please show me where i said that's why people are voting for obama. i merely replied that's where the impasse lies. great for you for liking a candidate, but that is also a pretty safe position to be in: to think that nader would accomplish what he states but yet you'll never know. because he will not be elected. as for obama, we'll have a chance to see what he can accomplish. and hopefully he will accomplish these shared beliefs. i'm personally pretty jazzed about the situation.
He has already had time to prove he's more than just words. I haven't seen anything too impressive.
i stated that i thought nader's presidential run was misguided. i didn't call you misguided. however, you did imply that obama supporters themselves were misguided. was there a point with all of this? it's lost on me.
So supporting a presidential run that is misguided isn't misguided on my part? I took them as the same. Or are you privy to some clear sense of guidance I'm not able to tap into?
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
He has already had time to prove he's more than just words. I haven't seen anything too impressive.
and that's why you're not voting for him. others who have and will obvs feel differently. but what i was saying above, which obviously i did not make clear enough, was that we will never see what nader can accomplish in the capacity of being president and having to deal with the rest of the government in our system of checks and balances. we have not yet seen what obama can do in that capacity as president, though he has worked with congress in a different capacity). but i'm trying to make that happen and i think we have a chance at that one.
So supporting a presidential run that is misguided isn't misguided on my part? I took them as the same. Or are you privy to some clear sense of guidance I'm not able to tap into?
well i'd probably have to get ffg on this, but i think what you said is fallacious. i said i think nader's presidential run is misguided. you are not nader's presidential run; therefore, it is not a given that you are misguided.
if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside
"Name Recognition: Ralph Nader has the name recognition to run a serious presidential campaign that reaches the masses of voters. Most Americans of every economic class and ethnic group know who Ralph Nader is.[/quote] And what they know about Ralph Nader is that he always stands up for the little people against the big moneyed interests.
Media Presence: Nader has the public profile, record, and stature to command media attention, which he continues to receive today as a prominent public citizen. As a serious presidential candidate who could have a big impact on the debate and outcome, Nader’s coverage will explode when he announces. An historic reunion of Nader and the Greens in 2008 in a unified independent progressive presidential campaign to stop the war, meet the people’s needs, and save the planet will electrify progressive activists, upset the two corporate party election dynamic, and compel the focus of the media spotlight."
"Ralph Nader doesn't have the biggest problem of most third- and fourth-party candidates: name recognition. Since the mid-1960s, when he burst on the national scene with his book on dangerous automobiles, "Unsafe At Any Speed," Nader has been one of the nation's best known consumer advocates."
"Name Recognition: Ralph Nader has the name recognition to run a serious presidential campaign that reaches the masses of voters. Most Americans of every economic class and ethnic group know who Ralph Nader is. And what they know about Ralph Nader is that he always stands up for the little people against the big moneyed interests.
Media Presence: Nader has the public profile, record, and stature to command media attention, which he continues to receive today as a prominent public citizen. As a serious presidential candidate who could have a big impact on the debate and outcome, Nader’s coverage will explode when he announces. An historic reunion of Nader and the Greens in 2008 in a unified independent progressive presidential campaign to stop the war, meet the people’s needs, and save the planet will electrify progressive activists, upset the two corporate party election dynamic, and compel the focus of the media spotlight."
"Ralph Nader doesn't have the biggest problem of most third- and fourth-party candidates: name recognition. Since the mid-1960s, when he burst on the national scene with his book on dangerous automobiles, "Unsafe At Any Speed," Nader has been one of the nation's best known consumer advocates."
If you wanna sit here and pretend Nader gets anywhere even remotely close to the amount of coverage Obama, Hillary and McCain get then go right ahead..... He is known nationally, sure but certainly not by the masses in general and most often is associated with the negative spin the media loves to pin him with.
Even you were posting that Nader hasn't done anything but bring us seat belts, spoil the 2000 election and then disappear every 4 years between elections so you kinda made my point for me.
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
and that's why you're not voting for him. others who have and will obvs feel differently. but what i was saying above, which obviously i did not make clear enough, was that we will never see what nader can accomplish in the capacity of being president and having to deal with the rest of the government in our system of checks and balances. we have not yet seen what obama can do in that capacity as president, though he has worked with congress in a different capacity). but i'm trying to make that happen and i think we have a chance at that one.
Yeah but my point was that Nader already has actions to back up his words and Obama....not so much. And I'm just not seeing much of a shift in current policy in any of Obama's stances either way not on the issues we need to finally start addressing if we really hope to see come actual change.
well i'd probably have to get ffg on this, but i think what you said is fallacious. i said i think nader's presidential run is misguided. you are not nader's presidential run; therefore, it is not a given that you are misguided.
But like I asked, does me supporting this 'misguided' run make me also misguided? If not then explain that please.
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
Yeah but my point was that Nader already has actions to back up his words and Obama....not so much. And I'm just not seeing much of a shift in current policy in any of Obama's stances either way not on the issues we need to finally start addressing if we really hope to see come actual change.
But like I asked, does me supporting this 'misguided' run make me also misguided? If not then explain that please.
if i haven't made myself clear already well i just don't know what more to say to help. especially with what you said in the first part above, we'll keep going in circles.
if you wanna be a friend of mine
cross the river to the eastside
if i haven't made myself clear already well i just don't know what more to say to help. especially with what you said in the first part above, we'll keep going in circles.
Fine by me because it seems you're not seeing the point in what I'm saying either.
You've said it has nothing to do with Obama's ability to win vs Nader's but I haven't gotten much else out of you besides that point. And I think our gov't could and would be able to work with Nader's ideas, especially considering how the people support them. And if they don't then they should lose their jobs for not representing us and for blocking much needed change that the majority is behind. If we keep simply accepting the fact that our govt works against our own best interests in the name of special interests as being 'just the way it is' then that mindset will ensure that nothing will ever change and it makes all the rhetoric that Obama keeps shouting about 'real change for a change' complete bullshit because even his supporters are saying how that's not even possible due to the way our system is set.
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
If you wanna sit here and pretend Nader gets anywhere even remotely close to the amount of coverage Obama, Hillary and McCain get then go right ahead..... He is known nationally, sure but certainly not by the masses in general and most often is associated with the negative spin the media loves to pin him with.
Even you were posting that Nader hasn't done anything but bring us seat belts, spoil the 2000 election and then disappear every 4 years between elections so you kinda made my point for me.
i am simply pointing out that he is basicly a household name, gets plenty of media coverage and has plenty of name recognition.
the point is people do not vote for him or supprt him because they choose not to, not because of some media conspiracy. the old "whoa as me ralph nader" pitty party doesnt hold water. the fact is, the media is not to blame for ralph getting 1-3% of the vote. the problem is ralph nader. but feel free to continue to blame people in dark shadows
here is a list of the corporate mass media conspiracy announcing Ralph Naders 2008 presidential bid
i am simply pointing out that he is basicly a household name, gets plenty of media coverage and has plenty of name recognition.
the point is people do not vote for him or supprt him because they choose not to, not because of some media conspiracy. the old "whoa as me ralph nader" pitty party doesnt hold water. the fact is, the media is not to blame for ralph getting 1-3% of the vote. the problem is ralph nader. but feel free to continue to blame people in dark shadows
here is a list of the corporate mass media conspiracy announcing Ralph Naders 2008 presidential bid
You're the only one bringing up conspiracy in a weak attempt to discredit my points.
Yeah, that he announced he's running. That is SO comparable to the exposure the mainstreamers are given. You really got me there. :rolleyes:
nice try.
all i have heard for 8 years is how their is a media blackout on ralph nader fuled by a corporate conspiracy...and you have said the same thing, you just said the conspiracy was "blatant"
and these claims always come from Nader supporters... and it is bullshit. the media doesnt follow nader because ralph nader is not interesting news to 99% of the world.
thats all i am saying.
why do the Boston Red Sox get more national TV coverage then the Baltimore Orioles? because the Red Sox are a better team so more pople are interested, thats why. same thing.
people always blame the media, the media is just giving the public what they want. and the public wants shit, so they get shit. so please stop blaming the man behind the curtain.
all i have heard for 8 years is how their is a media blackout on ralph nader fuled by a corporate conspiracy...and you have said the same thing, you just said the conspiracy was "blatant"
and these claims always come from Nader supporters... and it is bullshit. the media doesnt follow nader because ralph nader is not interesting news to 99% of the world.
thats all i am saying.
why do the Boston Red Sox get more national TV coverage then the Baltimore Orioles? because the Red Sox are a better team so more pople are interested, thats why. same thing.
people always blame the media, the media is just giving the public what they want. and the public wants shit, so they get shit. so please stop blaming the man behind the curtain.
yeah that's the same thing exactly...how insightful
the media is controlled by corporations and ran by their money. Things/people that don't fit into that agenda are not covered. This is nothing new and it's not a conspiracy.
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
seems the media outlets decide what 'news' is. When they decided Ralph Nader wasn't a story they made it harder for him to get his voice heard. The fact that he is even considered when people discuss the mainstream candidates shows just how powerful his platform is. They can only hide the truth for so long.
seems the media outlets decide what 'news' is. When they decided Ralph Nader wasn't a story they made it harder for him to get his voice heard. The fact that he is even considered when people discuss the mainstream candidates shows just how powerful his platform is. They can only hide the truth for so long.
people blame the media, i blame the people for watching... TV sells what sells, period... if long drawn out detailed coverage of key political discusions got them ratings then they would all be running the PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer... guess what, people dont watch that shit and dont want to.
news is 24/7 now... people want it as entertainment, sprinkled with a little info, so that is what is given to them...
not to mention that the internet is wide open for anyone, google ralph nader and you get about 8 million hits... you can see some links above
the media isnt hiding anything, the people are hiding it from themselves
people blame the media, i blame the people for watching... TV sells what sells, period... if long drawn out detailed coverage of key political discusions got them ratings then they would all be running the PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer... guess what, people dont watch that shit and dont want to.
news is 24/7 now... people want it as entertainment, sprinkled with a little info, so that is what is given to them...
not to mention that the internet is wide open for anyone, google ralph nader and you get about 8 million hits... you can see some links above
the media isnt hiding anything, the people are hiding it from themselves
Do me a favor and do a NEWS search on Google and see how many hits you get for each candidate.
Spoiler warning:
Nader gets about 1% of the news coverage that either Obama or Hillary get. :cool:
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.
Comments
so, you dont think people know who Ralph Nader is? and that is because of a corporate controlled media conspiracy?
i will just say that i think you are wrong on both counts. nader is extremely well known, and he is a non issue because, well, he is a non issue.
conspiracy? they are pretty blatant about it.
oh well that makes sense...he is because he just 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
He has already had time to prove he's more than just words. I haven't seen anything too impressive.
So supporting a presidential run that is misguided isn't misguided on my part? I took them as the same. Or are you privy to some clear sense of guidance I'm not able to tap into?
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
and that's why you're not voting for him. others who have and will obvs feel differently. but what i was saying above, which obviously i did not make clear enough, was that we will never see what nader can accomplish in the capacity of being president and having to deal with the rest of the government in our system of checks and balances. we have not yet seen what obama can do in that capacity as president, though he has worked with congress in a different capacity). but i'm trying to make that happen and i think we have a chance at that one.
well i'd probably have to get ffg on this, but i think what you said is fallacious. i said i think nader's presidential run is misguided. you are not nader's presidential run; therefore, it is not a given that you are misguided.
cross the river to the eastside
Media Presence: Nader has the public profile, record, and stature to command media attention, which he continues to receive today as a prominent public citizen. As a serious presidential candidate who could have a big impact on the debate and outcome, Nader’s coverage will explode when he announces. An historic reunion of Nader and the Greens in 2008 in a unified independent progressive presidential campaign to stop the war, meet the people’s needs, and save the planet will electrify progressive activists, upset the two corporate party election dynamic, and compel the focus of the media spotlight."
http://www.draftnader.org/case-for-nader.php
"Ralph Nader doesn't have the biggest problem of most third- and fourth-party candidates: name recognition. Since the mid-1960s, when he burst on the national scene with his book on dangerous automobiles, "Unsafe At Any Speed," Nader has been one of the nation's best known consumer advocates."
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/candidates/velection/nader.shtml
"Mr Nader, 73, enjoys high name recognition, is a familiar figure on American television and author of several books."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jun/21/uselections2008.usa
Nader not winning (which is likely)
or Nader winning and not being able to do anything because he cannot function in a deeply corrupt system?
I believe anything is possible if we demand enough from our gov't in place of our current policy of accepting nothing from them.
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 you wanna sit here and pretend Nader gets anywhere even remotely close to the amount of coverage Obama, Hillary and McCain get then go right ahead..... He is known nationally, sure but certainly not by the masses in general and most often is associated with the negative spin the media loves to pin him with.
Even you were posting that Nader hasn't done anything but bring us seat belts, spoil the 2000 election and then disappear every 4 years between elections so you kinda made my point for me.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Yeah but my point was that Nader already has actions to back up his words and Obama....not so much. And I'm just not seeing much of a shift in current policy in any of Obama's stances either way not on the issues we need to finally start addressing if we really hope to see come actual change.
But like I asked, does me supporting this 'misguided' run make me also misguided? If not then explain that please.
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 haven't made myself clear already well i just don't know what more to say to help. especially with what you said in the first part above, we'll keep going in circles.
cross the river to the eastside
Fine by me because it seems you're not seeing the point in what I'm saying either.
You've said it has nothing to do with Obama's ability to win vs Nader's but I haven't gotten much else out of you besides that point. And I think our gov't could and would be able to work with Nader's ideas, especially considering how the people support them. And if they don't then they should lose their jobs for not representing us and for blocking much needed change that the majority is behind. If we keep simply accepting the fact that our govt works against our own best interests in the name of special interests as being 'just the way it is' then that mindset will ensure that nothing will ever change and it makes all the rhetoric that Obama keeps shouting about 'real change for a change' complete bullshit because even his supporters are saying how that's not even possible due to the way our system is set.
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 am simply pointing out that he is basicly a household name, gets plenty of media coverage and has plenty of name recognition.
the point is people do not vote for him or supprt him because they choose not to, not because of some media conspiracy. the old "whoa as me ralph nader" pitty party doesnt hold water. the fact is, the media is not to blame for ralph getting 1-3% of the vote. the problem is ralph nader. but feel free to continue to blame people in dark shadows
here is a list of the corporate mass media conspiracy announcing Ralph Naders 2008 presidential bid
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/24/nader.politics/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23319215/
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/nader-announces-vp-pick/
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/02/24/nader-says-he-will-run-for-president/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7261670.stm
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8655.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/28/ralphnader.uselections2008
http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/ralph_nader_running_again_impa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufKqqZvJmNA
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/24/politics/main3869672.shtml
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=4336298&page=1
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/02/24/nader_announces_run_for_president/
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-talk/2008/02/nader_hopes_third_presidential.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-02-24-nader_N.htm
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usdems255590663feb25,0,1644267.story
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed8/idUSN2465110920080224
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/24/nader-announces-run-for-p_n_88163.html
that is one hell of a conspiracy fueled media blackout against Ralph Nader :rolleyes:
You're the only one bringing up conspiracy in a weak attempt to discredit my points.
Yeah, that he announced he's running. That is SO comparable to the exposure the mainstreamers are given. You really got me there. :rolleyes:
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
which is not the point i was even making so i will just end here.
cross the river to the eastside
nice try.
all i have heard for 8 years is how their is a media blackout on ralph nader fuled by a corporate conspiracy...and you have said the same thing, you just said the conspiracy was "blatant"
and these claims always come from Nader supporters... and it is bullshit. the media doesnt follow nader because ralph nader is not interesting news to 99% of the world.
thats all i am saying.
why do the Boston Red Sox get more national TV coverage then the Baltimore Orioles? because the Red Sox are a better team so more pople are interested, thats why. same thing.
people always blame the media, the media is just giving the public what they want. and the public wants shit, so they get shit. so please stop blaming the man behind the curtain.
yeah that's the same thing exactly...how insightful
the media is controlled by corporations and ran by their money. Things/people that don't fit into that agenda are not covered. This is nothing new and it's not a conspiracy.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
people blame the media, i blame the people for watching... TV sells what sells, period... if long drawn out detailed coverage of key political discusions got them ratings then they would all be running the PBS Newshour with Jim Lehrer... guess what, people dont watch that shit and dont want to.
news is 24/7 now... people want it as entertainment, sprinkled with a little info, so that is what is given to them...
not to mention that the internet is wide open for anyone, google ralph nader and you get about 8 million hits... you can see some links above
the media isnt hiding anything, the people are hiding it from themselves
I completely agree.
Do you think that a better place to start would be the corporate media? We boycott their products until they agree to report accurately and fairly.
the media is little more than a mouthpiece of corporations which control politicians.
If we can get the corporations in line then we can control the politicians.
Electing nader is just a glorified "none of the above" choice.
which is not a choice. It's too little, too late.
Do me a favor and do a NEWS search on Google and see how many hits you get for each candidate.
Spoiler warning:
Nader gets about 1% of the news coverage that either Obama or Hillary get. :cool:
Nader
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=nader&btnG=Search+News
Obama
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=obama&btnG=Search+News
Clinton
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um=1&tab=wn&q=clinton&btnG=Search+News
***********************
"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.
I saw we take actions on ALL fronts not just one here and there because they all need drastic change to compliment each other effectually.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
again, I completely agree. I just don't believe you are realistic in terms of how it's going to happen. You are putting your socks on over your shoes.
Obama will be a stabilizing element. I'm not expecting much more.