To All Nader Supporters
cubbieblue82
Posts: 292
Why do you insist on trying to get a 3rd party started at the highest level of office? Nader has absolutely NO chance of ever being elected president. I don't believe any 3rd party candidate does in this day and age.
It makes so much more sense to start at local and state levels and work up from there. For one, it is easier to get a smaller number of people to get behind an alternative candidate than convincing a nation 300 million strong. Last gubenatorial election in IL, the Green party candidate made a double-digit showing against the Repubs and Dems. Nader would be lucky to get 2%.
Why not build up from the bottom until there is enough grassroots support for the party to challenge the 2 party system on the main stage?
Not trying to offend any of you out there, but idealism with no basis in reality wont get us any farther than if you don't vote at all.
It makes so much more sense to start at local and state levels and work up from there. For one, it is easier to get a smaller number of people to get behind an alternative candidate than convincing a nation 300 million strong. Last gubenatorial election in IL, the Green party candidate made a double-digit showing against the Repubs and Dems. Nader would be lucky to get 2%.
Why not build up from the bottom until there is enough grassroots support for the party to challenge the 2 party system on the main stage?
Not trying to offend any of you out there, but idealism with no basis in reality wont get us any farther than if you don't vote at all.
Obama/Biden '08!!!
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
LOL. Good one.
I guess I exhaust all of my hopeless optimism rooting for the Cubs each year.
I support Nader because I agree with his policy principles more than the other candidates, and at the local level I typically support the green or libertarian parties too. I don't think there are many Nader supporters who don't support a 3rd party at the local level too.
It is this sort of pessismism that will be a self-fulfilling prophecy that will inevitably produce more of the same centrist politics and politicians.
Thanks for your post. I've seen this question so many times, it really gets tiring.
***********************
"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.
Nader is a critic.. Critics ae very valuable, and he has been a great one, his research and discoveries have served us well
he is not a leader..
The president of the united states must lead - bring direction to a mob. Ralph Nader can not do that...
What would be the problem with voting for third parties on local/state levels AND presidential?
Are there rules that say this has to be an either/or situation?
This is a cop out...pure and simple. We can most certainly do both.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Nicely put.
How so?
He's much more than just a critic. He's proven himself as a man who turns words and ideas into direct actions. Can you say the same for the other candidates?
How is he anything BUT a leader?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_nader#Activism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_nader#Non-profit_organizations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_nader#Taking_on_the_automobile_industry
Again, how have the other candidates shown any leadership skills even remotely close to rivaling the decades of dedication and leadership Nader has shown?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Of course you can do both. However, does voting for a candidate with 0% chance of winning a single state accomplish anything towards validating a 3rd party? Is anyone paying attention to how many people vote for Nader?
It isn't a cop out to criticize the methods of the Green Party. When they should be emphasizing grassroots local politics, instead they focus on a futile national campaign. Why not devote more energy to local politics first?
Using IL as an example, Whitney was the first viable Green Party candidate during my political awareness, and he reverberated with a lot of people. I believe that more people are willing to break with the mold of Dem and Rep on less significant levels than the Presidency. If these parties could accumulate a significant number of representative in state and local govs then they would hold a LOT more weight when taking on Congressional or even Presidential elections.
Just my 2 cents. Not saying he shouldn't run, I just think that the approach is flawed.
How is being realistic pessimistic? I don't think any sane person would challenge the fact that Nader has absolutely no shot.
I am disagreeing with the strategy of these so called 3rd parties, not whether they should have a voice. I completely agree that more political parties could only be a good thing for America.
However, I feel that these parties are unable to set realistic goals that could help them to establish themselves on a national level.
Nader is running as an independent so it has jack to do with any party only focusing on the presidency.
And as I've stated sooo many times already...these people will have a chance as soon as we get fed up and decide to give them one...it's that simple. We don't have to choose to vote against our own interests...we CHOOSE to because we are told it's the only possible options and we seem to be looking for cues as to what everyone else is doing before we make our own decisions....I don't live my life like that. I make my own mine up based on what I view as right...not what the media tells me is viable.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
ask ralph nader. they are his words.
possibility of some fresh start. better than what we've got now.
Its easy to lead activists. It the rest of the world that needs leadership. I never said anything about the other candidates, other than the fact that Nader may perhaps be the least of the three evils.
We need to somehow harvest cooperation between each other and other nations. That is the major task... Nader is a fighter for truth, and that is the other major task. We need someone that sees and speaks the truth and inspires community.
Nader can be annoying and can often get lost in the details chasing unreachable goals. We need to take baby steps in a positive direction, and bring more and more people on board at each milestone. Right now there is no direction and everyone proudly pulling in different directions. Its no wonder we are falling apart.
Olney, Md.: Mr. Nader, I voted for you in the past two elections and I applaud your efforts to challenge the status quo. However, I wonder if some of the issues you care about might be addressed more effectively through local politics, which then could lead to larger, national movements. Have you considered running for elected office as either a senator or governor? Would you consider doing so if your bid for the presidency is unsuccessful this year?
Ralph Nader: My purpose is to have a national impact to arouse people all over the country to challenge the two-party dictatorship and to encourage people to run as independents and third-party lines at the local state and national level. In this manner, you stimulate the local through the national and the national through the local. This could not be done running in a state for senator or governor.
***********************
"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.
3rd party candidates have won at the local level...and??? i'm pretty sure the founding fathers would be upset at the notion that there are only 2 parties you should vote for as president and they'd probably dislike how near impossible it is for other options to even be allowed on the ballot
and i guess you think rosa parks should've been realistic and just moved? maybe the ppl thought women should have the right to vote or equal rights should've been realistic and just accepted that's how it is? what about civil rights? these things only changes b/c ppl kept pushing and fighting for it instead of just giving in and accepting it like you seem to be saying
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
I think the "third Party" candidate is just the suger to help the election go down. No chance to win. We need lots of reform..
We need people willing to support what they think is right instead of looking to the media polls for their decision making.
You have to give someone a chance before they can have one. It doesn't just magically appear.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Its a very simple answer... very few people care and get involved in local politics/elections. The masses dont bother to vote in the presidential election let alone a mid-term (with some exception to '06). The system by which an indy or 3rd party is forced to comply with is rigged from top to bottom. Its alot harder than you might think. I have(had) a similar view and tried to run locally, you should try too.
PM me and I will give you countless examples of my experience...
I am with you... I have posted similar ones to the post below numerous times on this forum and it just gets ignored...
from :http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5639815&postcount=4
That is my biggest problem with the dream of a Nader presidency (and change from the top down in general)... NOTHING at all domestically would get done in this country. Congress wouldn't pass or even introduce most of what Nader would like to get done, and it would bring our already dysfunctional government to a complete standstill.
While Nader supporters would view this as a victory, thinking it shows how currupt congress is, most of America would view it as the opposite and focus their disqust on Nader. People don't want drastic change... as much as everyone bitches and complains about government, most people have accepted the system we have, and for the most part go along with it.
I will never understand why the Nader/Progressive/Independent system doesn't put in the heavy lifting and money/time consuming work of starting change from the local level up. After 2000, there was genuine support for 3rd parties, with Nader's most successful run, Ventura as a popular governor, etc., but that momentum was left to die instead of embraced. Maybe it's because between all of the 3rd parties/agendas, no one is willing to find common ground and work together, but would rather just sit on the sidelines and complain about our current system.
My local NY State assemblyman is an independent... it's the sort of start that is needed. Once people get comfortable voting/working with independents and 3rd parties on the local level, then state level, etc., it doesn't become such a foreign idea to vote for one on the national level.
And that's not a cop-out?
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
The reason Rich Whitney was able to get that much support is because of the other two candidates. The Republicans had Judy Barr Topinka, who is WAAAAAAY too moderate for downstate Republicans. The Democratic Governor Rod Blagojevich is also hated downstate. In fact, he has the lowest approval rating of any governor in the US (13%). People were voting for the Green to show their distaste for the two candidates from the major parties.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
i am no nader supporter, never was....and while i agree there could be far better ways for him to go about his desired changes, i fully support any/all who back him. that's democracy.
i do believe, and support 3rd parties, have voted for candidates on a more local level and i would do so on a national level as well, if i found a candidate i believed in. i don't think voting for a candidate who has no chance in winning as throwing a vote away, but more that it shows what some want, and putting their votes where their ideals are. nothing wrong with that.
