Apparently Ed supports Obama

13»

Comments

  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114
    I admire your ideals as I said to another Nader voter - we just differ in opinion as to what is the best way to achieve change. I would like to at least get closer rather than further from where this country needs to be, while you feel it is more important to make a stance.[/quote]



    This is exactly right. And I would like to add that it is also about self awareness. You have to look around and understand where the country is right now. What can we accomplish NOW that will give us more chance for serious change in the future. Obama is the first crack in the ice. You can feel that America is hungry for real change. It's all about baby steps. This wave will grow, but Obama is our best hope to get it rolling.
  • brandon10brandon10 Posts: 1,114

    It is ridiculous. What would be the point of voting for the most probable winner? It's voting to support the most viable candidate that most closely represents your ideals that is wise IMO.

    I admire your ideals as I said to another Nader voter - we just differ in opinion as to what is the best way to achieve change. I would like to at least get closer rather than further from where this country needs to be, while you feel it is more important to make a stance.


    Sorry didn't include all of the quote in the previous post.
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487

    Does anyone feel this vindicates their choice more, just out of curiosity?


    If it does it only means that they can't make a decision for themselves. People who vote for someone because a celebrity tells them to should not be allowed to vote.
  • unsung wrote:
    If it does it only means that they can't make a decision for themselves. People who vote for someone because a celebrity tells them to should not be allowed to vote.

    Nobody is saying that...nice try though. Simply pointing out with (my apparently overlooked) sarcasm, that even the most steadfast of Nader supporters (PJ) have elected to campaign for Obama despite their support of Nader, does not mean anybody (on here) is voting for Obama because PJ supports him. Using them as a reference point to shed some light on this issue does not mean anybody is following them to the Obama camp.

    This is the last time I am saying this: PJ supports Nader. Make sarcastic remarks about them calling me on the phone and telling me if you want, but the fact of the matter is that you know they haven't jumped ship because they suddenly think a Democratic candidate is better. This concept was given support when the sarcasm in my previous post failed to be recognized. I'm paraphrasing here but I believe "that doesn't sound like the PJ I know" was the jist of it and is exactly the point that I am trying to make.

    With that being said, it would seem to me that decisions are being made by people all across the nation to support the best possible candidate that has any hope of actually being elected to run our country.

    I use PJ as an example because they are what has brought us all to this particular forum. So this common ground allows for a great example of choices being made by individuals that we are all familiar with...familiar with enough to know that we do in fact share many of their ideals. They have elected to compromise their ideals rather than fight the system in a futile effort this go around. As it happens, I share that perspective and am trying to communicate why I find this to be a logical choice.

    Keep stretching and evading while I attempt to show common ground...this is going nowhere fast, and not because of lack of effort on my part.
    Left the Porch
  • whitepantswhitepants Posts: 727
    Two weeks ago I just got fed up with the pro-Obama emails from moveon.org, so I unsubscribed. I was asked why I wanted to unsub and I just told them that I don't like being spoon fed whom I should support. I then said that I supported the OTHER democratic candidate HRC.

    Ed is a grown man and he can support whomever he wants - this time around, we differ and my opinion of Ed has not changed, he's still cool in my book, we just disagree on whom should be president.
    ~*~Me and Hippiemom dranketh the red wine in Cleveland 2003~*~

    First PJ Show: March 20, 1994 | Ann Arbor | Crisler Arena
  • whitepants wrote:
    Two weeks ago I just got fed up with the pro-Obama emails from moveon.org, so I unsubscribed. I was asked why I wanted to unsub and I just told them that I don't like being spoon fed whom I should support. I then said that I supported the OTHER democratic candidate HRC.

    Ed is a grown man and he can support whomever he wants - this time around, we differ and my opinion of Ed has not changed, he's still cool in my book, we just disagree on whom should be president.

    Nothing wrong with that. Some of my closest friends are UM fans, I choose not to abandon them either ;)

    Go Bucks!
    Left the Porch
  • Nobody is saying that...nice try though. Simply pointing out with (my apparently overlooked) sarcasm, that even the most steadfast of Nader supporters (PJ) have elected to campaign for Obama despite their support of Nader, does not mean anybody (on here) is voting for Obama because PJ supports him. Using them as a reference point to shed some light on this issue does not mean anybody is following them to the Obama camp.

    This is the last time I am saying this: PJ supports Nader. Make sarcastic remarks about them calling me on the phone and telling me if you want, but the fact of the matter is that you know they haven't jumped ship because they suddenly think a Democratic candidate is better. This concept was given support when the sarcasm in my previous post failed to be recognized. I'm paraphrasing here but I believe "that doesn't sound like the PJ I know" was the jist of it and is exactly the point that I am trying to make.

    With that being said, it would seem to me that decisions are being made by people all across the nation to support the best possible candidate that has any hope of actually being elected to run our country.

    I use PJ as an example because they are what has brought us all to this particular forum. So this common ground allows for a great example of choices being made by individuals that we are all familiar with...familiar with enough to know that we do in fact share many of their ideals. They have elected to compromise their ideals rather than fight the system in a futile effort this go around. As it happens, I share that perspective and am trying to communicate why I find this to be a logical choice.

    Keep stretching and evading while I attempt to show common ground...this is going nowhere fast, and not because of lack of effort on my part.


    What was evaded? I seriously don't know who supports Nader anymore after the way I've seen him treated by Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Jimmy Carter and others who used to support him. I'm not talking about simply not voting for him. I'm talking about dismissing his plight and begging him not to run and other things of that nature.

    My main problem with this is the reasoning used when saying this:

    "support the best possible candidate that has any hope of actually being elected"

    Who gets to decide that for us? the Democratic party? which I have proved in the links I posted earlier in this thread are corrupt and try to limit our choices as best they can. Doesn't it bother you... the lengths they go to to keep good candidates out of the debates and off the ballot? Is this how we want our democracy carried out? How can you support a party that would do things like this?

    Or does the media get to decide who is viable enough for us? I know I don't trust them to make the best decisions for the people because they are all owned by corporations with certain interests they have to tend to. 'Corporations rule the day' and boy do we all line up to prove that every election!!

    So all that I can do is ignore what other people are saying about who is a viable choice and listen to my own voice then make the best decision. If everyone did this, the media and the DNC couldn't tell us what is and isn't possible because for fucking once, the people would have the power and make that call for themselves.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • cornnifercornnifer Posts: 2,130
    What was evaded? I seriously don't know who supports Nader anymore after the way I've seen him treated by Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Jimmy Carter and others who used to support him. I'm not talking about simply not voting for him. I'm talking about dismissing his plight and begging him not to run and other things of that nature.

    My main problem with this is the reasoning used when saying this:

    "support the best possible candidate that has any hope of actually being elected"

    Who gets to decide that for us? the Democratic party? which I have proved in the links I posted earlier in this thread are corrupt and try to limit our choices as best they can. Doesn't it bother you... the lengths they go to to keep good candidates out of the debates and off the ballot? Is this how we want our democracy carried out? How can you support a party that would do things like this?

    Or does the media get to decide who is viable enough for us? I know I don't trust them to make the best decisions for the people because they are all owned by corporations with certain interests they have to tend to. 'Corporations rule the day' and boy do we all line up to prove that every election!!

    So all that I can do is ignore what other people are saying about who is a viable choice and listen to my own voice then make the best decision. If everyone did this the media and the DNC couldn't tell us what is and isn't possible because for fucking once, the people would have the power and make that call for themselves.

    Believe it or not, i agree. Somewhat. i won't be voting for Nader because i don't believe he is the best candidate. Period. He can run if he wants to and should be allowed to. i question his motives, but, it isn't my call. Begging the guy not to run makes one look ridiculous.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • cornnifer wrote:
    Believe it or not, i agree. Somewhat. i won't be voting for Nader because i don't believe he is the best candidate. Period. He can run if he wants to and should be allowed to. i question his motives, but, it isn't my call. Begging the guy not to run makes one look ridiculous.

    :eek: hehe ;)

    Did you see the clips and the article I posted on page before this one? The DNC has fought to keep Nader, Kucinich and others from the debates. And then to keep his name off the ballot! That's not democracy! How can people stand for this?

    I understand the people who say Obama is who they like the best. My concern here is directed at the people who support Nader and like his stances more but won't vote for him because they've been told how 'unelectable' he is from various sources.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • What was evaded? I seriously don't know who supports Nader anymore after the way I've seen him treated by Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Jimmy Carter and others who used to support him. I'm not talking about simply not voting for him. I'm talking about dismissing his plight and begging him not to run and other things of that nature.

    My main problem with this is the reasoning used when saying this:

    "support the best possible candidate that has any hope of actually being elected"

    Who gets to decide that for us? the Democratic party? which I have proved in the links I posted earlier in this thread are corrupt and try to limit our choices as best they can. Doesn't it bother you... the lengths they go to to keep good candidates out of the debates and off the ballot? Is this how we want our democracy carried out? How can you support a party that would do things like this?

    Or does the media get to decide who is viable enough for us? I know I don't trust them to make the best decisions for the people because they are all owned by corporations with certain interests they have to tend to. 'Corporations rule the day' and boy do we all line up to prove that every election!!

    So all that I can do is ignore what other people are saying about who is a viable choice and listen to my own voice then make the best decision. If everyone did this, the media and the DNC couldn't tell us what is and isn't possible because for fucking once, the people would have the power and make that call for themselves.

    Good post. I agree with you 100%. The only difference is that I've made a conscious decision to deal with the hand that has been dealt. Someone else mentioned that we still have 8 months for Nader to gain momentum, and while I like the optimism, I do think it's much too late. Miracles do happen my friend, and there is nothing I would like more than to see this one come to fruition - but in the past Nader has been much stronger than he is in this election and still only had a very insignificant percentage of the popular vote. I'm a realist - I'm not trying to insult you and insinuating that you're a dreamer or a few fries short of a happy meal or anything like that, I'm just saying that I can't take another four years of Republican reign for many, many reasons and call it fear appeals if you will, but I want my vote to count. I know, your vote will count toward showing that we're not gonna cave and accept corruption etc. and if everyone did it etc. we could make it happen. IMHO it is just not going to happen this time around...and it's not even close.

    Peace,

    MFG
    Left the Porch
  • :eek: hehe ;)

    Did you see the clips and the article I posted on page before this one? The DNC has fought to keep Nader, Kucinich and others from the debates. And then to keep his name off the ballot! That's not democracy! How can people stand for this?

    I understand the people who say Obama is who they like the best. My concern here is directed at the people who support Nader and like his stances more but won't vote for him because they've been told how 'unelectable' he is from various sources.

    I understand your concern. I am one of those people. I can't apologize for being realistic rather than true to my beliefs though...as much as it pains me, I am playing the game.
    Left the Porch
  • Good post. I agree with you 100%. The only difference is that I've made a conscious decision to deal with the hand that has been dealt. Someone else mentioned that we still have 8 months for Nader to gain momentum, and while I like the optimism, I do think it's much too late. Miracles do happen my friend, and there is nothing I would like more than to see this one come to fruition - but in the past Nader has been much stronger than he is in this election and still only had a very insignificant percentage of the popular vote. I'm a realist - I'm not trying to insult you and insinuating that you're a dreamer or a few fries short of a happy meal or anything like that, I'm just saying that I can't take another four years of Republican reign for many, many reasons and call it fear appeals if you will, but I want my vote to count. I know, your vote will count toward showing that we're not gonna cave and accept corruption etc. and if everyone did it etc. we could make it happen. IMHO it is just not going to happen this time around...and it's not even close. Peace,

    MFG


    If the majority keeps this kind of thinking it will never happen...not this time or any other...because it will always be up to us.

    "There is no chance, no destiny, no fate, that can circumvent or hinder or control the firm resolve of a determined soul.” ~ Ella Wheeler Wilcox


    “You have to do it yourself, no one else will do it for you. You must work out your own salvation.” ~ Charles E. Popplestone
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Nobody is saying that...nice try though. Simply pointing out with (my apparently overlooked) sarcasm, that even the most steadfast of Nader supporters (PJ) have elected to campaign for Obama despite their support of Nader, does not mean anybody (on here) is voting for Obama because PJ supports him. Using them as a reference point to shed some light on this issue does not mean anybody is following them to the Obama camp.

    ***whole bunch of rambling***

    Keep stretching and evading while I attempt to show common ground...this is going nowhere fast, and not because of lack of effort on my part.


    I must have missed the part where we were having any type of conversation. I answered the question I quoted, and I had not even read your post. You must be confused.
  • If the majority keeps this kind of thinking it will never happen...not this time or any other...because it will always be up to us.

    "There is no chance, no destiny, no fate, that can circumvent or hinder or control the firm resolve of a determined soul.” ~ Ella Wheeler Wilcox


    “You have to do it yourself, no one else will do it for you. You must work out your own salvation.” ~ Charles E. Popplestone

    or...'Life is an occasion. Rise to it.'

    or...'You have to believe it to see it'


    :)
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    "Loyalty to the master is the ethic of the slave. Loyalty to principle is the ethic of the free citizen."
    that is a damn good quote. cite that shit
  • unsung wrote:
    I must have missed the part where we were having any type of conversation. I answered the question I quoted, and I had not even read your post. You must be confused.

    No, you didn't miss the part where we were having a conversation, that was my fault for combining a response to you with a response to others as well. However, you are in fact the one that is confused. It would be helpfull to read an entire thread, especially one as short as this, before jumping in with your opinions. Maybe you're new, I don't know, but it's not only common courtesy but common sense. If you would have read the thread maybe you wouldn't have shown ingnorance to the idea that someone was casting their vote based on a celebrity following - sometimes doing your homework keeps you from stepping in it...hope this helps.
    Left the Porch
Sign In or Register to comment.