Nader: A Vote Worth Casting!

flywallyfly

Urban Hiker wrote:

I take it you haven't checked out his legislative track record.

I think Abook posted a lot of this useful info in the OP.

I'm having some trouble with the links. Could you please explain in a short manner how Nader's legislative track record mixed with Carter ignoring Nader lead to Carter being a one term president. I always thought it had to do with the economy, the Iranian hostage crisis mishandling, and general malaise the American people felt towards his administration.

Abookamongstthemany

Kenny Olav wrote:

you know i love ya abook but trying to get americans to vote for nader is like trying to make wine out of oranges.

I'm not really interested in aiming for what America has been prone to vote for. Kinda left a bad taste in my mouth. You? To me, they seem to have trouble when it comes to knowing what's best for them...a bit misguided if you will. I'm interested in change.

I'm interested in getting the idea out there that we are not forced to vote for people who are undeserving and down right crooked. I'm interested in getting people to look at other options, take the time to look into the issues and see how they affect them. That's how you get them to think more about their vote...show them how important it really is. There is no obligation to vote for crap...I want better. How do I show that? By choosing things that are better and that I won't have to call 'less evil'. Win or lose...I'll know I did what I felt was right and that's all you really can do.

Be it Nader, Kucinich, Gravel, Paul whomever...I'm willing to stand behind what I see as right because I believe in it....not because I think other's will also vote for it. That's how you get ideas to gain traction...you fight for it in the face of a steep climb when the odds are stacked against you. When people see others willing to do that...it gets them to pay attention and look deeper....just like with Paul this year. I don't share some of his ideology so I won't vote for him...but I applaud those brave enough to stand behind him because they view him as right...they did this no matter what they nay sayers spewed at them...and they have made a lasting impression! Bravo! That's what we need in this country. People who lead by example...each and every one of us. I'm not interested in following the trends of what the masses are doing. They'll catch on soon enough....they always have. We will just have to wait until then while steadily building a strong foundation.

Abookamongstthemany

angelica wrote:

Nice point.

Unfortunately, it's my opinion that most fear mongering is done by people who don't know how to deal with their own fear. They truly buy into it.

Very well said!

Rhinocerous Surprise

I'm gonna ignore the rest of your excellent post for the sake of this one joke:

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I'm interested in change.

Then Obama's your man!

Abookamongstthemany

hobbes wrote:

yes. no one can question is contributions to the well being of others. however in recent years the negative impact he has had cannot be measured. not to mention the pretense and arrogance that surround the man now. he's holding on to stuff he did many years ago. he is NOT A VIABLE THIRD PARTY CANDIDATE. give up. i'm fucking sick of his bullshit. his "obama is talking white" ended any respect i have for the man.

What do you base this opinion of pretension on?

and negative impact?

arrogance?

not viable?

Abookamongstthemany

stupidcorporatewhore wrote:

yes. but that makes him like carter in reverse. effective, respectable citizen....

terrible president.

you nader folk must feel strongly about this guy if you are willing to risk Putting America through the McCain nightmare.

it's your right to throw away your vote.

Voting out of fear seems to point to a belief of being powerless in this situation. You aren't.

The only vote thrown away is one where you didn't voice your true beliefs but instead settled for someone who contradicts those beliefs but you have been told he is the only option you have.

There are always other options for us to choose. We just have to be willing to let go off the old ways that have proven to fail us over and over again and instead reach out for something that represents a new way. This old way is not working for our country. At some point you realize this and move on already.

Urban Hiker

flywallyfly wrote:

I'm having some trouble with the links. Could you please explain in a short manner how Nader's legislative track record mixed with Carter ignoring Nader lead to Carter being a one term president. I always thought it had to do with the economy, the Iranian hostage crisis mishandling, and general malaise the American people felt towards his administration.

Nader was able to attack corporations and safety standards with great success until Carter took office and shut the doors on him.

The public supported Nader. I was only 6 when Reagan was sworn into office, so I can not speak to the feelings of the nation of the time without posting links you may have trouble with.

However, I am suggesting that the nation saw Carter as weak-willed under the influence of lobbyists and corporate interests. Then the nation was wooed by a former B movie star. A weak willed nilly willy had no chance.
I like to give my country the benefit of the doubt by saying they would have had more faith if Carter would have continued to stand by and have faith in those who did him.

Abookamongstthemany

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I'm gonna ignore the rest of your excellent post for the sake of this one joke:



Then Obama's your man!

I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but some here won't know you're joking.

Rhinocerous Surprise

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I'm not sure if you realize this or not, but some here won't know you're joking.

Explaining my system of sarcasm, nude depravity, and disclaimers for serious moments seemed to detract from the snappiness of the joke.

i am a target

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

What do you base this opinion of pretension on?

and negative impact?

arrogance?

not viable?

does he not define self importance? no one in his position actually thinks they have ANY chance of EVER getting ANYONE to vote for them.

negative impact? arrogance? not viable?

well let's see. did he get the required percentage during his last "campaign" in order to have a third party represented in the next election (this was in 2000)? i think it was 6% of the national vote he needed.

there's no way of telling if gore was would have been a better president then bush. but nader took votes and support from him.

he's come on in the media throwing racial bullshit around at obama.

not viable? hmm..let's look at the percentage of votes cast by americans in 2004 ( http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html ) ...a really strong showing for a man who is a viable third party candidate.

he's done a lot of good. i can't take that away from him. but his ventures into presidential politics..laughable.

ron paul and nader are a joke. you nor i will ever see any of their ideas in the mainstream during our lifetime. sad? yes. depressing? yes. true. very much so.

Urban Hiker

hobbes wrote:

does he not define self importance? no one in his position actually thinks they have ANY chance of EVER getting ANYONE to vote for them.

negative impact? arrogance? not viable?

well let's see. did he get the required percentage during his last "campaign" in order to have a third party represented in the next election (this was in 2000)? i think it was 6% of the national vote he needed.

there's no way of telling if gore was would have been a better president then bush. but nader took votes and support from him.

he's come on in the media throwing racial bullshit around at obama.

not viable? hmm..let's look at the percentage of votes cast by americans in 2004 ( http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html ) ...a really strong showing for a man who is a viable third party candidate.

he's done a lot of good. i can't take that away from him. but his ventures into presidential politics..laughable.

ron paul and nader are a joke. you nor i will ever see any of their ideas in the mainstream during our lifetime. sad? yes. depressing? yes. true. very much so.

When the White House locks you out, how do you fight them? Answer: By trying to get a ticket in.

http://www.c-span.org/video_rss.aspx?MediaID=37051

Rhinocerous Surprise

hobbes wrote:

he's done a lot of good. i can't take that away from him. but his ventures into presidential politics..laughable.

ron paul and nader are a joke. you nor i will ever see any of their ideas in the mainstream during our lifetime. sad? yes. depressing? yes. true. very much so.

Do you ever stop to think that it's people's resignation to that idea that perpetuates it?

i am a target

national politics are bullshit anyway. career politicians have ruined the system. it'll only be a matter of time before obama is bought.

if you want to change your world then focus on the state level.

i am a target

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

Do you ever stop to think that it's people's resignation to that idea that perpetuates it?

sure. i can agree with you. in fact i would love to get someone like nader into the white house. unfortunately i do not represent the majority of voting americans. ignorance is bliss. money buys votes. the system is fucked.

mca47

I have tremendous respect for Nader.
That said, I will NOT vote for him this time around.

i am a target

Urban Hiker wrote:

When the White House locks you out, how do you fight them? Answer: By trying to get a ticket in.

http://www.c-span.org/video_rss.aspx?MediaID=37051

hey ralph. i hate to break it to you buddy. but america is run by businessmen with their businesses in mind. national health care? not until they take it away from private industry. and you sir. will not be the one who does it.

Urban Hiker

hobbes wrote:

hey ralph. i hate to break it to you buddy. but america is run by businessmen with their businesses in mind. national health care? not until they take it away from private industry. and you sir. will not be the one who does it.

Fucking naysayers bottlenecking progressive action, as usual.

