though I believe that McCain is much more of a constitutionalist than given credit for.
absolutely not. baldwin was given more time to think of an answer, and still came off as trying to be too "neutral" (which is bullshit), while Nader gave a truly respectable answer that called out Obama and McCain's blind support of occupations.
I honestly do not see how people can show Nader disrespect like this. While you may not agree with his policies (which is very odd), or you may not think he is "doing things the right way" (whatever the hell that means), his campaign is still the most respectable one when compared to the likes of Obama or McCain. When people say he does not "offer any practical solutions", that is just you trying blinding yourselves from it. So far, Obama and McCain's plans for Iraq is to sit around and draw out a timeline for withdrawal of troops, while helping the Iraqi govt become more.. legitimate (if that's wrong, feel free to correct me)... Nader's plan is the same way, only it involves a shorter timeline - six months - and reparations for Iraqi people. Obama's plans for Afghanistan and Pakistan are absolutely atrocious. Ending an occupation in Iraq to continue one in Afghanistan (and, while not likely, Pakistan as well), is god awful. His policy on Iran is too stern - if you want peace with the Iranians, treat them with respect, not as if they are already terrorists themselves and that you are "forced" to have to deal with them, by pushing for sanctions and stuff. Obama's policy on Israel/Palestine is just horrendous, and goes without said. I think Nader of all people would really give this country a respectable name, and his solutions will work. You guys claim if he were president, Congress wouldn't be able to work with this "radical" ideas - You guys DO realize that if he were president, that would mean the majority of America supports these "radical" ideas, and they would be forced to come into effect.
To say that you think you have to vote for Obama, or something - fine, I won't argue that right now. but to see people actually trying to undermine all the good work Nader has done is just plain absurd. He's a respectable candidate and runs an excellent campaign, whether you agree with "how he does it" or not.
To say that you think you have to vote for Obama, or something - fine, I won't argue that right now. but to see people actually trying to undermine all the good work Nader has done is just plain absurd. He's a respectable candidate and runs an excellent campaign, whether you agree with "how he does it" or not.
Who is undermining all of his good work? And exactly how can someone run an "excellent campaign" and have absolutely no chance of winning. Isn't the success of a campaign based solely on how well the candidate ends up doing vote-wise? That's like saying a football team who lost 63-5 played a great game.
My whole life
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
absolutely not. baldwin was given more time to think of an answer, and still came off as trying to be too "neutral" (which is bullshit), while Nader gave a truly respectable answer that called out Obama and McCain's blind support of occupations.
I'll buy that
what struck me about the Baldwin answer was his stance on globalization, which I didn't remember Nader addressing.
I think Nader is a bit naive in his world view (pretty rich i know)
And I agree with those wondering why the lack of respect for Nader. I disagree with him greatly on many things, but how can you not respect a guy who brought us safer cars, food nutrition labels, etc..
I believe he's improved our quality of life greatly
Who is undermining all of his good work? And exactly how can someone run an "excellent campaign" and have absolutely no chance of winning. Isn't the success of a campaign based solely on how well the candidate ends up doing vote-wise? That's like saying a football team who lost 63-5 played a great game.
more like saying that highschool team that went up against the steroids pumped NFL team and lost played a good game.
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.
Comments
To say that you think you have to vote for Obama, or something - fine, I won't argue that right now. but to see people actually trying to undermine all the good work Nader has done is just plain absurd. He's a respectable candidate and runs an excellent campaign, whether you agree with "how he does it" or not.
Who is undermining all of his good work? And exactly how can someone run an "excellent campaign" and have absolutely no chance of winning. Isn't the success of a campaign based solely on how well the candidate ends up doing vote-wise? That's like saying a football team who lost 63-5 played a great game.
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
I'll buy that
what struck me about the Baldwin answer was his stance on globalization, which I didn't remember Nader addressing.
I think Nader is a bit naive in his world view (pretty rich i know)
And I agree with those wondering why the lack of respect for Nader. I disagree with him greatly on many things, but how can you not respect a guy who brought us safer cars, food nutrition labels, etc..
I believe he's improved our quality of life greatly
more like saying that highschool team that went up against the steroids pumped NFL team and lost played a good game.
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)
(")_(")