I am ready to declare war on the Green Party

[Perky]

I do not give a rip about Casey's position on Abortion. It is in the hands of the Courts anyway. We have a great opportunity to get this wing nut idiot out of office and I think it is reprehensible that their are folks on this site who would support a Greenie before Casey.

You folks helped keep Gore and Kerry out of office. YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS two-term Debacle called a president. You are the ones who either decided to stay home or vote for Nader in an act of political selfishness and ignorance.

If you vote Green in PA you are THE undisputable reason Santorum will be returned to power and the NEOCONS will stay in control And I will work my darnedest to keep you off the ballot anywhere, anyway I can.

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SANTORUM_GREEN_CANDIDATE?SITE=CATOR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-08-01-01-48-30

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Background info would be helpful

I knew Santorum was running and his Dem opponent was trouncing him in the polls but I didn't realize there was a third party candidate?

[Perky]

6. Link

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SANTORUM_GREEN_CANDIDATE?SITE=CATOR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-08-01-01-48-30

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Looks like the enemy is the repuke party

not the Greens.

[Norquist Nemesis]

29. BINGO! n/t

[marmar]

2. I'm not ready to declare war...

I think the Greens represent many noble ideals, but these candidates like Romanelli who accept money from the GOP completely betray those ideals. It's probably fair to assume those of his ilk don't represent the whole of the party.

[BOSSHOG]

3. I do not live in Pennsylvania

and am not familiar with the situation you refer but what does abortion have to do with a green party supporters point of view? Surely Greenies know they will be much better off with dems in the majority in DC. Surely?

[Perky]

4. If you are a green.... Why are you even on this site?

You folks are as about as bad as the Freepers.

[GreenPartyVoter]

16. Thanks a lot. :^(

[Vidar]

43. So much for the large tent & tolerance.

[Perky]

56. Tell it to the folks who are intolerant of any one who believe in a higher

power.

[Crowdance]

128. Hijacking your own thread? n/t

[Perky]

144. LOL who me?

[Vidar]

153. I would be one of them. What's your point?

[EFerrari]

66. Some days, I ask myself the same question. And speaking of

being as bad as the Freepers, get your facts straight.

Greens didn't spoil thousands of Black votes in Florida in 2000 or in Ohio and Florida in 2004. We also didn't set the machines to default to Junior in 2004. We didn't invite Mr. Nader to run as our candidate in 2004. Many of us actually worked and voted for your candidate in 2004. Why I have no idea. Maybe that was a mistake. Dems seem to have a hard time winning the elections they win any more. And they will have a hard time until they help clean up our elections and most of all, protect the minority vote.

Do we even know if more Green votes were cast in 2004 than the number of Black votes that were intentionally spoiled?

Who this guy is who is being bankrolled by the Thuggery, I have no idea. I don't know anyone who'd do something like that. But, I guess he must be the first politician to take money from his opponent's opponent.

Geezus. It's silly to lash out at your natural allies over one idiot. Tell you what. Send me that Green idiot and I'll see about FedExing you Feinstein.

[flyarm]

118. ij 2004 nader took rethug money from big corporate groups

attempting to split close states..and nader damn well knew what was going on..it was exposed ..but was kept quiet by our ever powerful msm!

i will see if i still have links in my files that work..about Naders sell out in 2004

fly

on edit: here is one story that the link works from my files..

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/10/ale04057.html

Ralph Nader Accepts Campaign Contributions from Funders of "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"

October 6, 2004

snip:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Funders of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a right wing PAC, have made thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Ralph Nader, United Progressives for Victory (UP for Victory) announced today. In addition to accepting contributions from donors of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, Nader has also taken money from conservative PAC donors who have given to the Club for Growth, along with legal representation and ballot help from Republican consultants, lawyers, major donors, and state parties.

snip:
Specifically, Travis Anderson (NJ), Brian Pilcher (CA) and Donald Burns (FL), are three of Nader’s largest donors and each has given him $2,000 (the maximum allowable contribution), while also contributing to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Charles Eckert (CA) and Oliver Grace (NY) have also given to both Nader’s PAC and the swift boat PAC.


snip:

Robert Brandon, a former Nader associate, public interest attorney and co-founder of UP for Victory said, “Now we learn that Bush, through his proxies, is funding Nader’s campaign. If Nader wishes to have any credibility left with progressives, he must give back all right wing money and finally acknowledge that his campaign is being used by the Bush/Cheney re-election team.”

Altogether, UP for Victory research has documented over $100,000 in cash and known in-kind contributions to Nader by GOP donors and consultants. This does not count the unreported in-kind contributions made by the GOP in circulating his ballot petitions in many states.


sorry the following the link no longer works..but i will excerpt it here
from Boston globe online..
if you want search the archive..

BREAKING: Bush Finance Honcho Donated to Nader
The Associated Press

Thursday 12 August 2004

BOSTON - Ralph Nader has found an unexpected friend in Massachusetts.

Hopkinton computer tycoon Richard Egan, the Bush campaign's finance chairman in John Kerry's home state, has personally contributed the maximum amount allowed by law -- $2,000 -- to Nader's presidential campaign.

Egan's son John and daughter in law have each also "maxed out," bringing the family's total to $6,000.


Bush backers are hoping Nader will siphon enough votes from Kerry to tip the election to President Bush.
The co-founder of data storage giant EMC Corp. and Bush's former ambassador to Ireland, Egan is legendary in Republican circles for his ability to collect hundreds of thousands in campaign dollars.
He's a member of an elite group of Bush fund-raisers known as "Rangers" -- those who have helped raised more than $200,000 for the campaign. Egan's two sons are also Rangers.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/4/5310/printer

Republicans Helping Nader to Help Themselves
By Brian Faler
Washington Post

Monday 19 July 2004

The Michigan Republican Party submitted more than 40,000 signatures last week in a bid to get independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader on the state's November ballot.

Of course, this is not really about helping Nader. It is all about helping President Bush and hurting Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry's campaign in a closely contested state.

The Michigan GOP denies that, of course. Matt Davis, a spokesman for the group, said it was merely concerned about third-party candidates being left off the ballot. He could not name, however, another third-party or independent candidate his party has helped.

Nader may need the Republican signatures. He has been endorsed by the Reform Party and had planned to use its line on the Michigan ballot. But a dispute over who runs the party's state chapter - and which candidate it supports - has thrown that into question.




i kept asking at the time..what does the GOP have on Nader...i never got an answer!


fly

[Guy Fawkes]

147. Nader didn't run as a Green in 2004

nice fact checking. :eyes:

[grindrail]

110. i'm here because progressives are here

...or so i thought
"Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives....and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates."(bold added by me)
Voting Green or some other third party is a way to exercise freedom of speech. If there were just 2 parties, people wouldnt be able to vote for who they thought truly expressed their viewpoints. Who would communists and fascists vote for? Who would libertarians vote for? who would i vote for next election? Hillary who thinks game creators should be responsible for third party software that unlocks blocked content? Condi (i dont even need to explain why not)? I'll vote as all progressives should, i'll look at the candidates and vote for whoever represents me best, instead of voting for whoever has the mandate of a party that is merely the lesser of 2 evils, and is still ridden with corruption and hypocrisy.

[EFerrari]

114. Welcome to DU, grindrail. What a strange thread to be welcoming

you on!

:hi:

[mother earth]

5. The problem(s) are the voting machines and massive cons

called election fraud. The Greens didn't take away our vote, they were the only ones interested in fighting for it. Sit back, take a deep breath and contemplate the debacle that took place & you will realize, our enemy is complacency. Other countries marched in the street when they realized they were robbed.

[Perky]

8. Was Nader on the Ballot in FL, NH or OHIO in 2000?

[phiddle]

17. Yes, on the ballot in all 3.

A switch to Gore of a mere 5000 Green voters in NH (IIRC, Nader got about 15,000 votes in NH) would have won the state and the presidency for Gore, regardless of what transpired in FL and OH.

[EFerrari]

77. Gore did win the state and he has said so in public.

Tell me, how many Black voters were disenfranchised in Florida in 2000? And why did no Democrat stand with the Black Caucus to protest?

Not one.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

13. what you said.

the problems are not with the greens, but the GOP, Dieboldical machines, and spineless dems. If we had a party that stood up to the prez and his "Patriot" acts, the greens would not have formed.

That is why what happens in Connect-icut will be so important. If the core of democratic voters say, ENOUGH to joe, the DLC has to sit up and take notice. It is not the fault of the soylent green party, and they do not eat their own. It is much more complex.

What the original poster suggests is akin to blaming the plaster cast for the initial leg fracture.

[mother earth]

18. Totally agree .

:toast:

[bowens43]

20. You're wrong of course.

90,000 votes in Florida for Nader gave us Bush. That is fact. There is no wiggle room.

[EFerrari]

79. Nope. Spoiled Black votes gave Florida to Bush. Geeze

before you ask Greens to vote for Dems, you better promise to count the votes.

[flyarm]

131. no..spoiled votes aside..Nader stole fla! he siphoned off

90,000 votes!

and he knew he was going to..he deliberately knew he was going to with no chance in hell of ever winning..

i have wondered loudly...what does little lord pissy pants and the rethugs have on Mr Nader??

fly

[flyarm]

135. these are just a few threads on GD today..right now

and just think..if nader hadn't siphoned off 90,000 votes in Fla in 2000

we might not be seeing this kind of shit!

so how did this help the Green's causes???


While the rich get even richer, the poor go hungry
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1786400

Global Warming rate may increase by 50% in the next two years
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1785664

(VIDEO) Gore 2000 campaign ad on the environment

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1787969

CNN's Faith and Values Correspondant is telling us about the rapture!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1782895&mesg_id=1782895

[GreenArrow]

81. here's another fact

"Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush"
-San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 9, 2000.

[flyarm]

139. we in fla do have dixiecrats..if you do not know fla you will not

understand that..many in the North of fla are registered dems but most vote rethug...or border rethug..we never count on those 200,000

its the 90,000 that Nader Siphoned that killed fla in 2000..

and Nader knew he was doing this!

fly

[flyarm]

129. bowen is absolutely correct!!

Nader took Fla votes in 2000 that put little lord pissy pants into our white house..

seems people have selective memory!! but we floridians will never forget..and as far as i am concerned ..i will never forgive ..

there are too many dead soldiers now to ever forgive..and too many dead iraqi's and americans on 9/11 to ever forgive nader!

fly

[TechBear_Seattle]

7. All opposition to the Dems must be destroyed!!

No matter how much better opposing groups like the Greens represent ones values and beliefs. We must be like the sheep in "Animal Farm" and mindlessly bleat morning, noon and night:

"Democrats gooood!
Greenies baaaaaad!"

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

9. The greens should stick to what they're supposedly good at.

Namely, fielding candidates in local elections in liberal/labor-vote areas of the country. They've proved to be nothing but a scam and a nuisance at the national level.

[Perky]

10. Fine by me. (N/t)

[Norquist Nemesis]

14. Not disagreeing, but it's the CONS that are doing double duty

in an an effort to subvert the election. If the Cons are serious about Santorum, they should stick with him and leave it at that.

edit to add: My anger is with the Cons for these underhanded tactics, though. Not the Green candidate(s).

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

32. I see it as a symbiotic relationship.

The greens will take support from anyone, anywhere, even people who hate them and everything they stand for. The Republicans are using this to their advantage, obviously, but the greens are enabling them.

[EFerrari]

116. In the larger scheme of things, Greens simply don't have the numbers

to enable the Thuggery as much as some Democrats do. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

107. They get a double return on their investment if they can try to

split the PA vote AND the left generally.

[mmonk]

11. The purpose of voting is to vote one's conscience.

Yes, Nader helped put bush in. But democrats that support bush tactically on foreign policy and have allowed the rightwing to stack our courts are the sole reason the party is weak right now. Failure to recognize this and correct this will ensure millions of democratic voters will in default have no representation.

[GreenPartyVoter]

12. So true. The goal should be get progressives of any stripe

into office. Right now we do not haev a system that is progressive-friendly and we are all paying the price for it.

[Perky]

33. If you were in PA and it was a Santorum-Casey race

who would you vore for if there was no Green candidate?

[GreenPartyVoter]

42. In that race I would most likely vote Casey regardless of who else was

running simply because I think Santorum really needs to go. But in the last House race here in Maine I voted for the Socialist over the Dem because I really didn't care for him but could see that he was most likely to win. I don't gamble on races like those unless the odds are really in my favor.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

39. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with him/her?

(S)he said "The aim of voting is to vote one's conscience".

You said "The goal should be to get progressives of any stripe".

Those are diametrically opposed positions. The former is "vote for the candidate who's views most closely match yours", and the latter is "vote in such a way as to maximise the prediced similarity between the the person elected's views and yours". In the context of green sympathisers, the former says "vote Green" and the latter says "vote Democrat".

[GreenPartyVoter]

46. I am speaking in the long term of overhauling the system so that you CAN

vote your conscience and actually get that person into office as well: http://www.hostdiva.com/liberalchristians/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=116&Itemid=29&limit=1&limitstart=1

[bowens43]

22. Voters who vote for greens have no conscience.

They vote with the intent of spoiling the election for Democrats because they aren't extreme enough for them.

[EFerrari]

140. Next time your candidate needs his votes recounted, I hope

you find enough extremists to do the heavy lifting for ya.

:rofl:

[Perky]

That is Naive.

A democratic president would not have led us into this frightfully inept foriegn policy.

It is the siphoning off od votes at the Presidential level that has put us in this position.

You want to vote you conscienc goe to Denmark. The issues are too important here to be pissy and thow you asinine and infantile tantrums. You keep Santorum in office and you have declared war on the Democratic Party

[Perky]

23. That is Naive.

A democratic president would not have led us into this frightfully inept foriegn policy.

It is the siphoning off od votes at the Presidential level that has put us in this position.

You want to vote you conscienc goe to Denmark. The issues are too important here to be pissy and thow you asinine and infantile tantrums. You keep Santorum in office and you have declared war on the Democratic Party

[mmonk]

50. Naive is voting for party only and expecting

someone who will vote against your conscience in government to represent you.

[Irreverend IX]

136. Voting your conscience is a luxury now ill-afforded.

You can vote your conscience when the progressive side is strong. The right wing has taken domination over the country precisely because their members do not vote their conscience, but rather side with the biggest bully on the playground. You don't see the religious right voting for the Jesus Party whose platform promises a theocracy; they vote for Republicans and hope that their candidates will push their issues. Once the scum are driven from power, progressives can start fantasizing about third parties. Until then, it's political suicide no matter how you spin it.

[GreenArrow]

15. dfsdafjhljdfhldsjfhlfjh

.

[bowens43]

19. I am convinced that ALL greens are actually republicans

or they're just dumber then a sack of rocks. Either way, they do nothing but help elect neo-cons.

[mmonk]

24. Failure to recognize neocons in the democratic party

also helps elect neocons.

[MrPrax]

54. LOL

I was wondering when that part would come up...yeah a choice between two or THREE right wing jerks kind of makes progressives stay home anyway -- regardless of Nader's machinations.

How come Gore couldn't win his own State? Did having Lieberman has a running mate have anything to do with the 8 year Vice-President losing to a GOP nobody called George Bush?
Perish the thought...if anything the last 6 years vindicates third party supporters' (as well as pissed off GOPers) in thinking that the democrats are next to useless.

Democrats won't talk about impeachment; democrats won't talk about withdrawal; democrats don't talk with a single voice on a single issue, other than getting Ds elected instead of Rs. No compelling reason to consider them and folks that are inclined towards a third paty alternative, haven't been given anything reason not to think they have been right all along.

[mmonk]

59. I don't vote third party.

That will not preclude me from speaking the truth.

[MrPrax]

101. Well go speak truth...

to the elected democrats, because Woolsey only has 22 signatures and the 'leadership' won't touch H.R. 5875 (The Iraq War Powers Repeal Act of 2006)...OR is this another iniatitive down the toilet as the voters try to figure out which Pro-Life Pro-War Democrat they have to support.

[mmonk]

103. I'll keep trying.

You too.

[MrPrax]

121. Sure...

but don't slag people who prefer to KEEP trying elsewhere...hardly a way to endorse a political party by pointing to it's failures, but then telling people who figure this is their issue, to keep the faith.

That is Faith-based politics...by definition

[mmonk]

126. Without pointing out failures, no corrective measures

can take place.

[mmonk]

127. And what does slag mean?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

87. Indeed!

It is disgusting how many alleged Dems support Bushevik policies.

[proud2BlibKansan]

26. The ones I know are all former Dems

who care deeply about the earth. They are as far removed from the gop as I am.

[jonnyblitz]

30. yup. they got tired of the DLC's bullshit. nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. Amen

There are a ton of Greens in the peace movement. I have more in common with them than with the DLC Dems.

[wiley]

27. Possibly Both. There may be an outcomes disconnect. What's

the definition of insanity. Doing the same thing and expecting different results? Greens vote for third Party candidates. Republicans win.

[EFerrari]

137. So, how many hours did you put in for Kerry?

:eyes:

[cobalt1999]

25. not war, but I can't forgive the 2000 election

IMHO, the Nader votes killed Gore.

If they want to make a difference, start winning local elections, then state elections, then, if successful, go national.

[newburgh]

104. Damn the new immigrants

but not OUR forefathers who immigrated here. So I guess the Democratic Party formed by "winning local elections, then state elections" before they became national. This country was built on encouraging competition. Why is it that any attempt to create truly competing political races is frowned upon? Is the Democratic Party so insecure as to believe it couldn't survive without being just one of a duopoly? I beg to differ.

[cobalt1999]

160. I look at it differently.

To be successful nationally, you have to have success at the state level.
To be successful at the state level, you have to have success at the local level.

To have neither of these and run against the democratic party just enables the republicans.

I love competition, but I don't expect to get invited to the Olympics unless I've won a whole lot of smaller races building up to it. That's all. Prove you can connect with enough voters to be successful anywhere at a local level.

So I'm not frowning upon "any attempt to create truly competing political races", but hindering the chances of Democrats at a national level without having proved you can win in numbers anywhere in this country is just plain misguided.

[acmejack]

28. I agree then the Democratic Party can be come a wing of the Republicans

Run Pro Life Candidates, The OP tells us he 'gives not a whitt about women's rights' in a previous post so who is to stand up for this half of the population in your world bereft of these opposition candidates? It's as if there isn't enough people for us to be fighting right now, but you go ahead and devote your time to stomping out the only people that apparently care about half of the people in your state. Obviously there is some reason people are attracted to that party, people don't just decide to vote for them to screw you over personally. What needs are not being met by our platform and candidate?

If you were at all serious about being such a big time DEMOCRAT, you would get your panties in a bunch about a state party that nominates a Candidate that doesn't support the DEMOCRATIC Party's platform and leaves it to a third party to do so.

[Perky]

31. Um I think you completlery miquoted my OP

I never said I did not not care about chopis. I said I did not care all that much about Casey's position because it is up to the Courts anyway. SHeesh

[acmejack]

58. Here it is

"I do not give a rip about Casey's position on abortion"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1786680&mesg_id=1786787

[Perky]

62. yep

but that is not the same as saying I oppose a womman's right to choose.

[acmejack]

113. You are supporting a gentleman opposed to that right.

By extension, you support his position. You are busy damning others who fail to support someone who is ready to work with the Republicans, whom you profess to hate, to deny that right to women! I fail to understand how you can possibly reconcile that.

[Perky]

117. I can not reconcile it

I am more concerned about taking power out of the hands of the Thugs on the right than I am about any particular issue.


What folks do not understand is thatif the DEMS control the saneta abortion votes would never make it to the floor.

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. Have you read Crashing The Gate?

If not, do so. We are losing races over one issue - choice. As the OP says, the courts will decide that. In the meantime, we need to get Dems in office so those judges nominated and approved for the courts are not radical religious fruitcakes who WILL take choice away from women. You got to look at the big picture here.

[acmejack]

61. Whatever

You either stand for soemthing or you don't. I am not a woman, it is a female's issue. You make up your minds!

[proud2BlibKansan]

154. We need to stand for taking back congress

If we don't, a woman's right to choice will be gone. Electing a few 'pro-life' dems isn't going to hurt us as much as a conservative court system. That is where the decision will be made - in the courts.

[mmonk]

64. Like the democratic members of the gang of 14?

[tomp]

35. anti-democratic hogwash.

this is the ultimate in negative campaigning.

if you think the green party doesn't have the appropriate criteria for being placed on the ballot you have every right to speak up. but purposeful obstruction of an entity gaining a place on the ballot is arguably against the first ammendment and potentially a violation of voting rights.

if the Democratic party can't win a plurality in any locality, it ain't worth a damn anyway.

stop attacking democracy and go push your candidate.

and by the way, please clarify: any legal means or any means?

[Perky]

40. ANY Means.

They kbowingly take money from the GOP to finnace their quixotic mission, they have crossed a line.

[tomp]

75. that's what i thought you meant

for your own self interest and the interest of this board i urge you not to encourage illegalities.

[Vidar]

45. Thank you for a bit of sanity in this thread.

[tomp]

76. you're welcome. nt

[xchrom]

36. outside of a local elections -- i've never voted for a party other than

the democratic party.

but i'll tell you what -- any person who is not pro-choice is de-evolved. nutty.
nuttier than a bag of nuts.

as nutty as pat robertson or jerry falwell.

democratic party member or repuke or purple party member.

and here's another thing -- if you think i'm voting for a woman who's husband was for the defense of marriage act you are as nuts as falwell or robertson.

out of your gourd -- batshit crazy.

[Perky]

44. So you would prefer Santorum over Casey?

[xchrom]

52. i would prefer somone fucking sane.

casey -- being pro-life -- for my money is as nutty -- nutty nutty nutty -- as rick santorum.

it is utterly, completely de-evolved to be ''pro-life''.

that's not someone i would ever put in a place of power.

[The2ndWheel]

37. A Democratic Jihad?

What do you mean declare war? Like in the Congressional sense(even though they haven't done it since the 50's)? In a metaphorical sense? A literal one? If Green Party members are completely responsible for Bush, shouldn't they be locked up with him? Yeah, yeah, that's even better. Round them up and put them in Gitmo.

[Perky]

41. hee hee I will get back to you the first Wednesday in November

[mainegreen]

47. News: Democrats spend $ to attack Greens to defeat GOP.

Reportedly suprised when plan backfires.

:eyes:

I'm glad you're not in charge of courting voters!

[Perky]

67. There are more voters in the middle than there are on the left!

And not I said Voters...not people. Elections are won and lost according to who shows up to vote.

[EFerrari]

91. Perky, how do you know who shows up to vote?

Do you remember all the lies they floated trying to cover the 2004 fraud? They said more Latinos came out for Junior. Lie. They said "values voters" came out for Bush. Lie. They said young people stayed home. Lie.

Elections are won when the votes are counted in a transparent process. We don't have that. So, you really don't know who showed up to vote for John Kerry. I'm 50, and I've *never* seen such a mobilization. We held that coalition together for more than two years.

If Bush won that election, I'll eat one of my cats.

[Perky]

102. were there ore disenfranchised blacks in Florida then there were Nader

Voters.

Show me hard numbers where 80,000 votes were dicarded.

[EFerrari]

108. Up thread, we were reminded that 200,000 Democrats in FL

voted for Junior. Shall we start with that?

Check out Pallast's work on spoiling Black votes in Florida. In one county, 1 in 8.

Another way to look at this, Junior pulled about 3 million votes out of thin air. Who WERE those people?

[EFerrari]

111. Here's the link to the original article. He was onto them early

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won.php

And, I think he's refined his work since then.

[RethugAssKicker]

48. If we had a different electoral system

You wouldn't be thinking this way..

If we could have 2 choices - a first choice.. and if your first choice doesn't win .. then your votte goes to your second choice.

This would solve your problem !

[meganmonkey]

49. Good god you have to be kidding

Yeah, let's blame the Greens or other minor-party voters. THat way we don't have to face the facts.

---Our election systems are broken. People who think they couldn't have stolen Florida 2000 or Ohio 2004 if no one voted for Nader or whatever are totally DELUDED. You don't almost steal an election -you either do or you don't. Not to mention that there is NOT some parallel universe (except in your mind) in which these voters WOULD have voted for Gore/Liberman or Kerry/Edwards. I say this as someone who voted Nader in 2000 because I could not vote for Lieberman. And might I add - I have no regrets. He surely hasn't done anything since then to make me reconsider.

---The 2 Major parties DO NOT represent most of the American people. And until at least one of them actually starts to (instead of simply spewing pretty rhetoric pre-election and then working against the needs/will of the people after getting into office) a huge number of Americans will continue to NOT VOTE for them, or at all.

But go on and blame whoever you want, especially those who vote for the person who represents them best. That's real fucking deMOCKratic of you.

[martymar64]

155. Smartest thing I've heard all day

If the Dems want more votes, they need to start REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE!!!!!!

[meganmonkey]

156. Well, thank you martymar

although, in fairness, it doesn't take much to sound smart around here lately ;)

[Mir]

51. Uh, you might want to

put a little of the blame for the 2000 campaign at the doorstep of Dumbass Gore. If this dipshit would've won his own friggin' state we wouldn't be in this mess; but, unlike Democratic heavyweights like Dukakis and Mondale before him, he didn't. In fact, he got his ass whipped there. As for 2004, well, chalk that one up to the uber-mobilized gun-toting, Jesus-worshipping trailer park freaks who were terrified that if Bill and Frank got a marriage license, the sky was gonna fall and civilization - as if they ever had any real idea as to what it is - would be coming to a swift end. Hats to be tipped to the Pukes on that one. Neither though had anything at all to do with the Greens. They are true liberals who stand for true liberal values, not like the far too many sell out repuke-lite fucks (listening Lieberman?) that currently reside in the Democratic party.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. Thomas Jefferson disagrees.

“I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.” - Thomas Jefferson

If either of my senators(D) were anti-choice I wouldn't vote for them. As it is I won't be voting for her because of her support of BushCo's war.

[MagickMuffin]

55. I would think that instead of going to war,

Why not try to influence the Green's into joining our party?

After all the Democratic Party is more in tune with the Greens. The reason the Green Party left the Democrats in the first place is because of how the DLC took control of the party, and destroyed the part of the party that stood for honest debate and the working class, i.e. the Progressive part of the party.

I know how hard it is for any progressive candidate to get any funding from the party. Unless the candidates accept the party line then sometimes they will fund that candidate. On a thread earlier today I saw where the DSC is going to spend up to $25 million on just a small hand full of candidates. I think this is a waste of resources. My senate candidate could use some funding and exposure, but alas that is not going to happen:shrug:

I understand your anger, but perhaps if we all took the time to attend some of their meetings we could persuade them to join forces with us in defeating the Repubs.

And as far as the 2000 (S)election, that was decided by 5 votes! The USSC decided who the winner was, along with Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Poppy Bush, and James Baker, as well as fox news (with the cousin of Bush who declared Mad king Boy George the winner). There was also massive voter fraud. As a matter of fact the news media after pouring through the data determined Al Gore won Florida, but refused to make it an issue because of 9-11.....

[MadHound]

57. Funny how the Greens become the scapegoat for all the Dem failings

"Greens cost Gore the election" Well that shit has been proven wrong time and again. "Greens cost Kerry the election". Again proven wrong, and let's see, who was it who actually went into Ohio and started bringing about accusations of voter fraud? Oh, yeah, the Greens, long before Kerry jumped in, in fact Kerry had just given up on the issue, rather than fight it.

And now you're bashing the Green candidate in PA, a candidate who is running against two others who have the same anti-choice position. Yes, it is apparent that you don't give a damn about abortion rights, you admit it yourself. And for your own information, the future of abortion rights isn't solely in the hands of the courts, but also in the hands of Congress too, or have you forgotten the recent passage of a bill banning people from taking minors across state lines without a parent's permission. Way to write off half the US population:eyes:

And frankly it is high damn time that the Democratic party got some pressure from the left. We over here on the left were once the base of the party, now we're ignored and cast off, our issues aren't addressed, and we're on our own, except come election time when we're browbeaten into voting for the increasingly right wing/corporatist Democratic candidates, many times against our own self interest. A credible threat from the left is a good way to get these issues addressed, and our voices heard. After all, it worked back in the thirties when FDR was facing a third party challenge from the left. Instead of moaning and groaning about it however, he nicked a couple of Socialist Party planks and made them his own. Good thing too, otherwise we wouldn't have Social Security or Unemployment Insurance.

You say you want the Greens gone? Well there is real simple solution friend, start addressing the issues that we on the left want addressed, stopping the war, UHC, etc. Stop putting up candidates whose loyalty is to their corporate money men rather than we the people. And goddamn it, start acting like Democrats again rather than moderate to conservative Republicans. You start getting the party to do that, then the Greens won't be a threat. Until then, the Greens have every right in the world to run, and if you don't like it, either change or go the way of the Whigs.

[oc2002]

60. agreed. there would be not Green Party if the DNC was not so RNC.

its that simple.

[charlie]

69. Also funny

If you go completely off the reservation and vote for criminals, you get a cute name like "Reagan Democrat."

[xchrom]

73. ooops! -- no you dih-uhn't!

[omega minimo]

63. Straight from Freeper "How To Disrupt DU" handbook

[Perky]

74. Never even been on the freeper site.

and a loyal donation providing member of DU for a long time.

[omega minimo]

130. An unfortunate coincidence, no doubt

There are some problems with Dems demonizing Greens.

We need to find common ground to remove Repugs from power.

Solely blaming Greens for Bushco.2 ignores all the other factors.

The Dems need progressives and progressive issues to succeed.

[Perky]

145. That is fine

How about a Green wing of ghe Dem Party? How about the Greens not taking payola from the GOP?

THe Greens outght to start at the gress roots level rather than at the top of either the state or national ticket.

Win a congressional seat. Run for governor, run for President. Build momentum for your party but don't take money from the Rethugs and expect to remain credible.

[kentuck]

65. Instead of backhanding the Green Party, you should have embraced them

After all, they seemed to be more representative of the Democratic Party than the DLC and the Joe Lieberman types. We want peace in the Middle East and we can't even call for peace in our own Party. Shame...

[Skidmore]

68. How, kentuck? Bribe and use them like the Rs do?

The greens are political streetwalkers.

[EFerrari]

82. And Democratic candidates finance their campaigns with their ideals.

:rofl:

Come on.

[Perky]

125. Of course they do.

Look at Frits Mondale and Dukakis and McGovern....oh wait...never mind.

[Perky]

71. Romanelli acknoweldges he took money from the GOP !

How could you ever support a guy like that? He can't raise his own money? What does that say about his electabality????

[kentuck]

150. I doubt he will get much support...

Most Greens have deeper "democratic " roots than the average DLCer.. They will not be fooled by anyone uless he has a more progressive message than the Democratic Party..

[reprehensor]

70. Election Fraud is the problem, not "Greens"

http://verifiedvoting.org

[Perky]

72. In PA... The Greens are the Problem all eight of them

[zalinda]

78. I know a woman who voted for Nader because

both parties are the same. Then she voted for Nader again in 2004 because Kerry didn't stand up to repubs on Clinton's impeachment. Then I printed out Kerry's speech for her and she said, "Oh, I didn't see that". I'm coming to the conclusion that green's are either stupid or not informed, or maybe selfish. I had always voted green when he/she was linked to the dem candidate, just to give their party a boost, but I'd never vote for one over a dem. And, now I won't even for for them to give ANY type of support. They've shown their true colors by taking money from the GOP.

If you greenies don't like it here, and don't like to hear the truth, I'm sure that your party has a board you can use. We are fighting for the life of this country, and you guys are looking at whether or not the dem running agrees with ALL your positions? I'll take a anti-choice dem over a pro-choice repub, any day of the week, and I'm pro-choice. It's the big picture that matters, not whether or not there's a pixel or 2 out of place.

You guys don't get it and never will. The RW took over the media and started to move the country to the right, the dems had to move to the right too, just so they could win some elections. If we can restore the balance in the media, we can then start moving back to the left. I'm guessing many of you have never had your backs to the wall, when this happens, you do what you have to do to survive. Contract for America stopped ANY leftward movement, and dems are out there just trying to survive. The Greens should be helping dems to get elected if they were truly concerned about this country, but I don't see that happening. If the Greens want to be a major party, they have to change the way we vote, but if repubs stay in power that will NEVER happen. Not only are you guys screwing yourself, but you're screwing the entire country.

I lost respect for the Greens in 2000, and my opinion of them has only gone down since then.

zalinda

[EFerrari]

85. This post is so full of error, I don't even know where to start.

It might be simpler to say, unless you stop losing the elections you win and whining about Greens instead of counting votes, the Democrats will not return to power.

Not only are you guys screwing yourself but you're screwing the whole country. And, it's a shame, really.

[zalinda]

138. And how do we get to count the votes

with the repubs in power? Give me a break. I swear Greens must be living in la-la land. Dems have no real power, at the moment. Get them in power and THEN rag on them for 2 years to get what you want. We have no real idea what most of these dems really feel. If they are running anti-choice, maybe they are in a district that polls anti-choice. Damn, grow up!

These elections are NOT about you, it about the majority. The only way to change the way the majority thinks is to get control of the media. Why do you think the RW has bought so much media, for their health? Blaming DLCers or dem "corporate whores", is crap, pure and simple. The party wants to survive, and win. If the majority moves to the right, they move to the right. They represent THEIR district, not you. Lieberman is finding out that his district has moved more to the left than he thought, and is paying the price. This is how the system works.
You don't like the system then change it! Voting Green will NOT change it, it will only give us more repubs.

zalinda

[EFerrari]

142. You are in la la land if you refuse to confront election fraud

don't count the votes you do get, and then keep demanding support!

Count the votes you get!

Do you have any idea that your boys won in 2000 and probably also in 2004? Any clue? Greens didn't put Bush in office. Your election systems did. And unless you get that, prepare to be disappointed again.

:shrug:

The election forum could use some help. There are law suits going on all over the country right now and there's a ton of work to do.

[acmejack]

119. That's it! All Greens are stupid!

I've seen five or six members here suggest, hell, flat state, all Greens are just stupid, several of the "stupid" Greens I happen to be acquainted with are professors, so I am pretty sure that isn't correct. So if the posters are misinformed on that basic fact, we may have to worry about the validity of the remainder of their suppositions.

Perhaps you folks can try again with a sizable portion of Greens are stupid. Even though they generally sound smarter than a lot of posters around here lately. Has anyone considered that a hundred thousand dollars that whathisname took is a $100,000 that the cons no longer have? Greens generally run out of commitment, he would have been there at the end, money or no money.

[EFerrari]

120. Stupid AND selfish. Like when we fought to recount Ohio.

:wtf:

[mmonk]

80. Why not also declare war

on mislabeled members of the democratic party as well?

[Perky]

84. Which Democratic party

The party of Clinton and Carter or the party of Conyers and Kennedy?

The party of Humphrey? the Party of Talmadge and Nunn? The party of Dukakis or Bentsen? I don't know how you slice the baby?
But this much I know Democrats would never take moeny for the GOP so that they can get on the ballot to siphon votes away from their party's nominee.

A pox on the hous of any democrat who thinks that is permissable

[mmonk]

88. Pox away. Anyone who tacitly supports rightwing

authoritarian government is not a democrat if one is to take the true meaning of the word which comes from democracy.

[Perky]

98. You did not answer my question

Seems to me that the Democratic Party legacy is both lberal and moderate and I am not sure who has a greater historic right to say who is and who is not a democrat? And I mean that honestly. I simlpy do not know. Logic would say the libearls because they are more antithetical to the GOP, but they historically get trounced in Presidential election all the way back to 1972 (McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, That is my paternity test for legitimacy.

[mmonk]

112. I did. You just failed to interpret it.

[Montauk6]

83. I'd be more inclined to declare war on any Dem who sat at home or

voted for Bush.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

86. The Greens' influence on 2004 was negligible

:eyes:

and in 2000, they had no more influence on the outcome than those who voted for Libertarians.

Why reignite the centrist Dem vendetta against the Green Party?

[newburgh]

89. Republican bogeyman: Clinton

Democratic bogeyman: Nader

Why did we end up in Iraq and why are we still there? Why has our debt risen to $9trillion? Why have the rightwing nutjobs taken over the Supreme Court?

Because there are enough "middle of the road" Republican-enabling Democrats who've failed to stand up to these tyrannical vote-stealing criminals. Why is that? Because our "democracy" is a two-party system with little competition. There's no room for a third(or more) choice on issues. For or against, you're either with us all the way or Republican/Freeper. Maybe I'm mistaken in my observations, but one of the reasons I'm a Democrat is that this party is more open to debate and new ideas and more accepting of diverse viewpoints. But if Democrats are going to pull the Republican line and blame others for their misgivings, I'm outta here. If you're running a Democratic candidate, what business do you have criticizing another party's campaign strategy? When a Republican offers their opinions about Democratic campaigns all here at DU go bat-ape crazy "how dare they".

And while I'm at it, at the risk of being flamed, Nader had NOTHING to do with the ballot-counting fraud that happened in Florida. The Republicans were hell bent on stealing the election and they would've succeeded no matter how many votes anyone else had- and again, because there weren't enough influential Democrats daring to scream bloody murder to our democracy. As for Nader pulling in a decent amount of votes, he spoke to things like corporate control of our government, something so many people here at DU continually harp on and no elected Democrat has dared to visibly change for fear of, of all things, losing campaign contributions from these corporations. As a lifelong Democrat, I'm insulted by all the accusations thrown at Nader that he determined an election that we all worked so hard on, AND WON, for Gore in 2000. Enough already. :rant:

[EFerrari]

99. I agree. This thread is Clinton's fault.

:rofl:

[Perky]

90. HE TOOK MONEY FROM THE GOP PEOPLE!!!!

For the love og God how in the world can you support this whore and his quixotic mission? If a liberal democrat did that in a primary battle against Casey you would be out for him with torches and pitchforks.

Why are you remotely tolerant of a Greenie who does this?

[EFerrari]

95. When you start talking about who takes money and where

I think you might make a lot of people nervous.

lol

[Lydia Leftcoast]

96. And why can't YOU understand why a person might be so disgusted

with the Bush-enabling members of the Democratic Party that they genuinely feel that the Greens fit their ideology better?

The Iraq War, the bankruptcy bill, tax cuts for the rich, the nominations to the Supreme Court--they all passed with support from significant numbers of Democrats.

I voted Green in 1996, although not in 2000, but I understand COMPLETELY why someone would have voted Green in 2000.

[charlie]

109. Nevermind all that

Right now we're watching Democratic heavy hitters, including the Prime Democrat/Alpha DLCer, and the head of the DCCC, go to bat for a guy who's set to go third-party spoiler if the primary doesn't go his way. All that blah-de-blah posturing from "centrists" about subsuming your faction to the larger good of party unity turned out to be so much fatuous baloney.

And Joe does and definitely will take GOP money if he goes independent.

[EFerrari]

115. Fatuous baloney! Definitely not for breakfast.

:rofl:

[meganmonkey]

97. And all the Democrats' money is clean as can be...

:eyes:

Projection?

Or are you just really bored?

[Perky]

106. STILL HAVE NOT SEEN A RESPONSE TO WHAT I SAID!!!

Romanelli took money from republicans to finance his petition to get on the ballot. He can't raise the money on his own apparently.

That tells me has little popular support. Sow I guess Santorum is going to run pro-choice ads next?

[Perky]

122. STILL NO RESPONSE>!!! SURPRISE SURPRISE

[EFerrari]

123. Are you reading your own thread? n/t

[Perky]

124. I am talking about this subthread.

HE TOOK MONEY FROM THE GOP, No one has a response to that?????

WOuld you support a left of center Dem in a primary against Casey whgo knowingly took money from the GOP?

[EFerrari]

134. No, of course not. But your brush is a wee bit broad.

And there have been cases of Democrats taking money, or influence from the GOP before.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/09/politics/main1600694.shtml



and don't forget this guy



Politics is a strange business. What are you going to do, declare war on your own party?

[Perky]

146. Not to starte an insurgent campaign against one's own party.

That would be poliitcal treason.

[Lilith Velkor]

92. Yesss! Attack the far left while the far right is in power!

:thumbsup:

[helderheid]

93. The Green party is NOT responsible for *. ELECTION FRAUD IS.

WE WON 2000 and 2004.

[ToeBot]

94. 'cause if your liberal - the Democratic Party OWNS your vote...

and they owe you nothing in return. Now that's democracy!

[ShortnFiery]

100. Very well put ToeBot!

Time for The Democratic Party to represent The American People FIRST!

That's Democratic, NOT Far Left or Green. :patriot: :applause:

[flyarm]

143. thats silly!!..and hopefully in the near future we can stake our

democracy once again on conscience..

but today with the atmosphere we are living in..and with the total demise of this democracy and republic at stake...are you willing to see it all go into the shitter??

what has anyone gained by one party being in control????????

tell me..tell me what has our environment gained?

what has the middle class gained?

what have the poor gained??

what have your privacy rights gained?????

what has our contitution gained?

what have our bill of rights gained?

what have our courts gained?

what have children gained??

what have seniors gained?

what medical has gotten better for any one ?

what job creation been helped?

what unions have been helped?

what national security has been helped ..unless you are JOE'S BAR in east jabip?

how has education in this country been helped by one party rule?

one party rule is selling our highways, selling our ports , selling our airlines to foreign bidders, building highways in the midwest to steal more americans jobs with cheap labor,
they have sold your medicines to the highest bidders ..they have protected law breaking corporations..and the little people get fucked over and over again..
they are spending your kids and my kids future, to the cronies that pay them through the back door and to the highest bidders..

do dems do it too..yes..but until we the people get back any semblance of the democracy i grew up with..we have no chance of ever weeding them out..because they are owned by the same devil..

but there are good ..honest people ..on both sides..their voices have been neutered..because of a one party system now in place..

so go ahead ..and throw a vote away ..for some form of your consience...or ideals that are not working now...but i will hold you accountable..for being ignorant enough to think your issues are more important than the big picture.. the saving of this democracy and republic!

i do believe....you will only think this country has gotten better
under one party rule..if you have a first class ticket to the fucking rapture!


fly

[lojasmo]

105. We need multiparty elections with IRV

We do not need to exclude people from the electoral process.

[helderheid]

132. AGREED AGREED AGREED AGREED!

[mmonk]

133. Let me say

I'm a democrat that supports ballot access for third parties. Without it, anti-democratic forces can manipulate the system. Some say that makes me less of a democrat, but I don't see it that way since democrat comes from the word democracy.

[flyarm]

141. people we neeed at least one house in government to save this republic

what part of that are people not getting..time has run out for all the silly games and bullshit..
its time americans grow up..

we need subpoena power in one house of congress..or you can bend down and kiss this republic good bye..is there some part of this greens or any other group 3rd party group are not getting?????????

wtf???????

how much more carnage must people see??

and how many of your rights must you give away, before you fucking get that??????????

vote your conscience when it doesn't effect our constitution ..and the total destruction of our republic and our democracy..please people ..wake the fuck up!

how many signing statements do you want when the greens help the gop save both houses of congress??
how many laws are you willing to let the rethugs break before you wake up??

and how is dumping nukes on Iran going to settle in the craw of Greens..when they vote these bastards back in, because of mis-begotten silly assed third party votes..
as far as i can see ..the third party votes haven't worked out so good on our environment..or the causes of the greens!..so what gains have the greens made??

fly

[zalinda]

151. They don't get it

and probably never will. Of course, their issue is more important than the country. Look how well it's been working for them until now. They blame everyone but themselves. They blame the election system, they blame the machines, they blame the politicians, but the truth is, if you are not in power there isn't much you can do about it, and the dems aren't in power. And the ONLY way to change things is to have ALL progressives band together to get the repubs out so we have a chance to change things.

Is there bad dems, yes. And after the dems are in power, vote them out, just the way it's working in CT. And to be honest, while I don't like all dems, and hate neo-cons, I don't trust Greens. They seem to working more with repubs, and don't seem to care that their issues aren't being addressed, they just like the money and their 15 minutes of fame.

zalinda

[High Plains]

148. Spoken like a real small-d democrat--NOT!

God forbid we allow anyone but Democrats and Republicans to actually get on the ballot.

[Perky]

149. I have no problem with Third party candidates

I have a problem with candidates running quixotic campaigns using GOP money because they apparently can't raise the money on their own.

The guy is a pig and a whore and he betrays the Green cause at the sufferance of both his own party and the Democratic coalition.

Again He would rather take money from Santorum to help Santorum drive a wedge in the Democratic coalition in a last ditch effort to win than allow Democrats to take control of the Senate.

[flyarm]

158. not the point..how many are they winning..and how has it helped

our constitution , and our democracy with this one party government so far??

show me where the greens splitting the votes and taking republican think tank money ...has protected our privacy , or environment, or the poor and middle class, our schools, our jobs, our water ways, our energy problems, our medical care, the air we breathe, global warming...i could go on and on..

so please do show me how rethugs holding all government power has helped the greens causes??????????

please..just show me...

but i do point out how * has signed over 800+ signing statements to totally negate our laws...weren't we a nation of laws at one time??

so how have the greens splitting the voting helped that out lately????????

can you hear me now NSA??..or how about you AOL...are you reading me now??



oh and check out how the rethugs have a bill up to cut down the sequoia trees in Calif...

please do show me..

fly

[SaveElmer]

152. As a Democrat...any party that is trying to deny my party's candidates...

The election...is an enemy...Republican or Green

[Radical Activist]

157. Political parties field candidates.

That's what they do. Otherwise they wouldn't be a political party. You might as well get angry at the Republican's for putting up candidates against Democrats. Personally, I'm glad the Greens are running a candidate against my pathetic excuse for a Democratic Governor in Illinois.

[flyarm]

159. then work real hard on getting a good dem to run for governor

but giving a vote to a green that is taking money from the corporate rethug whores is not the answer!

and will not in this climate protect our repbulic from creeping into the fascism abd police state that is upon us right now!

go out and find good dem candidates...and support them..work for them..and get them elected!

fly

[Radical Activist]

161. I do that.

No one ran against the Democratic Governor because he has raised tens of millions of dollars from the same corporate special interests as the Republicans. I work for good Democrats but no one can make be feel obligated to support the bad ones just because they have a party label next to their name.