I Sent Ralph Nader An E Mail

I would like to see Bush fall stumbling drunk out of Airforce One and land on Cheney's fat belly, but that won't happen either.

ebrown Nader stated publicly that he was glad to see bush in office because if he screwed up things badly enough it would better his chances in 2004. Political opportunism, period.

All grievances should be ignored in order to band together and get this dangerous man off Pennsylvania Ave, and back to his ranch in Crawford.

IMO.

YES, BPD! (shouts she from the other side of the planet.) This affects the whole world, not just the US.

My boy?

Ross Perot got Clinton elected with a small plurality in 1992. His motives were about as unfathomable as Nader's. Turnabout ....

OK
It's good that Darth Nader is running. Hopefully, he will have some influence on the moderate Dems, who think by being Rethug LITE that they will get more votes. Dean and Kucinich are the only real Dems in this race but the Corp. Media ignores Kucinich and assasinates Dean.

I do think about 5 more years of the Neo Fascists. I wonder how they will ruin Amerika and could the country recover from their rape. Maybe if they get re-elected it would help the Dems understand that being weak and going along with the Neo Fascists &/or trying to be more like them won't do it for them.

The Dems have been, in the main, cowards. They mostly voted for the illegal Iraq invasion. No excuse that they thought Shrub wouldn't invade sans UN. They aren't that stupid. Dems voted for the tax cuts to the Upper Class, Dems voted for The Patriot Act. Dems voted for the Omnibus Bill. I could list a lot more that they voted for that does not represent the working class. Tom Delay is a disgrace to the Dem party. That he is the Minority Leader is a pathetic joke. My Senators Feinstein & Boxer are a couple of sell outs. It's Dem party's own fault that many of us that are paying attention feel that they are weak cowards and shameless sell outs.

My point exactly. You want my vote? Neither whining nor yelling angrily will accomplish anything.



Yep, you got it. If they don't pay attention to me, then they have no reason to expect my vote.

------------------------
I didn't vote for Bush and saying that my vote was a "vote" for Bush is offensive. You could save your spite for the majority of Americans who don't vote.

I happen to believe that the Democrats can win with a truly progressive platform. I also believe it seems easier for them to stand for nothing and hope to win with mediocrity. This latter choice smells awfully bad.

But the fact is the Democrats seem to want my vote. Attacking me or a candidate I say I respect seems to be a step in the wrong direction. Blaming me for your loss is just ludicrous.

This is the last paragraph of the article I read confirming that Nader is running:



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040222/ap_on_el_pr/nader

I posted stats elsewhere that showed that 6% of self-proclaimed Liberals voted for Nader whereas 1% of self-proclaimed Conservatives did. It seems safe to say that "the bulk" of the votes that went to Nader would have gone to Gore otherwise. Perhaps those people just wouldn't have voted. I don't know.

I apologize for yelling. I very much agree with your statement, "But I think we can both agree that the best thing would be a well run campaign where Kerry or/and Edwards stand up for the ideals that you and I care about, followed by a competent, progressive administration."

I just feel very very strongly that another 4 years of Bush would be disastrous, and I can respect what Nader stands for (I do) while questioning what he actually hopes to accomplish with this bid.

Nader has a funny way of making a point/getting attention.

He reminds me of Homer when he becomes a "whistle blower".

What his own friends are saying:



http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/23/politics/campaign/23NADE.html?pagewanted=2&hp

As I said elsewhere in A2K, an error term of 2~3% does not have a serious result, in most cases. Unless you are a Nader supporter you need not be worried about it much.

Edit: Ignore my poor attempt at sarcasm.

I'm sorry you feel that way, zionlion.

I sent Ralph Nader a email too, and it wasn't pretty. We must do everything to discourage this ego-head. His email address is [email protected], <[email protected]>.

satt, I worry because most people are not tuned into the election process all that much, and Nader is the perfect spoiler to give GWBush that edge if it's a close race. By every recent polls, it's still too close to call. I don't want GWBush to have any advantage, and we all know Nader will take away votes from the front democratic runner.

I actually support much that, as I understand it, Nader stands for, ebrown.

Nonetheless, this is the dilemma. It seems quite clear that, if he stands, he will take votes from whomever stands against Bush. Therefore, in effect, voting for him in the last election, appears most likely to have been for Bush. This is reality, as far as we can tell.

If he can take the Dems further to the left, well and good - IF - and, if they therefore don't lose a lot of their current supporters.

Sigh - these are, unfortunately, the pragmatics of politics. They are gone through again and again here in Oz, too - mainly in relation to our Labor Party.

Is it better for political party to be able, by its own lights, to do a little bit, via lots of compromising of values? Or to remain true to values, and to be locked out of power?

If Nader is using the old "let 'em really suffer, until they are radicalised" - well, I am not sure that works.

Normally, I'd stay out of a foreign election - but, America affects the world - and Bush has the world pretty much horrified.

I hope he doesn't get in - and, if Nader does split the vote, and allows that - well shame on him.

At least here, we can vote for the likes of Nader, without it meaning the right wins an otherwise winnable election...

I failed to convey my subtle sarcasm effectively. Damn these expressionless computers.

My point being that the Nader situation is being blown a little out of proportion here. We have three threads on the front page dedicated to him, each one filled with the same content: Ralph Nader is an egotistial idiot who is ruining the chances for a Democratic president. I have never - not even in the case of Bush - seen as much disdain for one man expressed here in such little time. Now, I am no Nader fan myself, as I made clear in other threads. But this Nader lynching is getting a little out of control. Move on.

BBB
I agree with Mark Green.

BBB

BBB
In the 2000 election, it was a mistake not to allow Ralph Nader to participate in the presidential debates, which was something he very much wanted to do. It would have added intellectual depth to the vapid debates that proceeded without him.

I wonder if Nader is invited to participate in the 2004 presidential debates (after all Kuchinich and Sharpton don't have a chance to win the nomination either) that he would be more open to endorsing either Kerry or Edwards?

BBB

LOL! You make the man sound like the bad fairy who wasn't invited to Sleeping Beauty's christening!

I so hope he has more maturity than that.