|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
![]() |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:21 PM Original message |
Nader says Edwards is the most progressive. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:23 PM Response to Original message |
1. Just about to post this. Thanks. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
surfermaw
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:23 PM Response to Original message |
2. And he is right... Edwards is going to win Iowa. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deja Q
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:23 PM Response to Original message |
3. Uh-oh... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ihavenobias
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:22 PM Response to Reply #3 |
43. Why the attacks on Nader?! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:39 PM Response to Reply #43 |
47. Not only did he, without a doubt, cost Gore the election |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ihavenobias
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:43 PM Response to Reply #47 |
51. That's fine |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stimbox
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:21 PM Response to Reply #47 |
75. Election fraud cost Gore the election. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pberq
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:44 PM Response to Reply #47 |
85. The Rpublicans stole Florida in 2000 - Nader just gave them cover |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:32 PM Response to Reply #43 |
79. Nader IS a special interest. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ellisonz
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 07:33 AM Response to Reply #79 |
106. He's the Alan Keyes of the Left. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mzmolly
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:33 PM Response to Reply #3 |
80. Heh, that's great! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zynx
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:24 PM Response to Original message |
4. I don't mind Edwards, but I don't give a damn what Nader says. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Botany
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:25 PM Response to Original message |
5. I loves me some Edwards but .... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
penguin7
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:27 PM Response to Original message |
6. As if I needed more reasons to dislike Edwards |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:28 PM Response to Reply #6 |
8. What reasons DO you have for disliking Edwards? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AndyA
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:33 PM Response to Reply #8 |
16. Pay no mind to those dissing Edwards. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:06 PM Response to Reply #16 |
28. I really, really hope you're more intelligent than that post would indicate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
surfermaw
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:29 PM Response to Reply #28 |
36. Is that because you support another candidate..... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 07:07 AM Response to Reply #36 |
105. No. I don't support another candidate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inspired
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:51 PM Response to Reply #16 |
58. Edwards is the change candidate. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:59 PM Response to Reply #58 |
64. Absolutely, he is the change candidate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beaverhausen
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:28 PM Response to Original message |
7. I agree- but I wish Nader would just shut up already |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:29 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Nader said some good things. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Beaverhausen
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:31 PM Response to Reply #9 |
11. Well, Nader caused enough damage to the party back in 2000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mojambo
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:33 PM Response to Reply #11 |
15. Nader and the DLC share equally in the debacle of that election, IMO. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:38 PM Response to Reply #15 |
23. I blame the Republicans and their criminal machine. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:41 PM Response to Reply #15 |
48. Nader got 97,000 Florida votes, more than 100 times what was needed for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mojambo
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:12 PM Response to Reply #48 |
72. And the DLC running their candidate away from winning Democratic policies lost millions of votes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pberq
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:46 PM Response to Reply #48 |
86. That's assuming that those voters would have voted for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
struggle4progress
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 11:44 PM Response to Reply #48 |
101. Florida By The Numbers: Al Gore Won Florida in 2000 by 77,000 Votes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:35 PM Response to Reply #11 |
19. He's supporting Edwards campaign strategy. That's not trouble -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BigDDem
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:31 PM Response to Original message |
10. Nader is now pro hedge fund |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:35 PM Response to Reply #10 |
21. I didn't hear that... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mojambo
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:40 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. Tune your receiver to the smear channel. It's playing 24 hours a day. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:45 PM Response to Reply #24 |
26. Huh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mojambo
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:31 PM Response to Original message |
12. Correctamundo. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:32 PM Response to Original message |
13. I saw it too - very interesting conversation... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
K Gardner
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:32 PM Response to Original message |
14. He said Obama had "excluded himself by his statements" from |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:34 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. He said Obama was too "conciliatory" toward entrenched power... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
readmoreoften
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 06:52 AM Response to Reply #17 |
104. "Obama is conciliatory towards entrenched power." Great way to put it. /nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
emmadoggy
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 10:44 AM Response to Reply #17 |
111. Me too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnorman
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:34 PM Response to Original message |
18. Presumably, he meant the most "electable" progressive. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:35 PM Response to Reply #18 |
20. He mentioned that he agrees with Kucinich on a lot... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
proudmoddemo
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:37 PM Response to Original message |
22. The kiss of death n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 05:42 PM Response to Original message |
25. I think Nader has been the conscience of the Democratic Party in some ways... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:44 PM Response to Reply #25 |
53. Nader only appears to have a conscience. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:48 PM Response to Reply #53 |
55. Or, as he points out, his getting into the race forced Gore to move to the left... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:51 PM Response to Reply #55 |
59. Nader has contradicted himself then, because he also claimed many times |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:53 PM Response to Reply #59 |
60. I don't see Nader that way... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:06 PM Response to Reply #60 |
67. I hold the Republicans responsible for what they did, and Nader for what he did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:11 PM Response to Reply #67 |
71. But you're not figuring in the votes Gore got BECAUSE Nader forced him to the left... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 11:26 PM Response to Reply #71 |
97. Those votes are a fantasy of Nader's, and that fantasy conflicts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 07:43 AM Response to Reply #97 |
108. I'ld like to hear Gore's take on it now... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bvar22
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:01 PM Response to Reply #108 |
120. Gore agrees that Nader did NOT cost him the election. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:02 PM Response to Reply #120 |
121. Thank you! :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DURHAM D
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 11:33 PM Response to Reply #71 |
99. There is no evidence that Nader forced Gore to the left - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 07:40 AM Response to Reply #99 |
107. To me it sounds like you and others have bought the DLC story... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LoZoccolo
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 10:54 AM Response to Reply #107 |
113. Our story is not the DLC story, but the default story... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 01:29 PM Response to Reply #113 |
117. Nice try... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 12:28 PM Response to Reply #107 |
115. Nader isn't a Democrat AT ALL. He's an opponent of the Democratic party, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 01:30 PM Response to Reply #115 |
118. Like I said, I'd love to hear Gore's take on it all now... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
comradebillyboy
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:02 PM Response to Original message |
27. Nader's endorsement is almost as valuable |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BigDDem
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:07 PM Response to Original message |
29. I definitely think Edwards should take Nader on the road! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:16 PM Response to Original message |
30. Interesting, does that mean that Nader won't run if Edwards is nominated?... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:18 PM Response to Reply #30 |
31. That's where he was going when Chris interrupted. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FlyingSquirrel
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:18 PM Response to Reply #30 |
32. Edwards - Nader? ;-) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:20 PM Response to Reply #32 |
34. I think Nader was trying to say that "if Edwards gets the nomination and doesn't back off" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vickers
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:20 PM Response to Original message |
33. C'mon Edwards, don't get the stink of Ralph on ya! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:16 PM Response to Reply #33 |
41. I think Edwards shows that if you DO run as a true progressive Democrat... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:42 PM Response to Reply #41 |
50. That's how I see it. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cascadiance
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:55 PM Response to Reply #50 |
62. If Nader plays his cards right this time, he can be an asset rather than a penalty... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:00 PM Response to Reply #62 |
65. I was so frustrated when Chris interrupted him because... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catchawave
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:25 PM Response to Original message |
35. I'll catch the re-run at 7pm EST, but did they bring up |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:30 PM Response to Reply #35 |
37. Nader was one of my early heroes too... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:07 PM Response to Reply #37 |
69. Spoke at my college too |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slick8790
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 06:42 PM Response to Original message |
38. Yikes. He's right, but I don't want Edwards to get associated with that asshole. n/t. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 12:29 PM Response to Reply #38 |
116. Exactly. Nader would only drag him down. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
noiretextatique
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:04 PM Response to Original message |
39. nader is right about many things |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:08 PM Response to Reply #39 |
40. I have to believe that those who trash him at DU... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
noiretextatique
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:18 PM Response to Reply #40 |
42. you are kind |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stimbox
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:27 PM Response to Reply #40 |
77. Maybe too brainwashed too... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:34 PM Response to Reply #77 |
81. Ohhhh, I didn't get that at first... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
annie1
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:23 PM Response to Original message |
44. Awesome. He seems it. Cool. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
maximusveritas
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:25 PM Response to Original message |
45. Edwards has adopted Nader's rhetoric |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:32 PM Response to Reply #45 |
46. It will make a difference to progressives .. unfortunately, many Democrats |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
maximusveritas
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:42 PM Response to Reply #46 |
84. I think it has more to do with dislike for Nader |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:42 PM Response to Original message |
49. Charlie Cook says that Edwards is giving the most populist message. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kucinich4America
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:44 PM Response to Original message |
52. Does this mean we'll see "FUCK EDWARDS" avatars now? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:46 PM Response to Reply #52 |
54. Only if DUers are dumbies! nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hieronymus
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:49 PM Response to Reply #54 |
56. Seems that DUers have drifted to the center. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:50 PM Response to Reply #56 |
57. FOOLS! :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:56 PM Response to Reply #52 |
63. No, you'll see FUCK NADER avatars |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Freddie Stubbs
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 09:16 PM Response to Reply #52 |
93. Only if Edwards runs as a 3rd party candidate after he loses the nomination |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occam Bandage
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 07:54 PM Response to Original message |
61. Fuck Nader. He's right, though; Edwards is a good candidate. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:02 PM Response to Reply #61 |
66. There you go! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:07 PM Response to Reply #61 |
68. He's been right many times... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:15 PM Response to Reply #68 |
73. Was he right when he said there's no difference |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:19 PM Response to Reply #73 |
74. He was telling us to embrace our progressive values... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:21 PM Response to Reply #74 |
76. Leave Edwards out; this is about Nader |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:27 PM Response to Reply #76 |
78. They WERE elected... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:34 PM Response to Reply #78 |
82. I'm still trying to understand how Nader was right |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:40 PM Response to Reply #82 |
83. He's right when he reminds us to vote our progressive values... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:48 PM Response to Reply #83 |
88. All I see is thousands of dead American soldiers |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:51 PM Response to Reply #88 |
89. Oh well... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:56 PM Response to Reply #89 |
91. As I said already, forgive me, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 09:20 PM Response to Reply #91 |
95. Nader's an easy scapegoat... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Auggie
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:47 PM Response to Reply #82 |
87. Nader's reference was to the influence corporate America had over politicians and parties. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Xipe Totec
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:54 PM Response to Reply #87 |
90. And to make his point, he enabled Bush |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
noiretextatique
![]() |
Wed Dec-19-07 11:32 AM Response to Reply #90 |
125. nonsense...gore won the election |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TransitJohn
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 08:07 PM Response to Original message |
70. Well, not really. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Franc_Lee
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 09:10 PM Response to Original message |
92. Obama must really be a threat, even Nader is trying to divert interest to Edwards |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robbedvoter
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 09:19 PM Response to Original message |
94. And Ralphie never stirred us wrong, did he? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cronus Protagonist
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 09:21 PM Response to Original message |
96. He must be blind |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
VarnettaTuckpocket
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 11:28 PM Response to Original message |
98. Wish he'd cursed Obama with his endorsement n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kurth
![]() |
Mon Dec-17-07 11:34 PM Response to Original message |
100. No shit, Sherlock |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sjdnb
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 12:23 AM Response to Original message |
102. My thoughts on Nader from early am November 8th, 2000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
eridani
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 01:18 AM Response to Original message |
103. He's wrong. Kucinich is the most progressive |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 07:44 AM Response to Reply #103 |
109. That's actually what Nader said... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Freddie Stubbs
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:44 AM Response to Original message |
110. Does Nader have a history wacko political analysis? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dionysus
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 10:49 AM Response to Original message |
112. he endorses a dem, and somewhere Loz's head has just exploded... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 01:34 PM Response to Reply #112 |
119. No endorsement, as of yet anyway... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hunter
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
114. Coming from a right wing tool like Nader, that's not saying much. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mtnsnake
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:08 PM Response to Original message |
122. Edwards might SOUND progressive, but it still remains to be seen that he's progressive. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
polichick
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:12 PM Response to Reply #122 |
123. Lol - this has come up over and over here... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
teacher gal
![]() |
Tue Dec-18-07 08:21 PM Response to Original message |
124. Edwards is the first candidate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:34 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC