agree that Israel has committed many disgusting acts of their own ... but, both Obama and McCain (and many other politicians) refuse to stand up, and continue suckle up to AIPAC's teet. I mean, you heard Palin on Charlie Gibson right? We should never question Israel's need to be aggresive with Iran ... never? really?

I've stated over and over ... Obama does NOT have all the answers ... and whomever wins this election has such an enormous hole to dig out of, I find it hard to find how either can be overly successful. But, I do think McCain's policies and path for the future is FAR closer to going along with what has happened in the past 8 years under Bush, which, has been a fucking disaster and turly, a global embarassment ...

I do think Obama has a much better handle over all on the issues we face now and in the future. I agree with his stance on taxation, choice, global diplomacy as well as others ...

But, I'll break it to anyone that asks .... Obama is not a savior.

MrBrian

ledvedderman wrote:

Yeah that whole "talk to those who we disagree with" approach is right in line with Bush and McCain.

^^^^^^^

A good example. Thanks.

You support Obama, now you are bringing up how he want's to talk to the people/countries that he/america/mccain/bush disagree with. Now don't you wonder, why he even disagrees with them (these countries)in the first place?

Also to add to that, indeed he will talk to them. But if they do not listen, 'all options are on the table'

But please, hope all you want.

Strangest Tribe

Why would Obama want to give Nader the fuckin time of day? This is stupid...Nader is stupid... Nader says he won't run for president if Obama addresses Middle East foreign policies, corporate regulations, health care and Isreal....

So... has addressed these issues and even Ralph admitted he and Obama were real close on most of the issues he (Nader) just wanted Obama to clarify a few issues...

WTF????? Ralph's only running because of ego...

Fuck Him. .. Obama doesn't owe him shit.

Nader's not even the best third candidate anymore...

rebornFixer

MrBrian wrote:

^^^^^^^

A good example. Thanks.

You support Obama, now you are bringing up how he want's to talk to the people/countries that he/america/mccain/bush disagree with. Now don't you wonder, why he even disagrees with them (these countries)in the first place?

Also to add to that, indeed he will talk to them. But if they do not listen, 'all options are on the table'

But please, hope all you want.

Are you suggesting that Obama SHOULD agree with countries like Iran on many issues?

MrBrian

reborncareerist wrote:

Are you suggesting that Obama SHOULD agree with countries like Iran on many issues?

No, but what are his reasons for having a problem with them in the first place? Really, why is he going around ready to attack Iran? Obama is just keeping in line with McCain and Bush. Is Iran really this great threat? No, I dont think so. Bush does, Obama does.

That's not change, it's more of the same!!

rebornFixer

MrBrian wrote:

No, but what are his reasons for having a problem with them in the first place? Really, why is he going around ready to attack Iran? Obama is just keeping in line with McCain and Bush. Is Iran really this great threat? No, I dont think so. Bush does, Obama does.

That's not change, it's more of the same!!

Well, yeah ... Assuming that Obama would attack Iran, you're right. And that's kind of the point I was trying to make earlier. I am not slagging Obama. If I was American, he's probably who I'd vote for. But my decision wouldn't be based on the idea that he's chocolate to McCain's vanilla (sorry, couldn't resist!). They are really just different degrees of vanilla.

Strangest Tribe

you can knock Obama all you want about hope and change and I guess as an Obama supporter I can only have faith in him doing like he says...

But why would I ever consider voting for Nader... Now that's a flying monkey leap of faith...

Besides, Nader's of Lebonese Arab decent... So of course we're really gonna get an impartial view of Isreal from him...ha ha get real with the Isreal shit it's not even being discussed...

digster

MrBrian wrote:

^^^^^^^

A good example. Thanks.

You support Obama, now you are bringing up how he want's to talk to the people/countries that he/america/mccain/bush disagree with. Now don't you wonder, why he even disagrees with them (these countries)in the first place?

Also to add to that, indeed he will talk to them. But if they do not listen, 'all options are on the table'

But please, hope all you want.

I think the reason that we all blindly 'hope' is that many of us on this board and in this nation are more moderate than you are. They don't expect a President who would never consider military action as an option. They don't want someone who believes that war is never an option. You may disagree with these people, but many of them can hold that thought in their head at the same time as realizing that Obama is not a carbon-copy of McCain or Bush. That's just tired political rhetoric.

This election is important to me; I am all for third-party candidates and hope to put my vote in the future to good use to bring a more diverse set of opinions into the mainstream political dialogue, but the country's in deep shit right now. Maybe it's been in deeper shit before, but it's in deep shit right now. And I don't feel that it could stand a McCain/Palin presidency. I don't think the country would collapse on their watch, but after eight years of identical policies to the Bush presidency, the damage would be irrevocable. I'll save my political vote for a later time. And your attitude here is also the problem I have with Ralph Nader as a candidate. It's not only that Nader speaks his mind on the issues, and there are people who agree and those who disagree. Anyone who disagrees with him and his platform, whether candidate or voter, is either sucking on the corporate teat or oblivious to the issues that face our country. Both of those are bullshit, especially the latter. I, and many other Obama supporters on this board and in the country, have a firm grasp on the issues and are voting for Obama based on those issues. I don't have to blindly hope, as you put it. That kind of arrogance is not at all appealing.

Collin

Strangest Tribe wrote:

you can knock Obama all you want about hope and change and I guess as an Obama supporter I can only have faith in him doing like he says...

I thought Obama had said he'd debate anyone running?

catch22

MrBrian wrote:

No, but what are his reasons for having a problem with them in the first place? Really, why is he going around ready to attack Iran? Obama is just keeping in line with McCain and Bush. Is Iran really this great threat? No, I dont think so. Bush does, Obama does.

That's not change, it's more of the same!!

because he's got to talk tough to get elected. he needs to show redneck america he's willing to blow people up if it comes to that. doesn't mean he's going to do it. and i don't think he will. he certainly will be far more reluctant than mccain to attack iran.

this is the same bullshit i used to spout for nader in 2000. sorry, mccain and obama aren't the same. they were saying the same about bush and gore in 2000 and it was dead wrong. the fact that they both say they'd fight iran if needed doesn't mean shit. because their defintions of necessity are so vastly different it's absurd to even be discussing this.

musicismylife78

its a felony that he isnt allowed to debate.

flywallyfly

I think Nader dropped out of the race a few months ago because of lack of interest.