Nothing funny about Nader

[LoZoccolo]

Really, there's nothing funny about Ralph Nader. His repeated sallies onto the campaign trail are not amusing, but merely laughable. Now apparently beginning his third run for the White House, Nader seems determined to keep hurting his natural allies until he has taught them a lesson of some sort. In the process he undermines the democratic process, even as he exploits it.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/5526840.html

[whatchamacallit]

1. I think people are onto his spoiler games at this point

If he runs, I predict he won't have anywhere near the support he's enjoyed in the past. Hopefully he'll just dry up and blow away.

[Occam Bandage]

2. Which is exactly why the Republicans funded him in '04.

[Exilednight]

4. I'm no Nadar fan, but ...

this is America and we are a democracy. I will not begrudge him, or anyone who supports him. I can see the issues that many people find appealing about his campaign. I honestly believe that is where many Democrats want to be, but they know that it's a failed position. America is split in three equal groups, left - middle - right. The trick is finding a way to get garnish enough of the middle without compromising too much.

I give Nadar credit for tilting at windmills. It's easy for people to laugh at him, but I find an admirable quality in it.

[eleny]

3. "he undermines the democratic process"

I don't understand how he undermines the process. I've never voted for him but he does have the right to run. Is this still America or what?

I think it's laughable how people say they'd fight for the right of people to say something they don't agree with. But when it comes to someone's right to run for election we freak out.

Nader's positions aren't outrageous. Most are embraced by DUers. Time to make a deal.

[whatchamacallit]

7. I agree with most of his positions, and support his right to be heard, but

he doesn't work for it like everybody else. He doesn't have to do all the hard and nasty shit, or endure the rigors of the primaries. He just drops in at the end and fucks shit up because he can.

[eleny]

8. Then work to change the process

[Exilednight]

10. There is no law that requires a party to hold a primary, Primaries are really an ...

invention of the 20th century. Before that parties picked the candidates by using party insiders.

Here's the problem, it will be kind of interesting to see what right wing third parties come to life. Will the Libertarian movement finally get the kick-start it has been so desperately seeking? Will Jesse Ventura keep his word and announce a run? Stay tuned as these answers and more are answer on as the shrub replacement turns.

[anigbrowl]

18. He has name recognition

so (in california at least), the Green Party put him on the ballot just because he was known and a few voters would recognise him and go 'oh yeah! Nader! Cool!'.

The green party is a bit of a mess here, whereas in European countries they've largely turned into a grown-up political party - but then those countries tend to have functioning multi-party democracies because they are structured rather differently from the US system.

[stimbox]

5. Dooga, dooga, dooga? n/t

[LoZoccolo]

6. Looks like there might be a 2008 sequel! n/t

[stimbox]

12. I look forward to it. This time find a bigger, meaner supporter to taunt.

I'd love to see that.



:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[FreakinDJ]

9. Ralph Nader = Karl Rove's secret weapon in 08

As seen during the last election cycle he will be funded almost exclusively by republican big money contributers to hand yet another election to the republicans

Words just don't do justice to the amount of sell-out he encompasses for the American people

[COFoothills]

11. At this point...

...I am convinced that Ralph Nader is a republican operative.

I used to respect him for his consumer advocacy work. But not any more.

[zulchzulu]

13. Just as we have mosquitos, we have Nader

I absolutely respect the work he has done for the consumer, but his presidential bids are simply an ego massage for himself.

He'll get 1% again. Lots of time and money that could go to more productive efforts will be gone.

[WTyler]

14. It's sad to see what's happened to Nader

I supported Ralph in 2000. In fact I was on one of his state coordinating committees and met him several times in that capacity. 2000 was a different world than 2008 (or 20004 for that matter). In 2000 Gore was running as a DLC style democrat (if only the Gore of today was the Gore of then) and promoting a continuation of Clinton policies that had marginalized large portions of the Democratic base. Bush was running as a "compassionate conservative" and there was no indication of what he would become after 9-11-01. Pretty much the entire thing was about removing the DLC crowd from power so we could elect a progressive in 2004. EVERYONE knew that.

Unfortunately Nader himself seems to have missed the memo on what we were doing in 2000. After 9/11 Bush created such a crisis situation that the important thing was to stop his presidency. Howard Dean stepped forward to represent the "democratic wing of the Democratic party". Dennis Kucinich stepped up to represent the more... colorful elements of the old campaign. Several of his former supporters (including myself) wrote, called, or met with him urging him to get back on board with the Democrats. Michael Moore and Bill Maher (both former Nader supporters) went so far as to get on their hands and knees and beg him on national television not to run again. He didn't listen. He ran.

Whatever. Life goes on, and the Democratic party continues to move away from the corporate DLC model of the 90s. Whether Ralph Nader has noticed or not.

[anigbrowl]

16. Yep fully agree. The only good thing about him is...

that like Dennis Kucinich, he draws the ideological extremists to him.

Kucinich is a really nice guy - I even campaigned for him in 2004. And he articulates really nice policies. But nice isn't the whole story - I don't have confidence in the ability of someone like DK to balance the budget or respond to a military crisis or take any decisions that requires a choice between two unpleasant alternatives.

Ralph Nader is the same, but more so. The things he's against are bad, but he has no real policies or solutions. All he can do is draw protest voters...the kind that are eternally pissed off and won't be happy until everyone agrees to move back to living in trees or suchlike (though a lot of them seem happy enough to own iPods and cellphones). The one good thing about Ralph Nader is that by drawing these people off, it saves time on Democrats having to make excuses for them when arguing with Republicans.

[applegrove]

15. I just hope the Democratic nominee wins in such a way that there

are very few people who will vote against them - which means Nader. A fair & square win for the nominee is what we need.

[Renew Deal]

17. Nader is well on his way to becoming Lyndon Larouche

Nader should be treated like the enemy, because he is the enemy.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

19. Yeah, except I don't think Lyndon got enough votes

to affect a general election.

Nader can do it. Rove knows that. Nader can expect big Republican donations.

We are so dumb sometimes ...

[eissa]

20. I can't believe he's seriously

doing this. You would think a man like Nader would be just as horrified, if not more, at what has happened to the country after 8 years of shrub. Why would he in any way try to siphon votes, as few as they may be, away from us? I agree every one should be heard, but let's be realistic here. If the Green Party wants to be really taken seriously, run for local/state seats, get a foothold in there first. Grow your base and then run in a presidential race.