Uh oh Nader....
shadowcast
Posts: 2,231
If he decides to run you can kiss a Democratic presidency good bye. I think he is going to run because why hasn't Ed supported anybody yet. The whole band in behind Obama except EV. I like Nader and all but this is awful timing and he wouldn't stand a chance. Can you say monkey wrench is the situation?
Here's the link
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080222/ap_on_el_pr/nader
Here's the link
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080222/ap_on_el_pr/nader
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
And I think that you are giving Nader way too much credit as a presidential candidate in 2008. In 2000, there was a ground swell of support, a terrible democratic nominee and coming off of a democratic whitehouse in scandal. I just don't see anyone noticing or caring this time around.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
that would make for some interesting concerts in this years VFC
1) Nader is not going to have any impact on this election whatsoever. He hasn't even tried to campaign, as far as I could tell. Even in 2000, when a decent amount of people knew he was running, he barely made a dent as far as impacting any other candidate.
2) Ed probably likes Hillary, and probably because he feels she is the strongest candidate to take down the Elephants-- looks like this is changing, I wouldn't be surprised if he jumped on the Obama wagon soon enough.
I can't see him supporting Nader, especially after he didn't support Nader in '04, as he knew he needed every vote to count against Bush, and a protest vote for Nader would do more harm than help to that cause. I remember hearing that it caused a rift between him and Ralph, if I remember correctly. Anyway, Ed knew Kerry wasn't the best guy for the job (no one was in that election), and ideally he'd like to vote for Ralph over Kerry. To him, this election is like the last one-- focus on getting the Republicans out of office, and start rebuilding. There was some quote he used about having to rebuild the house that burned down from the foundation up-- meaning, "Yeah, I'd love to have Ralph as my president, but he isn't gonna win, so we'll have to back Kerry and settle for him, since he's better than Bush."
I think Ed would like Paul, if it wasn't for his stance on abortion-- but again, any candidate that has no shot of winning / or can't take down the Republicans is probably not going to get Ed's vote. It'd be great to have either one of those guys as president as polar opposites as they are, because at least you know they care.
The country needs revolution, but is going to have to settle for slow change, unfortunately.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Gravel, knowing he's obviously not going to be the Democratic nominee, is trying to coalesce the third parties behind him for a general election campaign - i have no idea if he can really do that, but the idea of 'third party coalescence' is something i've been wanting to see for years, and I think Gravel, with his liberal/libertarian stances, has the best ability of anyone to unite the Green, Libertarian, Natural Law and Reform parties... I'm sure Ron Paulies think so too. Gravel said he has a running mate in mind, and "that person happens to be a Democrat" so that leaves out Ron Paul, and I don't think it'd be Kucinich, but who knows?
all that said, i have to admit i may decide to vote for the Democratic selection of the polyarchy on Nov 4.
Where I'm not ugly and you're lookin' at me
agreed... guess we'll find out what he has up his sleeve Sunday. If Hillary is the nominee and he runs I'm voting for him... McBush and Hillary are two of the same old dirty politicians.
And you're not leaving here without me, I don't wanna be without
My best... friend. Wake up, to see you could have it all
Good for Ed!
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
why? if nadar runs this time around its nothing but an ego trip.
i was at the anti-war rally..and although i love ralphy and respect him greatly for standing up for what is right. his speach was one of the least moving. its not his time...he should be a man and throw in the towel. fight a diff. fight.
-Big Fish
i think abook's just saying good for Ed for not supporting Obama. it has nothing to do with Ed supporting Nader, if he even does this year...
i don't know why Nader feels the need to run against... maybe it's not egotistic, tho i assumed it was, but maybe the guy feels like he has a mission and he can't give up until he wins. maybe he just doesn't know when to throw in the towel.
I just don't believe Obama to be this wonderful gift that is going to bring all these kind of changes you guys think he is. Feel free to lap him up all you want but I'll pass. I'd have to compromise my ideals/principles to throw a vote his way and I'm just not going to do that again. I'm guessing that's partly why Ed hasn't said he's supporting him but what do I know?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
If I don't want another Republican president, I probably still feel like you ... but I vote for Obama anyway, because that's the only way to avoid the following phrase: "President McCain."
for the least they could possibly do
Nothing will ever change if people keep giving in and settling for the two turds they put out there to choose from. That idea is more important to me than focusing on the whole Dem/Rep thing because to me they're pretty much the same thing anyway.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
This is all true. But only one of two turds are gonna win. Which one you want?
for the least they could possibly do
Neither so I'm not voting for one. That would mean making the same mistake everyone else is making. There's no progress in that.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I used to think that way and then I decided to stop being part of the problem. The two major parties are mostly the same and don't allow for much change. I have issues with Obama and Hillary that I refuse to just ignore. The system is set so they have everyone scared to vote for someone they believe in for fear their vote will be meaningless. They stay in power this way despite how unsatisfied the citizenry is with our elected officials. The same creeps get in year after year and I've had enough. Standing behind something you believe in is not meaningless and no one else is going to do it for you. I don't see what's so great about Obama. How is he such a standout? There are plenty of you guys who think he is worth believing in
and that's your opinion to have. But I don't share it and I won't be voting for him.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
That is a great point but we are becoming more and more liberal. For example and this might get wordy. Let's take something like MTV. People might bash it because it is a commercial whore and they don't play videos but it has made the youth a lot more liberal. Liberal in ways like accepting gays, minorities, different culture ya know? It is also a rating GIANT and it's demographic in what 22 and under? What it has done is chipped away at society so they are more accepting and learning that different people are ok. So mix this demographic with Obama who has not been tainted by Washington yet..... Then you might start getting that fire power that might lead to new type of Nader. It's worth a shot and we need a Hail Mary if you will. So Obama might be that guy. Basically I just want someone who gives a shit.
"Empty pockets will Allow a greater Sense of wealth...." EV/ITW
(a) To make sure Clinton doesn't get the Democratic nomination
and (b) To make sure McCain doesn't win.
Exercising a precious, principled vote is your right and constitutional privilege but it's also a bit selfish, and self-righteous to put your hallowed views above a sense of duty to others, who are backing the only realistic alternative (however similar to the bad guys you might see him). Don't vote for the person who best shares your opinions, the visionary in the wilderness. Vote for the person who will keep Clinton or McCain away from The White House. Obama mightn't be Che Guevara, but he's better than the alternatives.
It's time to grow up and join the movement, and leave people such as Nader to your days of over-worthy adolescence.
It's like "Oh we needn't a sherpa, warm clothes, a tent, food, drink or icepicks - we'll walk up to Mt. Everest!"
Sorry, I'm not on board with 'growing up' and being part of keeping the same two party system trucking along. The same system that people have been unhappy with for as long as I can remember but continue to support because they are afraid to support anyone the media deems as 'unelectable'. The same system where yes, the candidates have very little difference, are all backed by corporate interests, and offer little more than hot air when it comes to really doing what's best for the american people. It makes no sense to me to vote for people who I view as part of the problem and I won't be a part of it anymore. I'm not following the flock and their bad choice this time and it's my right to disagree and stand up for my 'selfish' principles which oddly enough are mostly centered around altruistic ideals.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde