Nader, "If your concerned about defeating Bush, vote for Kerry."

[mdmc]

There you have it, DU. Just now, on CSPAN at NC State, Nader said that if a voter is worried that their vote for Nader will take away votes from Kerry, and thus help Bush win, then they should vote for Kerry.

Why all the hate? I love this man. Every time I hear this man I feel somewhat ashamed of being a Democrat.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

1. so if you're not concerned about defeating bush,

should you vote for bush? where does nader fit in?

[FauxNewsBlues]

68. Bush is a War Time President

He actually is telling the truth there.
It is one thing, during the peace & prosperity of the Clinton years, for Ralph to feed his ego.

However, if Bush wins, Syria and Iran might be next. He is a lame duck, the PNAC crowd will be lame ducks as well, once all the truth bleeds out. They might manufacture crises in order to start WWIII. Pakistan has nukes, and an angry populace who may just overthrow the government over Iraq. It is in this climate that Nader is running.

Nader wants to syphon off progressive votes in this climate. With multiple supreme court slots going to pop up in the next 4 years. With the white house trying to pass constitutional amendments. Nader is running in this climate.

This is not 2000. We have had 4 years of Bush. Nader wants to risk 4 more? There is something seriously wrong with him. I have gotten over his actions in 2000. I accept that he thought there was not a dime's worth of difference, even though he was wrong.

He now knows though. Bush has invaded Iraq, passed right wing legislation, appointed ideologues to the court. What is Nader's justification now for letting even worse things happening? Have you no shame Nader?

[Sparkly]

2. How big of him.

If he wants to defeat Bush, he could work *with* Democrats instead of against us. Instead, he's selling out every issue he claims to champion. I'm sorry, I have ZERO respect for Nader.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

3. Is he concerned about defeating Bush?

[DRoseDARs]

4. If he really did just say that... (I haven't watched any TV today)

...then he has just earned back some of my respect. :)

I was never a Nadar-hater, though I strongly regret voting for him in 2000.

[Sparkly]

7. He was asked a question

about his candidacy hurting Kerry and supporting Bush. What else was he going to say? Kind of a no-brainer.

He then went on to make a spurious argument that he takes votes from Republicans as well, which is not what the polls show.

[zulchzulu]

5. Take the next step, St. Ralph

DROP OUT!!!

[Room101]

10. Democrats are pro-choice for woman and anti-choice

for presidential candidates, you can cut the electronic irony at DU with a virtual knife.

[zulchzulu]

14. That's BS

Any half-thinking twit can figure out that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.

A vote for Nader is a vote for the Religious Reich and the opportunity to give Bush 3 Supreme Court seats to not only take away Roe v. Wade, but a hell of lot more.

A vote for Nader is basically saying that you like how much power assholes like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have on Bush.

Any half-thinking twit can tell that there is a HUGE difference between Kerry and Bush.

Anyone who thinks that Nader is a Democrat or offers a choice for a Democrat this year is an idiot. Period.

If anyone here wants to vote for Nader and think they are a Democrat, they need to get their head examined.

[Room101]

18. zulchzulu- Please explain your Orwellian math

"Any half-thinking twit can figure out that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush."

I must have missed the fine print on my ballot. You are using the same scare tactic anti-logic that that insane Republican recently used when he proclaimed “ that a vote against Bush is a vote for Bin Laden”.

[zulchzulu]

21. You don't get it.

The mere fact that you're still for Kucinich is enough proof to me that you're hardly someone I would be able to carry on a reasonable conversation with.

Vote for Nader. You've been following Mr. 23 Delegates in his myopic, self-absorbed journey as a documented political failure.

I see a pattern.

By you voting for Nader, you are voting not only for Bush. You are voting for Pat Robertson. You are voting for Tom DeLay. You are voting for Dick Cheney to keep his job.

I hope you're proud.

[Room101]

28. zulchzulu- Your political Bigotry should be pitied

The Vietnam/Gulf war veteran I spoke to for an hour two days ago would disagree with you about my capability to carry a reasonable conversation.

You should pay attention to the details in ones post, I'm a California resident. California will go Kerry, my possible vote for Nader is a protest vote declaring that the Democratic establishment has forgotten the working class. Hello I’m an Independent!

[zulchzulu]

32. OK...yawn...whatever...

Vote for the dog who was running for Governor for all I care.

Your vote to protest the "whatever blah blah blah" against the evil, dark Democratic party will be wasted.

