|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
![]() |
midnight armadillo
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:16 PM Original message |
Let's get Ralph Nader as Souter's replacement |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
damonm
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:18 PM Response to Original message |
1. Nope - Bill Clinton. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
midnight armadillo
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:28 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. that would also be great |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NYC_SKP
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:29 PM Response to Reply #3 |
32. Yea, either Clinton would blow their minds, but... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wyldwolf
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:33 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. Obama: "I nominate... Bill Clinton......naw, just kidding! Did y'all see Joe Scarborough? .. lol!" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Honeycombe8
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:42 PM Response to Reply #1 |
36. If you stop and think about what a Justice does, you'd understand why neither Clinton |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
damonm
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 04:49 PM Response to Reply #36 |
68. Well aware, thanks. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NorthCarolina
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 11:06 AM Response to Reply #1 |
82. No thanks, too conservative n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Velveteen Ocelot
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:19 PM Response to Original message |
2. Well, at least he has an ego to match Fat Tony Scalia's. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
oviedodem
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:28 PM Response to Original message |
4. After calling Obama an "Uncle Tom" on election night and saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:32 PM Response to Reply #4 |
8. Seriously, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cha
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:33 PM Response to Reply #4 |
10. nader's real good at name calling.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Better Believe It
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:19 PM Response to Reply #10 |
21. Ya ..... no one ever picks on Nader and calls him names! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlooInBloo
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 12:11 PM Response to Reply #21 |
56. Worst. Comeback. Ever. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cha
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 02:12 PM Response to Reply #56 |
60. Gee |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Aragorn
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:18 PM Response to Reply #21 |
61. Yoda's press release re: Nader for SCOTUS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Flying Dream Blues
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:51 PM Response to Reply #4 |
28. He called Obama an Uncle Tom? How did I miss that? Not that I didn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 07:36 AM Response to Reply #4 |
46. shameful and disgusting behavior |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
superduperfarleft
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 07:47 AM Response to Reply #4 |
47. He never called Obama an "uncle tom" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occam Bandage
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 11:49 AM Response to Reply #47 |
55. Yes, he did. You are wrong. You are very wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
superduperfarleft
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 11:26 AM Response to Reply #55 |
83. You are being dishonest. Very dishonest.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Alexander
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:30 PM Response to Original message |
5. About as dumb as putting Kucinich on the court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
digidigido
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:30 PM Response to Original message |
6. Nader is dead to me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Muttocracy
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:31 PM Response to Original message |
7. among other things, too old. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Aragorn
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:22 PM Response to Reply #7 |
62. Yoda agrees |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zulchzulu
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:46 PM Response to Original message |
11. Nader has marginalized himself so much that he is forever "unmarketable" politically |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
SeattleGirl
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:48 PM Response to Original message |
12. Um, let's not. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:50 PM Response to Original message |
13. Deleted message |
omega minimo
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:24 PM Response to Reply #13 |
22. If you were a plant, what kind of plant would you be? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:50 PM Response to Original message |
14. Forget all his baggage. Nader wouldn't make a good Supreme Court Justice because |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrModerate
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:52 PM Response to Original message |
15. I just did a triple spit-take . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:03 PM Response to Reply #15 |
18. . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jonestonesusa
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 06:29 PM Response to Reply #15 |
90. Do policy stances make any difference in who one picks? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
depakid
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:54 PM Response to Original message |
16. If Clinton had put Nader (or someone like him) where they belonged- as head of the FTC |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vidar
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 12:06 AM Response to Reply #16 |
70. Would have been a superb role for Nader. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thrill
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 09:59 PM Response to Original message |
17. What about Michelle Obama? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
azmouse
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:11 PM Response to Original message |
19. No thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlphaCentauri
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:17 PM Response to Original message |
20. Nader's vice candidate would be ideal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
depakid
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:28 PM Response to Reply #20 |
25. I thought you were talking about Winona LaDuke! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlphaCentauri
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:53 PM Response to Reply #25 |
29. Any of them would make the perfect choice for a real progressive |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
omega minimo
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:25 PM Response to Original message |
23. "(note - take the 2000 florida comments elsewhere)" -- good luck with that! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tarheel_Dem
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:27 PM Response to Original message |
24. Isn't Nader like a thousand years old? What would be the point? (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Brother Buzz
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:47 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. He would be over a two thousand years old before he would ever be confirmed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tarheel_Dem
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:26 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. I suspect you're right. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:53 PM Response to Reply #24 |
38. Yes. See, Obama would get to appoint his replacement soon! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tarheel_Dem
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 12:13 AM Response to Reply #38 |
40. So true. But, on a serious note, I'm so hoping that the Prez will be able... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Two Americas
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 10:32 PM Response to Original message |
26. never |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
firedupdem
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:26 PM Response to Original message |
31. Never n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lucretia54
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:34 PM Response to Original message |
33. I don't care what anyone says, I LOVE Ralph! He's ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Honeycombe8
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:38 PM Response to Reply #33 |
35. Sorry, you're wrong. If Nader had not been in the race, Gore would've won, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lucretia54
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 12:01 AM Response to Reply #35 |
39. If that's the way you feel, than you don't believe in our democracy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 04:04 AM Response to Reply #39 |
44. One can believe in our democracy without loving all the participants. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlphaCentauri
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 11:46 AM Response to Reply #44 |
53. remember who concede the election not going to the courts |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 07:49 AM Response to Reply #53 |
74. I remember the SCOTUS over-riding Florida's state rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Honeycombe8
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:38 PM Response to Reply #39 |
66. That is what I believe, and I DO believe in democracy. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Aragorn
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:27 PM Response to Reply #35 |
63. ?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 07:51 AM Response to Reply #63 |
75. Do you seriously believe the years 2000-2008, with 9/11, Illegal Invasion, Katrina disgrace, and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamthebandfanman
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 09:15 AM Response to Reply #33 |
52. blah even ralph knows al lost because of election fraud |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabbat hunter
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 10:54 AM Response to Reply #33 |
81. he is also |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zynx
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:37 PM Response to Original message |
34. Two problems: One is that he's old. He won't be there long. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
havocmom
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 08:58 AM Response to Reply #34 |
50. Third: he would have trouble getting/keeping clerks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver
![]() |
Fri May-01-09 11:52 PM Response to Original message |
37. No, let's stop pretending that Ralph Nader is more than a jackass with an ego. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muryan
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 01:22 AM Response to Original message |
41. Nadar seems a few screws short of a toolbox these days |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 02:53 AM Response to Original message |
42. How about the fact that he's 75 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Liberal_in_LA
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 02:55 AM Response to Original message |
43. hell no! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CTLawGuy
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 07:36 AM Response to Original message |
45. I was going to dissent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PopSixSquish
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 08:47 AM Response to Original message |
48. Not only No But Hell No! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Danger Mouse
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 08:51 AM Response to Original message |
49. Why not? Because he's unhinged. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamthebandfanman
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 09:12 AM Response to Original message |
51. yikes, wouldnt that rock the boat... on both sides! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occam Bandage
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 11:47 AM Response to Original message |
54. Ahahahaha. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Unsane
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 12:19 PM Response to Original message |
57. What's with all these ridiculous suggestions? Ralph Nader, Hillary Clinton, Judge Judy, Spitzer? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fujiyama
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 01:10 PM Response to Reply #57 |
59. I don't even get it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Uzybone
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 12:20 PM Response to Original message |
58. too old, too egotisical, too stupid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Phx_Dem
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:28 PM Response to Original message |
64. Uh, no. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mopar151
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 03:36 PM Response to Original message |
65. Wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabbat hunter
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 04:22 PM Response to Original message |
67. exactly what |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Orsino
![]() |
Sat May-02-09 07:04 PM Response to Original message |
69. "Florida 2000." n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
girl_interrupted
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 12:26 AM Response to Reply #69 |
71. You can kiss Roe v Wade goobye if it's Nader |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadBadger
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 12:55 AM Response to Original message |
72. No I think all the 2000 florida comments among other things are welcome in this thread. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
davidpdx
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 03:18 AM Response to Original message |
73. How about FUCK NO! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bonobo
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 08:53 AM Response to Original message |
76. Blah, blah, ego, blah, blah; Repeat. Blah, blah, ego, Gore, blah, blah. Rinse, repeat... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JI7
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 09:03 AM Response to Original message |
77. i don't trust him , i think he would vote to overturn Roe v Wade |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mark E. Smith
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 09:32 AM Response to Original message |
78. Let's not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saltpoint
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 10:38 AM Response to Original message |
79. Nader would be a very poor political choice for President Obama. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
opihimoimoi
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 10:51 AM Response to Original message |
80. Nader should be on the FORGET LIST...he is a POS... a large 197 lb shit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Joanne98
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 11:39 AM Response to Original message |
84. I think that's a great idea. He hates corporations and he's vicious and vengeful |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LWolf
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 02:44 PM Response to Original message |
85. Shit, I expect DU to spontaneously combust at the suggestion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
anonymous171
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 02:47 PM Response to Original message |
86. That would be one way to get rid of him. He's too old. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jeff In Milwaukee
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 05:02 PM Response to Original message |
87. And he's fucking batshit crazy.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 05:56 PM Response to Original message |
88. Let's get real |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Peacetrain
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 06:09 PM Response to Original message |
89. I tell you what.. let's not and say we did |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Thickasabrick
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 06:48 PM Response to Original message |
91. He's not a woman - the next pick should be a woman. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Milspec
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 06:57 PM Response to Original message |
92. Fuck no nf |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GreenPartyVoter
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 07:37 PM Response to Original message |
93. If he wasn't so old, that would have some merit, esp when it comes to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JerseygirlCT
![]() |
Sun May-03-09 07:40 PM Response to Original message |
94. Seriously? Oh goodness, no! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thu Mar 13th 2025, 03:23 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