Ralph Nader

1…457910…14

Comments

  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    sure. but the fact remains. nader is taking away votes of dems. and really, for what? he has no chance of winning. its a waste if you ask me, but do as you will.

    How is voting for the best choice a waste? How is your voice ever heard if you're voting for what you don't want? That makes no sense. The only way I don't waste my vote is to vote for who best represents my own views. If I vote for Obama, I've wasted my voice/vote on someone else's idea of what represents them and silenced my own ideals.

    So we are supposed to vote for the likely winner simply because they will probably win?? How is that democracy? When do I get to voice my opinion? The others don't deserve my vote.
    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
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    How is voting for the best choice a waste?
    because he can't win.
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    How is your voice ever heard if you're voting for what you don't want? That makes no sense. The only way I don't waste my vote is to vote for who best represents my own views. If I vote for Obama, I've wasted my voice/vote on someone else's idea of what represents them and silenced my own ideals.
    its a free country, vote for whomever you'd like. :)
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    So we are supposed to vote for the likely winner simply because they will probably win?? How is that democracy? When do I get to voice my opinion? The others don't deserve my vote.

    judging by the hatred the left have developed for bush of the last 8 years, yes. people are willing to vote for whoever isnt bush-like. I'm simply stating that voting for someone who can't win, indirectly helps a candidate that you HATE win.
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    because he can't win.

    its a free country, vote for whomever you'd like. :)



    judging by the hatred the left have developed for bush of the last 8 years, yes. people are willing to vote for whoever isnt bush-like. I'm simply stating that voting for someone who can't win, indirectly helps a candidate that you HATE win.


    I don't hate McCain. The mainstreamers are more alike than different.
    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
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    “Success is not measured by what you accomplish, but by the opposition you have encountered, and the courage with which you have maintained the struggle against overwhelming odds.” ~ Orison Swett Marden

    "Leaders are visionaries with a poorly developed sense of fear and no concept of the odds against them.”
    ~ Robert Jarvik quotes
    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
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    'Nader Should Run, Too. The Clintonistas share the Democratic disdain for Nader. They shouldn't. What is wrong with Ralph Nader running for president, yet again? He could well cost the Democrats some votes as he did in 2000 although that seems increasingly unlikely. But so what? It's not his job to elect Democrats and if they can't defuse his insurgency by appropriating a few of his issues, then they're idiots. Republicans didn't come down on Pat Buchanan for his independent run in 2000 in nearly the same way. Nader is villified as a spoiler by Democrats who believe that any real leftie should sacrifice their principles for politics and get out of the way. Should Teddy Roosevelt be seen as a spoiler for handing the 1912 presidential race to Wilson? It's not the job of the third party insurgent to mollycoddle the dominant party. If it were, well they wouldn't be a third party.'

    http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/capital/2008/03/27/hillary-should-stay-in-so-should-nader

    Now that Ralph Nader has announced his candidacy, we again see the blatant hypocrisy in many Democrats. They charge him of being egotistical while implying that their candidate is entitled to all liberal votes. They treat him and his supporters like second-class political citizens.

    Nader wants "more voices and more choices." He gives a say in the system to people disenfranchised with our corrupt plutocracy. Even if he were egotistical, his ego is infinitely less glaring than that of Democrats who ironically declare him "arrogant," while shunning him and his supporters for participating in our system.

    The only people spoiling the system are those who wish to silence candidates in what is supposed to be a democracy.

    http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080328/OPINION/803280318/1005/OPINION
    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
  • katew
    katew Posts: 15
    my2hands wrote:
    what are his exact ideas and plans if elected...


    I am hoping his supporters will be able to overwhelm me with his detailed agenda...
    have youm seen them live at the garden NY eddie with ben harper singing with my two hands .. its amazing , i love it :)
  • Commy
    Commy Posts: 4,984
    whether or not Nader can win is irrelevant. No one expects him too, we just need 5%. If we get 5% of the national vote we recieve matching federal funding for the next election, possibly turning that 5% into 10 and so on.

    You have to start somewhere. What better time than now?
  • sweet adeline
    sweet adeline Posts: 2,191
    Commy wrote:
    whether or not Nader can win is irrelevant. No one expects him too, we just need 5%. If we get 5% of the national vote we recieve matching federal funding for the next election, possibly turning that 5% into 10 and so on.

    You have to start somewhere. What better time than now?

    my hard on for obama has subsided a bit, doesn't mean i don't want him to win the election anymore but i don't have as big of a problem with nader running anymore.
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    katew wrote:
    have youm seen them live at the garden NY eddie with ben harper singing with my two hands .. its amazing , i love it :)


    i was at the show the next night... but i do own the dvd ;)


    i bet Ralph Nader doesnt own Live at the Garden :cool:
  • Eliot Rosewater
    Eliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    I got ripped off at chicagophotoshop.com....
    funniest.
    post.
    ever.
  • stratomaster
    stratomaster Posts: 23
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    he is a dumbass because he is taking away votes from the democrats.
    Regarding your comment that Nader cost gore the election. I disagree. My reasons already stated here http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?p=5263262#post5263262.

    As long as citizens see politics as some kind of tactical game to elect a less repulsive candidate, rather than to achieve change, then you will get stuck with the same cake with different coloured icing. Nader is needed for the sake of democracy. I am for Obama, but like the fact that Nader is running, offering an alternative. He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them. He will keep the Dems honest and make sure they follow through on their promises.

    If you are not sure of who is worthy of your vote, then don't just vote for the lesser of the two evils. If you keep doing that, we will always have evil, and we will always have less.
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    'Are you gonna bark all day, little doggy, or are you gonna bite?'

    *comedic Gold*

    *applause*

    :p:D
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    stratomaster wrote:
    Regarding your comment that Nader cost gore the election. I disagree. My reasons already stated here http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?p=5263262#post5263262.

    As long as citizens see politics as some kind of tactical game to elect a less repulsive candidate, rather than to achieve change, then you will get stuck with the same cake with different coloured icing. Nader is needed for the sake of democracy. I am for Obama, but like the fact that Nader is running, offering an alternative. He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them. He will keep the Dems honest and make sure they follow through on their promises.

    If you are not sure of who is worthy of your vote, then don't just vote for the lesser of the two evils. If you keep doing that, we will always have evil, and we will always have less.


    well, if they need nader to be around for them to do the bolded part do they deserve your vote at all??
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    Here are the actual results from the 2000 election:

    Gore 50,999,897 48.38%
    Bush 50,456,002 47.87%
    Nader 2,882,955 2.74%
    Total 105,405,100 100.00%*

    * Includes all candidates

    See: http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

    Allocating the 2,882,955 Nader votes along established patterns: 46% / 1,326,159 to Gore and 23% / 663,080 to Bush (leaving out the 31% of Nader voters who said they wouldn't have voted at all) shows Gore more than doubling his popular vote margin.

    what about the other 3rd party candidates??? why don't you blame buchnanon for costing him the elections??

    since you couldn't take the time to read the thread given to you i will repost it here for you, if you can manage


    http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2000&fips=12&f=1&off=0&elect=0&minper=0


    George W. Bush Richard Cheney Republican 2,912,790 48.85% 25
    Albert Gore Jr. Joseph Lieberman Democratic 2,912,253 48.84% 0
    Ralph Nader Winona LaDuke Green 97,488 1.63% 0
    Patrick Buchanan Ezola Foster Reform 17,484 0.29% 0
    Harry Browne Art Olivier Libertarian 16,415 0.28% 0
    John Hagelin A. Nat. Goldhaber Natural Law 2,281 0.04% 0
    Monica Moorehead Gloria La Riva World Workers 1,804 0.03% 0
    Howard Phillips J. Curtis Frazier Constitution 1,371 0.02% 0
    David McReynolds Mary Cal Hollis Socialist 622 0.01% 0
    James Harris Margaret Trowe Soc. Workers 562 0.01% 0
    Write-ins - - 40 0.00%


    bush won by 537 votes, only the write-ins had less than that

    and why do you think nader voters would only vote for gore or no one at all?? nader got 20some% or so from republicans

