A poll for those who hold Nader responsible for Bush

[WilliamPitt]

Poll question: A poll for those who hold Nader responsible for Bush

Has Michael Moore atoned for his support of Nader in 2000 by supporting Clark this time around, and by releasing F9/11?

(for the record, I don't think Bush is Nader's fault, ergo Moore needs to be absolved for nothing, but many do)

[cjbuchanan]

1. Remember that in less then a week before the election

Michael went to Florida and told people there NOT to vote for Nader. Vote for Gore because Florida is going to be very close.

[NMDemDist2]

4. yup that;s why i forgave him and that was AFTER he begged Nader

to do the same thing

[WilliamPitt]

2. .

[gpandas]

20. just read "thank you michael moore"...

especially you,Mr. Pitt, should take some special breaths of accomplishment. your stellar pursuit of the truth has led many to question the antics of this absurd administration. there are no words to express my heartfelt graditude for your efforts. maybe you can take a short break after the landslide.

[onehandle]

3. Nader was not fully responsible....

But he Was a factor. It was obvious that the election was going to be close. He should have avoided the swing states.

And he wanted Bush to win, so that he could further his cause and keep himself relevant. However he did not foresee the blowback that has marginalized him.

GOP cheating.

Gore running away from Clinton.

Democratic errors in Florida.

Nader.

All factors.

[Kahuna]

8. What makes Nadar think the bushies will play fair this time? He knows..

that they won't. He already knows that they hold all the power and use any trick in the book to keep it. So why is he helping them again? Obviously because he wants them to win again.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

9. Nader also stated publicly that the reason he was running was to....

..."make sure that Gore lost".

His campaign also allowed some GOP-supporters in the northwest to pay for a number of anti-Gore ads in Oregon, Washington, and other western states.

[Nlighten1]

12. Link?

Link to this statement by Nader please.

[onehandle]

18. Reference...

This is just one of many.

IF GIVEN A CHOICE BETWEEN BUSH AND GORE, HE WOULD VOTE FOR BUSH. Mr. Nader would happily throw the country to the Right, placing the Supreme Court, the rest of the federal judiciary, and the entire executive regulatory system including the Food and Drug Administration in the hands of the most retrograde elements in our political life. (see Outside Magazine, August 2000)

http://dir.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/06/letters/index.html?pn=3

Which, Nader confided to Outside in June, wouldn't be so bad. When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush." Not that he actually thinks the man he calls "Bush Inc." deserves to be elected: "He'll do whatever industry wants done." The rumpled crusader clearly prefers to sink his righteous teeth into Al Gore, however: "He's totally betrayed his 1992 book," Nader says. "It's all rhetoric." Gore "groveled openly" to automakers, charges Nader, who concludes with the sotto voce realpolitik of a ward heeler: "If you want the parties to diverge from one another, have Bush win."

http://outside.away.com/outside/magazine/200008/200008camp_nader1.html

[Nlighten1]

21. Ahhh...

So the first references the second but the first takes the second slightly out of context, or at least the portion of it you posted.

This is the important part of the original.

"If you want the parties to diverge from one another, have Bush win."


The parties MUST diverge if we are to save our country.

[Senior citizen]

22. Yes, Nader was right again.

And many on DU are concerned that the parties haven't diverged enough. Look at some of the threads wondering if Kerry will end the war or make any substantive reforms to the election system. There are threads wondering if Kerry is going to be in attendance at Bohemian Grove. Even after the theft of the 2000 election, the Dems were in complacent lockstep with the pukes as Gore presided over the electoral count--except for the Congressional Black Caucus and Rep. Bob Filner. And only in 2004 fundraisers have the Dems attempted to distance themselves from the pukes--prior to that it was go along to get along all the way.

Sometimes I think that the Nader-haters are corporate shills who are desparately trying to support the winner-take-all 2-party system on behalf of the business interests that own it. If you love democracy and want people to have a voice in government, and if you oppose fascism (government = business), you don't blame everything on the only voices calling for positive change.

[Nlighten1]

24. I couldn't agree more.

It never ceases to amaze me at how people just completely ignore the fact that the Democrats ARE fucked up. They are no longer the opposition party and John Kerry even admits this.

It just makes it easier for them to blame Ralph. If they blame the Dems, well, then the work begins. Then...they will have to come to the realization that we are really in big trouble here in America. I think it is just too much for some of them to think about so they take the easy way out and blame Nader.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

10. To what "Deomocratic errors in Florida" are you referring? Are you...

...referring to the "Felon's List" that scrubbed tens of thousands of legitimate, non-criminal Florida voters from the rolls? Are you talking about the "butterfly ballot" introduced by a woman that had also worked for Adnan Khoshoggi of Iran-Contra fame? How about the police roadblocks, the early poll closings, and the polling places that were closed the day before the election took place?

By the way, those activities also took place throughout the Southern States. The reason that the states other than Florida were not discussed is because of the number of electoral votes involved, the fact that Jebbie was governor, and the fact that the mainstream media virtually ignored what was going on elsewhere.

[onehandle]

17. No, most of those come under the GOP cheating category.

I meant the mistakes that Gore's handlers made during the recount.

I've been around long enough to know the facts.

[Skip Intro]

5. Do you think Kerry would have a better chance of beating bush if Nader

quit this race (for the good of the nation, of course)?

And if Nader stays in, and Kerry loses by the slimmest of margins in a pivotal state in which Nader recieves say, 4% of the vote, and Kerry therefore loses the election, would you hold him responsible for four more years of the bush regime? I would.

Not trying to argue or anything, but all the same elements are there.

I do hold Nader responsible for the 2000 theft - there were other factors, but it couldn't have happened without him. And he was practically begged to drop out. Water under the bridge, sure, and in fairness, I don't think anyone had any idea just how bad bushco was going to be.

What kills me is that now that we DO know how bad bush is, now that we've suffered thru almost four years of his lies and murderous deeds and damage that will take years to repair, with all that is at stake, Nader has chosen to replay the role he played in 2000.

And yes, MM has done a great thing by putting space between himself and a man who could (again) tilt the race to bush.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. Except for one minor detail. The Green Party has chosen to pick...

...someone else as their candidate. Nader no longer has the political support he had in 2000.

[Skip Intro]

15. It may not take much Nader support to swing a particular state

One percent of the vote could swing (or be used to steal) a particular state, and possibly, the entire election. Just like Florida in 2000.

Of course, the possibility that Nader could help bush this year could be eliminated 100%. And why not do that, if you can?

[stevebreeze]

6. registered as a not sure but really meant other

I have no doubt in my mind that the person most responsible for the loss of Al Gore is Al Gore. Yes the deck was stacked against him in many ways. i.e. the fed raising interest rates far enough in advance of the election to weaken the economy, despite any real evidence of inflation. However Gore had his best response coming out of the convention were he use the most populist rhetoric of his campaign. It seems likely to me that he backed off it because that sort of talk tends to scare off the moneyed interests. Had he kept up the same tone who knows?
The media also helped Bush a great deal. They bought into the idea that he was so stupid that if he but together a complete sentence in the debates he was the winner. He managed to memorize enough of those so the media had ever the more reason to show him support.
:kick:

[Kahuna]

7. You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. I don't hold 2000 ...

against him. I appreciate what he is doing now. But there is no atonement for supporting Satan. Whether that Satan is Nadar or Bush.

[Columbia]

13. Nader's letter to Michael

http://www.votenader.org/why_ralph/index.php?cid=83

Hey, Michael, Where Were Your Friends?

Once upon a time, there was Michael Moore the First. He never forgot his friends. Come time for the Washington, DC premiere of Bowling for Columbine a while back, he invited his old buddies in Washington—gave them good seats and spent the rest of the evening with them. During his other movie's premiere, he affectionately recognized how much those old friends helped him and supported him after he was mistreated and let go by Mother Jones. He was generous with his words and time.

Now there is Michael Moore the Second. Last night he hosted the Washington, DC premiere of Fahrenheit 9/11, and who was there? The Democratic political establishment, the same people whom he took to such mocking task on the road with us in campaign rally after campaign rally in 2000. Who was not there? His old buddies! Not personally invited, not personally hung out with.

A few weeks ago, Michael, I sent you a message: "Hey, Dude, where's my Buddy?" It is attached. It has gone without reply. It simply asked you to come back to your progressive constituency and take on the two-party monopoly of our rigged election system—to challenge the pro-warlike, corporate party with two heads, wearing different makeup when it comes to playing toady for Big Business. These are the giant multinationals who have no allegiance to our country or to communities like Flint except to control, deplete or abandon them. It is not that your views have changed, with an exception or two. It is that your circles have changed. Too much Clinton, not enough Camejo.

Your old friends remain committed to blazing paths for a just society and world. As they helped you years ago, they can help you now. They are also trim and take care of themselves. Girth they avoid. The more you let them see you, the less they will see of you. That could be their greatest gift to Moore the Second—the gift of health. What say you?

Best wishes,

Ralph Nader

[Myra]

14. I forgave Moore after his kickass Oscar speech

He's been a flat out hero since.

That man is courage personified.

[quaker bill]

16. Mike Moore is doing all he can.

Nader should not have run in 2000. Nader's entire Gore = Bush line is clear evidence of his true inability to judge character. He does the entire progressive movement a profound disservice by even trying to get on the ballot this year.

I like Ralph, he has stood up for alot of good things during his career. That being said, he is simply not cut out for elected office. He should stand aside.

[sffreeways]

19. Never

blamed him in the first place.

Voted for Gore

Respect others right to vote for the candidate of their choice.

Gore won.

[KG]

23. hi

:hi:

[JohnLocke]

25. Yes, of course.