Robertson and Falwell would certainly love your voting choice. David Duke would think it's great too.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

59. This election is so important, that no state, even CA, can be

assumed to be in our column. You are free to do as you wish, but I think we can ill afford a "luxury" protest vote for Nader like you are contemplating doing.

[mdmc]

80. There are states up for grab

but a Texan voting for Nader WILL NOT hurt our chances of winning the white house.
There are only a few states where I would specifically request Greens and other non Dems to support Kerry.

Perhaps swing states can create a chapter of The Working Families Party (WFP) that would endorse Kerry, but allow lefties to dissent against the moderate Democratic party.

[tinanator]

49. i see a pattern too

this should be emblazoned on the first page of this forum, either as a warning or an example-
"The mere fact that you're still for Kucinich is enough proof to me that you're hardly someone I would be able to carry on a reasonable conversation with.

Vote for Nader. You've been following Mr. 23 Delegates in his myopic, self-absorbed journey as a documented political failure.

I see a pattern."

holy shit, batman! I think we got a Kerry organizer in our midst!

-"Kerry organizer" slur, copyright Tinanator March 26, 2004
all rights reserved.

[Sparkly]

30. The fine print on your ballot

I don't see how it's "scare tactic anti-logic." It would make perfect sense that a vote against Bush would be a vote for Bin Laden, IF Bin Laden were on the ballot as the opposing candidate. (But if you'll read the fine print, he isn't.)

[tedoll78]

35. May I suggest a civics course?

reality check: We live in a winner-take-all system.

If we had a system of proportional representation, I'd gladly vote Green/Nader with many others. But since we don't, I'm not going to shoot the progressive political cause in the head so I can feel illogically good about myself for a few moments.

[NinetySix]

36. I don't think your math follows either.

Even if I were to step into the booth and write in Bin Laden's name, while that is certainly a vote against Bush (although not a very useful one), it does not imply that everyone else who casts a ballot against Bush has the same extreme pro-Bin Laden views as does my hypothetical self in this example.

However, casting a third-party Nader ballot against Bush along with all of the Democrats casting their ballots against Bush does imply that Nader supporters and Democrats have in common a negative opinion regarding his leadership skills and past job performance.

The main difference is that if I did cast my Bin Laden vote, I would very likely be alone in that act, while it appears as though Nader supporters might do it in the hundreds of thousands or millions, with a significant impact on the outcome of the election.

A vote against Bush is not, to be sure, a vote for Bin Laden (this is a false alternative fallacy), but simply an expression of dissatisfaction with the one possible way among many that Bush has chosen to deal with the problem of terrorism. But a vote for Nader does have the practical consequence of improving Bush's odds of taking another four years in the Oval Office to continue to pursue his failed foreign policy in addition to his terrifying domestic policies.

Please hold your nose and vote for Kerry. Please.

[Rationality]

78. No zulchzulu, what YOU'RE saying is bullshit.

Although I've seen enough Bush to avoid making the same mistake in 2004, I'm getting tired of all of you people trying to paint Nader as some kind of idiot enabler. Many of the issues we Democrats support come from Nader's activism through his time, and we owe him for what we are today. Besides, there are a few voters who will simply never vote for Kerry, and they might as well go Nader instead of Bush or even instead of not voting.

Instead of blasting a guy that has stood for the consumer when corporations tried to sell us out, we should be courting his potential voters and incorporating his positions as our own.

[Sparkly]

15. Who's thwarting your choice?

You can write in Mickey Mouse. Nobody's proposing a law that prevent you from making that choice. Please don't throw the reproductive choice issue around as if it relates here. It doesn't.

[Redleg]

44. Hogwash- we had a field of 10 Dem candidates this campaign.

They ran the full gamut in the party from people like Joe Lieberman to people like Dennis Kucinich.

[Lavrenty Beria]

47. Is Ralph Capable of Being Tactical?

Ralph can't undue 2000. However, if he runs for POTUS but then drops out within 60 days of the election and admonishes those that are inclined to vote for him to vote for Kerry instead, he can then be said to have made up for 2000. Is he this smart? Is he running so that he can drop out? If he hadn't run, he couldn't drop out.

[lastknowngood]

6. Nader is a self centered ass who may finally be getting the

message that he is an enemy of everything he espouses when he strokes his ego instead of going after the shrub. He spends most of his time talking about how bad the Dem's are. To hell with him.

[BillZBubb]

9. My sentiments almost exactly!

Except I'm not so sure he's getting it. If he wants to do the right thing, it's simple: blast Bush*, endorse Kerry, and drop out.