    what about the greens, world workers, socialist and socialist workers party? i have a feeling they would lean more towards a dem than a republcian...where is your condemnation for them? stop using nader as an excuse for gore losing or kerry losing or whoeverf. it's not naders fault ppl voted for him or didn't vote at all! maybe the dems shouldn't worry too much about being republican lights and have real issues that address the needs of the ppl
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    what policies in particular do you like most about nader?
  • stratomaster
    stratomaster Posts: 23
    El_Kabong wrote:
    well, if they need nader to be around for them to do the bolded part do they deserve your vote at all??
    I am more than capable of making up my mind if someone deserves my vote or not.

    That's not the ONLY reason that i have no problems with a Independent running.

    Why not bold this as well? I said this too. 'I am for Obama, but like the fact that Nader is running, offering an alternative. He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them.'.
  • Urban Hiker
    Urban Hiker Posts: 1,312
    stratomaster wrote:
    I am more than capable of making up my mind if someone deserves my vote or not.

    That's not the ONLY reason that i have no problems with a Independent running.

    Why not bold this as well? I said this too. 'I am for Obama, but like the fact that Nader is running, offering an alternative. He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them.'.

    I appreciate your post, stratomaster.

    Nader tried to meet with the Dems to press the issues. They didn't want to listen to him, so he decided to run to be heard. I love him for it and I'm seriously pissed off that Obama thinks he should get my vote when he won't take the time to meet with somebody as respected as Nader.


    I say, (IMHO, of course. ;)) Fuck the mother-god-damn-fucking dems!!!! :mad: They won't listen to someone who represents my views, they aren't getting my fucking vote. If they lose the election due to votes lost to Nader, well shame on them for not listening to and incorporating some of his platform into theirs.
    Walking can be a real trip
    ***********************
    "We've laid the groundwork. It's like planting the seeds. And next year, it's spring." - Nader
    ***********************
    Prepare for tending to your garden, America.
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    stratomaster wrote:
    I am more than capable of making up my mind if someone deserves my vote or not.

    That's not the ONLY reason that i have no problems with a Independent running.

    Why not bold this as well? I said this too. 'I am for Obama, but like the fact that Nader is running, offering an alternative. He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them.'.


    b/c i thought that last part was most important. the quote is there in full context

    and actually, i did mean to bold 'He will force the establishment to take those ideas seriously, rather than just ignore them' ;)

    imho, in my case, i have trouble supporting that idea; i would support someone who has to be forced to take the will of the populace seriously....that someone NEEDS to keep them honest and follow through!!!!

    :confused:

    i'm not trying to be mean, i just don't see it

    and my simple reply of
    well, if they need nader to be around for them to do the bolded part do they deserve your vote at all??

    in no way inferred you couldn't think for yourself
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    what policies in particular do you like most about nader?


    i understand you may not have seen them, i have posted a few times specific issues w/ links on issues i liked of Kucinich and Nader. if you want i can maybe search for some of the tomorrow for you.

    but to answer your question i like both of their health care plans, plans on iraq, plans for jobs and the economy, energy/sustainability/environmental. israeli /palestinian conflict, workers rights, military budget, waste in government spending, impeachment....

    hell, here's an easy enough link
    http://www.votenader.org/issues/

    if you want more specifics, like i said, maybe tomorrow i can find some of earlier posts
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    El_Kabong wrote:
    i understand you may not have seen them, i have posted a few times specific issues w/ links on issues i liked of Kucinich and Nader. if you want i can maybe search for some of the tomorrow for you.

    but to answer your question i like both of their health care plans, plans on iraq, plans for jobs and the economy, energy/sustainability/environmental. israeli /palestinian conflict, workers rights, military budget, waste in government spending, impeachment....

    hell, here's an easy enough link
    http://www.votenader.org/issues/

    if you want more specifics, like i said, maybe tomorrow i can find some of earlier posts

    I like some of his ideas as well but I really hate their website. whats all this off/on the table stuff. do you know of a detailed site stating his stance?

Categories