in time, i hope....more and more 3rd parties will have a bigger voice, and more impact. hopefully more candidates that i personally would support will go that route and we will have more choice in our elected officials.....and more likelihood of 'fringe' candidates not being so fringe at all anymore. nader is not the right person for the job imo, but there WILL be someone....someday.....be great to see.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
You're free to vote however you choose at the local, state and national level. Why should we discourage more options and competition for the presidency? I don't get what the problem is with people using their vote to vote for the candidate they think is best on any level. I simply view that as using democracy in the true meaning of the word. If I think someone is the best option, I'm gonna say why, I'm going to say it as often I feel is needed. I'll sing it from the roof tops if need be. And I'm going to engage in discussions about it to make my point, as well. I believe that anyhing is possible if you just keep working at, persevering and remaining consistent in your message/what you wish to achieve. The national spotlight is the perfect time to run third parties because everyone is focused on the election...this is the way to gain attention and get exposure for your cause.
Why don't you tell me why you think it is.
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'm not really questioning why someone would vote for a candidate or judging them for it, or discouraging more options and competition... What I am questioning is why the entire movement of change from the two party system only seems to be focused on a top down approach?
Because you said that, "You have to give someone a chance before they can have one. It doesn't just magically appear." That goes back to exactly my question about the top down approach... You know the media isn't going to cover a 3rd party candidate unless there is a demand for it... You know the voting public will basically ignore a 3rd party candidate because they are set in their ways of a two party system.
That is why the only way to pull it off for real change is from the bottom up.... if people gradually accept 3rd party candidates, and 3rd party candidates get elected and perform at the local and state levels, they will start to be covered by the media as a real alternative.
Knowing that the system is screwed up, and totally against 3rd party candidates, expecting to just be "given" a chance, then complaining year after year that it doesn't happen, is an absolute cop-out. It reminds me of the quote about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
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
Just because one decides to vote for Obama and not Nader doesn't mean they're persuaded by the media....I can't stomach listening to CNN or other "news" channels.
Some listen to the candidate, listen to how they respond to the media, how they respond to questions, hard questions. How they respond to the rubbish that's said about them, the campaign style.
Obama's fresh, he's not your typical washington insider, his parents weren't rich, he worked for everything he has...he's half black and white with a Muslim name...give a lot of respect for that...and this will transend if he becomes elected.
I'd choose Obama over Nader if they were the only two running.
Because people here are from all over and it's pretty much always national issues we discuss in set ups like this board. And with the national level, the messages spreads to a broader base thus getting people to look into their own local levels, too.
Then you put pressure on the media and we have been. I can't make anyone do anything but I, myself, can always do what I think is right and that includes supporting and putting the time and effort into my goal however long the sentiment might take to catch on. When others see people willing to support a long shot simply because they view it as right then it catches on and spreads. I'm not going to do it half-assed and say I know Obama isn't great but he's the only choice we have...when I know that's a lie and I know we as citizens in this democracy can always get fed up and vote in whomever we choose.
The chance is given based on supporting what one views as right and can be done on all levels...not just one. It's not just given for the hell of it. And you'd have to be blind to say it's been the same results.....looking at 2004 compared with 2008....there has been a strong and constant buzz surrounding the less likely candidates based on ideals and the realization of just how much the 2 major parties are in fact the same. There was hardly any talk of Kucinich on this very board 4 years ago, no Nader supporters hardly and I can't even remember the libertarians starting any threads. Now we have lots of talk about Ron Paul and people are starting to buzz about Barr. There was nothing close to this kind of exposure back in 2004. But now there's facebook, myspace, youtube, bloggers...and they are spreading their thoughts on the candidates without having to rely on the mainstream media to do it for them. Welcome in the age of information! There is always good and bad information out there but at least we are finally getting the chance to hear it and decide for ourselves based on a much broader view of the situation.
'Change don't come at once. It's building like a wave.'
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 about Obama makes him seem better to you? Just his style and his race? Nader's parents were poor and from Lebanon. He's also quite articulate and a pro at responding to media questions.
I guess he's young so he's got that going for him but I couldn't see myself ignoring all Obama has supported or not supported just because he's young and fresh.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis