Ralph Nader is running. You know who I think you can thank for that?

[mtnsnake]

I think you can thank Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and almost the entire Democratic Congress who failed to deal with the real issues in a responsible manner, and that includes Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and right on down the line....the people who should have ended this war and impeached "the most impeachable president and vice president in history". If the people we elected had done what we hoped they'd do, I highly doubt that frigging Ralph Nader would be running.


Nader had a talk with Obama very recently and on MTP they played a clip of Obama running Nader down verbally to the press. Nader was clearly upset with Obama for not listening to him, and he went on to pretty much crucify Obama, saying how he doesn't have much of a record, how he doesn't take any steps for peace in the Israel/Palestine situation, and how he leans corporately in all his political maneuvers...among other things.

Nader and Russert didn't talk much about Hillary because I guess they assume she's all washed up. All Nader said was that Hillary's political strategists ruined her campaign and that any money that he receives for donations will not be wasted on political strategists like what happened in the Clinton campaign.

[skipos]

1. Actually, you can thank Ralph Nader and no one else. nt

[terrya]

3. Exactly right.

:thumbsup:

[Captain Hilts]

2. Then why'd he run in 2004? Nader is to blame for Nader running. nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. Nader. Nobody else is to blame.

[UALRBSofL]

5. Wow, this happened between Naderand Obama???

Well, Nader has no room to talk about Hillary's campaign seeing Nader has run like 5 or 6 times, LOL.

[rodeodance]

12. This will be interesting to say the least.

[demo dutch]

6. Nah he just wants a secure place in the history books, and that will surely happen again

[rpannier]

7. Nader

He chose to run.

[EffieBlack]

8. No - it's not any Democrat's fault. Ralph Nader is an opportunist

If he were so concerned about how Congressional Democrats have been operating, where has he been for the past 8 years? He doesn't say a word, do a thing or lift a finger in between elections. He doesn't use any of his supposed clout to force change. He just sits quietly and then every fourth year, he crawls out from under his rock and screams at the top of his lungs.

But I think people are on to him now. They should be. He's an opportunistic gadfly.

[demo dutch]

10. There will be some who will support him, but you'd hope they've learned since 2000

[mtnsnake]

13. Some people are just too thick to ever learn.

That is a fact of life, unfortunately.

[njtechguy]

bs

if nader was serious about making changes and creating that real 3rd party he speaks of. he would spend his time supporting people running on county and state levels to start. then get some reps in the house and maybe a couple senators out there. showing up every 4 years to do this is doing nothing for his cause.

[mtnsnake]

17. It might be bs, but it was shocking for me to actually hear him live on TV say he was running

I think Russert was shocked, too, although he's probably kind of acting and knew in advance I would imagine.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

25. Welcome to DU. Well said.

:toast:

[Botany]

9. This is 100% Ralph being an ass.

Ask him and he will tell you that he didn't effect Florida 2000
as he took money from republicans to run commericals.

[UALRBSofL]

14. Nader did effect the election

He took about 100,000 florida votes that would have gone to Gore.

[Exilednight]

34. I'm no friend of Nader, and I love Al Gore, but this statement ...

is completely ignorant of any facts. The green party registered thousands upon thousands of new voters in Florida. There is no fact that any or all of those votes would have gone to Gore.

You might want to also think about why people voted for Nader. Do you think it might be possible that the Democratic party has failed to live up to expectations of many people? Do you believe that votes are earned and not owed?

Personally I think Nader is a nut job, but don't blame the village idiot for Gore's shortcomings.

[Florida22ndDistrict]

46. RE: Nader did effect the election

First, the supreme court was the determining factor that tossed Florida to Bush. Second, why do you assume that those Nader voters would have voted for Gore? Every Nader voter in Florida I have spoken with was dissatisfied with both of their options and would have sat out of the elections if they didn't have an alternative to “protest vote” for. He had no real effect on the 2000 election. Stop misplacing the blame on Nader and direct it where it belongs, 1) Sandra Day O'Connor, 2) Catherine Harris & Jeb Bush, 3) the Bush Campaign.

[monmouth]

51. I'm sorry....affect..n/t

[Florida22ndDistrict]

52. Its one letter, was it realy worth the post?

As a Biden supporter I would have thought you would have put more weight into the substance of an idea rather then its shinny appearance. I guess you see Joe in a special light.

[monmouth]

57. Well, it would have been a "shiny" appearance, and yes, it was worth it...n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

11. Nader Is A Narcissistic, Egotistical, Selfish, Ignorant, Lying, Deceitful Utter Piece Of Filth.

The blame rests squarely on his piece of shit brainless shoulders. Period.

[TZ]

31. You forgot

STUPID. How the fuck does he think he's gonna help this situation? I remember you once had an avatar that said it all: Fuck Nader.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

37. Hehehe.

[samplegirl]

15. I could not agree

with you more!

[mtnsnake]

26. Thank you. I'm so disappointed that the 2006 elections ended up meaning squat for us

and I know Nader was serious when he talked about how the Democrats always fail to do anything about what's clearly wrong.

If the Democrats ended the war, like we all thought the would, and if they tried to hold Bush and Cheney accountable, we wouldn't be on this merry-go-round of a Nader mess again.

[Yurovsky]

16. I've always loved Ralph Nader ...

but I'm not sure his actions of late have really helped the progressive movement. He's certainly done more to keep Chimpy in the White House than anyone else I can think of outside of the GOP (albeit perhaps unitentionally).

I know where he's coming from, as I often feel the same way. But how much of this is Ralph's ego, and how much of it is Ralph's desire to do the right thing? At this point, I can't tell.

[UALRBSofL]

19. Yurovsky, I suppose you have a point

Problem is, our country doesn't seem to want a third party. This isn't like Europe.

[JVS]

18. You're blaming the "goddess of peace"?

:rofl:

[mtnsnake]

20. Did any of our people, with the exception of Dennis Kucinich, tackle the REAL issues?

No, they didn't. We're still at war, when the war should be over by now, and according to Nader, the two "most impeachable" politicians ever, Bush and Cheney, have not been held accountable by our Democratic Congress for a goddamn thing.

If our wimpy assed Congress had done their jobg, then this dipshit probably wouldn't be running. He made it clear that he hates what the Republicans are doing, but the Democrats haven't done an iota to clean up the mess.

[UALRBSofL]

22. Kucinich would have been a good choice

But people aren't ready for a true progressive. I would have voted for him.

[mtnsnake]

29. People aren't ready for him? I'm starting to think it's our own people who won't give DK the chance.

But you're right. He is the ONLY true progressive, and that's why I documented it so many times in the past that he was always my number one choice throughout the primaries, despite me sticking up for Hillary (always my second favorite) all the time.

[TZ]

28. Oh yes, Lets help the democrats by

Electing more Republicans. Yay Ralph. You fucking moron.

[rasputin1952]

40. Yes, Bill Richardson did as well...no one wanted to hear about issues

at the time... most people have been taught to look at "star" quality, we have become a society that looks at "celebrity" and tosses all else off.

Inevitably, the citizens of this nation believe things will "work out" like they do in movies and in books...when that is not the case, because to make a system work people actually have to work, people feel cheated. They have cheated themselves, but they blame anything else they can.

Nader is a joke, and yet people will see this as some "noble" effort. The real "noble" effort comes from people that act and get things done, not sit around waiting for "something positive to happen".

[mtnsnake]

41. Thanks, I forgot about Bill

and I couldn't agree more with your post. The thing that really worries me, though is that Nader will be bluntly point out things about our nominee that we will not want anyone else to hear. It's one thing when he disses the Republicans; eveyone expects him to do that, but when he disses the Democratic nominee, weird things happen in the minds of some people and then we lose votes.

[blondeatlast]

21. Yes. Ralph Nader. He's irrelevant and deluded, two qualites I'd like to avoid in a president. nt

[seaglass]

23. You are right. Add the media in to those responsible. I actually

think Nader will get more votes this year than he has in the past. I can't believe I'm saying this as someone who excoriated (in my mind) those who voted for Nader in 2000, but I finally get it.

I'm not saying I'm voting for Nader. Never voted for a non-Democrat in my life but I am very unhappy with the choice in the voting booth this year.

[mtnsnake]

33. I agree with you about the media.

Nader pretty much opened the show by ranting about it.

I actually think Nader will get more votes this year than he has in the past.

Nader made it clear how much the internet will be to his advantage this time. He said how his internet gurus have assured him that his website will be the most attractive of any of the candidates. It was almost scarey to hear him talking so confidently.

[NashVegas]

24. Ultimately, You Can Thank the Press, IMO

They've been picking our presidents for too long, and acting like irresponsible children.

Today's broadcasters never hear the words "public interest, necessity and convenience" before they're handed a microphone.

[mtnsnake]

38. Oh for sure, that, too, but our own people should have done a better job to do what was RIGHT

and they weren't very successful, obviously. One of the reasons is because they were too scared to vote down funding for the war because they didn't want to be perceived as being unsupportive of the troops. This war could have been over, and it SHOULD be over by now. Pelosi is way way too cozy with Bush. And Hillary, Obama, Biden and the rest of them all vote to enable the war to continue. They share much of the blame for Nader jumping in, IMO.

[Debi]

27. Nader criticizes Obama's record?

How many years has Nader served in office?

[rasputin1952]

30. No, you can thank Nader's absurd ego, and masochistic

tendencies.

He has zero chance of being elected, he knows he is a "spoiler", and his "campaign" will bottom out, he is the epitomy of a fool.

I believe he is doing this for nothing more than getting Federal funds and soothing his pathetic ego.

[Franks Wild Years]

32. Nadar is a hardcore Republican...

...who operates under the rouse of left-wing crusader. That's been obvious for quite a few years now. Unfortunately, he manages to fool a few unequivocal buffoons into voting for him every time. His candidacy will only have legitimacy and exposure if McCain & the media decide to make it so.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

35. The votes of the left are available to the Democrats.

All they have to do is earn them.

[robbedvoter]

36. Not really worried here. Nader also ran in 2004

[mmonk]

39. You are correct in that it is Congress's fault.

I figured if Edwards didn't make it, Nader would run. I was correct in my assumptions.

[beyurslf]

42. I think we should thank Ralph Nader's ego.

[NJmaverick]

43. How about just blaming a-hole Nader?

He is an ego (screw the Country) maniac

[mtnsnake]

45. Yes, it was his decision but

I'm just telling you how he put it to Russert, which can lead to no other conclusion that Nader's reason for running is because the Republicans have ruined things, and the Democrats are failing to fix them, but instead are just leaning as corporately, politically, as anyone. Nader made it clear that he's running because our people are afraid to tackle the real issues and he's going to make sure the real issues are at least addressed. I'm paraphrasing, but that's what he said.

[NJmaverick]

47. Nader is a lying sack of excrement

Nader only cares about himself, so it really doesn't matter what anyone else does.

[suston96]

44. I believe Nader took New Hampshire in 2000....

http://www.bluehampshire.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3591

As well known round these parts (NH), in the 2000 General Election Nader garnered 22,198 votes. Al Gore out performed him 12:1 but lost (NH) to GWB by 7216 votes. CW says those are votes that would have gone for Gore (as opposed to votes that would not have voted). Even if Gore had just 7217 of those Nader votes we would likely be wrapping up year number eight of the Gore/Lieberman (that is strange to type) Administration.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cloudythescribbler]

49. To me, it's perverse that Nader'd endorse the running-against-his-own-record Edwards, whilst ...

making a point of launching a campaign against the (in my arrogant opinion) more authentically progressive Obama, a campaign in which his chances of making any serious headway (eg getting 5+% of the vote) are basically zero.