[Room101]

8. I will never be a Democrat- forever a INDY

It still blows my mind that people here at DU are more angry with Nader for 2000 as opposed to the illegal purging of close to 80,000 voters in Florida by choice point/Harris and Jeb Bush.

The Democrats have completely abounded their original base the working class. "We have two parties that are essentially two factions of the one business party." I can go on and on, I live in California and will vote for Nader. Funny I voted for Gore in 2000 before my political awaking.

Gore Vidal once said “we live in a Democracy in name and oligarchy in fact”

[mdmc]

11. I work locally with the Democratic party

but I certainly don't hate the Green party or non enrolled voters that I come across in my other passions, such as universal health care, fair trade, criminal justice reform, and poverty reduction. I think of these people as fellow travelers.

[Sparkly]

12. So what are you doing at Democratic Underground?

"people here at DU are more angry with Nader for 2000 as opposed to the illegal purging" -- Was there a poll on this question? How do you know people are "more angry" with Nader? It's kind of like the "what about Zell Miller" diversion on a thread about Nader earlier today: it's not an excuse for Nader to effectively support Bush. There is no excuse, in my book.

The truth in your quote is: "We have two parties." You can deal with that reality, or not. There *is* a difference between them: one heads in a better direction than the other -- whether or not it goes far enough can be argued to death, and once we have that luxury I'll join in. I think we need to avert a Theocratic overthrow of the Bill of Rights right now.

[Room101]

22. Sparkly- You better put in more time before you question me

For why I'm here! Ask William Rivers Pitt about my level of Commitment to peace and justice he saw it in person!

How do you know people are "more angry" with Nader?
I know because I have been here long enough to know!

[Sparkly]

34. Oooooh, I'd "better?" Or what?

I questioned why you were at Democratic Underground since you vowed you'd never be a Democrat. Seems logical to me.

As for how you know people are "more angry" with Nader than they are with the Florida disenfranchisement, I'm not convinced. Is "Florida illegal disenfranchisement" on the ballot again with support and cheerleading from people who claim to care about human rights, the environment, peace and justice? Is anybody here championing Diebold machines and false felon lists while claiming they oppose Bush? If so, there might be a way to assess and compare anger about that vs. anger about Nader.

[Room101]

38. Sparkly- Do some research !

As for how you know people are "more angry" with Nader than they are with the Florida disenfranchisement, I'm not convinced.

Do a DU search about Nader as opposed to the purging of voters, the evidence overwhelmingly supports what I said regarding the direction of anger.

I have spent hours on the phone and writing people/reps/papers about BBV for the past 8 months!

[Sparkly]

41. Apples and Oranges

Sorry, I'm not intimidated, not impressed, and not convinced -- because, as far as I know, nobody's supporting disenfranchisement here on DU. So you won't see the same anger here.

I realize it's a bigger issue, and a greater threat, than Ralph Nader, if that's what you're trying to say. That doesn't mean people here should be any happier about Nader, and doesn't mean they're any less angry about subversion of the democratic process itself.

[Room101]

46. Sparkly- The facts don't support your argument about Anger

I realize it's a bigger issue, and a greater threat, than Ralph Nader, if that's what you're trying to say. That doesn't mean people here should be any happier about Nader, and doesn't mean they're any less angry about subversion of the democratic process itself.

When there have been historically more posts directing anger at Nader than the purging, it does mean people are less angry about the "subversion of the democratic process itself" (see the thread we are currently entangled in for an example );)

Knock on my electronic door when the facts are on your side.
Funny that you should mention the Democratic Party, your boy Clark voted for Nixon and Reagan. :hi:

[Sparkly]

48. For the third time...

"Historically more posts" means nothing. Nader is an issue of controversy here, because some here support him. Phony felon lists etc. are not controversial here, because nobody's supporting them. Controversy and arguments, or lack thereof, affect the number of posts.

Funny you're trying to change the subject to Clark. I'm happy to discuss Democrats who once voted for Nixon and Reagan, but I think that's for another thread.

[Room101]

50. Sparkly -" So what are you doing at Democratic Underground?"

Oh wait did I just change the subject? :smoke:

I’m a California resident. California will not be in play come November so my possible vote for Nader is a clear message to The Democratic establishment that their base bone is still bleeding.
There is a wacko conspiracy theory floating out there that people are angry with the Democrats for giving progressives like myself a reason to vote for Nader.

The Democratic establishment does not represent Joe and Jane public. Of course they are the lesser of the two evils, but it is still a vote for :evilfrown: (Note: If I lived in a swing state I would definitely vote for Kerry)

[Sparkly]

51. Still no answer

No, you didn't change the subject -- you brought it back to your assertion that you'll never be a Democrat. So what are you doing at Democratic Underground? 'Cause it seems what you're doing here is dissing Democrats and espousing some "reason" to vote for the Democrats' opponent.

