Obama ‘failing pretty badly,’ Nader tells audience at New Paltz rally for Tasini

[LoZoccolo]

You know what? I won't even post the link to this article. Nader failed pretty badly when he got Bush* elected. Post things about Nader in this thread.

[Bicoastal]

1. Who the where for whom?

[LoZoccolo]

2. Yeah that's what I was like.

New Paltz where's that?

[roguevalley]

15. well, who would know better than former President Ralph Nader.

Oh, wait ...

[cliffordu]

35. Ralph Nadir??

Rolf Nuder?

Relph Neuter??

[Jello Biafra]

73. In New York State...

80 Miles north of NYC.

[Raineyb]

79. Upstate New York. Need a map? n/t

[FrenchieCat]

3. he would.

Also in other news, the sky is blue a lot! :rofl:

McKinney voters know what I'm talking about!

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

5. If Nader hadn't gotten 95K progressive votes in Florida, Gore would have been sworn in. n/t

[stevenleser]

6. Bingo (n/t)

[Oregone]

10. If Gore would of won those 95K votes in Florida, Gore would of been sworn in

Are you sure its not the fault of road department, who left a pothole on Mayburn Street?

[pnwmom]

14. Nader lied about Gore, deceiving those who voted for him,

every time he said that Gore and Bush were "Tweedledee and Tweedledum" and that there would be no difference in their Presidencies.

Many of Nader's progressive friends asked him to pull back in the swing states, and to concentrate his efforts in the states that couldn't swing the election to Bush. He did the opposite, and afterwards he gloated about his effect on the election.

He deserves all the (dis)credit that he wanted.

[Oregone]

21. If 95K people were so easily pursuaded, seems like Gore could of snatched em back

Maybe he could of promised to take them out to ice cream after the election? Or maybe he could of told them he was going to renegotiate NAFTA, while using the threat of an opt-out as leverage (heh, worked for Obama)?

[Eric Condon]

16. I'm not a Nader fan but if those 95K people were inclined to vote for Gore they would've done it

People, get it through your heads: blaming Nader for the 2000 debacle gives the system too much credit, since it presupposes that "democracy" had anything to do with that outcome in the first place. Gore could've beat Bush 2-1 in every state, and somehow, Bush still would've managed to be sworn in.

Let me say it as simply as I can: it was NEVER in our hands.

[pnwmom]

19. If only 1% of Nader voters had voted for Gore, he would have won.

If Nader hadn't been on the ballot, I'm sure at least 1% would have voted for the other progressive.

[Oregone]

24. So its Nader's fault that Gore could peel off just 1% more of his voters with political appeal?

[stevenleser]

31. Yes. See, now you are getting it!

[pnwmom]

32. It was Nader's decision to run his hardest in the swing states, and openly

acknowledged that this could swing the election to Bush.

[pnwmom]

34. Yes, because Nader put Nader's name on the ballot. n/t

[Oregone]

41. Ah, and he was automatically entitled to those 95K instead of Gore being entitled to them?

And there is no way to win them back, right? All he had to do was spell his name correctly?

[pnwmom]

48. No, he's entitled to swing an election to the Republicans if he wants to.

And even to brag about it, as he did.

But any progressive who voted for him on the theory that Bush and Gore were the same was grossly misled.

[Oregone]

49. What universal law stated he was entitled to those 95K people by signing his name on the line?

How was he entitled to swing an election? How many votes was Gore entitled to?

Are politicians entitled to any votes? Or do politicians simply win or lose votes?

[pnwmom]

51. Politicians are entitled to whatever votes they can legally get -- as opposed to

stealing votes through election fraud (as Bush did.)

Freedom of speech means they can even lie -- it's up to us to use our heads, though, and too many of us don't.

[Oregone]

64. Odd. I didn't think politicians were entitled to any votes

What a system you live in, eh?

[dionysus]

54. why DOESN'T it surprise me you'd support that douchebag...

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Oregone]

65. Do I? Or is it that I think this argument is absolutely retarded?

Think about it, if you can.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

71. The argument is retarded

But those who are prone to kneejerk reactions love to blame Nader.

[Eric Condon]

27. Then blame Nader's supporters, not Nader himself

Anyone who can legally run for President has a right to, and the presence of ANY third-party candidates is always inherently good for democracy.

Look, I remember 2000. I remember how high the emotions were running. Since I was such a fervent Gore supporter, I too wanted to blame Nader there for a while. But as time went by I slowly realized that blaming Nader for 2000 is just an easy way out. It's easy to hold Nader up as a convenient bogeyman, because it helps us go on believing that our country isn't rotten to the core, and that our elections aren't just an illusory charade. But the sooner we face facts, the sooner we can enact real change in this country, because only then will people wake up to the fact that their country has been stolen from them.

[pnwmom]

33. I blame both. Nader for his overwhelming, preening ego

and his supporters for following him.

[Eric Condon]

37. I agree about Nader's ego - it's the main reason I'm not a big fan of his

but like I said before, you're giving the system too much credit. No outcome of that election could have prevented Bush from stealing the Presidency. The only thing that could've prevented it would have been for us to have seen it coming. Of course, coming off eight years of relative peace and prosperity, the idea of having some shred of faith in this country wasn't quite as laughable as it is now.

[pnwmom]

38. What we needed was a margin so big that Bush could not have stolen the

Presidency -- as occurred with Obama. But Nader's involvement meant that the margin was razor thin.

[Eric Condon]

39. We already theoretically had that margin - it was called "Gore winning"

The point isn't the closeness of the election. We're talking about people who perpetrated an unambiguous crime and made no attempt to hide it. It doesn't boil down to Gore, or Nader, or either of their supporters, or the closeness of the election, how many votes Nader cost Gore - none of it matters. All that matters is that we had a goddamn coup in this country, and it happened in broad daylight.

[pnwmom]

47. The point WAS the closeness of an election. When a margin is very close,

a spoiler has the opportunity to swing the vote. Bush wouldn't have been able to steal the election if the margin between Bush and Gore were big enough -- but it wasn't, because Nader drew off a significant number of progressives.

[Raineyb]

82. Then you should blame Gore for not doing a very good job of convincing people

that there was a difference significant enough between him and Bush that people would be better off voting for him rather than anyone else. THAT is how elections work. You seem to be under the impression that politicians are entitled to the support of the voters rather than having to earn said support. It's wrong and leads to rather erroneous leaps of logic such as the one that brings you to the conclusion that Bush's installation is Nader's fault.

[Raineyb]

81. So it's Nader's fault that Gore couldn't convince those people to vote for him?

You do know that Gore wasn't entitled to those votes right?

I have to ask since so many people around here are ignorant as to the relationship between a candidate and the electorate. To get to the point and make it as clear as possible; the electorate doesn't owe the candidate anything the candidate has to earn the vote of the electorate.

[pnwmom]

84. It's Nader's fault that he deliberately chose to draw off some progressive support

from the only viable progressive candidate, knowing that this would help the Rethug to win.

He could have taken the vote-swap offer, and built the Green party with the non-swing states, but he chose to run in the way that was as damaging as possible to Gore's campaign and the country's welfare.

[stevenleser]

20. Let's not be obtuse. If you split the left vote among two or more people and there is only one right

winger, is it really that hard to figure out the likely outcome?

[Oregone]

25. One right winger? Was that Pat Buchanan or Bush?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Oregone]

42. And I don't even live in Florida! Go figure

I must be more powerful than them all

[mac56]

63. Obtuse is the perfect word for Naderites.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[Raineyb]

83. That's exactly what I say about the knee jerk Nader bashers. And after 9 years

they still haven't learned.

I suppose it's true you can lead a person to knowledge but you can't make them think.

[MadHound]

55. If Gore hadn't pissed off 600,000 registered Democrats and self described liberals,

He would have won handily.

Gore was in favor of allowing off shore drilling closer in to the Florida shore. This pissed off 200,000 registered Dems and 400,000 self described liberals so much that they voted for Bush instead.

Oh, and let's take a look at where Nader was really pulling his votes from.

"The assertion that Nader's marginal vote hurt Gore is not borne out by polling data. When exit pollers asked voters how they would have voted in a two-way race, Bush actually won by a point. That was better than he did with Nader in the race" Al From
<http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=179&contentid=2919>

So gee, it looks like Nader helped out Gore after all.

It's sad to see Democrats in such a state of denial after all these years. Gore screwed the pooch in '00 all on his own, but Democratic apologists continue to try and fly in the face of the facts and blame Nader. Sad, pathetic really.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

70. It is too bad progressives still don't know the truth n/t

[pnwmom]

7. Yeah, and how did Nader's guy, George W., do? n/t

[xchrom]

18. I've always found liars and dumb motherfuckers like to stick together. Nt

[Cha]

8. Creepy liar as always.

[Oregone]

9. Nader got Bush elected? Damn, he is powerful!

I guess I should be following this guy in the future then

[stevenleser]

11. Not powerful, just a spoiler. The concept isnt new.

Candidates A, B and C run, Candidates A and B are polar opposites and the favorites. Candidate C's positions are much closer to candidate A than candidate B.

Candidate A gets 45 percent of the vote, candidate B gets 46 percent of the vote and candidate C gets 9 percent of the vote. Candidate C's voters were polled and if candidate C had not run, 50% of its voters would have voted for candidate A, 40 % would have stayed home and 10% would have voted for candidate B. Candidate C certainly isnt "powerful", but candidate C was enough to change the result in this case.

[Oregone]

13. Could Nader part the Red Sea?

[stevenleser]

17. I do believe he has enough hot air to do so, yes

[Oregone]

22. Can Nader make a rock so big that he couldn't lift it?

[pnwmom]

23. He swung the election. Is the concept too difficult to understand?

By splitting off a significant number of progressive votes, he handed the election to Bush.

[Oregone]

26. Wow. Did he also turn Miami to salt?

[depakid]

44. Americans still haven't grasped what's been happening to them

and they're pointing fingers all around looking for any scapegoat they can find. Even- or maybe especially at those who tried to warn or stop their decline- policy by policy at a time.

(this is only going to get much worse, btw).

[Oregone]

50. What is slightly funny is that on the eve of HCR that completely repudiates socialism...

offered by Democrats, they sit around and complain when a candidate used some socialism to appeal to people whose votes they feel entitled to.

A decade later, they haven't figured out that if they cannot fill that void, these people will look for leadership and representation elsewhere.

You know, if a tree falls in the woods, and no one is there, it doesn't make a sound. But if you fill those woods up with people, its an entirely new story. Thats what the Democrats are doing. Essentially, they are creating a sub-group of people to listen to Nader while he is on his soapbox; otherwise, he would just be mumbling to himself alone in the corner.

By ignoring Nader and the people who he appeals to, for decades (continuing today), the Democratic party errected him into his position; a position that is not within the party. And instead of looking at why they failed to appeal to those people and how they failed to offer solutions to the country's problems, they instead attempt to just blame it all on him.

[treestar]

67. You reveal an authoritarian personality

The followers of authoritarians have the personality.

But at any rate, no, it wasn't Nader. It was those who voted for him.

[KingFlorez]

12. This troublemaker has no credibility

He's partially responsible for every mess Bush created, he helped him into office.

[Politicalboi]

29. I would love to blame Nadar

But I think the media is more to blame than anything else. They gave Bush a pass even though he was stupid. Who on earth would have seen that coming. Even the heavy sighs from Gore at the debates didn't get looked at like I saw it. I think Gore was frustrated that he had to debate such a moron. But everyone was polite like they are with Palin. Another idiot that might sit in the White House someday when the media is being polite and not asking such gotcha questions. Questions like "What do you read"? LOL!

[damonm]

30. In other news, Ralph Nader still alive...

and desperately seeking relevance.

[HughMoran]

57. ...fortunately not forever

:rofl:

[keopeli]

36. Nader capitalizes on people's frustration with the establishment.

That is what you get when you listen to Ralph Nader.

[depakid]

40. What you get when you fail to listen is EXACTLY what you've got

I hope you and others are enjoying your decline into a third world state, because it's more or less what those who got it right for the last couple of decades told you what would happen.

On issue after issue- and policy after policy -on the record.

[impik]

43. Nader can kiss my butt. He destroyed this country

[depakid]

45. LOL- proof positive of what was mentioned to Oregone above

You keep looking for your scapegoats- and we'll keep laughing at your juvenile outbursts.

[Chef Eric]

62. Yes! Nader is responsible for global warming, AIDS, & spontaneous acceleration in Toyotas.

Thank you for pointing this out to people. People need to know!

[xchrom]

46. Gore wo Florida -- why is anyone listening to revisionist liars? Nt

[mmonk]

52. How long are you going to keep fighting windmills?

Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court through flawed thinking.

[BeyondGeography]

53. Nuck Fader

[HughMoran]

56. I knew Nader posted here!

I knew it!


:rofl:

[Phx_Dem]

58. Nader sounds just like the rest of his whiney followers.

Bitterness is so ugly, and that's what Nader is.

[Armstead]

60. Bitterness?....remember that ol' thing about glass houses....

[Phx_Dem]

77. I'm not bitter. In fact, I'm quite happy with the President

and the direction of the country. Just because I think Ralph Nader is an bitter old asshole, doesn't make me bitter. If it did, 2/3 of the world would be bitter because they hate Dick Cheney.

[harkadog]

74. If bitterness is ugly please don't look in the mirror.

[Phx_Dem]

78. Oh, that's hilarious. Kinda like, I'm rubber and you're glue. What are you 5?

[Cha]

80. Bitterness is Ugliness but it's not you who shouldn't look

in the mirror..it's that fucking ol' uglyass nadershit.

[Jennicut]

59. Nader lost any shred of respect I had for him when he took Repub donations in 2004.

His ideas are not always ones I disagree with, such as on NAFTA. But you don't accept help from the enemy and then expect me or any other Dem to like it.

[mac56]

61. Nader is irrelevant.

A washed up loser, who once did some good things but pissed it all away due to ego.

Who gives a rat's ass what he thinks anymore?

If he was serious, he'd run for some other office.

[Arkana]

66. Hey, Ralph--why don't you do something constructive

rather than sitting back and taking potshots at the only people who are trying to fucking govern?

[DevonRex]

68. Fuck Nader. He's an irrelevant blowhard. nt

[old mark]

69. Nader has been irrelevant for at least 40 years. Who cares for his opinion?

Besides him....


mark

[Monk06]

72. Nader loves failure so much he wants to share it with everyone.

After playing the underdog since the sixties he
has become a pathetic caricature of himself.

Nader the Crusader is nothing but a cranky old
man who aspired to greatness but didn't have
the social skills to be an effective politician.

He's doctrinaire, overcome by self importance and
not nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

Kinda like a Chomski for Dummies

[WeDidIt]

75. NAder is the biggest piece of shit in American politics

I despise his ass more than Bush because Bush would have never happened without NAder.

Fuck that prick.

[zulchzulu]

76. Nader is always one to inspire us all to...

...realize he is an insignificant Charlatan who couldn't campaign his way out of the back seat of a Corvair.

[invictus]

85. So an AIPAC shill who picked LIEberman as VP is entitled to progressive votes that went to Nader?

That's bullshit. The Democratic Party should have picked better Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates if they wanted to win.

[LatteLibertine]

86. Nader

really has become an annoying dick.