Here's a repost of a comment from other thread(s) of my analysis of Nader's candidacy, especially in 2000:

(I can't say that I have read a whole lot of material from the Obama campaign myself, but on the other hand, I don't put so much stock in all the specifics outlined by candidates in these documents). I have watched some 8 debates and several speeches by Obama during the campaign, and seen plenty of detail for my purposes there and in extensive social commentary.

Actually, the advantage of figures like Nader, to the extent that in an election where the ONLY significant impact they could possibly have is to be a spoiler helping the Repukes get power, is that they advocate positions, details or no details, like single payer health insurance ignored by the mainstream.

Nevertheless, as in the past, including Nader's MOST SUCCESSFUL (both in getting votes and in possibly tipping the election FROM the Democrats to the Repugs) in 2000, the MSM attention on Nader has been almost exclusively on his role as a spoiler, and he has done little to counteract that. In 2000 in particular, he spent LOTS of time campaigning in swing states like Penn, Ohio, and FL, and relatively little both in solid blue states (like MA, CT, and CA) AND IN SOLID RED STATES WHERE HE WOULDN'T ACT AS A SPOILER (such as TX, WY, and IN). Most states and jurisdictions fall into one of those two categories, even in widely contested races with many states "in play" such as in 2000.

What this and other factors show me is that Nader is more interested in drawing attention than in 'going hunting where the ducks are'. After all, the logic of the two MAIN candidates under the present system is to FOCUS on all the "purple" and 'purplish' states such as CO, MO, MN, OH, and FL, while the logic of someone running to get at least the minimum 5% threshold to qualify for federal financing (and possibly being included in the debates as well) is, as noted, exactly the opposite.
Nader, even in 2000, didn't even come CLOSE to getting 5% of the national vote.

As for building up a progressive movement (something I am very interested in, in its proper context, with groups like sds/mds -- the newly reconstituted students for a democratic society/movement for a democratic society) the fact that at Nader's main appearances in DC, his audience(s) were reportedly almost entirely white belies any notion that he is really effective in pursuit of that at least ostensible goal either

cloudy the scribbler

[dionysus]

50. brewer and shipley?

:hi:

[Forkboy]

53. I apllaud your efforts to get Dems to look at themselves, but Nader is our Clenis.

Not many Dems want to examine why he ran and had the effect he did. It's a denial that will come back to haunt us again and again whether it's Nader or someone else.

[ulysses]

54. rehabilitator!

:D

[Forkboy]

58. If I really was I'd start on myself.

:)

[Fire Walk With Me]

55. Exactly. Utter inattention to the national issues by our party have "created" a Nader run.

[RoadRage]

56. Right.. if only the Dems would just do exactly as they psycho - freak says, we could avoid

all of this??

WTF?

There are some good reasons to stay the hell away from Nader.. similar to why Repugs stay away from Ron Paul.

I'm not going to pretend to know all of the details of Naders platform - I don't. But, I will say, if he was so popular, and his thinking was in line with mainstream dems - then he could be running on our ticket. If he's so LEFT that most dem's don't like him (and most done) and his positions, then why the HELL is it the fault of Pelosi, Ried, Obama or Clinton for not following in step wiht what others in our party don't agree with?

It's NADERS fault.. and perhaps even the republicans that like to fund him.

If we want to get even, then rasie $10,000,000 and ship it over to Ron Paul - what's fair is fair, right?

[Swamp Rat]

59. Good points, but I am no longer intersted in Nader's point of view.

I can get my dose of reality from my candidates of choice like, Dennis Kucinich or John Edwards.

[VotesForWomen]

60. it's true; dems suck, and that includes Saint Obama, but it's so much more fun to bash nader than to

look in the mirror and make the changes that the dem party needs to make.

[bigbrother05]

61. Think we can thank McCain and the RW machine

They don't want to have a real election, just want to muddy the waters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4743657&mesg_id=4743657