Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ralph Nader hasn't done shit since writing "Unsafe at any Speed"! Except for ....

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 » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:21 PM
Original message
Ralph Nader hasn't done shit since writing "Unsafe at any Speed"! Except for ....
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 10:22 PM by Better Believe It
Some of the books Ralph Nader has written or helped produce:

◦Unsafe at Any Speed
◦Action for a Change(with Donald Ross, Brett English, and Joseph Highland)
◦Whistle-Blowing (with Peter J. Petkas and Kate Blackwell)
◦Corporate Power in America (with Mark Green)
◦You and Your Pension (with Kate Blackwell)
◦The Consumer and Corporate Accountability
◦Corporate Power in America
◦Taming the Giant Corporation (with Mark Green and Joel Seligman)
◦Verdicts on Lawyers
◦The Menace of Atomic Energy (with John Abbotts)
◦The Lemon Book
◦Who's Poisoning America (with Ronald Brownstein and John Richard)
◦The Big Boys (with William Taylor)
◦Winning the Insurance Game (with Wesley Smith and J. Robert Hunter)
◦Canada Firsts
◦The Frugal Shopper (with Wesley Smith)
◦Collision Course (with Wesley Smith)
◦No Contest: Corporate Lawyers and Perversion of Justice in America (with Wesley Smith)
◦The Ralph Nader Reader
◦Cutting Corporate Welfare
◦Crashing the Party: Taking on the Corporate Government in an Age of Surrender

Instrumental in the passing of the following legislation:

◦Clean Air Act
◦Clean Water Act
◦Consumer credit disclosure law
◦Consumer Product Safety Act
◦Co-Op Bank Bill
◦Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act
◦Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
◦Freedom of Information Act
◦Funeral home cost disclosure law
◦Law establishing Environmental Protection Agency
◦Medical Devices safety
◦Mine Health and Safety Act
◦Mobile home safety
◦National Automobile and Highway Traffic Safety Act
◦National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
◦Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
◦Nuclear power safety
◦Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
◦Pension protection law
◦Safe Water Drinking Act
◦Tire safety & grading disclosure law
◦Whistleblower Protection Act
◦Wholesome Meat Act
◦Wholesome Poultry Product Act


Just some of the organizations Ralph Nader founded or helped start:

◦American Antitrust Institute
◦Appleseed Foundation
◦Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest
◦Aviation Consumer Action Project
◦Buyers Up
◦Capitol Hill News Service
◦Center for Auto Safety
◦Center for Insurance Research
◦Center for Justice and Democracy
◦Center for Science in the Public Interest
◦Center for Study of Responsive Law
◦Center for Women Policy Studies
◦Citizen Action Group
◦Citizen Advocacy Center
◦Citizen Utility Boards
◦Citizen Works
◦Clean Water Action Project
◦Congress Project
◦Congress Watch
◦Connecticut Citizen Action Group
◦Corporate Accountability Research Group
◦Critical Mass Energy Project
◦Democracy Rising
◦Disability Rights Center
◦Equal Justice Foundation
◦Essential Information
◦FANS (Fight to Advance the Nation's Sports)
◦Foundation for Taxpayers and Consumer Rights
◦Freedom of Information Clearinghouse
◦Georgia Legal Watch
◦Global Trade Watch
◦Health Research Group
◦Litigation Group
◦Multinational Monitor
◦National Citizen's Coalition for Nursing Home Reform
◦National Coalition for Universities in the Public Interest
◦National Insurance Consumer Organization
◦Ohio Public Interest Action Group
◦Organization for Competitive Markets
◦Pension Rights Center
◦Princeton Project 55
◦PROD - truck safety
◦Public Citizen
◦Retired Professionals Action Group
◦Shafeek Nader Trust for the Community Interest
◦Student Public Interest Research Groups nationwide
◦Tax Reform Research Group
◦Telecommunications Research and Action Center
◦The Visitor's Center
◦Trial Lawyers for Public Justice

All the more reasons to throw Nader under the bus!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ditto
Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UnrepentantLiberal Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
201. Ralph Nader's Skeleton Closet
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 08:39 PM by UnrepentantLiberal
http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

"We spent a hundred years trying to clean sweatshops out of our system and what happens? Along comes the first major reformer of any impact, and he starts doing the same goddamned thing. ... My wife had to tell Ralph once to stop phoning after midnight." -- Jim Turner, former Nader lieutenant...

Ralph talks big about democracy and even unions. But when his own workers at one of his magazines, Multinational Monitor, got fed up with cruel working conditions and started agitating for a union of their own, Nader busted the union with all of the hardball techniques used by corporate owners across America. Workers at Public Citizen, another Nader group, also tried to form a union because of 60 to 80 hour work weeks, salaries that ranged from $13,000 down, and other difficult working conditions and were blocked by Nader, who remains unapologetic to this day...

Like many Washington politicians, Ralph Nader's groups have long taken advantage of earnest young ambitious workers, with two differences; Nader was more controlling and paid far less. In 1976, many were paid $5,000 per year and only a few at the top made as much as $20,000. (Nader's organizations refuse to release information on what they pay workers.) Meanwhile, Nader required daily logs of everything the workers did from 7am to 9pm, plus monthly summaries of these logs. If you didn't turn in your logs, you didn't get paid...

Back in 1996, we noted that Nader had long earned hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in speaking fees -- over $250,000 annually even in the mid-1970s -- played the stock market and carefully avoided making details of his finances public, even as he demanded that various corporations and other politicans reveal their money dealings...

David Sanford of the New Republic documented that residents of a posh neighborhood in Washington -- on Bancroft Place NW -- often spotted him sneaking into an expensive house there. Some investigation showed that Nader's brother purchased the house -- worth $100,000 even back in 1972 -- though he was an underemployed educational "consultant" and had no education beyond high school. Nader issued a statement "that he does not live in his brother's Bancroft Place house", but when a now-former worker (Lowell Dodge) asked him privately, he wouldn't deny it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #201
219. Yup, that's what I'm talking about. And why did he attack Gore so viciously
in the 2000 election while giving Bush a pass?

Nader got more attention that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. Thanks.
It will give us something positive to think about when Rick Perry gets inaugurated in 2013.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. So you think that Obama has destroyed his own presidency because of incompetence and

conservative economic policies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I do. He should have came in strong demanding far reaching reforms based upon the Nordic model
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 10:33 PM by white_wolf
and Germany's co-determination model, instead he choose the path of neo-liberalism. Though, I don't think he has been incompetent, I think this is exactly what he wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JanMichael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
114. Ding ding ding! To say he didn't want it makes him either weak...
...or incompetent. I do not believe he is either weak or incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
123. Kindly ...
Name the 218 members of the House and 51 members of the Senate that would vote for "far reaching reforms based on this Nordic model? Hell ... I'll settle for 200 members of the House and 40 members in the Senate that would SAY OUT LOUD that they even WOULD SUPPORT such far reach reforms.

Then, and only then, would your wish/desire/dream approach reality.

I know ... I know ... "But he could TRYYYYYYYY!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #123
154. Bullshit argument. The way to get positive movement is to insist on
things that are WAY out of reach, and then grudgingly settle of something less than that. Obama has chosen the moderate mid-point as the STARTING point for every bit of legislation prior to this jobs bill (and even that is far from a radical agenda) which means that after compromise we get RW legislation.

If they're going to call him a socialist anyway, he might as well actually present a couple socialist ideas. Give the right something to deny him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #154
202. No ...
the Bullshit argument is any argument that pretends actions dependant on the actions of others who you know are are not willing to act, is an actual plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nxylas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #202
226. Was that post translated into English using Babelfish?
I'm sure it made perfect sense in the original Norwegian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #226
234. Okay ...
Edited on Fri Sep-23-11 11:35 PM by 1StrongBlackMan
Let me simplify it for you ...

Any argument, presented as a plan, that has no chance of working is bullshit.

And anyone presenting such arguments is full of shit.

Is that clear enough?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #234
242. Yet, Republicans keep presenting plans that should have no chance of working and
they keep winning the fight. The only REAL FAILURE is not trying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-25-11 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #242
247. What plans ...
have Republicans presented? Are you talking about during the Bush years? Do you really believe that the Bush years were about Bush pushing and fighting to win the policy point? Or would a more accurate recounting of those years be summarized as Democratic legislators giving him everything he wanted, literally, without a fight?

If you are talking about today ... the Obama presidency ... I have to ask again what plans have they presented and won the fight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-25-11 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #247
248. Plans: Tax cuts, tax cuts, and more tax cuts - coupled with deregulation. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-26-11 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #248
249. Fail!
True ... the tax cuts continue, but did President Obama not get U/C extensions and DADT ... and didn't those tax extensions include the middle-class, as well? And, are you really complaining about the tax cuts that go directly to working class folks, like you and me?

And what de-regulation are you talking about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-27-11 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #249
250. A tax cut is a tax cut no matter how you justify it.
As far as deregulation goes, he's deregulated parts of the agriculture industry,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #226
235. Now ...
Kindly explain how your fantasy works in the real world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #10
136. Nice summation, and a very concise way with words.
Thanks - can I borrow that description?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #136
204. Sure, be my guest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trueblue2007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
227. YOU R WRONG!!! IT IS NOT THE PRESIDENT'S FAULT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
white_wolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #227
236. Yes it was. He choose to start his bargaining from a weak moderate position,
Because of that he ends up passing conservative laws. It is his fault, he could have at least bargained for strong reform instead of merely surrendering at the very beginning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. What kind of Faux News question is that?
Complete Horsehit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. Ralph Nader can help keep Obama in office.
It's early days yet. I just hope we don't get another 2000 style election. No, I don't think Nader is single-handedly responsible for George Bush, but he helped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. And Ross Perot was responsible for Clinton. I expect you bemoaned his candidacy, as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
131. 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voting for Bush "helped" ... John Roberts fascist GOP-sponsored rally
which stopped the vote counting in Miami Dade County of 120,000 votes not

previously counted "helped" --

The RW Supremes - Gang of 5 -- who stopped the Florida State SC's mandated

recount -helped" --

Theresa La Pore's "butterfly" ballot which gave more than 3,000 Gore votes to

Buchanan "helped" --

On and on --

Democrats didn't challenge the elections of 2000 or 2004 on any level --

but they were very anxious to scapegoat the guy who so frequently and correctly

criticized them -- and who was working for a better America --

Gore won 2000 -- the election was stolen -- and Gore won no matter how the votes

are counted --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. You want Rick Perry to win in 2012?
Is that what you are saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #9
27. No. In fact I'm waiting
before putting my retirement investment plan into mortuaries and cemeteries in case the GOP does not get in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #27
36. Good idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #9
133. No -- I want Sen. Bernie Sanders for President -- he's a better democract than
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 09:33 PM by defendandprotect
90% of our Democrats!!

We could have a split ticket -- Sanders could run as a Dem --


We need two strong anti-war candidates --

Two candidates who will strongly support MEDICARE4ALL --



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #2
56. I hope that is not going to be the incentive for people to vote
for Obama? The politics of fear that the other guy is worse. Vote AGAINST not FOR something? A horrible strategy that is doomed to failure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #56
75. Bullshit. It is a PERFECT reason to get the fuck off your ass and vote.
The best reason.

Hope never left me with anything more than the blues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #75
135. More FEAR-BASED reasoning -- ? We only push Dem Party and Congress to the right when
we vote for the "lesser evil" --

Look where that's gotten us this time around -- a Dem president who has

put Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid "on the table" --

and who betrayed our citizens on universal health care in back room deals

with Big Pharma and the private H/C industry -- and then they "crowed"

about how business should be "grateful" to Obama for "preserving the private

health care industry" -- !! Wow!!



> > > > > > > > > >


Also noticed this quote which another poster provided -- and seemed worthwhile to pass

it along ---

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth

of a private power to the point where it becomes stronger than their

democratic State itself.

That, in its essence, is Fascism -- ownership of government by an individual,

by a group or by any controlling private power."

President Franklin Roosevelt



--- and that should make it quite clear to anyone here still questioning whether

it's Fascism yet, or not!

"Congress is under the control of the oil and coal industries" -- Al Gore/Rolling Stone


Our government and its agencies has been bought lock, stock and barrel by elites/corporate

fascists --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gtar100 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #135
156. Wrong!! We allow the congress to go to the right by not voting!
The people got themselves into this mess by not paying attention, thinking the worst about their own government, and just plain not giving a damn. Elections are about far more than just the president and congress. They are about bond initiatives, community projects, our local schools, and so much more that touches our everyday lives.

We need to get the people off their asses and voting regardless if the lime light is on evil versus lesser evil. Ignorance of the issues is what is killing our democracy. All those jerks who are gaming the system and taking advantage of it at our expense are just using the opportunity.

In the meantime, I *will* vote for the lesser of two evils just so the greater evil doesn't get its way. And I will vote for our local officials and on all those other issues we call referendums, propositions, amendments and such because they are just as important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #156
243. Bullshit. I live in a purple district and my Rep won re-election. The lesser of two evils only
puts the country a grave a little slower, but just as painful. It's like going to the doctor and he tells you that have you have lung cancer and the average life expectancy of the for you have is one year, but then he tells you not to worry because you won't live to see out that full year because the form of bone cancer you have only gives you six months to live. Either way you're going to die a slow and painful death.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #75
189. Yes, that is exactly what 'hope' had done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 02:27 AM
Response to Reply #75
240. So do tell me, how was the second Carter Administration?
Phew that right winger Reagan was not elected in your reality or what? Oh and colliding realities..now I know why neutrinos travelled faster than light!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1StrongBlackMan Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #56
124. Why???
We, in the real world, make such choices all the time. And we don't give it a second thought.

But I guess politics is different, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #124
191. Have you taken a look at the 'real world' lately, a direct result
of politics as usual. Sometimes when I see comments ordering voters to do keep doing the same thing, election after election, expecting a different result, I know why we are now where we are.

Something different is needed and I have a feeling we are seeing the beginning of real change in this country. Not coming from the political class, they are happy with the status quo, but from the people. Wouldn't be the first time, and I feel very hopeful right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
era veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
76. BINGO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LanternWaste Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
91. I don't think that the one is predicated on the other...
I don't think that the one is predicated on the other. Granted, it's much easier and much more convenient to believe that the accomplishments of one we may disagree with denies the accomplishments of the ones we do in fact, agree with; however, they are each wholly independent of the other.

As for me, I have zero problems with an individual who votes in elections based on principles and convictions rather than on Electoral College pragmatism. Although it may be perceived as quaint, traditional, or even counter-productive to convention, it illustrates a strength of character many people merely pretend to posses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dotymed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
155. May the best man win. So far that is Nader by all accounts. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Recced up to zero or some negative number.. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. I didn't know a great deal of that.
K & R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
44. Never hear them howling about
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowCosmicSun Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Naderite in Democrat's clothing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. Unfashionable Democrats in Ralph Nader's clothing?

What's a Naderite?

Is that suppose to be some form of derogatory name calling sort of like calling someone a Stalinist, pinko, commie or terrorist?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowCosmicSun Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. Ralph Nader is not a Democrat. Those who cast their allegiance with him aren't either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #26
32. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #26
143. Nader -- like Sen. Bernie Sanders -- is a better Democrat than most of our Democrats -- !!
And do you think that Nader or Sanders would have put Social Security, Medicare

and Medicaid "on the table" -- ???

Or that either one of them would have extended tax cuts for the rich -- which we

had to borrow money to cover -- or given in to RW GOP blackmail on the budget -- ?

Maybe you think that Nader or Sanders would have betrayed the public on universal

health care in back room deals with Big Pharma and the private H/C industry -- ?


Or keep Bush's wars going into a second decade -- !!

Or reverse EPA regulations intended to clean up pollution --- !!!


On and on --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #26
149. Ralph Nader backed Obama for the nomination --- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Keep denigrating liberal heroes and you die on your knees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. liberal heroes.
The guy made an impressive impact on consumer protection, but he abandoned his "calling" to feed his ego and his bank account.

...talk about hero worship. :eyes:

btw....the OP is yankin' your chain.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
37. So, you've met Nader, eh? And you've seen his bank account? Nice!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #37
46. Couldn't think of anything, huh?
That's okay. Sometimes it's better to just let it go.

Looks like this was one of those times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. No really. I want evidence that Nader got rich off his campaign. I want evidence
that he only ran to feed his ego.

I see these accusations all the time. Similarly, I see accusations that Obama is a socialist. When I ask for evidence, his accusers run away... just like you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. Do I look like I'm running from
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 11:28 PM by Bobbie Jo
you? :rofl:

You want evidence of Nader's incredible ego?

I want evidence that you've confronted a socialist screaming teabagger, and the subsequent "running away" you provoked.

Not bloody likely. I'm here for the duration....how about you?


btw....the OP is STILL yankin' your chain. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. You haven't answered the question. That is running away.
And yes, this is not the only political discussion board that I participate in. Ask for proof from any idiot that Obama is a socialist and it is either crickets or some kind of insipid laughing emoticon or similar as a response.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #53
62. Common sense
and a semester of Psych 101 answers your question. If you think I'm googleing links in re: "Nader's ego" to satisfy your strange sense of "serious" political discussion, then you might be more suited to the conquer the "idiots" on your other boards. Insipid laughing emoticons :rofl: and all...

Nader is "ate up" with ego....deal with it.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #62
70. As I expected. A non-answer. I didn't expect you to google. Perhaps you have a child that can help
figure out how to support your unsolicited assertion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #70
86. See post #46.
....and "unsolicited?" Grab a dictionary on your way. This is a message board. Obviously no one solicited my opinion, but I gave it anyway. That's how this thing works.

Perhaps the word you were grappling for here was "unsubstantiated." Big words, I know...

Again, refer to post 46...you're looking more foolish with each response.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #86
94. Bobbie Jo, your irrational allegiance to party over sensible accomplishment and dedication
to ideals that improve the lot of working class Americans is exactly the reason that so many of us Democrats (I've been a loyal Dem for 40+ years) are fed up with the way the Democratic party is being run.

Ralph Nader has done more for the working people of this nation than Barack Obama has.

Get over yourself.

REC this thread.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #94
103. "irrational allegiance"
Describes Naderites perfectly.

I gave him praise for his accomplishments, sadly he abandoned his calling to promote his own interests.....Ralph Nader. Obviously, this is just my opinion. That it upsets you this much perhaps says more about your "irrational allegiance" than mine.

It's not so much that the Nader factor is necessarily a detrimental force, but rather the OP is "yankin' your chain" on a daily basis.

Urec.... as I do for ALL of the OP's threads.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #103
107. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
LiberalLovinLug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #103
183. You assumptions are pitiful
By your definition, ANY person that stops or puts aside their previous career and goes into politics is doing so to feed their own ego and make a crapload of cash? That Elizabeth Warren!....I knew it! Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich (who also ran for President) as well I suppose.

Might it possibly be that he knew that his stances on corporate control etc... (you know former Democratic principles) may get a more open discussion, even if he never actually won?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #183
198. I have an opinion
about Nader. Period. You don't like it. ( I get that, really I do) That opinion does not automatically translate to others, particularly the ones you mentioned because you're right, that would be pitiful and extremely stupid.

Do you apply all of your assumptions equally to everyone, ALL OF THE TIME?

Who the hell thinks that way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #198
215. dupe --
Edited on Fri Sep-23-11 01:02 AM by defendandprotect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #53
168. Poster suggested ... "he abandoned his calling to feed his bank account" -- hmmm.....
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 03:57 PM by defendandprotect
The guy made an impressive impact on consumer protection, but he abandoned his "calling" to feed his ego and his bank account.

...talk about hero worship.


But, let's concentrate on EGO until there is an ego-meter -- !!


:rofl: --



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #168
199. Poster suggested....
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 06:36 PM by Bobbie Jo
that she has an opinion.

But, let's concentrate on our tag-team efforts. :fistbump:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #199
216. You made a claim -- "he abandoned his calling to feed his bank account" -- evidence of that?
Your post --

liberal heroes.
The guy made an impressive impact on consumer protection, but he abandoned his "calling" to feed his ego and his bank account.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1974877&mesg_id=1975002


Posters are waiting for the evidence of that --


Tag team -- ?

Unfortunately, I think you have to face the facts that many disagree with you --




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #216
221. Again....
I am fully aware of what I posted. That you attach the label of "claim" to my opinion so as to demand "evidence" of the existence of tangible fact is nothing more than a vain inquiry.

There is no "evidence" that would rise to the level of proof of Nader's underlying MOTIVES. An OPINION, is a personal view, attitude, or appraisal. I formed my opinion of Nader over time, I lost respect for him a number of years ago.

So frankly, I don't care what other posters may be "waiting for." It is what it is....

If your tag team bullying tactics and demands for unobtainable "proofs" make you feel empowered and morally superior, then knock yourself out. There's safety in numbers....

It seems you're the one with the inability to deal with idea that someone might disagree with your version of hero worship.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #52
111. I think
He was primarily asking for the economic evidence.

With regard to the idea that he is "running merely on ego" is a characterization and cannot truly be proven as it borders on the ad hominem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 02:41 AM
Response to Reply #52
241. Argumentum ad Hominen
And I will leave it at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #23
144. You're underinformed on Nader -- most of what we know about government corruption we know
because of Nader -- and most of the fight-back against this privatized system

of elections comes from Nader and not the Dem Party -- !!


As though Nader would ever have put Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid "on the table" -- !!!

Or extended tax cuts for the rich -- while bowing to RW blackmail on budget -- !!

Or pushed Bush's wars into the second decade -- !!

Or shut down enacted EPA regulations on pollution -- !!


:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #144
160. Ah...
I see you have an OPINION too. !!

....with a touch of unsubstantiated speculation. !!

:eyes: !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #160
166. Are you saying obama didn't put Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid "on the table" ... ????
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 03:41 PM by defendandprotect
:eyes:


Or are you saying he didn't extend tax cuts for the rich -- ?



Or are you saying that Democrats have fought back on the stolen elections of 2000

and 2004? Or have been fighting Republican controlled computers?

Maybe you don't know that we have a private corporation controlling the presidential

debates BECAUSE of agreement between the two corporate parties?


Or maybe you think that both wars have ended and the troops are home -- ?


Or maybe you're just not saying anything --- which is more likely -- !!



ROFL




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #166
178. Please point out where I made
ANY of those claims?

Having waded through that massive load of straw...

HTF did Obama get thrown into this discussion?

or maybe.....you're just stuck recycling the same talking points as an automatic response to EVERYTHING, whether it fits or not.



:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #178
182. Where? In yet another of your non-response-responses ... ROFL
And as far as Obama vs Nader you have no defense --

Nader is an icon --

the other has betrayed the nation on almost every issue --

From Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid --

to back room deals with Big Pharma and the private H/C industry --

and then "crowing" about how business should be "grateful" to Obama -- !!


:blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #182
196. I didn't create the
Obama v Nader discussion, you did.

Here's the thing....

I have an opinion about Nader.
You obviously don't like it.
You want to turn this into a compare/contrast debate.

So......

Perhaps you could answer this: Are you here promoting a third party candidate for the 2012 presidential election?
I mean this thread IS about Nader, let's stay on topic.

btw....Is it tag team night? Who's up next?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wind Dancer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #196
207. It's not possible to debate.....
you're too close minded and opinionated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #207
208. Hooo....that took guts
Considering the closed minded, opinionated posters that have lined up so far.

Did you get the tag?

Clue: I can't stand Nader. I think he is an opportunistic, arrogant prick. The world will continue to turn just the same.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #196
213. Did Nader put Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid "on the table" -- ?


What we're discussing is achievements by politicians --


If you're attacking Nader, answer the question --

Did Nader betray citizens on universal health care or did Obama do that -- ?


And keep in mind that Nader supported Obama in 2008 --


IMO, Obama should be challenged in 2012 --

preferably by Sen. Bernie Sanders who could run on a Dem ticket --

but Alan Grayson, Matt Damon, Michael Moore -- and many others would be acceptable --

and many of them are better democrats than our elected Democrats who have been

pre-bought and pre-owned by corporations --








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #213
224. Okay..
Edited on Fri Sep-23-11 11:16 AM by Bobbie Jo
Fact: Obama WILL NOT face a Democratic primary challenger.
Fact: Nader has never held elected office, therefore was never in a position that required him to GOVERN within an adversarial system.
Fact: Nader IS NOT a Democrat.
Stipulated Fact: Nader is a politician.

Question: Are you promoting a third party candidate in the 2012 presidential election?

Enough with the platitudes already....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowCosmicSun Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. Ralph Nader stinks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. An amazing witty and deep analysis. I look forward to the mentally
stimulating discussions we will have in the future.

For instance, my rebuttal... stinky feet stink. Argue against THAT, sucka!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowCosmicSun Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #40
69. I had to get on your level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #40
78. LOL.
They always are. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
12. Sounds like the Manchurian Candidate to me! LOL N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AverageJoe90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. Nader's done some good stuff in his life, yes......
But I still can't quite forgive him for being quite the tool in 2000; his being manipulated gave the GOP the close call they needed to steal the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. How about Ross Perot. He gave us Clinton. Were you also railing against him
when he ran his fully legal and Constitutional right to run for president?

Was Ross Perot manipulated by the Democrats?


(Oh, and by the way, Nader was not manipulated by the Reps. He ran his own campaign and he ran it well.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #19
54. That would be silly, anytime you keep a Bush-Repug out of office, it saves lives.
However, Nader and his ego feeding put Dubya right into the White House whether you like it or not.
So quit repeating yourself, Ludicrous Animal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #54
169. ROFL--- so you only want to stop third party rights when they interfere with your candidate?
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 04:05 PM by defendandprotect
Nder and his "ego feeding" ... ???

Do you have an "ego-meter" somewhere you're reporting from?

The only people who put W into the White House were RW thugs who stole the

election -- which you seem to want to overlook --


Florida State SC had mandated the counting of the 120,000 votes at Miami Dade County

HQ's which was STOPPED by a fascist GOP mob orchestrated by now Chief Justice John

Roberts! Couldn't have been a payoff though, could it? :rofl:


And the final coup on the 2000 election begun by Fox/Jon Ellis in the recall of Florida

from Gore was the Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court who put W in office --


Meanwhile, Gore WON the election -- unless you want to deny that, as well?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. But Republicans gave a lot of money, millions, to John Kerry's campaign and not much to Nader.

And Joseph Leiberman betrayed Kerry which played a huge role in enabling Bush to steal the election. Watch the movie Recount.

The only people who voted for Nader clearly were those who would not vote for Bush or Kerry. Don't you think they had the right to vote for Ralph Nader or do you think people should only be permitted to vote for the Republican or Democratic candidate for President in elections?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
172. Democrats took money from RW Koch Bros, criminal Pfizer and Chevron ... and from Repugs ....!!
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 04:23 PM by defendandprotect
Kerry took money from Republicans --

but Nader is the problem -- ????


:rofl: -- :rofl: --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #15
96. Nader didn't steal the election. Five US Supreme Court justices did.
They handed Bush the presidency with a ridiculous ruling and opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #96
112. Oddly...
In Florida there were more registered Democrats that voted for Bush than registered Democrats that voted for Nader in 2000.

Strange that the hate-on is selective towards those percieved of being a Naderite. This seems applied to leftists that criticize the president (whether or not they voted for Nader), Leftists that are too demanding of Democrats, or anyone that ever agrees with something Nader writes or posts anything Nader says (even when it is theoretically an existing part of the Democratic party platform.)

I did vote for Nader in 2000 but it was a calculated vote. I am from Minnesota and Al Gore had this state very easily in the 'win' column. I was smarting over the selection Liebermann, a poorly run campaign, and a seeming movement towards the political right. Despite this I was angry as hell at the election being stolen by the Republicans while the party establishment sort of just rolled over and fought with all the tenacity of sloth in a coma.

Obviously I voted for Kerry in 2004 as I didn't want to risk anything on this (Minnesota went Democratic again for president). But we were again cheated and, despite ample evidence of cheating again in Ohio and Florida, we again rolled over for these bastards.

The conservative-leaning establishment Democrats seem to be more interested in 'getting along' than standing up for principle even when the voters and our party is getting stabbed by the opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AverageJoe90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #96
164. True, but......
Sadly, his campaign did get enough votes to allow the GOP to pull that little stunt of theirs. Nader played right into their hands like the unwitting sucker that he was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #164
173. That's not true -- 3,000 and more votes went to Buchanan on a Dem-designed butterfly ballot ...
and Theresa La Pore was later connected to the Repugs --

Gore actually WON the 2000 election according to the recount -- no matter how

the votes are counted -- keep that in mind.


The official "win" by W was 537 votes -- vs 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida who voted

for Bush!

Vs the Buchanan votes --

and vs all the other third party votes -- tens of thousands of them in Florida --

which certainly could also be exaggerated to suggest that they were votes that might

have gone to Gore.


Let's also keep in mind the lackluster campaign run by Gore because he listened to his

own organization -- the DLC -- and eliminated the populist rhetoric -- later he resigned

from the DLC realizing how wrong they had been.

Gore certainly also especially eliminated his knowledge of Global Warming during that

campaign -- UNTIL LATER!!

Gore also gave us Liebermann -- think of what a Trojan Horse that would have been!!

And, Gore had spent years with Lieberman in Congress -- he knew exactly who he was!



Without John Roberts organizing the fascist rally to stop the vote counting in Miami-Dade

Country mandated by the Florida State Supreme Court --

and without the 5 fascists on the US Supreme Court -- there would have been no W --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AverageJoe90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #173
209. True, the Supreme Court being stocked with CONservatives didn't help either.
But Nader did win almost 3,000,000 votes in 2000.
And Gore not being a populist was actually a smart move at the time, because if he had done so, it could have backfired and could led to Bush winning the election anyway, without the GOP's slick move.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #209
232. Nonsense ... Gore left the DLC after the "anti-populist" demands they made on him ...
and he deeply regretted having listened to the DLC --

The Supreme Court played the final card in the 2000 election ---

STOPPING the official recount mandated by the Florida State Supreme Court when

it got down to 34 vote "lead" for Bush --

and officially delcaring Bush the winner of the election ---


Tell me how Nader stopped the recount --

and when Nader was on the Supreme Court --


:rofl: -- :rofl: --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
171. It wasn't a "close call" -- Gore actually WON the election, no matter how you count the votes ...
and he was a half million votes ahead of Bush -- probably more --

2000 was 2004 were the same thing -- manipulation of one state's Electoral College

votes to steal the election -- 2004 it was Ohio --


When computers and fascist rallies and a Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court begin to

run things they'll be a lot of purposeful "close calls" --

which evidently the Koch Bros/DLC/Third Way Democratic Party prefers to ignore --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savannah43 Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #15
203. The Supreme Court APPOINTED Bush to the presidency.
That's the truth. Read the court case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bonobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
16. B, but he is secretly working to enact the Republican agenda!!!
I read it right here!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. So Nader's a secret right-wingnut! Thanks for the info. Who wouda thunk?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:48 PM
Original message
LOL
....for unintentional irony. :rofl:

Who woulda thunk, indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
17. And Obama is a socialist born in Kenya.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #17
82. You forgot secret muslim, anti-colonialist, and he stole a man's penis!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
145. Don't think a "socialist" would have put Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid "on the table" -- !!!
Nor extend tax cuts for the rich -- bowing to RW blackmail on budget -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
22. Wait
" Some of the books Ralph Nader has written or helped produce"
"Instrumental in the passing of the following legislation:"
"Just some of the organizations Ralph Nader founded or helped start:"

...writing books, "instrumental in" and founding organizations?

Here's something: Ralph Nader praises Sarah Palin

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #22
30. Yes and Obama praised Poppy Sr. and said he idolizes Ronald Raygun.
But I know you won't criticize that, you can't - it is not in your programming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Hmmmm?
" But I know you won't criticize that, you can't - it is not in your programming."

So you're criticizing Nader for praising Palin or are you defending him by comparing Palin to Bush Sr. and Reagan?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Just pointing out your hypocrisy for all to see.
Next.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #34
97. They're going to develop carpal tunnel from all that cutting and pasting quotes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #30
138. Obama stopped COLA's and put Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid "on the table" ... not NADER!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #22
148. LOL! That kinda reads like your collection of Obama lists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
25. Thank You. Timely, Needed, and recommended. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
28. and taking GOP money to compete against the democrat. nt
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 11:45 PM by seabeyond
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. Facts vs. Fiction: Republican Contributions: $10.7 Million for Kerry vs. $111,700 for Nader

October 19, 2004

Who's Really in Bed with Republican Funders?

Republican Contributions: $10.7 Million for Kerry vs. $111,700 for Nader

by CounterPunch Wire

Washington, D.C.

Today, the Independent presidential campaign of Ralph Nader and Peter Miguel Camejo released the preliminary findings of research conducted by the Center for Responsive Politics. The findings demonstrate that Senator John Kerry has thousands of contributors who have supported the Republican Party. Kerry has more than ten million dollars donated by Republican donors.

The anti-Nader Democrats have spread their big lie to discredit Nader and silence his anti-war and progressive message that Kerry could not rebut. The anti-Naderites hired Stanley Greenberg to conduct surveys and focus groups to determine how best to smear Nader. They found that falsely claiming Nader was funded and controlled by Republicans was the most effective line they could use ­ a line that can’t pass the laugh test when compared to the facts. They announced their findings at the Democratic Convention and then spread the lie through the Naderfactor.com and the United Progressives for Victory.

But the reality was only 700 Republican contributions (no individuals, but individual contributions) had given donations to the Nader campaign and most of the contributors were people Nader had worked with on justice issues in the past. Even among these 700 the Democrats received more money than Nader-Camejo — $111,700 to $146,000. But, the Democrats continue to use the Big Lie ­ despite the facts.

Preliminary CRP results: 50,000 contributions who have given to President Bush or the Republicans have given $10,697,198 in large contributions to Kerry. This means 100 times more Republican money has been contributed to the Democrats campaign than to the Nader-Camejo campaign. That amount is five times the entire budget of the Nader Presidential campaign! These are preliminary results because there are so many that it is too expensive for the Center to review the donations for final results. Maybe an independent media outlet would like to try, rather than continue to repeat the corporate media’s reporting of the malicious Democratic fabrication that the campaign is funded by organized Republicans. We’re waiting for the full story on how the Kerry campaign is funded by the Republicans who play both sides of the two party duopoly.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/10/19/republican-contributions-10-7-million-for-kerry-vs-111-700-for-nader/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. You and those DAM FACTS!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #33
39. So
"Facts vs. Fiction: Republican Contributions: $10.7 Million for Kerry vs. $111,700 for Nader"

...less is better?

BTW, the point isn't campaign donations from individual Republican contributors.

It's money specifically from GOP organizations for the sole purpose of challenging Democrats.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. Prove that Nader's Republican donations came from organizations who sought to
challenge Democrats.

Please note, that I said Nader's donations.

By the way, please explain your comment, "less is better". Absolutely makes no sense to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #39
113. Uhm
You know this is one of the blind spots I'm noticing regarding the facts. An obvious economic statement as to how much money Republicans donated to Nader versus Kerry which would contradict or at least complicate the suggestion that Nader was some kind of GOP plant or some such lunacy and the best you can do is "less is better"?

Damned right "Less is better." Even better would be no support at all from republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #33
45. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #33
93. Giving money to Kerry and giving it to Nader were quite different things
Nader was polling under 5 percent in 2000. Nobody who gave him money thought that he had a shot at winning the presidency - probably not a single donor believed that they were investing in a potential victory. Doesn't mean they all were just trying to get him to siphon votes off of Gore . . . though undoubtedly some were.

But in 2004, Kerry had a real chance at the presidency and everybody knew it. Giving his campaign money was an acknowledgment that you were willing to personally invest in a Kerry victory, because anybody who gave to him knew that in a race that tight, every little bit was helping push him toward the promised land. So if you gave money to him, it means that you were in effect helping work toward an actual Kerry presidency, not just making statement.

The two scenarios really don't have much in common.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #93
132. That's right. Good point! They were two different candidates.
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 09:32 PM by Better Believe It

Guess which one was the most liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #33
174. Ah, facts -- thank you -- !!!
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 04:45 PM by defendandprotect
What we have to begin to understand here at DU is that Democrats are also willing

to LIE to protect themselves from criticism --

and Nader has certainly been a huge threat to them, especially re war --

campaign money issues and many other issues -- from the environment to safety nets.


Time for DU to understand that the scapegoating of Nader was done purposefully by

the Democrats to try to rid themselves of their biggest critic -- !!


Le's continue to look at Democrats having taken money from Koch Bros/DLC -- and from

the criminal Pfizer and Chevron -- among the many others like the corrupt Big Pharma

and the private H/C industry which Obama betrayed us for in back room deals -- !!




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
38. No Nader Pavlovian response here.
I've always seen him as one of the strong voices opposed to the corporate takeover of this country. I just never knew how seriously until I saw this post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
42. Where are the reports of Nader attacking current Republican policies and tactics?
I must have missed those.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #42
47. Perhaps you need to get out more often.
http://www.nader.org/index.php?serendipity=search&serendipity=tea+party&serendipity=%3E
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #47
51. Or even watch Lawrence O'Donnell's interview with him.
Nader is VERY hard on the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #51
58. Thank you! I hope to catch it later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Everything he said was true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #51
98. And, he attacks them a lot when he's on Democracy Now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #51
104. Exactly!
And his current problem with the Democratic Party Leadership is that they agree with Republicans too much.
I agree with Nader 100% on this point.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone


photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



Solidarity!



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #47
73. Hmmm. Here's what your hyperlink returns
"No entries to print"

Care to point me to some specific report where Nader specifically takes the Republicans to task?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #42
60. Good point. I haven't heard any.
All I've heard is that asshole blathering on about how both parties are the same.

Which is a complete lie, of course. Typical of that dipshit Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #60
99. It's all around. Do your own digging.
But, you probably don't want to upset your beautiful mind.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
43. ......
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 11:17 PM by Bobbie Jo
instigator (noun)

Definition of INSTIGATOR
1. a person who stirs up public feelings especially of discontent <an instigator who always managed to be innocently standing by once the fighting began>

2. someone who deliberately foments trouble; "she was the instigator of their quarrel"

instigate (verb)

1 to bring about, as by incitement or urging to instigate rebellion
2 to urge on to some drastic or inadvisable action

Entry: instigator
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: troublemaker
Synonyms: agent provocateur, agitator, firebrand, hellion, incendiary, inciter, inflamer, knave, meddler, mischief-maker, nuisance, provocateur, punk*, rabble-rouser, ringleader, sparkplug, wise guy
* = informal/non-formal usage
Main Entry: agent provocateur
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: secret agent
Synonyms: agitator, firebrand, goad, incendiary, instigator, intelligence agent, noncooperator, operative, provocateur, provocative agent, provoker, rabble-rouser, radical, ringleader, spark, spy, troublemaker

On Edit: This isn't about Nader.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. That's a broad accusation. Could you be more specific?
Edited on Tue Sep-20-11 11:18 PM by Luminous Animal
To instigate rebellion is completely different that urging on an inadvisable action.

An a rabble rouser is not the same as an intelligent agent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #48
50. definitions.
Take it up with Merriam-Webster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #50
55. So, you apply all of them to the OP or did you have a point?
Because applying all of them is kind of like saying, "Hey poopy pants, you don't have any pants on!" I mean, what is it? Is the OP a poopy pants or is he pantless?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #55
63. What does that even mean?
Did YOU have a point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #63
71. Apparently, I have to start slowly.
I think this would work best if I didn't confuse you with too many questions so we'll start off with one.

Why did you post the definition of instigator?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 05:49 AM
Response to Reply #71
85. Apparently, you have to make sense.
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 05:51 AM by Bobbie Jo
Perhaps a child is available to help explain it to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #71
175. You're wasting your time --
try ignore --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #175
200. Tag...you're it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #200
217. Tag -- you're on IGNORE -- Bye -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #217
225. Finally.
Outstanding idea, too bad it didn't occur to you yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exilednight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #63
244. Did YOU have a point?
You asked the other poster, but I was wondering the same thing about your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
57. OH GOD!!! It's the NADER LIST!!!...
:rofl:

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #57
64. Exactly when did Nader go from Liberal Icon to Persona non grata?
I ask that question because for decades Nader's liberal credentials were beyond question or reproach.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. Never. Don't pay any attention to the thin sliver of people here
that hate Nadar because he is a liberal. No one else does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowCosmicSun Donating Member (383 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #64
80. He was never an Icon in anybody's mind but his own. Did you vote for him in 2000 or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #80
83. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Fuddnik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #80
101. You should read the references in the OP.
Nader was, and still is a liberal icon. he doesn't kowtow to any corporatist or partisan bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #80
177. Nader has long been an example of what anyone involved in government should be ....
vs the corporate "duopoly" he's been criticizing for four decades and more -- !!!

Rightly so!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #64
176. Nader's attacks on their corporate funding and agendas - "the duopoly" --
began to have an effect --

Democrats saw an opening to scapegoat Nader in 2000 in an effort to get

their biggest critic off their backs --

It's essential for the two corporate parties to continue to look like two different parties --

Nader has long put the lie to that --


And, let's see, Democrats took money for more than two decades from the RW Koch Bros --

from the criminal Pfizer and Chevron corps --


but it's Nader being criticized --




:rofl: -- :rofl: -- :rofl: --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #57
65. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
61. Simply correcting the record on this much
shouldn't cause so much consternation. I just saw the very claim in another thread that this rebuts.
Like him or loathe him, facts are good.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
67. yes, he has done a hell of a lot of good
too bad he negated it all by helping to make George W. Bush Preident.

The man will need 10,000 lives in purgatory to make up for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #67
72. Fortunately, for the Republicans, you've forgotten about voter intimidation...B
lack box machines owned by Republican operatives, vote caging, and voter ID initiatives. While you stamp your little feet and shake your little fists at "Emmanuel Goldstein", all of this is still going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #72
74. and yet with all of that Gore + Nader still beat Bush
Heck, even Gore beat Bush, but not in the electoral college. Since you denigrate whatever I do as stamping my little feet, then why should I bother to do so about BBV or voter caging, etc?

But without Nader, all of that voter intimidation, etc. would not have put Bush in the Whitehouse. Gore wins New Hampshire and disaster is averted. And presumably a Gore administration might have done something about those Republican dirty tricks, but Nader saved us from being able to find out.

Fortunately for the Republicans though, some people are still defending the dickwad instead of being united against them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #72
115. nice 1984 reference
And I agree with you on this. The hate on Nader should end. We should instead be stealing ideas from him and pushing them as hard as our little progressive Democratic hearts can pump.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #67
79. Exactly, just like 2004.
Oh, wait.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #67
180. Rather, anyone suggesting that ....
is simply moving the spotlight from the actual steal onto a scapegoat --

The "737 vote win" by W is overcome by a few facts --


#1 -- Gore actually won the election in 2000 no matter how the votes are counted --

#2 -- 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for Bush --

#3 -- 3,000 and more votes taken by Buchanan from Gore on "butterfly ballot" --

#4 -- 10,000's of votes taken by third parties other than Nader --


All add up to quite a bit more than 737 votes --


Meanwhile, the area where the spotlight should be is on the actual STEAL -- organized

in large part by now Chief Justice John Roberts in stopping the vote counting in

Miami-Dade County of 120,00 and more votes never before counted --

and the fascist five who finally put W in the White House --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
68. Not to mention giving establishment Democrats a handy scapegoat for their failures. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #68
81. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #68
184. +1 --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:02 AM
Response to Original message
77. Ralph Nader's tribute to Howard Zinn (BookTV)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 05:16 AM
Response to Original message
84. He doesn't actually organize, though
He starts things and leaves finishing them to others. Which is fine--we need the spark plug types too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #84
89. When he does people call him a "control freak"!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #89
158. He has never stayed with any organization he founded, so that accusation
--is completely baseless. Maybe in his personal life, but that doesn't count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #158
185. Nader has continued to support the organizations he helped found ...
he just doesn't lead them --

but they remain important to him and he does support them --

and, I think, in many cases monitors them --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #185
197. Claybrook on Nader
http://www.citizen.org/prezview/articles.cfm?ID=11217

I’d like to take this opportunity to explain his relationship to Public Citizen. Ralph founded this organization in 1971, and today we are the largest of the many organizations he started. But he stepped down as president in 1980 and for the past 24 years has held no position with Public Citizen or its board. The organization was founded on the principles he espoused, and we continue to be inspired by them. But, as a matter of policy, Public Citizen is nonpartisan and does not endorse or oppose political candidates. That includes Ralph. The fact is, he didn’t seek our opinion. We had no influence over his decision to run in 2000 or his decision in 2004, and we have absolutely nothing to do with his campaign.

Nevertheless, many of our supporters were angry at Ralph in 2000 and expressed that anger by withholding their financial support for our work. As a result, we lost about 20 percent of our members, and we are just now getting back to full strength. Although we were hurt financially by the reaction to Ralph’s campaign and had to cut back some of our activities, we kept fighting for the principles we believe in, and we’ve had notable successes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #197
211. Claybrook is simply addressing the "spoiler" issue ....
Edited on Fri Sep-23-11 12:24 AM by defendandprotect
the scapegoating of Nader by the Democratic Party which many believed without question!

Took the Democrats off the hook for their failure to respond to the many attempts by GOP to

suppress the vote -- and later to challenge the election -- !!

And, took a huge critic off their backs -- for a brief time!

Nader's criticism of the corporate party "duopoly" has awakened many --

but I have to say, no one has awakened the public to this corporate duopoly more than

Obama as he has unmasked himself and his pro-corporate agenda -- !!


The organization was founded on the principles he espoused, and we continue to be inspired by them. But, as a matter of policy, Public Citizen is nonpartisan and does not endorse or oppose political candidates. That includes Ralph. The fact is, he didn’t seek our opinion. We had no influence over his decision to run in 2000 or his decision in 2004, and we have absolutely nothing to do with his campaign.

Claybrook was trying to regain support for Public Citizen -- but she would have done better to

have directly attacked the scapegoating!

For instance, pointing out that had the recount mandated by the Florida State Supreme Court been

allowed to proceed -- think W was down to a 34 vote "lead" when they stopped it -- Gore would have

been announced the winner.





Claybrook and Nader have had their differences over the decades they've worked together --

but remain friends -- allegedly.

Here's Nader on one of those controversies ...

"There are no friends in government," he says, "only users and misusers of power. There is no animosity between Joan and me, but the stakes are too high for friendship and sentimentality."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
87. He looks like shit
He shouldn't try to represent "liberals" on TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #87
117. So who do you think represents more liberal ideas on TV. Obama or Nader?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #87
212. "Pretty is as pretty does" ---
Otoh, presume Obama still looks good in bathing trunks -- and who cares?

The mask is off -- it's over --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
88. Where'd you cut and paste that list from?...
You should probably give them credit for it.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
90. I get such a kick out of the frequent 2 minute hate
people have for Nader. :rofl: K/R for a great advocate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #90
92. Just a short break from the 24/7 hate machine.
We now return to your regularly scheduled program, already in progress.....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
95. What I hear him saying is that a primary race would allow for public
debates. The rethugs are having one after another and that is in the news. We have our candidate already so who are we going to debate with? How are we going to get our message across. So far President Obama has been on the road about the jobs bill but is he going to stay on the road every day from now until the election?

The primary debates are a way to get free air time. However, I also think that Nader has forgotten that primaries cost money - money we are going to need for the general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #95
118. What "jobs bill" are you writing about?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #118
153. All the speeches he is making about "pass this bill".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #95
188. Good point ....
and I've heard that he is forming a coalition to travel the country seeking

a challenger vs Obama for 2012 --

Keep in mind thatd Obama supported obama for the nomination in 2008 -- !!

Maybe Nader -- Michael Moore -- Matt Damon -- Ed Schultz -- and environmentalists

and other liberal groups will get together and come up with two strong anti-war

challengers for 2012!!

We need two challengers who are strong on universal health care -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
100. K & R !!! - Thank You !!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
102. Rec because it's important to support reformers even if we don't plan to vote for them.
Personally, I don't think that Ralph Nader would be a good president. That's not his best role. But I have great admiration and appreciation for the good that he has done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #102
116. Gore should have offered him an office
I would have loved to have seen Attorney General Ralph Nader. It would have been mind blowing and a symbol of Gore's willingness to reach out for the disenchanted voters. Instead he kept chasing a delusional and illusory center based on the words of the pundit-class. What a waste of time that was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #116
119. +1
That's one of the smartest things I've ever seen posted on DU

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #119
162. Thank you.
I'm surprised no one in Gore's campaign thought to do something like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #116
120. If Gore had been allowed to take the office he was elected to fill, maybe that would have happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #116
127. Attorney General Ralph Nader -- !! Love it --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #116
141. Gore never got that opportunity, but in retrospect Clinton probably should have
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanSocDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
105. Great post....


Too bad any of his detractors can't see themselves as consumers. They're Democrats. Apparently that's the difference.

.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
106. Dear Ralph: Please go f yourself. Thank you, Thinking Leftists. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #106
128. if you call that thinking
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #128
129. wrong place
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 09:27 PM by fascisthunter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #106
134. Others might describe such folks as "counterfeit liberals" rather than "thinking leftists."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #134
159. I worked for Nader in college. He's a meglomaniac.
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 08:25 AM by mistertrickster
He's never held elective office, but he runs for president.

That's pure Ralph. Don't do the hard work of actually governing within the existing system, just insure that the worst president ever gets into office and lies us into war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #159
190. And did Nader fire you?
I'm asking because your pesonal animosity towards Nader couldn't be more

obvious throughout the thread --

Ralph Nader has done more for the nation than most of our politicians --

In fact, just look at the damage that Obama has done and his term isn't up yet!


And, I'm sure what we need are more Democrats and Republicans pre-bought and

pre-owned by corporations -- :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 08:45 AM
Response to Reply #190
218. I worked for free. Kinda hard to fire a volunteer. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #218
231. I would guess that any "volunteer" with that much animosity for Nader ....
would be asked to leave --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #231
246. I didn't have animosity for him until I saw how he really was.
And how he treated people like me who believed in his causes.

If you're calling me a liar, well, I'm not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
108. You-u-u!


Better Believe It!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hun Joro Donating Member (511 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
109. Thank you! So tired of the pointless Nader-bashing.
The man deserves a great deal of credit for what he's done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libinnyandia Donating Member (526 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
110. Ralph Nader's legacy
      You forgot to include the Citizens United SCOTUS
decision. People were worried about Roe V Wade and didn't
think of any other issues. By the way, I worked as an
organizer for one the organzations he inspired- 8 years. 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
one_true_leroy Donating Member (807 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
121. You forgot _Still Life With Woodpecker_!
Just sayin...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue neen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
122. No problems with Nader here.
It's just interesting how you found a new plaything to deflect the positive attention away from Obama this week.

It's not the message here, it's the intent.

It's a free country. Enjoy yourself.

:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
125. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
126. Thanks -- pretty much everything we know about criminal capitalism and corrupt
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 10:09 PM by defendandprotect
government we know because of Ralph Nader --

We have FOIA because of him which they are still fighting against -- and which

gives you an idea of how much they need to hide --

Consumer protections -- many of the ideas we have about how to improve government

we have because of Nader --

And when it comes to corrupt and criminal elections it is Nader who is most often

challenging the private grip on our debates/elections -- !!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #126
137. He gave a big assist to everyone wanting to get the uncounted ballots in
Ohio counted back in 2004.

And he did it with far more enthusiasm than Kerry himself would bother mustering.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #137
146. Exactly -- we've had more fightback on election corruption from Nader than from Dem Party -- !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
130. REC... point made.... actions, not slogans
Edited on Wed Sep-21-11 09:28 PM by fascisthunter
and no, Nader is NOT responsible for Al Gore's loss... we know the truth now. It was stolen, and Nader was the patsy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
139. I'm going to throw it out there that both sides of the Nader debate have a point
Nader is an extremely accomplished man and he makes valid arguments about the two party system, the right-ward trend of the Democratic Party, and has good reason to challenge it.

It's also a very valid point that if a substantial amount of people who would've voted for Obama vote for him, then Obama will lose and the country will be worse off.

Both sides have extremely valid points and concerns. Maybe we should have a productive discussion about people could work together to reconcile the concerns of both sides of this debate. Oh wait, I forgot this is DU. Productive discussion threads sink like an anchor here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #139
147. The both sides argument doesn't work here either ... Those who voted for Nader would NOT
have voted for Gore -- but they did vote in Dems further down on the ticket --

the fact that Nader brought them out increased votes for Democrats, actually!!!

We need to stop living in FEAR of the RW -- didn't FDR make that clear?

Every time you vote for the "lesser evil" you move the Dem Party and the Congress

further to the right!!

Let's work to draft Sen. Bernie Sanders and for 2012 --

or two other democrats who aren't pre-bribed and pre-owned by corporations!


We need two strong anti-war candidates -- Obama is taking us into the second decade

on these wars --

We need two candidates who are strong on universal health care -- and who won't make

back room deals with Big Pharma and the private H/C industry!!

Or let the RW blackmail them on budget issues -- !!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #147
152. Exit polls show that some of them would've voted for Gore, some for Bush, some stayed home
And they also show that more would've voted for Gore than Bush, indicating a net loss for Gore.

Is that conclusive proof that Nader spoiled the 2000 election? No, it's not. Is it evidence that it's possible that Nader or another third party candidate could spoil a close election. Yes, it is.

The issue isn't black and white...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #152
165. "Some"...??? Some for Gore/Some for Bush -- so where does that leave you...???
And "some" would have stayed home --

In other words, Nader voters would have made absolutely NO difference to the

election had they not voted for Nader --

Even if "more" would have voted for Gore -- you still had 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida

who did vote for Bush! Any Nader voter who would have voted for Gore would NOT have

offset those 300,000 "Democratic" Bush voters in Florida.


Unless you want to ban third parties -- do you? -- your argument is moot --

In fact, OTHER THIRD PARTIES took hundreds of thousands of votes --

Do you want to ban them all?


What we absolutely do know is that Gore WON the 2000 election -- and that it was stolen --

Nader didn't control the computers -- Nader didn't stop the vote counting in Maimi-Dade

County -- and Nader isn't on the Supreme Court --


Without stopping that vote counting in Miami Dade County --

Without stopping the mandates of the Florida State Supreme Court --

Without the Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court there is no W Bush in the Oval office --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #165
179. Did you read my post or just the subject line?
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 05:06 PM by Hippo_Tron
The exit polls indicate more Nader voters that would've showed up would've voted for Gore than for Bush. In other words, they indicate that Nader was a net negative for Gore.

What we don't know is whether or not Katherine Harris could've simply pulled more Bush votes out of her ass, or "lost" some Gore votes if necessary. Or if the SCOTUS 5 would've maybe stopped the recount in a manner that had Bush winning. It's impossible to control for these things. Thus we really have no way of knowing if Nader really cost Gore the presidency.

Again, my argument was that if Nader peels off enough of the left vote, he COULD change the outcome of an election. I'm not arguing that he necessarily did in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #179
192. I read your post ... did you read mine?

Even if "more" would have voted for Gore -- you still had 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida

who did vote for Bush! Any Nader voter who would have voted for Gore would NOT have

offset those 300,000 "Democratic" Bush voters in Florida.



And, again, the question -- do you want to ban all third parties?



What we absolutely do know is that Gore WON the 2000 election -- and that it was stolen --

Nader didn't control the computers -- Nader didn't stop the vote counting in Miami-Dade

County -- and Nader isn't on the Supreme Court --


Without stopping that vote counting in Miami Dade County --

Without stopping the mandates of the Florida State Supreme Court --

Without the Gang of 5 on the Supreme Court there is no W Bush in the Oval office --


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #192
195. I did, I don't understand your argument about the 300,000 Democrats who voted for Bush
They were part of Bush's official vote total which was 500 more votes than Gore. How would 500 Nader voters having voted for Gore not offset them?

Is your argument that rather than complaining about Nader, we should be focusing on those 300,000 Dems who voted for Bush?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #195
210. If 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for W ... how is Nader responsible for W's "win" ... ???
You're evidently claiming that the 537 vote "win" by W were votes stolen by

Nader?

How do you know they weren't stolen by Buchahan -- or by the tens of thousands of

votes in Florida taken by OTHER third parties?

Or that they weren't the 600 military ballots illegally credited to Bush?

And how do you know that those 537 votes weren't one from 300,000 "Democrats" who

voted for W?


Evidently you're quite sure whose finger prints are on those 537 votes -- so just

tell me how you know --

In fact, during the actual aired recount, W was down to a 34 vote "win" when the

Supreme Court stopped the recount!


Additionally, you're completely ignoring the long list of RW interference with the

election -- from "caging" to ever other kind of intimidation -- and from the

GOP-sponsored fascist rally organized by John Roberts -- to the Supreme Court steal.


And, again -- Gore WON in 2000 -- no matter how you count the votes --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #210
220. well done... I really Wish People Would Stop Using Nader as the Patsy
I am not saying the poster you replied to is doing that intentionally but some are. We need better candidates who are left wing... no more staus quo, middle-of-the-road kill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #210
228. Again, where did I assert that Nader was responsible for W's "win"
As I said, there's no possible way to control for whether Gore would have won if Nader had not been in the race. What the exit polls show is that it is POSSIBLE Nader could cost a Democrat an election in the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #228
233. ROFL ... Now you want to deny that's what you've been suggesting ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #233
238. Did you read post #147 that you linked to?
It says...



Is that conclusive proof that Nader spoiled the 2000 election? No, it's not. Is it evidence that it's possible that Nader or another third party candidate could spoil a close election. Yes, it is.


That's exactly what I just said. There is no conclusive proof that Nader cost Gore the election. There is, however, evidence that he could cost a Democrat an election in the future?

What am I missing here? Where did I suggest that Nader cost Gore the election?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #238
239. What you're missing . . .
Edited on Sat Sep-24-11 02:07 AM by defendandprotect
is your own disingenuousness --

ROFL --

Bye --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-24-11 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #239
245. And this is precisely why we can't have productive discussion on DU
One person automatically assumes the other is disingenuous. Goodbye to you as well..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
140. THANK YOU! I love that this PISSED OFF the Nader haters!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
142. LOL! I see you kicked the hive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbie Jo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #142
163. Gee...wasn't that the point?
I see the OP has predictably abandoned this train wreck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zentrum Donating Member (125 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
150. Irrelevant.
While these are admirable and important accomplishments, they have nothing to do with his complete silence between elections during which he does nothing--nothing--to build a 3rd party or a movement. He just crops up every four years to make damn sure Bush or worse than Bush gets in.

I think he has an apocalyptic vision that it will only get better if it really implodes under a far right regime. Not unlike the phrase "to save the village, burn the village down".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
151. He's a better Democrat than 90% of all Democrats. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #151
214. +1 -- and KICK --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zeos3 Donating Member (912 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
157. KICK!
Thanks for this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
161. I think he might actually be overqualified to be president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #161
170. +1 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #161
193. +1000% --- !!!
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 05:42 PM by defendandprotect
I'd just add that when he ran in 2000, he didn't run on the Green Party Platform --

he had his own platform -- which was explosive democracy -- and could actually make

you cry that we've been here so long without such a platform!!!

Love Nader --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanSocDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
167. Kickin'....eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
181. And he blew all that to become far less than nothing. Amazing.
Edited on Thu Sep-22-11 05:14 PM by gulliver
The world is worse for Nader's having lived. A lot worse. Your list only makes the story more pitiful. Think where Nader would be now if he had stuck with the truth and not blown the election for Gore in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #181
187. 3 million people voted for Nader who couldn't support Leiberman or Bush. That's more than nothing!

Count to three million and tell me when your done with your "less than nothing" new math!

I think that among true liberals and progressives Ralph Nader has more respect than ever.

Isn't that right?

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #187
222. It sounds like those three million got what they wanted
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #181
194. Nader didn't "blow" anything --- Dem Party was smarting from corporate "duopoly" criticism by Nader
and were very anxious to get this critic off their backs -

Didn't work though -- never stopped Nader -- !!

Only wrong thing Nader ever did was to support Obama in 2008!!

As we have all learned from our own experiences with Obama -- !!


We need two strong anti-war candidates for 2012 --

Two candidates who are strongly for universal health care and who wouldn't

betray us in back room deals with Big Pharma and the private H/C industry!!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
186. Was someone attempting to suggest Nader is a do nothing guy??
K&R for his work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrMickeysMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
205. Clever, BBI!
I was ready to fight... then I read your OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mirrera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-22-11 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
206. I am not allowed to rec but I can kick...
There has been nothing lately worth logging in to comment on, but thank you for this. When I see Nader portrayed with such disrespect by Corporate Media, and the young and the gullible who know nothing about his history buy into this convenient portrayal, it makes me feel sick. Thank you for reminding us of real history!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
223. thank you
great post :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 08:28 PM
Response to Original message
229. He's done more regarding legisltation than most actual legislators.
Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
230. Nader was "instrumental" in gifting the nation w/Bush II & thus "helped" Americans to financial ruin
Edited on Fri Sep-23-11 08:42 PM by ClarkUSA
Funny how the same people who always sneeringly mock "teh list" don't mind one canonizing St. Ralph of GOP Campaign Funding, even if it's unsourced and thus unverifiable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestate10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-23-11 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
237. And a donut gets lots of reaction before it ends up in the gut of a coffee drinking
bozo. Now, what is your point?
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 Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion 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