Nader:B prepared to be very disappointed..

MrBrian

with Obama

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cE7PFbK5L88&feature=related

Rhinocerous Surprise

Notice how this well-spoken, on-the-money speech fails to make major news channels. Quelle surprise.

flywallyfly

The true reason for Nader's hate of Obama happens early in the video ---> Obama's refusal to meet with him, as if everyone should meet with Ralph Nader the King. He said the exact thing about Gore not meeting with him so he decided to attack him as well. Egomaniac.

prytoj

Pointing out Obama's decision making based on political expedience is well taken, but everytime Nader says something that makes sense, he soon thereafter says something that is so intellectually dishonest it's frightening. He couldn't stop himself in this piece either.

I posted a Cspan interview he had with Tabitha Soren, before the election, that echoed the sentiments about Obama's campaign finance. But the left are not hearing it.

I like Nader as a watchdog, and when he says something's not right I take a listen, but some of his ideology is looney-toons.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

whats newsworthy? he's been harping on the democrats for years. and all that speech really said was that oBAMA didnt have enough of a forceful personality to get anything done. he may be right, but Nader's forceful personality and combative nature hasnt had any impact in decades either.

i'll wait to see what happens. but as a general rule, i think pragmatism trumps fundamentalism in the long run.

plus, his name is Ralph. i mean come on, who's gonna listen to a guy named Ralph?

MrBrian

flywallyfly wrote:

Obama's refusal to meet with him, as if everyone should meet with Ralph Nader the King..

Nader was running for President, has a long and solid history of improving America for Americans. His views and ideas are sound.

For Obama to claim to listen to all sides, then constantly refuse to meet Nader, yes that is a problem and indeed does show the type of charater he
(Obama) really is.

nothinghead

Not totally on topic, but I've had at least a half dozen friends who live in/vote in overwhelmingly blue states tell me something to the effect, "Well, Obama is clearly going to win here, so he doesn't really need my vote. I'm going to vote for Nader instead."

Why don't people on the hard left seem able to differentiate between the two? Their ideas aren't particularly similar, their personalities aren't...yet some people seem to see them as two sides of the same coin.

I think Nader's criticisms are at times valid...right before they teeter into the absurd. But it's an interesting voice none the less and one that probably should be heard by so-called liberals. As much as I don't really like him that much as a figure, I would have preferred some third party candidates in the debates, including Nader. Of course, anyone who wants to know what Ralph Nader thinks--as limited as that audience is--knows exactly where to find him.

decides2dream

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

Notice how this well-spoken, on-the-money speech fails to make major news channels. Quelle surprise.

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.


i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

MrSmith wrote:

whats newsworthy? he's been harping on the democrats for years. and all that speech really said was that oBAMA didnt have enough of a forceful personality to get anything done. he may be right, but Nader's forceful personality and combative nature hasnt had any impact in decades either.

i'll wait to see what happens. but as a general rule, i think pragmatism trumps fundamentalism in the long run.

plus, his name is Ralph. i mean come on, who's gonna listen to a guy named Ralph?

MrBrian

decides2dream wrote:

i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

I encourage you to check it out.

Nader has offered words of encouragment to Obama, but Obama has already made bad choices. He has already said some things that show him going down a bad path. Things I have talked about in previous threads.

and he is not even President yet. It must make you wonder, and waiting may be too late, we need to go after him now.

Infact we shouldve been demanding things from Obama even before he was president-elect. But we gave him a free pass to the white house because we were too scared of having McCain/Palin.

Rhinocerous Surprise

decides2dream wrote:

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.


i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

decides2dream

MrBrian wrote:

I encourage you to check it out.

Nader has offered words of encouragment to Obama, but Obama has already made bad choices. He has already said some things that show him going down a bad path. Things I have talked about in previous threads.

and he is not even President yet. It must make you wonder, and waiting may be too late, we need to go after him now.

Infact we shouldve been demanding things from Obama even before he was president-elect. But we gave him a free pass to the white house because we were too scared of having McCain/Palin.

you're assuming my vote was one of fear, and i can assure you mine was not. i voted for obama b/c of the choices offered, for me, he was the best choice.

i rarely watch youtube clips, i far prefer reading, and aside for the occasional quick look-sees from home, 98% of the time..i read/post from work, and don't view youtube from work.

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

i won't comment for others, all i can say is i didn't watch that clip either, merely commented on what was offered as content. so in either situation, i clicked on neither clip. and quite honestly, the election is over...so for me, anything nader has to say on it, on obama, is not national news, period.






btw - go after him now? he JUST got elected...hasn't even taken office! you want to 'go after him' go for it.

Anon

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

My point was, when Nader says something about Obama that makes Nader look bad, people were all over it. Now that he's saying something that makes Obama look bad, people don't even click on the clip, never mind it making national news.

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. And maybe that's his real failing, in not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president or saying controversial things.

He could always do an A-Rod. The news is all over that. Kind of silly eh? Or maybe not. I'd bang madonna too j/k..

Collin

decides2dream wrote:

why should it?
a former candidate offers his personal opinions on the president-elect...so what? if he didn't garner coverage BEFORE the election, why in the world would anyone imagine he'd get any time now? not saying it's right or wrong...just seems obvious to me.

i didn't watch the clip, but quite honestly...nader offer a 'prepare to be disappointed in obama' clip seems totally unsurprising to me. if the man actually offered hope/encouragement, a let's wait-and-see approach, THEN i would be pleasantly surprised.

