A 20someThing Approval rating for President The Worst President In The History Of Worst Presidents... even LOWER Approval ratings for Congress.
Q: What does that mean?
A: The American voters are fucking IDIOTS!!!
Why?
Because WE vote these LOSERS into office.
Then, we bitch about it. WE are to BLAME because we get the poor leadership we keep voting for.
...
So.. this election, i am voting for ANYONE who is not the incumbant. I don't care if I think they are doing a good job... the way things are, they are part of a spoiled barrel of rotting fruit. i am voting for the person i believe will bring a fresh infusion of REPRESENTATION into the political leadership... not the same ols 12% approval rating team.
This way... i can honestly bitch about a Ted Kennedy or John Warner being lifetime Senators... because i refuse to take part in this bullshit we go through every 2 years. I am taking control and exercisine my power of TERM LIMITS. Beacuse WE have the POWER to control... we are just too fucking stupid to realize it.
we should have a binding "NONE OF THE ABOVE" choice on the ballot which, if it wins, would force new elections.
Well I can see no reason people wouldnt see him as sane. He's interviews are always spot on. He's the underdog but he is an articulate and very intelligent. I know that based on what he has to say not spin I've seen on tv.
See, for me, I see Ralph Nader as a person who doesn't have a clear set of ideas. It takes a lot for me to be pursuaded by a candidate, and it seems as though Mr. Nader's beliefs are neither for, nor against the ideals of the Democratic Party and the GOP. He disagrees with both, and for most Americans, politics is confusing enough, and he just makes it more complicated. He works well in taking away votes from the Democratic party. This year, we need those votes, John McCain isn't our biggest problem now.
Don't let the world bring you down, not everyone here is that fucked up and cold. Remember why you came and while you're alive, experience the warmth before you grow old.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
He disagrees with both, and for most Americans, politics is confusing enough, and he just makes it more complicated.
words like these are the reason why the sound of "DEMOCRACY IS A TOTAL FUCKING JOKE" that echoes in the back of my head gets louder and louder every year.
Most of Nader's current supporters would find a new candidate to support because Nader would have become too "mainstream", and loved by the corporate media...
Then new, TV news influenced voters would start supporting him, and then in turn be called sheep by the old supporters.
That's a bullshit response. I don't like Nader because he's not "mainstream". I like him because he's fucking amazing and has a very long and very good track record. I would bet that nearly all the people that like him are probably smart enough to realize what he's done in his life. We're just smarter, so we get it
It's not about anything to do with mainstream. That's like saying you don't like Pearl Jam because they're too mainstream. If the music is good, the music is good. And Ralph Nader plays some damn good music as far as I'm concerned.
See, for me, I see Ralph Nader as a person who doesn't have a clear set of ideas. It takes a lot for me to be pursuaded by a candidate, and it seems as though Mr. Nader's beliefs are neither for, nor against the ideals of the Democratic Party and the GOP. He disagrees with both, and for most Americans, politics is confusing enough, and he just makes it more complicated. He works well in taking away votes from the Democratic party. This year, we need those votes, John McCain isn't our biggest problem now.
Are you insane? Ralph Nader has a very clear set of ideas...and ideals. And he sticks to his values. That's a very clear difference between him and most prominent politicians (republican OR democrat). And it's not too hard to disagree with both when they're very, very, VERY similar. Even on the war...the dems talk big against it but keep funding and keep funding which = SUPPORTING THE WAR.
How did we get out of the fucking mess in Vietnam? Stopped funding it. It's simple. My six year old can understand it.
See, for me, I see Ralph Nader as a person who doesn't have a clear set of ideas. It takes a lot for me to be pursuaded by a candidate, and it seems as though Mr. Nader's beliefs are neither for, nor against the ideals of the Democratic Party and the GOP. He disagrees with both, and for most Americans, politics is confusing enough, and he just makes it more complicated. He works well in taking away votes from the Democratic party. This year, we need those votes, John McCain isn't our biggest problem now.
I see his views as very clear and thorough. And I don't care for the Democratic party at all so I guess I'm not seeing where you're coming from here.
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
That's a bullshit response. I don't like Nader because he's not "mainstream". I like him because he's fucking amazing and has a very long and very good track record. I would bet that nearly all the people that like him are probably smart enough to realize what he's done in his life. We're just smarter, so we get it
It's not about anything to do with mainstream. That's like saying you don't like Pearl Jam because they're too mainstream. If the music is good, the music is good. And Ralph Nader plays some damn good music as far as I'm concerned.
Spot on!
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
Are you insane? Ralph Nader has a very clear set of ideas...and ideals. And he sticks to his values. That's a very clear difference between him and most prominent politicians (republican OR democrat). And it's not too hard to disagree with both when they're very, very, VERY similar. Even on the war...the dems talk big against it but keep funding and keep funding which = SUPPORTING THE WAR.
How did we get out of the fucking mess in Vietnam? Stopped funding it. It's simple. My six year old can understand it.
What most people don't see now a days that there are people, like me for example, who are traditional democrats. Have you seen both parties take a complete 180 in the past decade? Dems and republicans have different values than did ten years ago. You now have to be "religious" to be a republican, and you have to be a pot smoking hippie to be a democrat. Also, personally, I don't understand WHY we must have a two party system. Most American's don't fall under either party, and I am one of those. I will say it clear, right now, I am more of a socialist. I believe the British Labour Party defines my personal political views. I don't support any war, ever. We had no reason to invade Iraq, other than to play along with Bush's game of Cowboys and Indians. We've spent 1.3 trillion dollars (roughly) on a war that has gone to shit, and taken away money from Education (tuition spikes suck ass), Welfare (and there are people out there receiving welfare who don't need it, making way for those who do need it to be royally fucked), Social Security! and we even tax it! goddamn, who knew that all that money that is taken out of my pay check every month is soon not going to be around. THANKS GOV'T., and well, the economy is shit right now. Thanks to the raising price of oil, well, it's like a game of dominos, everything else goes up as well.
I don't get why we always say that America is a democracy, because it's not. we don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. we have no direct say in gov't, we have assholes represent us, they are the ones who allowed Bush to become president in '04. Thanks to the electoral college.
Don't let the world bring you down, not everyone here is that fucked up and cold. Remember why you came and while you're alive, experience the warmth before you grow old.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
What most people don't see now a days that there are people, like me for example, who are traditional democrats. Have you seen both parties take a complete 180 in the past decade? Dems and republicans have different values than did ten years ago. You now have to be "religious" to be a republican, and you have to be a pot smoking hippie to be a democrat. Also, personally, I don't understand WHY we must have a two party system. Most American's don't fall under either party, and I am one of those. I will say it clear, right now, I am more of a socialist. I believe the British Labour Party defines my personal political views. I don't support any war, ever. We had no reason to invade Iraq, other than to play along with Bush's game of Cowboys and Indians. We've spent 1.3 trillion dollars (roughly) on a war that has gone to shit, and taken away money from Education (tuition spikes suck ass), Welfare (and there are people out there receiving welfare who don't need it, making way for those who do need it to be royally fucked), Social Security! and we even tax it! goddamn, who knew that all that money that is taken out of my pay check every month is soon not going to be around. THANKS GOV'T., and well, the economy is shit right now. Thanks to the raising price of oil, well, it's like a game of dominos, everything else goes up as well.
I don't get why we always say that America is a democracy, because it's not. we don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. we have no direct say in gov't, we have assholes represent us, they are the ones who allowed Bush to become president in '04. Thanks to the electoral college.
...
You answered your own question... don't vote along party lines.
Vote for the candidate, not the political party. There is nothing in writing that states if you are a registered Democrat, that you must vote for the Candidate with the (D) next to his/her name.
People who DO vote along party line are playing into the politicians hands. This is what they want... the electoriat to vote without thinking. They aren't stupid... WE are stupid. That is why we have a Congess who scores a 19% Approval Rating.
Maybe it's time we fire all of the fucking assholes that are in there and start a rebuilding effort.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
...
You answered your own question... don't vote along party lines.
Vote for the candidate, not the political party. There is nothing in writing that states if you are a registered Democrat, that you must vote for the Candidate with the (D) next to his/her name.
People who DO vote along party line are playing into the politicians hands. This is what they want... the electoriat to vote without thinking. They aren't stupid... WE are stupid. That is why we have a Congess who scores a 19% Approval Rating.
Maybe it's time we fire all of the fucking assholes that are in there and start a rebuilding effort.
I've yet to vote along party lines. Hell, I am voting for a republican for the Gov. of WA because the Dem. who is in office now has done jack for this state. I've really got nothing going for any presidential candidate right now, no one really stands out to me, GOP or Dem., no one at ALL. One day, soon I hope, there will actually be a person who can truly give America the change it needs to once again be the great hegemon it once was. It's one of the very two things I have hope for in this world. The other is love, but I think everyone is hopeful in that category.