Personally, I'm with Michael Moore and George McGovern.

[Room101]

52. Hey Sparkly- Here is your ANSWER..........

WHO IS WELCOME ON DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND, AND WHO IS NOT

We welcome Democrats of all stripes, along with other progressives who will work with us to achieve our shared goals.

This is a "big tent" message board. We welcome a wide range of progressive opinion. You will likely encounter many points of view here that you disagree with.

We ban conservative disruptors who are opposed to the broad goals of this website. If you think overall that George W. Bush is doing a swell job, or if you wish to see Republicans win, or if you are generally supportive of conservative ideals, please do not register to post, as you will likely be banned.

If you have been banned from Democratic Underground, you are not permitted to log on again using a different username. Previously banned members will be immediately banned, regardless of behavior.

People who repeatedly and willfully break the rules, or who generally engage in rude, antisocial behavior, will be banned. It doesn't matter if you are a progressive or a long-term member of this board.

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

Looks like we are both welcome here. It is now time to return to our regularly scheduled broadcast of DEFEAT BUSH!

[Sparkly]

53. Glad to know...

.. you'll be working with us Democrats to achieve our shared goals.

[mdmc]

79. shared goals like ousting * and ending the drug war?

or shared methods of achieving these goals, lockstep.

[Room101]

54. "Personally, I'm with Michael Moore and George McGovern."

I love them both! This country would be a much better place if George McGovern were elected, he was so ahead of his time. Remember I said I would never become a Democrat, that doesn’t mean I would never and have never voted for one. I voted for Gore in 2k and I’m voting for Barbara Boxer.

I took “A decline to state party” Democratic ballot in the primary just to vote for Kucinich. California has an open primary system.

[G_j]

55. one problem

It is absolutely correct that there has been far, far less outrage over the voter purges expressed here than over Nader. I don't think I'd be exaggerating to say that threads have run 100 to 1 in favor of Nader blaming. I might add that the purges were overtly RACIST and ILLEGAL, while Nader running for president was totally within the law.


Blacks did not win full voting rights until 1975. Yes that is only 29 years ago. Dr. King and others offered up their blood sweat and tears to make this happen. Many people GAVE UP THEIR LIVES to make this happen.

Forward to the year 2000, "up to 57,000 persons, the majority of them African American and Democrats, had their voting rights removed." (Greg Palast, see below)

The Democratic party for the most part has taken African American voters for granted, and the leadership left the Black Caucus dangling in the wind over the voter purges.

If one of these purged African American voters expressed an interest in withholding their vote or going third party in 2004, would they be called a traitor or any other number of names?

Are you old enough to remember the civil rights struggle?

Have you ever heard of the voting rights act?

Here is a refresher:
http://www.usdoj.gov/kidspage/crt/voting.htm

Voting Rights

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits discrimination in voting practices or procedures because of race and color. In 1957 and 1960, Congress had enacted voting rights laws that took small steps toward increasing minority voting participation for all Americans. The 1965 Act, however, made huge strides towards making voting rights a reality. The Act prohibited literacy tests and poll taxes which had been used to prevent blacks from voting (see Background and Introduction). In 1975, Congress recognized the need to protect citizens who did not read or speak English well enough to participate in the political process and expanded the protections of the Voting Rights Act to them.

In 1963, civil rights activists began an effort to register black voters in Dallas County, Alabama. During 1963 and 1964, although they brought potential voters by the hundreds to the registrar's office in the courthouse in Selma, they were unable to get them registered to vote. In January and February 1965, protests were held in Selma to bring attention to this violation of rights. The protests were met by violence by Sheriff James Clark and his deputies. On February 17, a small civil rights march ended in the shooting of Jimmy Lee Jackson who died from his wounds several days later. The civil rights activists decided to hold a memorial march from Selma to the state capitol in Montgomery on March. 7.
<snip>

--------------------------------
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=182&row=1

Tuesday, November 5, 2002

ISAAC HERNANDEZ. Special for EL MUNDO

LOS ANGELES.- The last presidential election, Greg Palast, journalist for the BBC and the newspaper The Guardian, investigated a voters purge list in the Florida electoral list. According to his investigation, up to 57,000 persons, the majority of them African American and Democrats, had their voting rights removed. The story is repeated in today´s election. In his book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, Palast tells how the State of Florida hired a company named DBT for four million dollars to remove felons from the electoral list to keep them from voting. Palast demonstrates how Jeb Bush´s office asked DBT to grow the list to the max, including voters with similar names and born on the same date as the felons.

Thousands of people came to the electoral office to vote only to find out that they were felons.

Originally we thought it was 57,000 people that were purged. Now I got the info from DBT that there were 94,000 people in this list. 91,000 were innocent. If those people have voted, Al Gore would most likely have received the 537 votes that he needed to win. What makes the story so sad and rotten is that the Secretary of State of Florida, Katherine Harris, has agreed that innocent people were removed, but they dragged their feet and have used this same list in this election.

According to the settlement from the NAACP lawsuit, the State has to revise the list and return the voting rights to the innocent ones. But they are going to wait until after the elections to do so.

Jeb Bush arranged to steal the election in 2000 for his brother, and is keeping it stolen for his own re-election. Election 2000 is not old news; it’s what happening on Tuesday. On top of that, computerized voting - it’s a real nightmare. Machines continue to fail in black districts in Florida. It happened in September and we will see it on Tuesday. All the problems of 2000, but it’s going to be worse. -What is surprising is that the main media channels are not talking about this.
<snip>


where's the outrage????? I'm not a Naderite and I am still pissed off about this! I think it is shameful but oh so typical that Civil Rights take a back seat to all the endless whining about Nader. That's America for ya..

[Sparkly]

70. Problem?

"there has been far, far less outrage over the voter purges expressed here than over Nader."

Nobody here is espousing the virtues of voter purges; there is no argument, so naturally there aren't as many posts. That is not a fair measure of how strongly people feel about the issue, nor does it mean that anybody here can't "remember the civil rights struggle" or never "heard of the voting rights act." I'm sure if you start some threads bashing the Democratic party and our candidate and touting voter purges as a good idea, you'll get some outrage.

It's still apples and oranges. The fact that apples have seeds doesn't make oranges have fewer. The fact that purging votes is an outrage doesn't make Ralph Nader's run less frustrating to Democrats. The fact that this argument is about Nader doesn't mean we're less angry, or less informed, about vote-purging. One does not mitigate the other. Changing the subject from Nader doesn't change opinions about him. And implying that people are ignorant of an issue if the dispute involves a different one is just plain insulting, in my view.

[LeahMira]

72. Senseless railing at Nader... yuk!

Nobody here is espousing the virtues of voter purges; there is no argument, so naturally there aren't as many posts.

True. Still I have the sinking feeling that no one is doing anything about voter purges. As you mention, there aren't as many posts. Who is watching, particularly in the "swing states" to make sure that these kinds of things aren't happening even as we type? If I recall correctly, the purges of alleged felons in Florida began a full six months before the election. In terms of predictability and such, that means it's likely getting geared up right now!!!

Realizing that this is a "general discussion" board, I still wonder why I haven't seen more posts from people saying what is going on in their own states, and what's being done or should be done about it. Does anyone have it in writing from the Governor of their state that nothing, absolutely nothing will be considered good cause for putting up any sort of road blocks on election day? Are people in place to verify overseas ballots and make sure that none that arrive past the due date are counted? In short, what is being done right now to make sure that every vote counts in November?

I certainly do see what is being done to express outrage directed at Ralph Nader. I'm equally certain that there are people working to make sure every vote counts. I wonder which is more important in the long run... but I vote for keeping an eye on the Republicans over watching what Ralph Nader is doing. At least we can trust Ralph not to screw us. We can't trust the Republicans to do anything else but screw us.

[G_j]

73. thats just the point

there may be "no argument" about voter purges, so why discuss what we can be done about it when arguing is so much more fun?
I don't know how long you've been observing DU, but most of the Nader/Green threads have been not much more than flame wars. If they didn't start that way they quickly degenerated into that. We've had people here more or less demanding that those who voted for Nader in 2000 should wear some sort of scarlet letter and hang their heads in shame.

OK fine, this is a discussion forum. However I can't be convinced that the endless back and forth about Nader has accomplished much of anything constructive. And again, I feel the need to say that the voter purges were illegal, criminal actions perpetuated by Republicans. Nader's candidacy was legal. Unless someone is advocating outlawing third parties I'm at a loss as to what has been accomplished beyond venting. I acknowledge that venting steam has it's value. But I stand by my dismay that the focus and passion has not been on the egregious civil rights violations in Fla.

[mdmc]

75. Are Democrats scared to address this?

:kick:

[trumad]

42. More thoughts on dumb ass Naderites...

Are they really freepers in Liberal clothing.... I mean they do support the opposition to the Democrats don't they.... So what makes them tick? Are they lonely and just want to yell, look at me... They act courageous with their mighty call that they will not fall into the trap of a two party system but yet their own Ayatollah is a guy who can't decide which party to run in...Green....Nah...let's go Independant.... It don't bother his followers that he had to switch back to Independant because the Greenies said no thanks, we've got bigger fish to fry rather than stroke your ego.

Nah..Naderites are miserable little creatures who seek great pleasure being that little piece of crap that you step in as you walk through the neighbors lawn. It's funny...I said the same thing about Republicans just the other day.

I asked up above if Naderites were Freepers in Liberal clothing... This cartoon answers that question perfectly:

[trumad]

13. Don't tell me what I should be angry about

Naderites are so fucking superior aren't they? What...you don't think us Dems aren't pissed about the purge that K. Harris masterminded... What you don't think we read Palast?

God I can't stand the high almighty Naderites...They're a bunch of fucking dweebs.....

[mdmc]

16. mercy

harsh!

[zulchzulu]

27. Who's Palast?

KIDDING!!!!



I have a signed autographed copy of his great book from when he was at the Fighting Bob Fest in Baraboo last August.

[zulchzulu]

19. Say hi to Pat Robertson for me

By voting for Nader, you're his best buddy. He loves you, man.

[Room101]

29. Hi, Pat Robertson

:think::think::crazy::crazy:

[Woodstock]

24. Oh, grow up!

Sorry, that's the only thing that comes to mind. (And yeah, I said it like Joan Rivers.)

One vote for Nader = one vote for Bush = one more kid getting cancer from pollution or one more soldier's leg getting blown off or one more fireman breathing in asbestos while he tries to clean up the remains of an office building that collapsed upon itself ...

[tedoll78]

40. BINGO.

A vote for Nader is a vote to make homosexuals second-class citizens for at least the next generation.

A vote for Nader is a vote to medically rape women.

A vote for Nader is a vote to put the Ten Commandments in every public building in the country.

A vote for Nader is a vote to say "fuck you" to the lives who could be saved via stem cell research. "Fuck you" to cancer patients. "Fuck you" to children with special needs, children with autism, children who need your help and cannot vote intelligently to defend themselves. "Fuck you" to people with heart conditions, asthma, or degenerative neurological conditions.

A vote for Nader is a vote to throw the juice on the electric chairs that seat minors and mentally impaired individuals - and a vote for the plunger to be compressed in their lethal injections.

A vote for Nader is a vote to ignore Clean Air standards, and perhaps even a vote to have the courts knock-down the EPA's very existence.

A vote for Nader is a vote to continue media consolidation and a continuation of crackdowns on "moral" grounds.

A vote for Nader is a vote to sentence thousands more to death via war.

...

A vote for Nader, in effect, is a vote for continuation and strengthening of Bush policies. You can vote for him and feel morally superior for a few moments, or you can vote for Kerry - one of THE most liberal senators we have - and know that you've voted logically when considering the realities of the structure of our political system.

[Woodstock]

63. Yes

Yes, folks, we are down to life and death here. Real people's lives. It's really sweet to hear all the righteous indignation at the Democrats, and I can see where it would really stroke one's ego to say "Please me or else" to a powerful political party, and yes, on the surface, it seems one is taking the high ground when one is completely unbending with respect to one's principles (although, I challenge everyone to REALLY consider if their principles are actually being served with the Nader vote - I say they experience disappointment, too, in ways they could never can imagine now, in the unlikely event Nader ever holds a political office.)

In short, IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU.

[G_j]

58. except

for my brother who is a conservative republican who seems to prefer Nader to Bush. He's not alone either, there are a lot of conservative republicans who are sick and tired of *.
It's not as clear cut as you make it sound.

[Woodstock]

64. Stats show Nader is hurting Kerry

Nader is hurting Kerry far more in the polls, just as he hurt Gore.

The stats show what is happening, just as they did in 2000. If you vote for Nader, you help Bush get elected. I don't care how you rationalize it to sleep better at night (although Nader says he has no trouble sleeping after saying Gore = Bush in 2000, so it would stand to reason his followers would have no such pangs of conscience, either), that is the effect your vote will have.

Vote for Nader = Vote for Bush = Vote for death and destruction (unfortunately, that's not an overdramatization)

Nader or Kerry? Fantasy or Reality? I know I'm lots wiser than I was when I was 20. There's a vote when I was 20 I really regret casting. It enabled death and destruction, too. I hope to spare someone the same regret.

[NinetySix]

25. The most infuriating thing about Nader...

...is that when I watch him speak, I agree with every Goddamn thing he says. But what it appears Nader fails to understand, and what you evidently fail to understand, is that the way in which the electoral system is set up, the winner takes all--without recourse to the overtly expressed preference of the electorate.

Imagine a situation in which an incumbent conservative Governor of a state wins his bid for re-election with 34% of the electorate because the progressive vote was split 33%-33% between two parties. While a scenario like this may be the most extreme and unlikely example of possible election outcomes, it nicely highlights the practical difficulties with third-party candidacies under the current winner-take-all design of the electoral process, absent such reforms as proportional representation or instant run-off election provisions.

Ralph Nader running as an independent against Bush reminds me of that old Monty Python election returns skit in which the Sensible Party candidate received 8766 votes, the Silly Party candidate received 8765, and the Very Silly candidate, encased in a block of cement, received two, thus splitting the Silly vote.

I agree that Nader has very important ideals with which to infuse the political dialogue in the United States (anti-corporate positions which, maddeningly, I FUCKING AGREE WITH!!), but until he and his followers understand that the only practical way to institute the kinds of reforms that, as he says, are necessary is to do so within one of the major parties, specifically the Democratic Party, and until he stops trying to pick the fight he wants with the DLC from the outside, he will remain the Very Silly Party candidate.

[zulchzulu]

31. Man, I totally agree too

What Nader says is generally the truth in most cases. I generally agree with him as much as I agree with Chomsky.

But the fact that he is a willing accomplice in possibly letting Bush have four more years is unforgiveable.

[mdmc]

Welcome to DU, Ninety six,

The Dems need to take the fight straight to *. Either get non voters out to the polls or run a progressive veep. The greens want to replace the Dems as the main opposition party- We all understand the two party system.
love this analogy
Ralph Nader running as an independent against Bush reminds me of that old Monty Python election returns skit in which the Sensible Party candidate received 8766 votes, the Silly Party candidate received 8765, and the Very Silly candidate, encased in a block of cement, received two, thus splitting the Silly vote.

[mdmc]

33. kick

:~)

[goclark]

26. My Beef Is Not with the Indy's

My beef is with Nader.
Please help me understand what a vote for Nader will do to make our country better off?

Since he doesn't have a chance in hell of winning, then what does a vote for any other party but the Democrat party get you where you want to be? Will you get the environmental issues you want, the congressional seats, the civil rights issues that are important to you? Will they take you ideas for who should be appointed a Supreme Court judge?

I love Dennis but Nader is no Dennis.

[mdmc]

37. In Blue or Red States, it represents the liberals and progressives

In swings states, it hurts democrats.

[shekina]

43. like the other person said

why are you here? this isn't Independent Underground, this is DEMOCRATIC underground.

And seriously dude, if you stay here, get rid of the Kucinich avatar. Kucinich was an absolute failure in the campaign and nobody supports him anymore.


Pretty much if you're not for Kerry, you're for Bush. Which is it man?

[union_maid]

45. Nader abandoned that base

When he helped the Bush into power. Of course we're angry about Harris and Jeb Bush. That doesn't absolve Nader of a damned thing. He did what he did knowingly and with callous disregard of the consequences to others of his actions. A pox on his house.

[InvisibleTouch]

17. Long Long Ago....

...I had a lot of respect for Ralph Nader. Once upon a time he accomplished some good things, and I'll still acknowledge him for that. But my opinion of him went down the toilet in 2000, when he seemed to go on some kind of weird ego-trip. Given statements like "There's no difference between Bush and Gore," and this current non-sequitur (if he wants to beat Bush, he needs to suppport rather than oppose Kerry), I'm starting to flat-out wonder about the guy's sanity. And yes, I'm still pissed about the 2000 heist.

[NNadir]

20. I hate him for the same reason I hate Bush: He's a liar and a fraud.

He did a great bit back in the 1970's though as a latter day Jack T. Ripper, leading the fight against fluoridated water.

His precious bodily fluids, like those of Ripper's, were severely affected. Apparently since he can't distinguish something as different as Al Gore, who might have been the greatest enviromental President ever, from the worst excuse for a human being ever to occupy the Whitehouse, the fluoride seems to have affected Ralph's brain.

But you know what I love about Ralph? That he once claimed never to have made more than $5,000 and still became a filthy millionaire with loads of corporate (yes corporate) stock holdings. That he did this while refusing to account for forced studen contributions to his PIRGs. That he broke strikes among his exploited workers.

Yeah, those would be the right words: Liar and fraud.

[Killarney]

69. Amen!

Fuck Nader.

[FrankBooth]

23. Aarrgh

I can't believe I actually once voted for that tool.

[Vickers]

39. Wait...I need HIM to tell me this?

Holy crap, the sheer self-importance of this guy.

Heck, I knew this 4 years ago!

[John_H]

56. LOL! He forgot the second part

"...but if you want to help ruin the country by enabling bush, vote for lil' ol' union busting me."

[Oddman]

57. I used to like Nader

but I think he has inhaled too many Corvair fumes.

A vote for Nader IS a vote for bu$h.

[mdmc]

60. Welcome to DU, Oddman

I disagree, and believe that only a vote for Bush is a vote for Bush. However, people that don't vote, or that vote for a third party candidate, don't help the Democratic candidate.
Its rather vain to think that all those non voters and third party voters are Gore, excuse me, Kerry voters.
Any-who, welcome to DU.

[Q]

61. It's threads like this...

...that have convinced me to go independent after November. Many of you sound just like the party you're supposedly fighting against. The same blind loyalty. The same hatreds towards anyone that doesn't tow the party line.

- Nader may indeed have been right about one thing: there really isn't that much difference between the parties.

[Woodstock]

65. Yeah, Q, we know how you feel

The indirect "Rally 'round Nader" vanity threads of righteous indignation that say all the button pushing words that get some of the kids going, "Democrats suck." Nice work. Hope you enjoy the second Bush administration.

I guess you never heard, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Or thought to apply that to the Democratic party. Nah, it's much more grandiose to say, "Please me or else."

[mdmc]

74. kick Q, kick

:kick:

[UTUSN]

62. Kick for-----Well, Duh------- n/t

[otohara]

66. Too Bad There's So Many Stupid People

in this country RALPH. Yuck,yuck...

[PATRICK]

67. Nader will vote for Kerry

Just in case. Running for president doesn't mean that you actually have to vote for yourself.

Seriously, the only danger Nader poses is GOP and media backing and attention he will be showered with. How does Ralph propose to keep himself squeaky clean(by his own rules) when that happens?

He may in fact be using the GOP support as a platform against Bush for real blowback against the WH. Then, if he were more devious, he would withdraw this fall at a dramatic moment. Let's see how good he is at making politics serve his causes. Let's see how much the GOP might be sweating out pouring ammo into a gun mainly directed at their agenda.

On the other hand this is not a factor Dems should be worrying about publicly.

[LeahMira]

71. And... ?

Nader said that if a voter is worried that their vote for Nader will take away votes from Kerry, and thus help Bush win, then they should vote for Kerry.

And what was the next part of Nader's comment? It seems as if there ought to be more than that. You wouldn't be acting a tad disingenuous with this, would you?

x(

So, good for Nader! He is right on the money! If all the voter is interested in doing is getting Bush out of the White House, then a vote for Kerry is going to work towards that goal.

But... what then?

Getting Bush out of the White House is, as I see it, the short-term goal. If voters feel that they have discharged their responsibilities as citizens simply by doing that, I disagree.

The long term goal is changing the direction in which this country is currently going. Generally speaking, laws that are made to protect and/or assist the powerful tend to be bad laws. Laws that are made to protect and/or assist the powerless tend to be good laws.

I totally believe that the Bush administration could have been stopped in its tracks if more Democrats in Congress had demonstrated a bit of spine. Some have, but many have been MIA as laws have been enacted to gut environmental protection and to rob senior citizens of their savings. Voters absolutely must understand that their job is not only to replace the resident in the White House, but also to nudge their Congressional representatives and to support those who have demonstrated their willingness to swim against the current.

Nader is raising issues that Democrats do not raise, perhaps do not want raised.

So now, let's look at Senator Kerry and decide if he shares the long-term goals that Democrats claim to espouse, or if his goal is the short-term one of simply winning the White House.

We will see.

[mdmc]

76. the next part was typical Nader rambling

dems support the drug war, dems support the death penalty, dems support NCLB, dems support the patriot act, dems support unfair trade (free trade v. fair trade).
If you agree with the Dems, then vote for them.
If you oppose these issues, vote Green.
+ You wouldn't be acting a tad disingenuous with this, would you?+
no, I rushed from my tv to du to post. When I returned to the tv, Nader was still a'ramblin on.

[mdmc]

77. keep in mind that I am still a Democrat

I am a progressive liberal, actually, but have been a Democrat all of my adult life, except from 18- 21 when I was registered a liberal.