Rhinocerous Surprise

hobbes wrote:

sure. i can agree with you. in fact i would love to get someone like nader into the white house. unfortunately i do not represent the majority of voting americans. ignorance is bliss. money buys votes. the system is fucked.

If you'd love to see someone like Nader in the White House, vote for him! If you don't, you'll just keep excusing yourself - it wasn't the right time, America wasn't ready... The system's broken because the voters allow it to be.

Abookamongstthemany

hobbes wrote:

does he not define self importance? no one in his position actually thinks they have ANY chance of EVER getting ANYONE to vote for them.

Someone of his already achieved legacy could just sit back and not have to do shit to make people admire him...he could write books and give lectures like many others do. He puts himself out there on the line, taking on huge amounts of criticism and insults, all to do what he feels needs to be done because he cares about this country and what going very wrong here. That's selfless, imo. We are all free to have our on perceptions, though. No one really knows for sure. But based on his years of service and dedication to his causes and efforts to try and make this place better where he thinks he can...I definitely do not hesitate to view him as courageous, determined and selfless.

hobbes wrote:

negative impact? arrogance? not viable?

Well let's see. Did he get the required percentage during his last "campaign" in order to have a third party represented in the next election (this was in 2000)? i think it was 6% of the national vote he needed.

The last election, the DNC fought to keep him off the ballot, here in the supposed democracy of the US of A. Surely, you're not okay with that and think people should just accept it and support the Dems anyway?

hobbes wrote:

there's no way of telling if gore was would have been a better president then bush. but nader took votes and support from him.

No, people voted FOR Nader. Gore is not owed anyone's vote..he must earn it. This logic is flawed and explains a lot about the ridiculousness of our elections and imagined 'choice' in the matter of picking representation that reflects what we what.

hobbes wrote:

he's come on in the media throwing racial bullshit around at obama.

I don't think he meant it to be what some took it as. I think he spoke out of frustration and it wasn't something that I agree he should have done. He is usually much more articulate and able to express his points without resorting to that kind of talk. What he said has some truth to it but the way he said it was all wrong. Everyone has their moments like these and it's not something that I think should have been made a big deal out of.

hobbes wrote:

not viable? hmm..let's look at the percentage of votes cast by americans in 2004 ( http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html ) ...a really strong showing for a man who is a viable third party candidate.

Like I mentioned earlier, the DNC fought to keep him off the ballot in 04. He then sued them and won. And crap like that coming from these spoiled and corrupted 2 parties make me wanna support Nader even more.

hobbes wrote:

he's done a lot of good. i can't take that away from him. but his ventures into presidential politics..laughable.

I hear people saying laughable but always failing to add why. I think he has proven himself to be a great leader with the needs of the people in the forefront of his mind. If that's not what makes a good president then maybe we need to start thinking about what the president is to us and how either of these other 2 clowns running have managed to qualify as 'presidential material'. What the fuck have they ever done for us? Their votes for FISA were mighty kind of them , the patriot Act also...war funding. Thanks Guys! I just can't wait to see what they do with their 'presidential ventures'!!

hobbes wrote:

ron paul and nader are a joke. you nor i will ever see any of their ideas in the mainstream during our lifetime. sad? yes. depressing? yes. true. very much so.

I'm not a pessimist and I DO NOT in the slightest see either of these men as a joke. People going against the odds to stand behind their ideals are not jokes. Politicians who pander for money and votes while lying and going against our interests yet you still give them your respect and support no matter what they do....well, there's where the joke can be found.

We can have anything happen in this country when we want it to..if we realized our power in this democracy of, by and for the people but we have to get behind it with our hearts, minds and effort first and quit thinking that crooked politicians will do it for us. It takes much more than supporting a broken system. It takes breaking the cycle and saying enough is enough.

Abookamongstthemany

hobbes wrote:

hey ralph. i hate to break it to you buddy. but america is run by businessmen with their businesses in mind. national health care? not until they take it away from private industry. and you sir. will not be the one who does it.

Well you and your apathy can see back and continue to whine and complain. But there are others of us who choose to try to do something about it. Win or lose, at less we are trying and not afraid of failing.