We mock the "Get a brain morans", guy but 698,798 rocket scientists voted for Ralph Nader last year

[NNN0LHI]

Barely edging out Bob Barr for third place. Kind of mind boggling when you stop and think about it isn't it? And Alan Keyes walloped Ron Paul. Another little factoid.


http://election.cbsnews.com/election2008/president.shtml

[Naturyl]

1. It's "get a brain, morans"

Although there is no question the same type of troglodytes are those who shout "get a job."

[notesdev]

2. I don't blame 'em

It's high time enough people in this country woke up to the two-party cartel and the systemic corruption that it represents. Smashing it with third parties is the only outlet for expressing this, short of violence.

[DaveinMD]

3. yeah

that worked out so well for the country in 2000.

[Fading Captain]

19. If Gore wasn't such a windbag, beating Nader would have been easy

Stop blaming Nader and his voters for the failures of the Democratic Party to adhere to its own principles.

[DaveinMD]

41. back in the real world

those who voted for Nader instead of the Democratic party candidate helped put this nation in the shape it is today.

[High Plains]

67. Way more Democrats voted for Bush than for Nader.

Live with it.

[DaveinMD]

82. liberals

who voted for Nader instead of Gore threw that election to Bush and all the war and death we've had since are on their heads.

[Fading Captain]

100. The War and Death are on the hands of Dems

Who voted for it!

[timtom]

133. I believe that the ones who voted Republican are the culprits.

[DainBramaged]

52. Nader is a DOUCHE BAG whose time ended in 1966.

RethuglicanLite, the new Meme on DU.

[WhiteTara]

53. Nadir is gop tool

and he used all the right symbols for the political idiots. The spoiler strategy worked. The election was stolen and the world has endured misery.

[BlooInBloo]

74. Fuck Nader. Fuck Nader voters.

[AndyTiedye]

78. Nader Was Not Adhering to His Own Principles

Nader wasn't in the campaign to win, he was running a spoiler campaign to defeat Gore.
This is obvious from his itinerary in the fall of 2000. In every swing state where Gore
needed every vote he could get, there was Nader, campaigning against Gore. Yet Nader
insulted our intelligence by denying what he was so obviously doing.

If Nader were trying to get as many votes as possible, why was he in small swing states,
instead of states like NY or CA with lots of potential Nader voters? He only came to visit
us when he wanted money.

[Fading Captain]

95. You're a liar or you are misinformed

Nader didn't campaign hard in the swing states.
He mostly campaigned hardest in DEMOCRATIC states, states that have democratic values, states, which, coincidentally, also had the biggest turnouts at Nader events.

There's a great Nader documentary out there addressing these very issues -- An Unreasonable Man

Check it out.

[Jennicut]

164. Gore was never a windbag or do you let the MSM dictate to you how an election should go?

I listened to all of Gore's speeches back then and the man was an intelligent good person who would have made a great president. Too bad some decided that Bush and Gore were one in the same..not.

[JackRiddler]

57. Here we go again: GORE WON. Bush stole it. Only cowards blame Nader for Coup.

I know:

- massive media manipulation on Bush's behalf during 2000 campaign

- massive election fraud in Florida

- Gore wins anyway, but then a recount coup is managed by Bush's brother...

- ...with cooperation from all of the corporate media

- a system that gives the loser of the vote a chance to take the office anyway

- the corruption of the judiciary to the point where the high court effectively suspends constitutional procedure and just appoints their favored candidate, 5-4

- resulting illegitimate government proceeds to shred Constitution, fuck everyone and everything in highly intimidating fashion, effectively accusing its opponents of "helping the terrorists"

- two-thirds or more of the Democratic politicians cooperate fully in said fucking of the world

- it culminates with the rape of a distant nation and the robbery of every last remaining Treasury penny on behalf of the banking class...

Wow. This stuff is tough to deal with!!!

You're talking about bad guys seizing power in a coup d'etat, a tyranny. It's the duty of the patriot to resist them, but they have a lot of power and a lot of friends. Challenge them and you're quickly marginalized by the collaborator press.

But you do need a scapegoat.

Why not go the easy way? Why not Blame Ralph?

[DaveinMD]

63. you can't face the fact

that without Nader in the race, the election isn't close enough for Bush to steal.

Gore also made the mistake of never asking for a statewide recount. The media audits show he would have won in a full recount, but not in the limited recount he asked for.

[High Plains]

68. You can't face the fact that the Democratic Party doesn't own the voters.

It's a free country, and anyone can run for president. Democrats in 2000 did not manage to convince enough voters to vote for them.

These anti-Nader diatribes are the political equivalent of a three-year-old's temper tantrums, and about as useful.

[DaveinMD]

83. you are free to vote for anyone

but when a liberal votes for a fringe candidate instead of the most liberal of the major candidates, they are throwing away that voted. Its akin to staying home and there is no doubt it helps the Republicans.

[JackRiddler]

70. That's not a fact, it's speculation.

A criminal organization tried to steal the election, but failed. Bush actually got less votes in Florida than Gore. But the Bush organization managed to hide the true Florida result by way of further frauds, took over the US government, and established a tyranny.

That actually happened. It's not speculation.

What would have happened without Nader on the Florida ballot is both speculation and a complete distraction.

It's like, thieves are in the house and have your children hostage. And while this is still going on, you want to blame your neighbor's loud TV, because you think you might have heard the alarm otherwise. (It will turn out the alarm was defective.)

One could pick out many other counterfactual, hypothetical and utterly irrelevant scenarios:

- What would have happened if Gore had not made the worst vice-presidential pick in history, including Palin?

- What if he hadn't run against Clinton?

- Why didn't his campaign attack the Bush family record, or point out Bush Jr.'s many shady business dealings, or mention the fact that the only death sentence Gov. Bush commuted was that for Henry Lee Lucas?!

It's all speculative blah-blah, because GORE WON.

And then Bush stole it and raped the world.

BLAME THE RAPIST. Stop looking for blame among the victims.

[Fading Captain]

87. Dumb, da-dumb-dumb ... dummmmm

Nader was a small factor, not a big reason.

Blaming Nader for Gore's loss is sheer stupidity.

[DaveinMD]

89. hardly

he took more than enough votes to tip a close election.

[Fading Captain]

92. Here's a project for you Davein MD

Go make a list of EVERY SINGLE FUCKING TINY FUCKING FACTOR WHICH PLAYED INTO THE 2000 ELECTION RESULTS, and from there, we'll rank them and see where Ralph Nader figured in.

What was bigger to you, for example?

A few thousand Nader votes in Florida?
Or, Gore losing his home state?

[creeksneakers2]

98. Nader

And its the thought that counts most.

[DaveinMD]

99. the Nader voters in Florida and New Hampshire

were a much larger factor. Tennessee wasn't going to be close. Its a Republican state.

[Fading Captain]

102. Senator from Tennessee, what?

How;s that list coming?

[DaveinMD]

109. he hadn't been the Senator

from Tennessee for 8 years and both Senate seats were held by Republicans. The Nader voters were enough to swing the election. The last 8 years are on their heads.

[JackRiddler]

112. Gore won... get over it.

It's funny when the winners of the majority nationwide and in Florida, and the victims of the worst election fraud in US history spend their days bitching about a third-party candidate who won all of his 2.5% fair and square.

POINT YOUR FINGER AT THE THIEVES.

[DaveinMD]

115. the election

isn't even close without Nader pulling the votes he did in Florida. I know the Nader voters don't want admit they were wrong, but they were and the rest of us had to live with the consequences.

[JackRiddler]

116. Are you insane?

Next time Pinochet comes into the palace guns blazing, be sure to blame some obscure faction to the left of Allende!

Who stole the 2000 election?

STOLE. COUP D'ETAT. TYRANNY.

CONSPIRACY. GANGSTERS. CRIMINALS.

AGGRESSIVE WAR. MILLIONS DEAD. CONSTITUTION SHREDDED.

TRILLIONS STOLEN. SURVEILLANCE POLICE STATE.

DEMOCRATS COMPLICIT IN BUSH REGIME FOR EIGHT YEARS.

You can't deal with the truth, so you kick around Nader.

If Nader hadn't been there to pick up people who were otherwise mostly non-voters, the Bush mob would have figured out how to steal Florida anyway! (Do you disagree? Tough! It's a completely counterfactual hypothetical statement -- just like the unprovable claim that Nader cost anyone anything.)

[DaveinMD]

122. nope

but its pretty clear that you are.

[Fading Captain]

129. Consequences? How many DEMS voted against the Iraq resolution?

Who was president when NAFTA was signed?
How many Dems voted against the Patriot Act?

Don't fucking pin the last eight years on Nader and then hold your OWN FUCKING PARTY HARMLESS. That's what Republicans do. And apparently, that's what a certain type of Democrat does, too. The Binary Dem. The one who views politics like a college football rivalry. Who supports their party, and never questions it. And attacks everyone one.

Hold YOUR PARTY to the fucking fire. And the best way to do that is to show them you'll take your vote elsewhere.

[Fading Captain]

128. How's that list?

You keep ducking the issue.

Do you think Nader was the ONLY reason why Gore lost?

come on, sport. List the reasons.
We can work together on ranking them and present our findings to DU.

[Selatius]

119. But anybody could run for the president. It is democracy. Regardless of their reasons. nt

[DaveinMD]

123. anyone can run

doesn't mean voting for them is smart.

[Selatius]

159. See. You demonstrate my point. It's just your opinion.

Nader running was but one factor out of a list of many that included Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, the Supreme Court, the Electoral College, etc. that led to Bush being seated as the president. Those are the facts. Yet, people like to harp on only one factor at the expense of all others. I found the fact that purging 50,000 blacks from voter rolls in Florida prior to the election infinitely more offensive and stupid than one man deciding to run for the presidency, regardless of his odds.

What I don't understand is why there is a knot of people here who consistently keep beating on the dead horse Nader as opposed to the other things that occurred in those days. The fact that Nader ran should not be considered a problem, IMHO. That is democracy. If a man or woman wishes to run, then let them run, and if people do vote for them, then that is also democracy, regardless if you think it's dumb. An individual is supposed to earn another's vote, and this was one of the prime reasons people like Washington opposed political parties. Sure, Nader didn't earn your vote, but he earned someone else's vote. Whether they are stupid is subjective at best.

I have found America's voting system, SMDP, to be infinitely more discouraging and frustrating than the mere presence of Nader, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.

[fascisthunter]

167. Nader is and was a Red Herring... the Election was Stolen

Al Gore won it and the democratic party did nothing to prevent Bush from taking over and after he did, they voted for a war of aggression, a war crime. Oh and "impeachment was off the table" for the worst criminal this country has had to endure as President.

[dflprincess]

94. And if Gore had asked for a full recount

Bush would still have appealed to the Supreme Court and they would have found a way to stop the counting.

Given the reaction the Democratic party had to the theft of the 2000 and 2004 elections, I don't think it would have mattered if Nader had not run - Bushco would have stolen it anyway and the official stance of the Democratic party would have been to look the other way.

[Fading Captain]

96. Agreed, Gore's lawyers fucked up big time.

I never understood why they didn't go that route. I am not a legal scholar, but even at the time, I couldn't understand why they asked for recounts in only certain areas. It was stupid.

[Mr Rabble]

125. That just isnt accurate.

The SCOTUS stopped the recount. They literally subverted the will of the voters and gave the pResidency to Bush.
There is no debate about this.

I had as much to do with Gore "losing" as Nader did.

[malaise]

145. 100% correct n/t

[acmavm]

153. THANK YOU!

Thank you very much.

[Orrex]

4. That's why I'm voting Nader/Barr in 2012. Who's with me?!?!

Anyone?


Anyone?



Hello?





Anyone?

[mike_c]

5. agreed....

We'll never improve the leadership in this country as long as we have only two flavors of corporatists to elect.

[DainBramaged]

50. WASTED vote wasted. NONE of those clowns has a chance in 100 lifetimes

of gaining office. And by brainwashing the dumb and ignorant that there is a chance they can change or even manage our political system without a revolution is just asinine. Imagine if 100 of those votes were necessary to keep McSame out of office?

[OwnedByFerrets]

77. Instant run off is the answer...as well as federally funded elections.

[Marr]

171. Yep. The structure of our system ensures a two-party cartel.

The only way to change that is from the local level up-- because obviously, the cartel isn't going to disassemble it's own machinery. That's why I do support the Green Party on the local and state levels. They've had success there.

[bluestateguy]

6. PUMAs and far left commies

n t

[galledgoblin]

86. agreed (n/t)

[Sultana]

105. TRUTH!

[Gman]

7. And half of the Nader votes post on DU

the other half thinks DU is an evil DLC worshipping sound board for wannabe Republics.

[LoZoccolo]

44. lol n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

58. where half of 638,000 = 4

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. No Breed I've Found Dumber Than Nader Voters.

Their opinions are as worthless as their candidate.

[bluestateguy]

9. But they will "feel good" that they "voted their conscience"

[Fading Captain]

21. Don't give me that bullshit, OMC

You think that someone FED UP with corporate control of their democracy should cast a "strategic vote" for the lesser of two evils?

Seen who Obama surrounds himself with? It's a veritable who's who of Wall Street.
So get off your fucking high horse and stop being a two-bit crony.

[Occam Bandage]

55. Words you need to learn the meaning of:

1. Crony.

[Radical Activist]

90. I'm so tired of that cynical bullshit.

If Karl Marx were the Democratic nominee the green Party would call him the "lesser of two evils" and a crony of Wall Street. I'm done with the cynicism that believes any Democratic nominee isn't good enough no matter who it is, what he has done or what he stands for. It's mindless, cliche, holier than thou, arrogant cynicism. I don't need it anymore. I'm ready to do something productive.
Nader only converted to grassroots activism when he found the doors of Congressional offices were increasingly closed to him. Then he started his top-down astroturf progressive non-profits.
Obama is the first left wing movement activist ever elected President and he has believed in bottom up change by the people from day one. His career shows it. The left should be celebrating instead of holding a torch for an arrogant poser.

[Fading Captain]

108. We'll see, won't we

And if he is, there will be a celebration.

One great thing, already: This $850 billion infrastructure plan! Cash-strapped communities from all over the country are submitting plans, hoping their much-needed and very unaffordable infrastructure projects get these grants.

1. It puts people to work.

2. It puts people to work fixing things that need to be fixed, like roads, bridges, water systems, etc.

[High Plains]

175. Naderites didn't start this thread. In fact, I don't know why it was started.

Some three-year-old throwing a tantrum over something that happened eight years ago.

As for Obama's left wing credentials, well, I guess we'll see how that translates into policy.

[Selatius]

120. Equalled only by the Democrats who voted for Bush, like those who voted for Reagan. nt

[martymar64]

139. So sez Mr. "THANK GOD IT PASSED"!

If you want worthless opinions, look in the mirror.

[DevonRex]

170. How about the brain surgeons who voted McKinney? They're pretty

damned stupid, too.

[pnorman]

10. In 2000, I supported and voted for Ralph Nader

n/t

pnorman

[TWiley]

11. I know someone who voted for ralph

He wears a little green corduroy coat and has fallen in love with the sound of his own voice. His quirk is that he makes everything FAR more difficult than it has to be. It is no less than a blistering engineering experiment to plant a bush or to mow the lawn.

[Fading Captain]

30. Makes everything more difficult than it needs to be`

Like what, he doesn't like having two choices?

[TWiley]

61. Yes, among other things

Having only two choices is a real problem for him. Not just in politics, but even with ordinary stuff. Instead of getting his car fixed (he can afford it), he will try to get one guy to diagonse it, shop for parts on ebay, take the parts to another mechanic, try to get him to put them in .... then try to make him responsible when it does not work. Everything is a complicated mess for him.

[dana_b]

12. yeah, God forbid they don't all think like the rest of us

how "stupid" of them :eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

16. You're right. They don't think.

I find that to be a problem.

[dana_b]

20. You are wrong

my co-worker is an extremely bright and educated woman. She just didn't feel that Obama represented her on Israel, FISA, rights for the LGBT community, Iraq and Afghanistan and more. She went for the candidate that represented her values most closely. She "thought" about it.

[Occam Bandage]

35. I'm glad you put the word "thought" in quotes there, because I wouldn't call

what she did "thinking." I'd call that "feeling." She went for the person who felt right on issues. Who represented her values, which is a squishy term having little to do with thought.

She did not think about the impact of her vote, nor did she think about what the country would be like under a McCain presidency versus an Obama presidency. She did not weight the "issues correctness" value of her vote against the positive impact on the end result that a vote for a major candidate would have, versus the zero impact on the end result that a vote for Nader would have. She did not think about the vote-splitting (and thus voice-diminishing) effect that Naderites have. She did not think.

She voted for the candidate that felt right. She may be bright, and she may be educated, but when it comes to her vote, she did not think.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

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

[Fading Captain]

88. Learn to read, Professor

What I wrote and what you say I wrote are two very different things.

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

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

[ProfessorGAC]

146. OK

Do what you need to do.
GAC

[Moochy]

34. moderate gatekeepers?

There is a cadre of about twenty, self-appointed hall-monitors here at DU who prefer bashing anyone to their left instead of actually discussing issues.

[Occam Bandage]

40. And a cadre of about twenty self-appointed hall-monitors

here at DU who prefer bashing anyone to their right instead of actually discussing issues.

[Moochy]

43. Hey no bashing in #37!

You stated your position well. I agree with much of the assessment of Nader as a self-serving republican tool, for what its worth.

[JackRiddler]

59. Dealing with tyranny is hard. Attacking Nader is easy.

What it comes down to is intellectual cowardice and desire for easy self-reassurance.

[Moochy]

73. Good Answer

I think you are onto something, and not just because of my own desire for easy self-reassurance. (I hope!)

[Occam Bandage]

37. Wrongo, buckwheat.

It's a response of someone who understands what's at stake in this country, and who understands that politics is more than "making yourself heard," as if the point of the political process was for everyone to scream in a verbal tug-of-war for the soul of the nation. Politics is about changing America for the better. Democrats have their faults, but they do more good than bad. The time to improve the Democratic party is at the conventions, during sessions of Congress, and especially during the primaries. November of even-numbered years is the time to ensure that the most progressive possible politicians remain in office, and that their regressive counterparts stay out.

Voting for Nader has no impact whatsoever on who gets to control the policy direction of the nation. It's akin to throwing your vote away--and is in fact worse than simply throwing your vote away, because giving him any false appearance of viability only encourages him in his narcissistic, quixotic, Republican-enabling vanity runs.

[camera obscura]

13. My stepdad voted Nader even though he leans right because he hated every other candidate.

He thought Obama was too liberal but couldn't bring himself to vote for McCain or Palin since he thought they were both unfit for office, he looked up the third party candidates but Barr, Baldwin, and McKinney were too crazy, so he voted for Nader since he respects the guy. :shrug:

Me, I supported Nader in 2000 - but I was only 13 years old. If I'd been voting age, I like to think I would have known better.

[JaneQPublic]

14. I was shocked that my very liberal brother-in-law voted for Cynthia McKinney

His reasoning was that he wants troops out of Iraq NOW, not in 16 months, as Obama promises. Since he lives in a reliably blue state, he thought it was safe to "send a message" by voting for the Green candidate.

When I heard this, all I could do was shake my head. For some progressive "purists," no Democratic candidate will every be good enough for them.

[NashVegas]

144. Nope, It Was a Good Message to Send, and Not Harmful to Dems

In 2000, progressives seeking a compromise between Washington Dems and reformists asked those of us in states that would undoubtedly go red, anyway, to vote for Nader, swing states were asked to vote for Gore.

[Occam Bandage]

15. They're a particularly moronic breed of idiot. Fuck 'em all.

[fishwax]

17. I'm glad Nader beat Barr

:rofl:

I don't think the fact that more people voted for Nader than Barr is evidence of stupidity, though. Also, that total is a lot lower than what he pulled in 2000.

[Fading Captain]

18. Nader isn't afraid to addess America's greatest threats

Obama is.
Obama is a slick, made-for-tv politician.
Nader is a patriot.

[Starry Messenger]

22. Which of these threats has Nader addressed recently?

I disagree with your characterization of Obama, but wish to know why you think this.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

23. Nader's a meglomaniac in love with the sound of his own voice

just like most other politicians out there.

[Fading Captain]

27. Yeah, maybe, but he's got the balls to call it like it is

And not pander to the media, and engage himself in hollywood-produced convention rubbish like we saw out of McCain and Obama.

But Nader has identified the corporate takeover of the United States and what its done to the working, poor and middle class.

Obama, with all his Wall Street chums and banker friends, has done NONE of that.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

33. Yes, it's always nice to stand on a heaping wreckage and say "I saw it coming."

What has Nader concretely done in the last 15 years that has led to the improvement of the nation? Why should I trust him more than any other politician? As it is now, you're not giving me any evidence, just trite statements, and you're coming across like a lot of the other political groupies kicking around on DU and other forums.

Bring me some solid evidence, then I'll listen.

[Warren Stupidity]

64. Yes but he first stood alone in the park for years telling us what was going to happen

You really can't fault Nader for being right about his analysis of what our problems are. His third party solution fails, and he should know better, but his analysis of our system is correct.

You would have to seal things Nader has done off at 15 years or so, as before that he was doing lots of stuff to try to improve our nation.

From Nader's web page, a list of 'what he's done'.

Ralph Nader's Record of Accomplishments

Instrumental in the passing of the following legislation:

National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act (1965)
Clean Water Act (1968)
Clean Air Act (1970)
Co-Op Bank Bill (1978)
Law establishing Environmental Protection Agency (1970)
Consumer Product Safety Act
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Mine Health and Safety Act
Whistleblower Protection Act
Medical Devices safety
Nuclear power safety
Mobile home safety
Consumer credit disclosure law
Pension protection law
Funeral home cost disclosure law
Tire safety & grading disclosure law
Wholesome Meat Act
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act
Wholesome Poultry Product Act
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 1970
Safe Water Drinking Act
Freedom of Information Act
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act

Founded or sponsored the following organizations:

American Antitrust Institute
Appleseed Foundation
Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest
Aviation Consumer Action Project
Buyers Up
Capitol Hill News Service Center for Concerned Engineering
Center for Auto Safety
Center for Insurance Research
Center for Justice and Democracy
Center for Science in the Public Interest
Center for the study of Responsive Law - 1969
Center for Women Policy Studies
Citizen Action Group
Citizen Advocacy Center
Citizen Utility Boards
Citizen Works
Clean Water Action Project
Clearinghouse for Professional Responsibility
Congress Project
Congress Watch
Congressional Accountability Project
Connecticut Citizen Action Group
Consumer Project on Technology
Corporate Accountability Research Group
Critical Mass Energy Project
Democracy Rising
Disability Rights Center
Equal Justice Foundation
Essential Information
FANS (Fight to Advance the Nation's Sports)
Fisherman's Clear Water Action Group
Foundation for Taxpayers and Consumer Rights
Freedom of Information Clearinghouse
Global Trade Watch
Government Purchasing Project
Health Research Group
Litigation Group
Multinational Monitor
National Citizen's Coalition for Nursing Home Reform
National Coalition for Universities in the Public Interest
National Insurance Consumer Organization
Ohio Public Interest Action Group
Organization for Competitive Markets
Professional Drivers (PROD)
Professionals for Auto Safety
Public Citizen
Pension Rights Center
Princeton Project 55
PROD - truck safety
Public Citizen's Visitor's Center
Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGS)
Resource Consumption Alliance (conserve trees) 1004
Retired Professionals Action Group
Shafeek Nader Trust for the Community Interest
Tax Reform Research Group
Telecommunications Research and Action Center

http://www.draftnader.org/accomplishments.php

Pound away at the guy for the stupidity of his 2000 run, but he most certainly has put in the time and earned the credibility through good deeds to have his say in the public forum.

[AndyTiedye]

126. Nader Was Good Back in the Day, But Senility Has Taken Its Toll

[Fading Captain]

91. I have HOPE for obama. I TRUST Nader.

I support who BEST REPRESENTS my views.

That's my duty.

I try to stay away from the "lesser of evils" votes.

I believe in UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.
I believe in PEACE.
I believe in GOOD PAY FOR HARD WORK.
I believe we need to FIGHT POVERTY,
I believe in more accessible COLLEGE EDUCATION.
I believe in ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE.
I believe in FAIR TRADE, not free trade.
I believe free trade ERODES OUR SOVERIEGNTY, and undermines labor and environmental laws.
I believe government's duty is to PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT.
I believe that government must protect the CIVIL RIGHTS of all men, women and children, regardless of their color, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference etc.

To me, these are the principles of the Democratic Party.

See, I am not sure, exactly where Obama stands on these issues. Sometimes, I think he's with me. Other times, I don't. He campaigned down the center, so its REALLY HARD to know exactly when he's being honest, and when he is patronizing for votes.

I KNOW where Ralph Nader stands.
I also KNOW that Ralph Nader UNDERSTANDS that the greatest threat to all off those principles, except civil rights, is the corporate lobby, which buys off both parties.

So you can call it pie in the sky to vote for Nader. But I think it's pie in the sky to just give my vote to Obama because I hope he might one day suddenly start representing my views.

Nothing would make me happier than to have the Democratic Party shed their corporate paymasters and return to the values I identified.
I have hope, perhaps, that Obama might start that process. But they are just hopes. And while having the AUDACITY OF HOPE hope sure sounds like a great title for an Oprah Book of the Month selection, in a Democracy, it's more important when citizens have the AUDACITY OF TRUST.

You want me to be practical with my Trust? To Trust someone who doesn't even have the AUDACITY TO PROMISE Universal health care, help for blue collar workers, and to fight the corporate lobby?

That's what a vote is. TRUST.
Voting for someone you don't TRUST is insane. It's better not to vote, than to get into the habit of voting for people you don't trust.

I TRUST Nader. But I don't have blind faith in him. And if I thought he was just paying lip service to my ideals out of some strange fetish for the public limelight, I'd look elsewhere to place my Trust and cast my vote.

[NNN0LHI]

25. Which one had a chance of becoming president?

That is kind an important factor isn't it?

Don

[gordianot]

28. Nader is a Republican tool, he accepted their assistance and money.

[Sultana]

101. Oh, Go Away

to a Nader Underground board or something

Nader is a ASShole & RACIST!

Patriot my ass, what has he done lately?

[anonymous171]

110. Nader is a fool. nt

[book_worm]

130. if you think Nader is so good and Obama is so bad why don't you leave DU?

Start a Nader site or find one if you can.

[mdmc]

31. true American patriots

one and all
:patriot:

[Blue_Tires]

32. i'm more surprised at the low Paul turnout

after all the trolls, spammers, flamers and talking-point spewers infested EVERY message board I post or lurk (even nonpolitical ones) on with their 'revolution' bullshit or how much money they raised...


and say what you want, but i'll sooner embrace the 700,000 nader voters before the 58 million mccain/palin voters

[Occam Bandage]

38. As I said all along.

Sure, you'll come across thousands of Ron Paul supporters on the Internet. And that's all the support he has, or will ever have.

[LoZoccolo]

46. Yeah, good point. n/t

[LoZoccolo]

47. About the Ron Paul voters, that is. n/t

[JackRiddler]

72. Please show me any states that had Paul on the ballot.

:eyes:

[Blue_Tires]

85. they could (and did) still write him in

as a lot of online Paulards swore they were going to do (in the name of their love of 'freedom' of course)

[JackRiddler]

121. Apocryphal bullshit.

Did Ron Paul run in the general? No, he did not. Wasn't on ballots, but more importantly: wasn't running. Said, "I am not running." Meant it. So you have no basis for mocking his turnout, any more than you do Madonna's or Clark Kent's (who also were not running). "A lot of online Paultards" that you claim "swore" they would vote blah blah was how many exactly? Two that you saw post on some board somewhere? Twelve? Thirty?

And oh, yeah, why don't you tell us the write-in results?

Oh, that's right, you don't know where those numbers are to be found, either. Do you?

[FreakinDJ]

39. If you voted for Nader - You need to "Get a Brain Moron"

Fuck head sold out Looooong agooo

[LoZoccolo]

42. Rocket scientists, lol. n/t

[Bjorn Against]

45. At least they are smarter than the tens of millions who voted for McCain

[Occam Bandage]

48. Debatable.

Nader voters are smart enough to understand good policy, but too dumb to understand good tactics.
McCain voters are too dumb to understand good policy, but smart enough to understand good tactics.
Barr voters are too dumb to understand good policy, and too dumb to understand good tactics.

[Bjorn Against]

49. There is nothing "good" about Republican tactics.

Being effective does not make them any less evil.

[Moochy]

51. Wow

That explains a lot! :yoiks:

[Occam Bandage]

54. "Some men truly are evil. Hitler is a good example."

"So you're telling me that Hitler is good? There's nothing good about Hitler. He was an evil man, and I'm shocked you'd call him good."

[Bjorn Against]

56. No you said McCain's tactics were good. They were not. Period.

[Occam Bandage]

62. I did not. I said McCain voters understood good tactics.

Voting for the major party candidate closest to your views is a good tactic for the particular goal of ensuring that your views are best represented in government. McCain voters understand this. Using any other reading of that sentence, including other, broader meanings of "good" and "tactics," constitutes an attempt to not only change the topic, but an attempt to construe my words to address a topic they were not formulated to address.

[Bjorn Against]

71. So in other words you were only talking about a single tactic, not tactics (plural) as you said.

I still disagree with you and think McCain voters are a hell of a lot dumber than Nader voters, but I can at least see your point when you actually explain it. Don't accuse me of misconstruing your words though, because if you are suggesting that only one of the many tactics that Republicans used was good you should have specified that rather than using a plural term that encompasses multiple tactics to describe a single one. You can't accuse anyone of misrepresenting what you are saying if you yourself are not accurately describing your position.

[Occam Bandage]

79. To be even more clear, I was referring to several closely-related tactics,

such as voting for the party closest to your beliefs, attempting to move that party towards your beliefs instead of abandoning it for a third party, convincing people to support that party instead of spending their time attacking it, etc., etc. You know, tactics related to one's vote and election day (that is to say, related to the topic of our conversation, as opposed to John McCain's campaign, which was not). Tactics that individual voters--again, the topic of our conversation, as opposed to John McCain--engage in, and which are universal to all voters regardless of policy ideas. Not to belabor the point, but rather to sum it up: tactics that are related to the subject of this thread.

Here's a hint that might help with future reading comprehension. When you come across something that seems mildly ambiguous, instead of thinking, "Wow, I bet he means something entirely bizarre that would make no sense whatsoever in the context of the discussion we are having," first stop and consider this:

Is there an alternate reading that would not only make sense in context, but would also be a reasonable thing for a person to say? If so, maybe you should go with that one.

[Bjorn Against]

81. Don't accuse me of a lack of reading comprehension, it is your job to express yourself clearly.

It is my viewpoint that virtually all Republican tactics are wrong, and the ones that you mention are not necessarily good in my opinion either. Just because I don't share your opinions or do not always know what you are talking about when you make ambiguous statements does not mean I lack reading comprehension skills, if you don't explain yourself then you should not be upset when people take your statements at face value.

[Occam Bandage]

84. It takes two to tango. I did my job. Not my fault you assumed I was talking about something

that was entirely removed from the discussion we were having.

[Fading Captain]

97. Voting against your interest is NEVER good tactics

The gauntlet is laid.

Stick to your principles, or risk losing, even to an idiot like Bush.

[backscatter712]

60. He couldn't even get seven digits? WEAK!!! n/t

See, I'm a glass 99% empty type of guy. :evilgrin:

[High Plains]

65. I'm a rocket scientist who voted for Nader. And proudly.

Okay, I voted in a state where the contest was not in doubt, so I had that luxury.

Nader's platform was far better than either of the major parties, and far closer to my positions than the platform of the Democratic Party.

[LibDemAlways]

69. You sound like a person who voted his conscience

and for that you should be applauded, not derided.

Nader's positions are closer to mine than Obama's and had I known Obama was going to keep Gates, I would have chosen your path as well.

[Fading Captain]

93. The very second you abandon your princicples, you abandon democracy

I wish more people thought like you.

[Sultana]

103. Keep voting Green and STFU

:eyes:

[High Plains]

118. Don't tell me to shut up, asshole. Not very democratic of you,

[High Plains]

66. Nader haters: Get a friggin' life.

[Sultana]

106. Nader lovers take your ish somewhere else

m,kay.

Thx.

[High Plains]

117. Fuck off, m'kay. You're welcome.

[G_j]

75. & maybe people still hand wringing about Nader

are morans...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

76. Another Emmanuel Goldstein moment brought to you by the DLC.

[Runcible Spoon]

107. Seriously!

NADER BOOGITY BOOGITY! :eyes:

Anyone who is still blaming Nader needs to get a hobby and get the fuck out of politics. OMG THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES GETTING VOTES WHAT'S OUR REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY COMING TO?!

[anonymous171]

111. Nader hates Liberals more than conservatives.

[JackRiddler]

114. (yawn) I hear he clips his toenails at the table, right next to the roast baby!

[martymar64]

141. They have to project their failures onto SOMEBODY!!!

Why not an easy target like Nader. I mean it's easier than examining their own party for its failings and trying to rectify those instead.

Even in victory they are poor sports.

[proud patriot]

80. My dad the mathematician voted for Nader too

:shrug:

[hughee99]

104. If it's any consolation, if we had a picture of a guy with a

"Don't blame me, I voted for Nader" sign, I'm sure we'd mock him too, and rightly so.

[anonymous171]

113. This article sums Nader up nicely

And in their most appalling move, the Greens are running a candidate for the Senate in Minnesota, where incumbent Democrat Paul Wellstone is facing a well-funded challenge from Norm Coleman, a popular former mayor of St. Paul (and former Democrat) who enjoys strong support from the White House. Experienced observers believe this important race will be decided by a very small margin.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/col/cona/2002/06/10/green/

[JackRiddler]

124. Nader voters may have been wrong, but they were the smartest, and obviously that bothers you.

Sorry.

[book_worm]

131. how do you know they were the smartest? do they do IQ tests at the polls now?

[rvablue]

155. You are aware of the fact that the Green Party has there own message board?

Why don't you jog over there and join up..........this board is for DEMOCRATS!

[JackRiddler]

157. False.

I won't engage you on who of the two of us is more of a Democrat. As far as I am concerned, I'm the real thing, those who blame the Bush mob for the coup d'etat of 2000 are the real thing, and those who blame Nader are cowardly fakers.

But of course what a real Democrat is and what the proper direction of the party is are subject to debate.

However, you are simply wrong in your implication that DU is limited to Democrats only. Perhaps this mistake is excusable because, after all, your stay here has been so short (since Sept. 4, 2008), whereas I've been around since 2002, long enough to know much better.

However, your ugly schoolyard bully attitude is not so easily excused.

For your reference - more people should read the following.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/about.html

About Democratic Underground, LLC

Democratic Underground (DU) was founded on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2001, to protest the illegitimate presidency of George W. Bush and to provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas. Since then, DU has become one of the premier left-wing websites on the Internet, publishing original content six days a week, and hosting one of the Web's most active left-wing discussion boards.

We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals. While the vast majority of our visitors are Democrats, this web site is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, nor do we claim to speak for the party as a whole.

[rvablue]

163. Ralph Nader is a narcissistic egomaniac who loves the sound of his own droning voice

and saying so doesn't make me less of a Democrat, it makes me more of one.

If he cares so much about his country (and not just satisfying his own ego) why doesn't he, for instance, run for Senate from California and get his ideas in play and be able to influence some REAL legislation.....like he did way, way, way back in the day.

No, we only get him bloviating on TV and running PRESIDENTIAL campaigns that he will never win.

And, correct me if I'm wrong but my post made no mention of the 2000 election.

We do agree on this: Bush and Co. ARE responsible for that.

And have fun tossing around that BULLY label and insinuating that I'm some kind of conservative-leaning Democrat.....it's fitting with the Nader love.

[JackRiddler]

168. I'm sorry that you are in denial... you can start by admitting your factual error

Your post was an attempt to bully me away from a site I've taken part in for seven years.

Your rationale was that this is a site for Democrats only. It is not. It is a site for Democrats, liberals and progressives.

Despite the bullying, I helpfully provided you with the DU "About Us" statement. I hope you have read it.

Please acknowledge your error about DU.

I don't care what you think beyond that, but please feel free to rant on about Nader. Thank you.

[RedCappedBandit]

127. Ah yes, mocking people who vote for the candidate they want to see in the white house

how democratic

[Greyhound]

132. Must... Keep... Myth... Alive...

This fantasy that some here cling to, much as a child clings to the belief that the monster can't find them under the blankets, has moved beyond just damn funny into the realm of possible concern.

It's OK now, Barack has been elected and the sun will rise in 17 days.

What will happen when you discover that he isn't going to fix things either, is a little worrisome.

[ProfessorGAC]

138. Wow! Talk About Myth

Look who's talking.
GAC

[Greyhound]

148. You believe that Nader is responsible for the coup? n/t

[Lyric]

135. Nader's an egotistical nut. When the liberal third parties decide to choose

a candidate who ISN'T either self-obsessed or batshit insane, then I might actually believe that they're trying to make a difference. Why the hell should anyone think that Ralph Fucking Nader would have the slightest clue about how to deal with a potential nuclear standoff between India and Pakistan, or increased violence in the Middle East? Give me a break.

God(dess) help us all if by some fluke, one of these third party candidates ever actually DOES win, because you can be sure said candidate won't have been properly vetted, and will have no fucking clue how to actually run a country.

Jesus. Hey third-party fanatics: whine to us about the Evil Two-Party Fascist Corporate Behemoth when you've acted responsibly enough to choose someone who can do the fucking job--ALL of it--instead of whichever mouthy, charismatic Jello-Biafra-stand-in happens to be the most popular at the organic foods co-op this year.

:eyes:

[depakid]

136. I guess those "fanatics" should just stay home

and not vote on state and local candidates and initiatives....

[NaturalHigh]

140. Everyone should vote his/her conscience.

Personally, I would write in my dog's name before I would vote for Nader, but I won't belittle people who cast their votes for the candidate of their choice.

It constantly amazes me that I see so little respect for democracy on "Democratic" Underground.

[robcon]

143. Did you want an election by acclamation?

Some people like Ralph. I don't. That doesn't mean that people who voted for him are stupid.

That's what an election if for... to vote for who you want.

[NNN0LHI]

147. "Did you want an election by acclamation?" Compared to what?

Another election decided by the Supreme Court?

Which would you prefer?

Don

[anaxarchos]

149. There are at least as many rocket scientists...

... who believe that the votes of "the left" are the private property of the Democratic Party, regardless of how it acts. They are usually the same ones who cheer-lead throwing the Left under the bus after every election. Sometimes, their rocket science extends to infantile explanations about how "real" politics "really" work, intermixed with stupid lectures about how voting for some right-wing tool every time is the best of all possible outcomes because it is for the "lesser evil".

[JackRiddler]

154. If you want to end a war, the responsible way is to vote for it!

[anaxarchos]

158. Nonsense...

How is that done? How do I vote against the War in Afghanistan? How do I vote against Israel's War in Gaza? And, how could I vote against the War in Vietnam? The only way that your post makes sense is that a Democratic vote is supposed to assure that. But the Democrats were FOR those wars (and many others). I did vote in 2006 to end the Iraq War, as did a majority of voters. How did that work out?

War is your example... what about enforcing the law? How do I vote for prosecuting War Criminals?

What you describe is not "responsibility"; it is a racket. What do you call a continuous recurring "choice" to act against you own interests? You get to choose between two and they are both against what you stand for. How does that work? Whatever that is, it isn't Democracy.

And, you want to support that with a loaded term like "responsible"...

I never liked Nader and I never voted for him, BUT... over the silliness of this OP or the bullshit of your kind of "responsibility", I would take Nader any day of the week.

[JackRiddler]

165. You seem to have misplaced your irony detectors.

Do you really think that was meant literally?

I know: "We had to destroy the village in order to save it" was meant seriously. But come on, look at my other comments on this thread. Of course I was mocking the "moderate" fallacy that the right way to stop war is to support it.

[anaxarchos]

173. ooops...

Got up in a lather over the subject matter. Sorry, I seem to have read your comment upside down. I withdraw my yadda yadda (from you at least) and donate it to the brilliant OP.

Of course you are right (in agreeing that I was right). ;-)

cheers,

[bertman]

150. I voted for Gore, but I have huge respect for Nader because he tells things like they are,

not like he wishes they were.

Nader rails against the powers-that-be. That's good enough for me. The Democratic Party has been working in collusion with Bush for eight years. Before that they were doing their best corporatist dance while trying to act like they were for progressive ideas. That's all bullshit. Democrats are Republican light. I'm saying that and I'm someone who supported Obama, sent him lots of money, campaigned for him, and is glad he's our new President-elect. But the fact is, he and every other President works for the corporatocracy and will be "removed" from office if he gets too far off the corporate track.

Nader is a thorn in the side of the Democrats only because they will not separate themselves from Corporate power and become a part of the people.

[LWolf]

151. I've never voted for Nader.

But I'd prefer Nader to Obama in the WH, myself.

Or at least, Nader's positions on issues, if not Nader himself.

I'll bet my IQ at least matches yours.

[DS1]

152. Nader = American Shitbag

[ulysses]

156. not enough going on to worry you, Don?

C'mon, man.

[eridani]

160. Nothing wrong with that unless they were in swing states n/t

[NNN0LHI]

162. You are right if you enjoy having your elections decided by the Supreme Court

Obama beat McCain by only about 25 thousand votes in Indiana. Most of the polls were showing McCain with a small lead days before the election.

Its not important who you vote for in non swing states you say?

Don

[eridani]

177. I'd call Indiana a swing state myself

Polling close to the election, not prior history, is the determinant. It soesn't mean diddly squat if people in MA voted for Nader.

[comtec]

161. The problem with the 3rd parties, by and large, is they seem to aim for the top

and not for the bottom, and work their way up.
IF there is going to be a viable 3rd party system here two things MUST happen:
1. 3rd parties need to get real and start seriously going after LOW-visible elected offices like dog catcher, mayor, STATE legislature, etc.
it always seems like the 3rd parties go ONLY after president, as opposed to Congress, legislature, etc.
2. there needs to be REAL reform in how politics is paid for.
we O W N the airwaves. US, the AMERICAN PEOPLE LEASE THE PRIVILEGED to use the airwaves TO the corporations and stations, NOT THE
OTHER WAY ROUND!
By DEMANDING that part of the PRICE of owning said license and stations is they MUST GIVE AWAY at least an HOUR to BOTH/ALL
candidates. That way even greens, peace and freedom frys, and the i-cant-admit-im-republican-libertarians all have an even break.
Also it's not unreasonable to demand equal time in the news papers, same thing, EVERY major market paper must GIVE ad space to
candidates, say a total of 100 inches over the campaign to each candidate that qualifies.
3. OUTLAW 527'S ! ! !
Since the advent of Internet campaigning, there's nothing you can do about a blog or a interesting youtube posting, but you CAN
outlaw 527 groups, which are fucking UNETHICAL! This would kill

Don't look to Europe or any other country for inspiration and say "SEE IT WORKS THERE"... no it doesn't.
The "democracy" that is under a parliamentary system is a sham at best.
YES you have like 20 parties, but (at least here in holland) you only vote for A PARTY, NOT A PERSON!
and the PM is NOT ELECTED BY THE POPULACE!!! for those of you who don't know, or had some kind of illusion of utopia, let me disillusion you.

the people have ONE vote... that's it. one. you vote for ONE person in a party, the PARTY decides who fills the number of seats they win (based on percentage of the vote, "majority" is usually 35%). Since there are so many parties NO ONE get 50+1%.

This causes the necessity of coalition governments where 2 or more parties are needed to form a majority. the "majority" party of THAT coalition then chooses from it's ranks, the PM or Prime Minister. The rest are MP, or Ministers IN Parliament. I'm using British titles, but its essentially the same everywhere.

Here in The Netherlands the majority party is the CDA... Christian Democratic party, who is at 35% iirc.

The SECOND major party (not in the coalition) is the SP or Socialist Party. they have 33%

the CDA is in a shaky coalition with the PvdA (Labor) and the CU (Christian Union, RIGHT wingers).

this government (when a coalition falls apart they say the government has fallen, it's not what it sounds like) is very inept, and VERY ANTI allochtonen (technically foreigner living here, but it has VERY negative connotations). It's only together still because they have not attempted anything TOO controversial. But they have decided to make life less pleasant for everyone, especially us damned allochtoon.

So the short of it is YES, coalition governments are possible, and no don't look towards Europe, or anywhere. The US is STILL the ONLY democracy of it's type IN HISTORY... and it's amazing it still works, more or less, to be honest. While I think of the parliamentary system as the "lazy man's democracy" it IS what we put in place in Iraq (such as it is) as opposed to "Jeffersonian" democracy.

Parliament works, well enough, and it works even better if you're fucking RICH!!!

Anyway, yes a real 3rd,. 4th, etc party system would be nice, but keep in mind... the Dem's have a large tent, which means MORE power to the fringes, like us left wingers. We could divorce ourselves, or we can work inside our already powerful party to get our agenda, or at least a reasonable form done faster than creating another party. THAT'S how the wingers did it in the GoP and that's what WE need to do!

[PVnRT]

166. And this affected the 2008 election how?

Oh, it didn't. You're just trolling.

[LanternWaste]

169. One is an objective, verifiable misspelling

One is an objective, verifiable misspelling.

The other is too subjective and biased (from both the voters perception and the perception of the critic) to allow anything close to an objective indication of one's intelligence or agenda.

[beyond_the_pale]

172. Nader officially the protest-vote candidate

My Republican friend voted for Nader because he was disappointed in McCain (he didn't like Palin.) Reminded me of how Dems voted for Nader in 2000 as a protest vote.

[JackRiddler]

174. Shhh! All Nader voters are stolen property of the DLC.

[NNN0LHI]

176. Or your Repub friend was playing you for a fool and was hoping you would waste your vote on Nader?

You don't really know who your Republican "friend" voted for in the privacy of the voting booth.

I don't trust any Republicans. Even the Republican family members I have. Especially them. They lie and cheat like dogs. I have seen them in action.

I don't have any Republican "friends" that I know of.

Don