Speech was August 11, 2008.

Collin

Pj_Gurl wrote:

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

d2d wrote:

not saying it's right or wrong...

You were not a presidential candidate, Pj_Gurl.

They blocked Ralph Nader from the debates, but they do put his "uncle tom" comment on national tv. Of course people will remember that comment, it's because that comment is fed to the people by the media. The rest he has to say is silenced.

And by the way, it's absolutely about whether it's fair or not... And it is absolutely wrong.

It's this mentality that will keep America where it is. You are the ones who are all about change; Well, is it fair to the people and to the third party candidates themselves that they are blocked form the debates? Yes or no? This is an issue, but it doesn't affect Obama or his supporters so I guess this can stay the way it is?

No need to change too much.

Anon

Collin wrote:

You were not a presidential candidate, Pj_Gurl.

They blocked Ralph Nader from the debates, but they do put his "uncle tom" comment on national tv. Of course people will remember that comment, it's because that comment is fed to the people by the media. The rest he has to say is silenced.

And by the way, it's absolutely about whether it's fair or not... And it is absolutely wrong.

It's this mentality that will keep America where it is. You are the ones who are all about change; Well, is it fair to the people and to the third party candidates themselves that they are blocked form the debates? Yes or no? This is an issue, but it doesn't affect Obama or his supporters so I guess this can stay the way it is?

No need to change too much.

Whoa whoa whoa....Get off your soap box with me. Right from the outset i have been outspoken on my view that Third Party candidates should be involved in the debates and have fair access to the media.

I'd love to see Nader on the spot. He says all the right things, and he talks about what we should do, but i honestly don't think he has any plan as to how he would follow through with what he is saying. Anyone can come out and say 'we should do this', but he never says how he would. The worst thing about Ralph Nader is that he has become irrelevant. He has done nothing to create a viable political alternative to the GOP and Dems, nor to build support for his positions among the electorate. Anyone could have predicted his position on the war, and nobody cared, because he has no effective base of support. His positions on the issues, no matter how good they sound, are useless because he has done nothing to achieve the power to implement them.

I've given the benefit of the doubt to Nader, and believed his intention of entering the election was primarily an attempt to structurally change the electoral process from a two-party system to a multi-candidate type of system, but the problem with Nader, and what makes it impossible to take his candidacy seriously, is that he himself puts forth the image that he just wants attention for being a spoiler rather than a serious candidate. again running for president or makaing . For all the accolades he get's for his progressive views, what good are they if he doesn't even make them known? He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. So i'll say it again, maybe his real failing is not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president OR coming out the day after the election making controversial comments.

Rhinocerous Surprise

Pj_Gurl wrote:

I could say something about Obama and it wouldn't make national news. Why? Because nobody cares about me or what i say. Now, whether i think it's 'fair' or not, it's the same deal with Nader, he's simply become a vanity campaign. The saddest thing is that, instead of being remembered for his great consumer advocacy, some people will remember him as the grumpy old man who made the uncle tom comment the day after Obama was elected president. He knew what he was saying, he was offered a chance to retract, and he declined.

He does nothing for the progressive cause as far as I can see, and instead works against it with these so-called presidential bids. And maybe that's his real failing, in not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president or saying controversial things.

He could always do an A-Rod. The news is all over that. Kind of silly eh? Or maybe not. I'd bang madonna too j/k..

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

flywallyfly

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

Dont forget his other remark about Obama "talking white".

He IS irrelevant and the only reason he is getting any mention on here is there are two or three Nader supporters on this board so it is newsworthy on here, not so out in the real world.

MrBrian

flywallyfly wrote:

Dont forget his other remark about Obama "talking white".

He IS irrelevant and the only reason he is getting any mention on here is there are two or three Nader supporters on this board so it is newsworthy on here, not so out in the real world.

Ok, you dont like Nader. But can you really argue that his ideas and views are irrelevant?....

btw the point Nader made about "talking white" was valid. I mean give his explanation a chance. Again, maybe it was not the best choice of words. But that should not take away from the validity of it, of the point.

VictoryGin

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

All I'm saying is, if people are gonna drag him over the coals for one off-colour (pun?) comment, they should at least give him the courtesy of listening to him when he's making valid points without questionable wordplay. He's either irrelevant - in which case, no one should care if he says "Uncle Tom" - or he's worth listening to, whether controversial or not.

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

Rhinocerous Surprise

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

As much as I appreciate the... vehemence... of your point, you completely missed mine. Of course people aren't going to care about Nader if all the news corps will do is introduce him as a spoiler and then accuse him of being a racist. If Nader isn't newsworthy, then don't have him on the news, racist comment or not. If he is newsworthy, then at least have the decency to show his ideas and valid criticisms.

MrBrian

VictoryGin wrote:

except for a few people on the pearl jam message board, no one does care! most people in the real world actually care about getting this country back together. jesus christ. you see, people have to do real work now, not hide behind the safety of their computer screens, jerking it to a washed up nader, who has made a complete idiot of himself and his legacy. for the last time, nader has been around long enough, and ran for president many times; if people actually gave a shit about his "valid points without questionable wordplay," they would have listened. and they would have acted. obviously we've seen what can come from grassroots organization---we elected barack obama to the presidency.

That was a really bad post, even yourself a few years ago would be disappointed with it....

Gin, You are nothing but a hypocrite.