Neutralize Nader. Contribute to Michael Badnarik's(LP) campaign.

[Classical_Liberal]

Many antiwar libertarians would rather die than vote for Kerry or Bush.

http://www.badnarik.org/

If Badnarik becomes popular it would offset Nader's potential spoiler effect.

[dad]

1. Neutralize Badnarik

Vote Nader

[Classical_Liberal]

3. It would create two antiwar candidates to tell the PNACers in

both campaigns to stick it.

[Liberal Classic]

2. I've got to say

I respect the greens for outpolling libertarians in 2000.

[JI7]

4. doesn't badnarik want to get rid of UN

[Classical_Liberal]

5. This is to neutralize Nader's spoiler effect.

All the Kerry bots are complaining that Nader is getting funding from the GOP, to spoil Kerry, and he probably is. So let's do the same thing to Bush and fund Badnarik.

He is also antiwar, and so are many conservatives, who will never vote for Kerry. The conservatives that will vote for Kerry may prefer Badnarik, so Kerry will be inspired to move left on the war.

[JI7]

9. "Kerry bots"?

[Classical_Liberal]

10. pro-Kerry campaigners

.

[thebigmansentme]

6. roy moore for constitutional party !!!

[Classical_Liberal]

7. Link?

?

[thebigmansentme]

8. yeah

they tried to get him, he almost accepted, but didn't happen

now they have this peroutka guy

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

[Classical_Liberal]

11. Kick for the morning crowd

:kick:

[pathansen]

12. Kerry voted for the war BECAUSE BUSH REPEATEDLY LIED ABOUT IT!

Kerry, along with most other U.S. Senators, thought Bush was telling the truth when he used the following arguments to go to war in Iraq:
- Having biological, chemical and nuclear weapons of mass destruction
- Link between Saddan Hussein and 9/11 (another lie).
- Saddam torturing his own people (and now we have our own prisoner abuse scandal).
Bush misled the entire Senate to go to war in Iraq.
Antiwar protesters must understand this!

[Classical_Liberal]

13. Most Naderites read progressive outlets and knew that these were lies

so that argument probably won't work, with them. It just makes Kerry look uninformed, and/or dishonest. It doesn't work with me either, but I am a strategic voter. Let's neutralize the Nader effect instead of taking their right, and responsibility to vote their conscience away. Triangulate the republicans and fund the antiwar libertarian candidate. I would have preferred a candidate that voted against the IWR. I would prefer a candidate that doesn't want to replace Chavez with a right wing government. I prefer a candidate that will get Israel to remove all the settlements on the West Bank. I prefer a candidate that has more to offer the poor than a 7 dollar minimum wage. I don't have one. Having said that, I know that many of my fellow progressives are probably going to bolt, which scares me. I am equally scared of Kerry taking advantage of my goodwill when elected, because the left has told him they have nowhere to go. It is like being a battered wife and having no women's shelter to turn to. He is already promising to make the balanced budget a bigger priority than workers and the poor. If we can't kill Nader, and it may not be desirable to, let's neutralize him with a Libertarian challenger to take W voters away.

[Classical_Liberal]

14. Kick for the afternoon crowd.

:kick:

[jackstraw45]

15. Uh...why not just give to Kerry or Moveon? NT

why not just give to Kerry or Moveon?

[Classical_Liberal]

16. This takes away from Bush not Kerry

There are some conservatives who just won't vote for Kerry. They would vote libertarian though. So I don't understand your complaint? This will triangulate voters away from Bush and neutralize the Nader effect, so it helps Kerry indirectly. If the Gop is funding Nader to defeat Kerry why can't we fund a Libertarian to defeat Bush? You all claim the repukes are evil geniuses for funding Nader. Why can't we be evil geniuses too?

I want more political alternatives, but I recognize the need to deal honestly with the spoiler effect.

[Classical_Liberal]

17. kick for the evening crowd

:kick: