That's it. I now hate Nader.

[Dob Bole]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&e=1&u=/ap/20040304/ap_on_el_pr/ap_poll_president

[onehandle]

1. dupe....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x399694

[RichM]

2. Nader at 6%? That seems surprisingly high. If it's true, though, I advise

Kerry to start leaning left! :-)

[kiahzero]

4. That's a real good idea

"Kerry responds to Republican "Massachussets Liberal" attacks by veering left"

What a great way to win a campaign!

[youngred]

6. It's better than running to the right

and being Bush-Lite

[kiahzero]

8. It's called "claiming the center"

and its the way to win elections. As I pointed out in a different thread, some leftists seem to have the inability to understand this concept.

The reason right wingers win elections is because they don't act like right wingers. They act like centrists, and centrists win elections.

[youngred]

14. Gee That playing for the Centere sure works for Bush

While its true that one does need to appeal to the centere, one cannot afford to alienate one's base (see 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002). What has third way politics brought us? 2 terms of Clinton and losing the house and the sure-win 2000 election. Meanwhile, it allows the Republicans to move further and further right, and they do it too.

I fully understand electoral politics and the concepts of political science (it is my 4.0 GPA major after all). Perhaps instead of alienating the left you might try to attract them to want to support you with activism, money and votes.

[sangh0]

16. It sure did

that's why you heard so much about his being a compassionate conservative when he was running in 2000. It's also explains why he said little about his right-wing plans during the 2000 campaign. It also explains why you will hear very little from Bush* about gay marriages

[youngred]

19. And your point is?

he never could mask his true conservatism...compassionate conservative fellatio from the media notwithstanding.

[sangh0]

36. My point is that Bush* did play to the center

and it did work.

[youngred]

40. Did it?

Al Gore ran a shitty campaign
Bush had huge help from everywhere from the media all the way up to nepotism and an abridgement of the constitution.

Bush didn't win shite.

[Nadienne]

30. Hasn't he already taken a clear stand

about gay marriages? I thought it (and other issues of morality and religion) was an issue he was going to push?

[sangh0]

38. Yes, Bush* made one clear statement

and I don't think we're going to here much about the issue from Bush* anymore. He'll get his proxies to do the dirty work while he keeps his hands off.

And this year, I don't think Bush* will be pushing morality too often. It worked with Gore because of Clinton. Kerry is not as vulnerable to that. Kerry is a war hero.

[kiahzero]

18. The key is knowing how to do both

I was claiming that the reason Bush is in office is because he can do both, partially because his base lets him.

[youngred]

22. And your base won't

because they're sick and tired of having been ignored, lied to, insulted, and pushed out for the last 30 years.

The key is indeed knowing how to do both...so why don't the DNC and the DLC understand that?

[SangamonTaylor]

28. your 'base' is not what you think

Most people who vote for the Democratic party are moderate. Most people are moderates. They think of themselves as Clinton Democrats. Where does the extreme left get off thinking that they are the majority of the democratic party?

[youngred]

31. No one said they were

but honestly, the level of ignorance about the way politics work is particularly disturbing so I will repost this:

In a Two Party system the people generally fall into a bell curve distribution. Except for extreme outliers the edge of the curve is considered the base of the party as it identifies with the major ideas and platforms of the party. They do not represent a numerical majority, yet they are the most likely to vote, volunteer and donate. Alienating a powerful and active base is a surefire way to electoral disaster. Why are the Republicans so strong of late? because they spent time and effort wooing that "fringe" and using them as footsoldiers in the fight against the left. The Left which had traditionally counted on unions to act this part are suffering from the decline of Unions in this country (coincidentally many of the Unions are the fringe left you speak about so derisively). The base is in the wing of the partiess not in the fairweather moderates who by definition will switch parties at any time they feel like. However, alienating, attacking, ignoring and mis-treating the left is a good way to watch that very important minority that you seem not to care about and wish would get lost leave your party or stay home. You are preaching the (failed) idea of third way politics. It's time for the Democrats to re-find their base and strength and present a clear alternative to Bush and the Republicans.

[SangamonTaylor]

32. How is Kerry not a clear alternative to Bush???

That's the most rediculous thing I've ever read.

[youngred]

34. Oh he is

There's the No Child Left Behind Act...oh wait. Well, there's the Iraq War right...oh, shit forgot that doesn't work either. Well there his stance on NAFTA and helping American workers...that's right its the same nevermind. Well he must have voted against the USA PATRIOT Act...hmmm didn't do that either. Getting the troops out of harm's way in Iraq that would be the difference...no, no Kerry supports leaving them there to die.

But I never said that Kerry wasn't a clear alternative to Bush. The Democrats aren't. They keep running right towards the center which allows the republicans to go further right and leaves a vacuum on the left that opportunists like Nader can take advantage of to inflate his ego. I will happily vote Kerry, he is not my ideal candidate, but he does have a lot of positions I can respect and support and is a far cry from the fascistic tendencies of the Bush administration.

At least argue against what I said and don't create strawmen

[sangh0]

39. RE: NCLB

I guess you don't remember the original NCLB, which Bush* proposed. Among other atrocities, it included provisions for federal school vouchers which the Dems like Kerry fought to have removed. But I guess that's just a minor difference.

I'll also guess you don't remember the original IWR, which Bush* proposed. Among other atrocities, it authorized an invasion of the entire Middle East, which Dems like Kerry fought to have removed. But I guess that's just a minor difference.

And I don't know where you got the idea that a vote for NAFTA is somehow goes against the grain of mainstream Democrats. Many Democrats support Free Trade.

I also don't see where you got the idea that pulling troops out of Iraq is in any way consistent with traditional Democratic values. The Democratic Party has never been an anti-war party. In fact, it's usually been more interventionist than the Republican Party.

And the Democrats don't need to run to the center. They've occupied that space for decades. It's funny how you keep saying the Dems aren't liberal, and at the same time say "They keep running right towards the center". If moving right brings them closer to the center, then simple geometry tells you that they are on the left side of the political spectrum

[youngred]

43. They were to the left of center, now they're center-left at best

which is a very important distinction. Its something that the third way movement tried to prove, but aside from initial success it has been a veritable failure after a short period of time. You are completely misunderstanding me, intentionally or not. Read some pol sci literature on the third way movement and theory, it would be very enlightening.

I don't care what they did about the originals, its their CONTINUED support for things that are even as bad as they are now. I remember a lot more than you think, and enough to know your arguments here are bunk.

There are vouchers currently, your argument makes no sense

The whole Middle East! I must have missed that for sure because I don't remember anything like that...can you prove it? I doubt it. I generally don't hold the IWR against Dems as I *do* understand why they did what they did, even though I hated it.

Many Democrats support free trade, even I do too, but not in the way that its currently being run (whereby it outsources everything at the expense of the american worker.

The Democrats have long been more interventionist that's true, but in situations where intervention was needed (well sometimes). However I don't see how it is within Democratic principles to fight on in Iraq when we could easily turn it over to the rest of the world for some help (but then Bushco wouldn't get its oil contracts so why bother with a sensible policy).

Like I said also in my post (and which you ignored so i shall re-itereate) there is indeed a large difference between Kerry and Bush. That is why he was the first candidate I supported last year and why I will vote for him in November. But this divisive war of scapegoating that some to the center of me have decided to engage in is ludicrous and unecessary. I have ALWAYS been a proponent of working with people to make a prty and country we can all live in...too bad some don't agree

[SangamonTaylor]

41. The Democrats aren't a clear alternative to Republicans?

That one has me at a loss too.

[youngred]

44. Are you going to reply to anything

or just keep taking single lines out of context?

You think the Dems are a clear alternative? Explain 2002 and polls which continually show people believe there is little difference then.

How on earth do you think Nader has any support?

[Frederic Bastiat]

15. Yup and very Clintonesque too

I'm all for it!

[youngred]

23. What did Clinton do for the party?

He himself was a gifted politician, but a disaster for the Democrats.

[sangh0]

42. What Clinton did for the party

He dispelled some of the lies the Repukes have been tarring Dems with for decades like

1) tax and spend (by creating a surplus)
2) weak on crime (by signing harsh criminal laws and presiding during a period of declining crime rates)
3) welfare queens (by signing welfare reform)
4) weak on defense (by being as quick to use military action as any Repuke)

You may not like all of those actions, but they did give some help to the party

[youngred]

45. And yet.....those lies still stick around

he did a good job at trying but the republicans are still saying the same things about us and people still believe it.

[nodictators]

35. How true. Go to Kathryn Harris' US House web page

You'd think she was one of them thar bleeding-heart "Libruls."

They're all phony, through and through.

And Nader is a crypto right-winger, friends with Grover Norquist.

He'll be lucky to get 1% of the votes. The polls are full of crap.

[Mairead]

47. It's called "becoming toast"

Do you really think people like us aren't furious and despairing about the Big Sellout that started on 12 December 2000?

Check around, see if you can discover Nader's numbers at this time 4 yrs ago. I bet they were less.

Or, alternately, carry on whistling past the graveyard. Tell yourself that the Dems don't need the lefties, that it's all fear rumours anyhow, that Kerry will win in November going away.

[KenLayedOff]

25. What's wrong with embracing Democratic principles?

Moving to the right rubs against what we stand for. The liberal label needs to be embraced and explained to the middle voters.

[robertpaulsen]

3. A vote for Nader does not help Bush lose!!!

God, reading that story has got me fumed! I can't believe after getting 2.7% in 2000 his support is actually HIGHER now. That can't be for real! Who are these people supporting him? It would have been nice if AP had polled Nader supporters as to whether they are Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, independent, etc. If some Buchanan conservative wants to vote Nader as a protest against Bush, fine. Otherwise, I just don't see how any rational open-minded human being could support giving Bush four more wars!

[onehandle]

7. The poll is not what it appears...

Here we see that the poll was mostly conducted before Kerry had the nomination sewn up. Super Tuesday was not decided until late on the second of March. Not until the third for people not paying attention. Also, these are Not all registered voters. (Larger margin of error)

"The Associated Press-Ipsos poll on the economy and President Bush is based on telephone interviews with 1,000 randomly selected adults from all states except Alaska and Hawaii. The interviews were conducted March 1-3 by Ipsos-Public Affairs. The sample includes 771 registered voters.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040304/ap_on_el_pr...

Let's see what the numbers are in a couple of weeks, bozos.

[WitchWay]

26. Rationality

Perhaps these people who are supporting Nader are not actually supporting Bush.

Maybe - they are people who support Nader.

[redqueen]

5. Nader's being a tool

Don't be another one. Recognize republican spin.

There is NO WAY IN HELL he's going to get 6%.

He won't even be on the freaking ballot in most states!!!!

Can we stop with the melodrama?

:eyes:

[G_j]

9. what is wrong with these people?

Freeman said. "He's taking votes away from the Democrats."

wrong

Hello, you can't TAKE a vote away from anyone! (Unless of course you are Jeb Bush or Diebold.)

I just wish people would attempt to use language correctly. :think: :think: :think:

[redqueen]

10. Want to hear something sad?

During my time as a tech writer, I found out that in writing to a wide audience (general populace), you're supposed to write for a 6th grade reading comprehension.

So... maybe it's intentional?

Either way, I share your disgust.

[G_j]

13. and what is disheartening is

that the bar continues to get lowered.
How long will it be before real communication is impossible?

.."well of course, he didn't really mean "take" (as in steal, confiscate etc.) their votes."

..Well then, what exactly did he mean, and why doesn't he have enough of a grasp on the language to say it?


:shrug:

[Snivi Yllom]

11. See hating Nader does not solve the problem

The problem is Kerry needs to move leftwards to pick up the support from Nader.

Hating Nader solves nothing.

[yardwork]

12. a poll like this nine months before the election means nothing

even if it is a fair poll with truly representative samples, etc., which none of the polls are now. This could easily be a Repub ruse to try to "scare" Kerry further left.

Even if the poll is accurate it doesn't mean much.....

People who are upset that their candidate is not going to be the Dem nominee might be telling pollsters they support Nader now, but I doubt they'll vote for Nader in the election.

Pay no attention to the man behind the polling curtain.

[sangh0]

17. When this poll was taken

Lieberman was the frontrunner!

nuff said

[WitchWay]

21. But then the polls

That had Kerry seeming so electable compared to Bush would also be questionable...
Or did the Repubs rig those polls too?

[northzax]

20. you know what's amazing?

after the 2000 debacle, if the Dems can't convince epople to vote for them instead of Nader, they don't deserve to win. that's it in a nutshell.

[Jack_Dawson]

33. Whoever votes for Nader...

deserves to be dragged out to the woodshed.

[KenLayedOff]

24. Hopefully the 6% are Bush voters

We can only hope.

[youngred]

27. Welcome to DU KenLayedOff

Glad to have you with us :-)

[OKNancy]

29. Nader won't get 6% in the general

because he won't be on enough ballots to make didddly-squat of a difference.

[JVS]

37. Wow, 6%. Looks like he's more popular than ever!

[WilliamPitt]

46. Then stop talking about him

Nader has:

- No party, which means he has

- No infrastructure, which means he has

- No good way to raise money, and also means he has

- No army to collect signatures to get him on the ballots in all 50 states.

All he has going for him - all - is free press and exposure. That's from the TV to the big papers to the alternative press, even to places like this. Every time you find yourself typing 'N-A-D-E-R' on this forum, you're giving him the best kind of help he can get.