Nader is in

13»

Comments

  • thunderDANthunderDAN Posts: 2,094
    now he can fuck up this election like he did in 2000
  • ThecureThecure Posts: 814
    yep. and kerry lost in '04 because he was a pussy and didn't fight those bullshit swiftboat liers.

    first off, never said anything abotu Kerry but let's face it in that election no-one was good. Bush or Kerry. Gore had everything going for him but did not use it.
    People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought which they avoid."
    - Soren Aabye Kierkegaard (1813-1855)

    If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me."
    - Alice Roosevelt Longworth (1884-1980)
  • i never forgave nader for what happened in 2000.
    Now don't take this lightly because it's not something I've ever recommended to anyone before and it's not necessarily something I would do myself but for you it might be the only thing that will help: Dude, go find Jesus. He'll help you forgive anyone, even if they've only done good, like Nader.
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    Now don't take this lightly because it's not something I've ever recommended to anyone before and it's not necessarily something I would do myself but for you it might be the only thing that will help: Dude, go find Jesus. He'll help you forgive anyone, even if they've only done good, like Nader.

    Maybe Nader will back Huckabee then....
  • thunderDAN wrote:
    now he can fuck up this election like he did in 2000

    I think Al Gore losing his home state fucked up the election more than Ralph Nader
  • I think the Dems being too worried about putting Republican Lite candidates, that many of us refuse to get behind, hurt elections more than Nader.
    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
  • Pacomc79 wrote:
    I guess it never hurts to try. I just don't see the point at this juncture.

    Maybe it's a money thing but honestly, who is advising him it's a good idea to run?

    It's just a waste of money until we do something to sway the publics attention from the two party system.

    Right now we're basically politically like Radio in the 1950's... want a hit, how about some payola.....

    You don't think having another candidate would be the best way to sway the publics attention from the two party system?

    There are other choices out there, people just need to reach their breaking point and decide to explore the other options.
    "Don't lose your inner heat...ever" - EV 5/13/06
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    There are other choices out there, people just need to reach their breaking point and decide to explore the other options.


    That's exactlly where we're heading I think. But the breaking point will see millions of people in the streets, not at the ballet box.
  • thunderDANthunderDAN Posts: 2,094
    I think Al Gore losing his home state fucked up the election more than Ralph Nader

    So you think that is Nader didn't run, most of those votes would have gone to Bush? intresting
  • thunderDAN wrote:
    So you think that is Nader didn't run, most of those votes would have gone to Bush? intresting


    So you think that if Gore was a better candidate or if there was a better candidate in his place, those votes would have still went to Nader?
    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
  • thunderDAN wrote:
    So you think that is Nader didn't run, most of those votes would have gone to Bush? intresting

    If you give Gore each and every Nader vote, Gore still loses by almost 60,000 votes. Nice try.
  • If you give Gore each and every Nader vote, Gore still loses by almost 60,000 votes. Nice try.

    actually, Gore just needed Nadar's votes in Florida to win Florida, and thus the Presidency with those delegates.

    Nadar got 97k votes in Florida in 2000, Bush won Florida by 537 votes. I think it is safe to say that if Nadar wasn't on the ballot, that Gore would have come out ahead.
    "Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)

    Stop by:
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    actually, Gore just needed Nadar's votes in Florida to win Florida, and thus the Presidency with those delegates.

    Nadar got 97k votes in Florida in 2000, Bush won Florida by 537 votes. I think it is safe to say that if Nadar wasn't on the ballot, that Gore would have come out ahead.
    I think there were over 90,000 votes that weren't counted in Florida, and thousands more were not allowed to vote.

    Seems the the problem wasn't Nader, it was the voting process itself. We could learn somethign from Venezuela's democratic process.
  • Commy wrote:
    I think there were over 90,000 votes that weren't counted in Florida, and thousands more were not allowed to vote.

    Seems the the problem wasn't Nader, it was the voting process itself. We could learn somethign from Venezuela's democratic process.

    I agree, but still blame Nadar, jk. I blame the American voter, and elibigle non-voter.

    As for Nadar in 2008, I think he is a non-factor. He has become irrelevant. Kucinich and Paul are relevant. Hope neither runs as an Independant, but if they did, it's the voter's responsibility, period.
    "Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)

    Stop by:
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
  • CommyCommy Posts: 4,984
    I agree, but still blame Nadar, jk. I blame the American voter, and elibigle non-voter.

    As for Nadar in 2008, I think he is a non-factor. He has become irrelevant. Kucinich and Paul are relevant. Hope neither runs as an Independant, but if they did, it's the voter's responsibility, period.
    I take that responsibliity seriously. He won't be getting anywhere near the 5% but eh, I see no major differneces between the dems and republicans anyway. I can't support the 2 corporate party system.

    Its either we change it in the polls or we change it in the streets. Either way its gonna change. Gonna try a vote first.
  • actually, Gore just needed Nadar's votes in Florida to win Florida, and thus the Presidency with those delegates.

    Nadar got 97k votes in Florida in 2000, Bush won Florida by 537 votes. I think it is safe to say that if Nadar wasn't on the ballot, that Gore would have come out ahead.

    There was so much corruption in Florida that year. If Nader weren't on the ballot, and Gore got some of those votes, Jeb Bush and Katherine harris would have found another way to steal the election for Jeb's brother. That is the definition of conflict of interest. That said I think most of nader's 97000 would have just stayed home if he wasn't on the ballot.

    I agree with you about nader in 2008 though. Especially if it's Obama vs. McCain. If it's Hillary, I think Nader will get some of her votes. People just don't like her, and may vote Nader as a protest vote.
  • OgnitOgnit Posts: 64
    No one blaims Harry Browne for throwing the 2000 election and he got some 16,000 votes in florida. Pat Buchanan got over 17,000 (although I guess it can be argued that he took votes away from bush and made the race closer). Every other 3rd party candidate had enough votes in florida to effect the outcome of the election. It's just sad that nader takes the blame. What did you want him to do, take himself off the ballot in florida? He was running for president to try and get 5% to open the green party up to funding for the next election. Now granted he didn't get close to the 5% and yet still decided to run again in 04. As for nader in 08, I'm not sure why he's trying again. He's probably still mad about the dems doing everything they could to get him off the ballot in as many states as possible. Atleast this time before he decided to run he started forming an army of lawyers to try and fight this effort when it happens again. Either way though, even if he makes it on the ballot in every state I still don't see him getting as many votes as he did in 2000. Although his chances do seem better should hillary get the nomination.
Sign In or Register to comment.