Don't let the world bring you down, not everyone here is that fucked up and cold. Remember why you came and while you're alive, experience the warmth before you grow old.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
That's a bullshit response. I don't like Nader because he's not "mainstream". I like him because he's fucking amazing and has a very long and very good track record. I would bet that nearly all the people that like him are probably smart enough to realize what he's done in his life. We're just smarter, so we get it
It's not about anything to do with mainstream. That's like saying you don't like Pearl Jam because they're too mainstream. If the music is good, the music is good. And Ralph Nader plays some damn good music as far as I'm concerned.
I have met plenty through the years that don't like pearljam because they are too mainstream. And I think deep down they realize PJ is very talented. But if it's not Lagwagon, Propoghandi, or Bad Religion then they are prob too mainstream. I Imagine there are some that think this way politically as well
I have met plenty through the years that don't like pearljam because they are too mainstream. And I think deep down they realize PJ is very talented. But if it's not Lagwagon, Propoghandi, or Bad Religion then they are prob too mainstream. I Imagine there are some that think this way politically as well
We have produced more than enough sound reasons to support Nader here so it's a moot point.
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
...
You answered your own question... don't vote along party lines.
Vote for the candidate, not the political party. There is nothing in writing that states if you are a registered Democrat, that you must vote for the Candidate with the (D) next to his/her name.
People who DO vote along party line are playing into the politicians hands. This is what they want... the electoriat to vote without thinking. They aren't stupid... WE are stupid. That is why we have a Congess who scores a 19% Approval Rating.
Maybe it's time we fire all of the fucking assholes that are in there and start a rebuilding effort.
100% agreed!
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
We wouldn't have anything to blame and then you'd actually have a point. As it stands now, you don't because Nader is completely ignored and not covered by the media so we can't not expect that to make a huge difference. Just like the way all you guys think Nader doesn't do anything but run for prez every 4 years and then vanishes...it's ignorance based on non-exposure.
Or could it be that people don't really care about Nader, therefore, no one seeks information about him or his stances...
It's not like he didn't have a national platform when he announced he was running this year...he was on Meet the Press...and fairly popular political show...
Or could it be that people don't really care about Nader, therefore, no one seeks information about him or his stances...
It's not like he didn't have a national platform when he announced he was running this year...he was on Meet the Press...and fairly popular political show...
We wouldn't have anything to blame and then you'd actually have a point. As it stands now, you don't because Nader is completely ignored and not covered by the media so we can't not expect that to make a huge difference. Just like the way all you guys think Nader doesn't do anything but run for prez every 4 years and then vanishes...it's ignorance based on non-exposure.
I agree that he doesn't get the exposure as major party candidates, that isn't the only reason that he won't win. And I don't think that it's some corporate media blacklist that keeps him off the air... Ralph Nader just isn't interesting or sexy enough to get TV ratings. Ross Perot made a splash as a 3rd party candidate because he spent a ton of money and came in during the right political climate... He got lucky, and the media picked up on him.
I wrote this in an earlier Nader thread, but I think it's true:
I know he doesn't actually quit working in the years in between, but what I was saying that if he is serious about turning around our government, he has to find a way to get the grassroots working. You see major candidates start years ahead of time in Iowa, doing a lot of door to door campaigning, developing local offices, and just getting out there. I'm not so sure that Nader does that enough. Also, he's no spring chicken, what happens to the movement when he is gone? There needs to be a charismatic leader to pick up where he leaves off.
And as far as people getting their news from other sources, that maybe true, but the vast majority of the people aren't digging any deeper... You look at Google searches and Yahoo news searches, and the top searched categories are still celebrity gossip, and whatever the story of the day is on the cable news networks. People are going different places, but the major news media is still setting the agenda.
That's why it has to be a ground-up change... Older voters are still going to vote for their party, and as younger voters get older, once they have their own families, etc., a lot of us get more complacent and apathetic to some huge change... we have a million other day-to-day things to worry about.
That goes back to your thread about what will it take to resist... I have a wife and a family, we juggle child care and other schedules, rising prices on gas and every other bills, and lack of free time, so when we do get a weekend off or some evenings off, we would much rather do fun "family" stuff, then worry about changing all of the wrongs with the world... Once our daily lives and freedoms get noticeable altered, only then will most people resist.
So, if you start getting third party candidates on local town boards, and city councils, then state government positions, and people see a difference, then we might see a reduction in the power of a two party system.
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
I agree that he doesn't get the exposure as major party candidates, that isn't the only reason that he won't win. And I don't think that it's some corporate media blacklist that keeps him off the air... Ralph Nader just isn't interesting or sexy enough to get TV ratings. Ross Perot made a splash as a 3rd party candidate because he spent a ton of money and came in during the right political climate... He got lucky, and the media picked up on him.
I wrote this in an earlier Nader thread, but I think it's true:
I know he doesn't actually quit working in the years in between, but what I was saying that if he is serious about turning around our government, he has to find a way to get the grassroots working. You see major candidates start years ahead of time in Iowa, doing a lot of door to door campaigning, developing local offices, and just getting out there. I'm not so sure that Nader does that enough. Also, he's no spring chicken, what happens to the movement when he is gone? There needs to be a charismatic leader to pick up where he leaves off.
And as far as people getting their news from other sources, that maybe true, but the vast majority of the people aren't digging any deeper... You look at Google searches and Yahoo news searches, and the top searched categories are still celebrity gossip, and whatever the story of the day is on the cable news networks. People are going different places, but the major news media is still setting the agenda.
That's why it has to be a ground-up change... Older voters are still going to vote for their party, and as younger voters get older, once they have their own families, etc., a lot of us get more complacent and apathetic to some huge change... we have a million other day-to-day things to worry about.
That goes back to your thread about what will it take to resist... I have a wife and a family, we juggle child care and other schedules, rising prices on gas and every other bills, and lack of free time, so when we do get a weekend off or some evenings off, we would much rather do fun "family" stuff, then worry about changing all of the wrongs with the world... Once our daily lives and freedoms get noticeable altered, only then will most people resist.
So, if you start getting third party candidates on local town boards, and city councils, then state government positions, and people see a difference, then we might see a reduction in the power of a two party system.
when corporations who provide you media... have stuff on their teleprompter that your news guys read to you... and its making candidates look like jokes... than im sorry to inform you about the country you live in... but it might as well be blacklisting... not to mention the fact he will be excluded from attending debates..
HOW CAN YOU ALL NOT SEE THE SILENCING THATS GOING ON??
Comments
we should have a binding "NONE OF THE ABOVE" choice on the ballot which, if it wins, would force new elections.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyfSN7B4lYI
See, for me, I see Ralph Nader as a person who doesn't have a clear set of ideas. It takes a lot for me to be pursuaded by a candidate, and it seems as though Mr. Nader's beliefs are neither for, nor against the ideals of the Democratic Party and the GOP. He disagrees with both, and for most Americans, politics is confusing enough, and he just makes it more complicated. He works well in taking away votes from the Democratic party. This year, we need those votes, John McCain isn't our biggest problem now.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
words like these are the reason why the sound of "DEMOCRACY IS A TOTAL FUCKING JOKE" that echoes in the back of my head gets louder and louder every year.
It's not about anything to do with mainstream. That's like saying you don't like Pearl Jam because they're too mainstream. If the music is good, the music is good. And Ralph Nader plays some damn good music as far as I'm concerned.
ha thats seriously the greatest idea I've ever heard. nice!
How did we get out of the fucking mess in Vietnam? Stopped funding it. It's simple. My six year old can understand it.
well it that case I should vote for nader and stop being a sheep to the corporate media!
I see his views as very clear and thorough. And I don't care for the Democratic party at all so I guess I'm not seeing where you're coming from here.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Spot on!
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 most people don't see now a days that there are people, like me for example, who are traditional democrats. Have you seen both parties take a complete 180 in the past decade? Dems and republicans have different values than did ten years ago. You now have to be "religious" to be a republican, and you have to be a pot smoking hippie to be a democrat. Also, personally, I don't understand WHY we must have a two party system. Most American's don't fall under either party, and I am one of those. I will say it clear, right now, I am more of a socialist. I believe the British Labour Party defines my personal political views. I don't support any war, ever. We had no reason to invade Iraq, other than to play along with Bush's game of Cowboys and Indians. We've spent 1.3 trillion dollars (roughly) on a war that has gone to shit, and taken away money from Education (tuition spikes suck ass), Welfare (and there are people out there receiving welfare who don't need it, making way for those who do need it to be royally fucked), Social Security! and we even tax it! goddamn, who knew that all that money that is taken out of my pay check every month is soon not going to be around. THANKS GOV'T., and well, the economy is shit right now. Thanks to the raising price of oil, well, it's like a game of dominos, everything else goes up as well.
I don't get why we always say that America is a democracy, because it's not. we don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic. we have no direct say in gov't, we have assholes represent us, they are the ones who allowed Bush to become president in '04. Thanks to the electoral college.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
You answered your own question... don't vote along party lines.
Vote for the candidate, not the political party. There is nothing in writing that states if you are a registered Democrat, that you must vote for the Candidate with the (D) next to his/her name.
People who DO vote along party line are playing into the politicians hands. This is what they want... the electoriat to vote without thinking. They aren't stupid... WE are stupid. That is why we have a Congess who scores a 19% Approval Rating.
Maybe it's time we fire all of the fucking assholes that are in there and start a rebuilding effort.
Hail, Hail!!!
I've yet to vote along party lines. Hell, I am voting for a republican for the Gov. of WA because the Dem. who is in office now has done jack for this state. I've really got nothing going for any presidential candidate right now, no one really stands out to me, GOP or Dem., no one at ALL. One day, soon I hope, there will actually be a person who can truly give America the change it needs to once again be the great hegemon it once was. It's one of the very two things I have hope for in this world. The other is love, but I think everyone is hopeful in that category.
Best two days of my life: Oasis at MSG and Pearl Jam at the Gorge.
I have met plenty through the years that don't like pearljam because they are too mainstream. And I think deep down they realize PJ is very talented. But if it's not Lagwagon, Propoghandi, or Bad Religion then they are prob too mainstream. I Imagine there are some that think this way politically as well
We have produced more than enough sound reasons to support Nader here so it's a moot point.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
100% agreed!
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Or could it be that people don't really care about Nader, therefore, no one seeks information about him or his stances...
It's not like he didn't have a national platform when he announced he was running this year...he was on Meet the Press...and fairly popular political show...
MSNBC interviewed him later:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/28/832412.aspx
Right or wrong, it seems that many people just don't care for him, which sadly trumps his stance on issues...
inmytree
visit
cnn.com
foxnews.com
msn.com
yahoo.com
tell me what their front pages, stories, and blogs all have in common.
one thing these sites all have in common..
.COM
COMMERCIALS.
What's that have to do with the price of tea in China? Just because something is ".com" they are trying to sell you something?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
you're a sheep.
they are selling an election.
and yes.. ledvedderman
websites that are littered with advertisements are trying to sell you something... and its bullshit.
I agree that he doesn't get the exposure as major party candidates, that isn't the only reason that he won't win. And I don't think that it's some corporate media blacklist that keeps him off the air... Ralph Nader just isn't interesting or sexy enough to get TV ratings. Ross Perot made a splash as a 3rd party candidate because he spent a ton of money and came in during the right political climate... He got lucky, and the media picked up on him.
I wrote this in an earlier Nader thread, but I think it's true:
I know he doesn't actually quit working in the years in between, but what I was saying that if he is serious about turning around our government, he has to find a way to get the grassroots working. You see major candidates start years ahead of time in Iowa, doing a lot of door to door campaigning, developing local offices, and just getting out there. I'm not so sure that Nader does that enough. Also, he's no spring chicken, what happens to the movement when he is gone? There needs to be a charismatic leader to pick up where he leaves off.
And as far as people getting their news from other sources, that maybe true, but the vast majority of the people aren't digging any deeper... You look at Google searches and Yahoo news searches, and the top searched categories are still celebrity gossip, and whatever the story of the day is on the cable news networks. People are going different places, but the major news media is still setting the agenda.
That's why it has to be a ground-up change... Older voters are still going to vote for their party, and as younger voters get older, once they have their own families, etc., a lot of us get more complacent and apathetic to some huge change... we have a million other day-to-day things to worry about.
That goes back to your thread about what will it take to resist... I have a wife and a family, we juggle child care and other schedules, rising prices on gas and every other bills, and lack of free time, so when we do get a weekend off or some evenings off, we would much rather do fun "family" stuff, then worry about changing all of the wrongs with the world... Once our daily lives and freedoms get noticeable altered, only then will most people resist.
So, if you start getting third party candidates on local town boards, and city councils, then state government positions, and people see a difference, then we might see a reduction in the power of a two party system.
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
So all the websites with .com are trying to sell you something?
It's taking me forever to post this because of all the pop ups and ads I have to navigate through on this .com page...
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Thanks for answering for macgyver
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
when corporations who provide you media... have stuff on their teleprompter that your news guys read to you... and its making candidates look like jokes... than im sorry to inform you about the country you live in... but it might as well be blacklisting... not to mention the fact he will be excluded from attending debates..
HOW CAN YOU ALL NOT SEE THE SILENCING THATS GOING ON??
im not even voting for Nader and its ridiculous!
what the fuck are you talking about??
this isnt a media outlet?
im trying to inform people that candidates are being silenced by corporations who CONTROL YOUR MEDIA AND NEWS
and this is the kind of shit you guys invade my threads with..
this is no conspiracy lazy moon.. and if you think i'm wrong... why not come back with something that disproves my theory?
on the subject of sheep and your failure to understand reality..
PearlJam.com is in fact... get ready for this...
here to sell pearl jam
OH MY GODDDDD
who knew?