Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT: Democrats United in Asking That Nader Not Enter Race

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:36 AM
Original message
NYT: Democrats United in Asking That Nader Not Enter Race
Democrats United in Asking That Nader Not Enter Race
By JIM RUTENBERG

Published: February 21, 2004


Some of Ralph Nader's best friends are desperately trying to persuade him not to run for president this year.

The left-leaning Nation magazine has pleaded in an open letter, "Don't Run." And yesterday Senator John Kerry's campaign delivered a not-so-subtle statement: "It is important that we remain united in November and rally behind the Democratic nominee, whoever that may be."

The Kerry campaign's appeal was just one in another frenzy of calls yesterday for Mr. Nader to sit this one out, prompted by the announcement by a Nader aide that he would reveal his intentions Sunday.

Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said he had met with Mr. Nader several times to ask him not to run. "I'm urging everybody to talk to Ralph Nader," he said in a television interview Friday on CNN.

Ever since Mr. Nader set up a presidential exploratory committee a couple of months ago, Democrats have reacted viscerally to the idea. Many contend that if he had not run in 2000 Al Gore would be president, and that Mr. Nader could get in the way of a Democratic victory this year as well....


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/politics/campaign/21NADE.html





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HowdyDUit Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. Sit down and shut up
That's what this sounds like. Who died and made the DNC dictator? Run a candidate that supports the basic civil right of Gay marriage and quit telling people when and where they can run for office.

Arrogance is what this reeks of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
matcom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. It is NADER who should sit down and shut up
arrogance?

who the HELL is more arrogant than NADER? he cannot win, he can only hurt.

i question whether Nader is a Dem at ALL! hell, he is doing pretty well financially under Bush ain't he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowdyDUit Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Who has ever said Nader is a Dem?
If Kerry wants to have a free ride then he should start by supporting the civil rights of those he wants to support him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
21. Nader never played an active role in civil rights
Nader only started paying lip service to civil rights when he ran for President. His role in civil rights is minor at best and his "contribution" to the last election set not only civil rights, but human rights back, 30 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #21
44. I think you give Bush too much credit.
His presidency is only a continuation of a rightward lurch in politics that's been going on for thirty years, which both Clinton and Gore were a part of. A Gore presidency would not have stopped this lurch. On the contrary, had he won the Republicans, with help from the media, would have tried to undermine his administration from the start, and he undoubtedly would tried to placate them by moving to the right himself. Quite frankly, I'm not sure that we wouldn't be in Iraq right now if Gore were president.

Nader does share part of the blame for Bush's coming to power. Not for running - which is his basic democratic right - but for failing to oppose the Republians' theft of the election. Instead, the most he did was to sarcastically suggest that Gore and Bush should flip a coin to decide who would win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #44
48. If Gore had been allowed to take the office he rightfully won...
...I personally don't believe 911 would have happened.

IMHO, the only reason that 911 took place at all (LIHOP or MIHOP, take your choice) was to create a rationale to attack the Middle East.

Nader's campaign took money from GOP backers to run Green ads in the Pacific Northwest. That also hurt Gore at the polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mobuto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
30. Nader and Civil Rights?
You do know that he denied federally guaranteed employment laws to his employees, and busted their union?

Nader's helping Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philosophie_en_rose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #4
35. But isn't this DEMOCRATIC underground?
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 12:41 PM by philosophie_en_rose
If people do not support Nader's efforts to undermine our party, then isn't this an appropriate place to discuss it?

Nader's not a democrat. He's competition. Minor competition, but competition nonetheless. Why shouldn't he have to face criticism for his lack of experience, commitment, or integrity?

Fighting for Nader at the expense of democrats is no different than freepers campaigning for Bush. Both deserve to speak, but shouldn't be surprised if their views are not popular here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Sushi Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #2
38. EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO RUN!
now GET OVER IT!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. You want a dictator??!?!?
Let Nader run. We'll get 4 more years of a dictator, and then another 8 when he rigs it so Jeb runs in 2008. This is too important to **** with!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowdyDUit Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. I want my civil rights
Otherwise it matters not who is in the oval office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaySherman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Well
What the hell do you think is going to happen to your civil rights under another four years of Bush?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowdyDUit Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. If Bush and Kerry won't let me marry then why should I care who wins?
I do not follow the lesser of two dictates. I support civil rights. All or none.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JaySherman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. If you really support civil rights
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 08:54 AM by JaySherman
then you are against Bush, bar none.

Time to stop putting political interests first, and start waking up to the fact that we are fucked if Bush wins.

It's not even about issues anymore. These fundies mean business. If they had their way, they'd see people like you and me in prison or dead. If Bush wins they may very well get their way.

Edited for typos
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrior1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. IF
I thought Nader had any chance. Hell you know what I don't trust him or his motives. He has every right to run, I just wish he would think more about this country and not himself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murielm99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. You sound like those one-issue fundies
who will vote for a candidate based on whether or not they are anti-abortion.

A few years ago, gay people were not even thinking about marriage. They were focusing on other rights, and pushing for things like AIDS research.

Don't get me wrong -- I would like my husband to be able to walk our daughter down the aisle when she marries her partner. Gays should have the right to marry, and they should have it now, not in some idyllic future.

But we are talking about basic survival here. I think shrub and his minions would like to see gays in ovens, women at home having baby after baby, and all working people flipping burgers for minimum wage, or dying in one of his endless wars.

Four more years of shrub will usher in these things. It may bring a depression that will dwarf the one my parents saw in the thirties. It may also bring unrest and battles in the streets, with many, many casualties.

I would like a job. I think I have earned the right to work, like anyone else. But my unemployment pales in the face of what will be coming if we have four more years of shrub. Remember, four more years of him will be only the beginning.

Help us, and we will help you. ABB!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mobuto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
31. Federal Marriage Amendment
If Bush gets reelected, it passes.

So you need to ask yourself if you want to see Bush reelected. Do you want to see Bush reelected?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
51. Here's a novel idea
Get enough people to vote for you so that Nader doesn't have an effect. You have 50% of the population who doesn't vote. Why don't you appeal to them instead of complaining about Nader?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #1
16. Right ON nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
27. Why don't you shut up and go find your perfect candidate?...
Nader let the GOP pay for his ads in the Pacific Northwest during the 2000 election campaign...is this the guy you want to support?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowdyDUit Donating Member (79 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #27
37. Why don't I shut up?
I'm sure you'd like nothing more than us abnormal sexual deviants to go away so you can elect yet another half-ass homophobic leader.

Guess what...I am going all the way this time because I am tired of lies and false hopes. You allow me to marry whom I desire or I spit on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #37
46. Considering the fact that I've never called into question your...
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 11:12 PM by Media_Lies_Daily
...self-admitted sexuality, I find your latest response to be rather astounding.

Spit on anyone you like if that makes you happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
belle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #37
50. Well, this queer girl is voting for the Democrat.
If you're serious, whoever you are, I don't know *where* you've been living that you think we can afford another four years of Bush, or that it "won't make any difference." If Bush wins, he'll install at least on SC judge, and that will effectively put the kibosh on gay marriage not just in the short-term but for years to come, because sooner or later DOMA is going to go to the Supreme Court. Me, I want to make sure there are sane people in there when it does.

This is of course not even taking into account all the *other* crap Bush is responsible for: see the "climate change" thread above. Or, you know, PNAC, Iraq...there might not even be a *planet* left by the time these goons are through with us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rebellious Republican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
36. I suppose you prefer " compassionate conservatism" ? N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
41. I want Nader to stand up and help unify moderates & progressives...
...instead of campaigning against DEMS...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
10. A corrupt system lost the 2000 election, NOT Nader. Remember Florida?
And if the Dems really don't want to allow other platforms such as those advocated by the Green Party, they should embrace more of their concerns and policy wishes. If the Dems had been more like the Greens, and worked more diligently on people's rights rather than allowing Lobbyists for major corporation to rule D.C. we also may have avoided a lot of pain.
It's time the Dems stop demonizing everyone who illuminates their shortcomings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #10
22. That's simplistic
Nader targeted Florida against the advice of many of his supporters. That served only to strengthen Bush's hand in the fake recount. The unfortunate fact is the President represents in theory the collective opinion of Americans, which quite naturally gravitates toward the center. The only opportunity really that politicans have to educate Americans is during the elections, and they're not going to turn things around right away.

Nader illuminates nobody's shortcomings. His views are decidely safe and middle class, good government stuff. He's no Kucinich. He's no Sharpton. He didn't even do nearly as much as Kerry to fight the Vietnam War or as much as Lieberman in civil rights. Nader has a narrow and arrogant view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GinaMaria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
11. Nader isn't a threat
People know what's at stake now. There's no reason for this kind of public pressure on Nader. If he chooses to run, we'll work twice as hard and he'll get fewer votes than he did in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingpunkrocker Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. I kinda agree
I don't think he's gonna be a big factor in this election, just because of the fact that he doesn't have the support base he did in 2000 and with so many of us Democrats and former Nader voters presuring him not to run, even if he does it won't make aa significant an impact like it did in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingpunkrocker Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. but
I damn hope Jello Biafra doesn't support him this time around. He'd better take the path Michael Moore(a fellow Nader voter)is going and to vote Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoman123 Donating Member (565 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
39. This is right.
Nader will not make any difference this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I Thaumaturgist Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
12. Nader and all the whiners out there
Okay, I understand that there are still some greens out there who believe that what they did in 2000 was right, but good God people quit being so selfish. The single most important aspect of the 2004 election should be getting Bush out of office, Cheney out of office, Ashcroft out of office, etc. etc. Why? Because if we want to keep the United States as our founding fathers designed we must wrest the white house out of the hands of the imerialists.

Sure the Gays have a point. Sure the environmentalists have a point. Sure the anti NAFTA people have a point.But how will that help anyone when our country is turned into the Corporate States of America? How will that help anyone when Rowe vs. Wade is repealed and the courts are filled with Judges reminiscent of the Salem witch trials?

Let's get some perspective here people. We need to unify to get the white house back, then congress, THEN we can start prosecuting the criminals that hi-jacked our country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. I would have voted for Kucinich but its Life and Death now
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 09:32 AM by Mari333


we have to get these kids home , that a priority. This has to end.
ABB or you are GOP.

http://www.bringthemhomenow.com
http://www.mfso.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #14
42. Mari333, I hope it's noted that this post came from you...
because you are a wise, brave woman with even more at stake in this election than the rest of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #14
45. Neither John Kerry nor John Edwards will "get these kids home,"
they're both as committed to the occupation as Bush is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. We don't know that, do we? I also find your post to be over the line...
...in view of that fact that her stepson has just been sent to Iraq. A little sensitivity on this issue might be in order, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Euphen Donating Member (209 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. I wasn't aware of her stepson.
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 11:24 PM by Euphen
However, I see nothing about my post that was insensitive. Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war, and have both made it clear that they will continue the occupation. It is wrong to say that a vote for either in the general election will bring our soldiers home.

I did find it very insulting for her to say that you are either "ABB or GOP" though. To me that doesn't seem very different than Bush saying you are either with him or you're a terrorist.

On edit: added the second paragraph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuttle Donating Member (919 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
15. I hope Ralph says this:
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JOHN KERRY AND GEORGE W. BUSH!

That alone will remind everyone of the second biggest lie of this century (right after the 45 minute WMD set of lies).

Tut-tut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingpunkrocker Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Wait though
With the exception of his way of fundraising, how much like Bush is he really. Explain yourself! Give us more reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
19. Ralph Nader says that he is running for health care, etc. If he
really cares about those issues, he will not run. Nader's statement that Bush and Gore were the same was totally outlandish. Gore has always been one of this nation's top greens and Nader must have known that. Now after 3 years of abominations on the people, the economy, our rights, our name in the world, there is no way Nader can support the declaration he made. If you all are worried about your rights, you had better pray Nader is convinced not to run. He won't win. He can push for his ideas in much more productive ways than being the spoiler again. This time might be embarrassing for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingpunkrocker Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. Also...
I think it's kind of stupid to say that the DLC corporatist Democrats are as corrupt and have as much power as they did in 2000. With the Howard Dean campaign and organizations like MoveOn along with the grassroots activism for the Democratic Party, have almost gotton rid of that attitude and have made the party a lot stronger than it was. If you're so worried about the Democrats being clones of the Republicans this time then why don't you follow the Punkvoter.com way of voting:
REGISTER GREEN,
VOTE DEMOCRATIC!
Probably the best way the Green and Nader people(with whom I used to be involved with)to have some of their agenda syphoned into the party and it's values. Besides with Dean and his new campaign(since he dropped out of the race)to build what I think will be a counter-organization to the DLC and even Kucinich has welcomed this idea. He's even praised Dean for his campaign despite him(Kucinich) being a little critical of the way some of Dean's views were. Also people like Kerry and Edwards have gotton a lot more vocal in their campaigning because people like Kucinich and Dean have held them and the rest of the "insiders" accountable and they have changed their views a little bit(to their own expense at times though)and have followed Dean's fundraising strategies as well.
I definetly think it's crazy to suggest that the Dems have lost there way or are the same as they were in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishnfla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
23. He's going nowhere and taking us with him
His campaign will be an exercise in futility. For want of attention, (and gosh, the build-up alone to MTP must really be stroking this wanker), to get a handful of votes. I know the Christian right will support his campaign, but not by voting.

But between Nader and *'s $150 million war chest, the Dem nominee is toast.

The judiciary will be full of rock'em sock'em holy rollers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lurking Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #23
33. "He's going nowhere and taking us with him"
Spot on.

This country, like it or not, has a 2 party system. Spoilers are simply there to spoil the working of that system, not enrich it.

We now face 4 more years of Bush.

No fetal tissue research.

No protected reserve in Alaska.

No protected trees in our National Parks.

No protections for clean air or water.

Multiple wars costing us what little International support we may have left and countless lives.

More homeless, more people without jobs, more people without insurance, more hungry children, destruction of the middle class.

A loaded fundamentalist right wing Supreme Court - ixnay on Roe v. Wade, ixnay on Miranda, ixnay on Title 9, ixnay on rights of the accused, etc., etc.

I really don't understand what people don't get about this.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
24. Kerry should not have used that approach
It is in concept, Democratic concept anyway, a free country. Kerry should make overtures to the Greens, not Nader and not grant him some fabled status as a specter of fear in his own right. As for gleeful liberals deserting to Nader, which this tone implies, it is unlikely that such persons would have supported Kerry at any rate.

The Nation perhaps has more cause to be embarrassed at the disunity and divisiveness on the usually quietly ineffective far left(such as it is in the US) and rob them of any pure, clear gadfly voice against both Dems and Repugs, which seems their trademark as much as Nader's.

Everybody talking to Ralph might just be counterproductive too. if there is one thing he enjoys it is "not being influenced" not "compromising". Of course, ignoring him is just as bad. This is one of those tough cases, but you make it tougher by doing the weak sister, begging approach just when we were looking strong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftwingpunkrocker Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Yeah...
That's the message I'm trying to get out to a lot of former Nader voters I know as well. You Greens are good people, but in all good consciousness don't vote Nader in '04.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
28. Don't want Nader to run? Here's his 2004 exploratory website...
<http://www.naderexplore04.org/>

...and here is his contact page:

<http://www.naderexplore04.org/contact.html>


Let him know how you feel about his role in the 2000 campaign and what you think of his threat to enter the 2004 campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gmoney Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
29. Ralph for Senate or Congress?
Couldn't he do MORE good concentrating his resources trying to get elected to Senate or Congress? He might stand a fighting chance, and if he was able to unseat a repug, that would do this country a LOT more good than having him squander millions on a campaign to divert votes away from the Democratic presidential nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DiverDave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
32. Jesus!
Edited on Sat Feb-21-04 11:07 AM by DiverDave
When will it get through to some people??

If Nader would have NOT RAN, we wouldn't even HAVE this website!!

If you really think he didn't have an effect on who won, well, you are dumber then a box of rocks.
The margin of Gore's win would have been too wide to allow the rethuglicans to STEAL THE ELECTION!!.

So please tell me again how ralphie is/was good for this country?

sheesh, more of KKKarls work being done, keep your mind on the prize, DAMNIT!

And ralph, just go away, you sniveling little fascist enabler.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
34. Of course the DNC wants to suppress Nader.
The Democratic Party fears a credible voice that points out the failure of the Democratic Party to offer opposition to:

-the continued Wal-Martization of America

-the continued support of management to outsource jobs

-the continued support of consolidation of Media

-the continued support of illegal wars

-the continued support of the supragovernment that exists in murky shadows outside national boundaries, laws, and accountability

-the continued support of a tax structure that widens the gap between the super rich and the rest of us. (The Clinton admn merely slowed this widening)

-continued support of a system that caters and whores to the voice of the super rich and gives only lip service to the issues of the working people

-continued support of a two tiered judicial and penal system

-continued support for the destruction of the Bill of Rights

Of course the establishment Dems don't want Nader to bring up these issues.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demoman123 Donating Member (565 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #34
40. I don't see why they care.
Nader will hardly get any votes this time. Most former Nader voters will vote anti-Bush, i.e., for the Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Onlooker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-21-04 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
43. Strange that Fox news would break the story
I wonder if Nader really is a Shill for the Republicans. How is it that Fox news gets the story that Nader will run before anyone else? Do they have friends in the Nader camp? Maybe he's so embittered that he's decided to betray what he once stood for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 25th 2024, 03:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

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