Nader throws out the name of Mayor Bloomberg as ideal candidate to take on corporate interests

[WI_DEM]

Former Green Party candidate Ralph Nader wants Mike Bloomberg to jump into this year’s Presidential race, because he believes New York City’s billionaire Mayor is the ideal person to take on “the establishment” and “the corporate state.”

Mr. Nader made his comments about the Mayor in a new video posted on Politico today. His call to draft Mayor Bloomberg isn’t so much an endorsement as it is a desire to see a third party candidate emerge in this year’s race.

http://www.politickerny.com/2011/10/11/ralph-nader-wants-mike-bloomberg-to-run-for-president/

[cui bono]

1. Would Bloomberg do that? Not run, but take on corporate interests? n/t

[Scurrilous]

2. @#$% Ralph Nader.

:P

[potone]

3. WTF N/T

:crazy:

[maddezmom]

4. well atleast he's being honest about looking for someone to run 3rd party

against Obama and not hiding behind finding a candidate for a primary. :eyes:

[WI_DEM]

5. You're right in saying honest about looking for somebody to run third party against Obama

and guarantee a GOP victory. After all it's doubtful that Bloomberg would get many republican voters but it is possible some dem or dem leaning independents might vote for Bloomberg particularly in the Northeast, which just happens to be the most democratic of the sections of the country.

[Scuba]

6. Bloomy is the "corporate state". n/t

[AtomicKitten]

7. Bloomberg defended the banks against OWS, and that makes Nader a hypocrite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yueyFs4GoJ4

[Bobbie Jo]

12. Of course, many of us already knew this.

Wonder how much the R's are funneling to him to make this happen. They know they have a slate of losers on their hands. Bloomberg would be the next best thing.

[Luminous Animal]

26. Except Nader never claimed that Bloomberg is the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests.

The OP and the linked Politicker article are dealing in truthiness*


*Truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or that it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.


Watch the video:

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001

[EdMaven]

28. well what did he claim? my computer is slow & video is aggravating sometimes,

can you just state the case?

[Luminous Animal]

34. He mentioned that it would take someone very wealthy to be able to run a political

campaign in order to challenge the two party system.

Not once did he state that Bloomberg would be ideal for anything but having enough money (ala Ross Perot) to self-fund a national campaign.

[EdMaven]

41. thanks.

[Luminous Animal]

21. Before smearing Nader perhaps you should get your facts straight and actually

listen to the Politico video.

Nader never claims (he doesn't even hint) that Bloomberg is the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests.

I remember when we used to do due diligence on this site and mock people for promoting "truthiness"*

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001


*Truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or that it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.

[AtomicKitten]

80. I've got my facts straight just fine, thanks.

Facts:
1. Bloomberg sided with the banks and against OWS in the video I provided.
2. Nader encouraged Bloomberg to run.

I trust you can do the math on that. If not, that's your problem.

[Luminous Animal]

85. Indeed, his encouragement is to advocate for ANYONE to run. And he never once claimed that Bloomberg

is an ideal candidate to take on corporate interests so your video rebuttal is irrelevant.


Nader:
"“I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run …

[AtomicKitten]

88. Did I claim he said Bloomberg was an ideal candidate? No, I didn't.

Chill the fuck out.

[markpkessinger]

8. Nader's advancing age is taking its toll on his mental capacity n/t

[undeterred]

23. Nicely put.

[Luminous Animal]

30. Except Nader never said what the OP & the linked article claims he said.

DU is getting as bad as FR for not doing due diligence and checking their facts. I suppose as long as it is Nader, it is okay to jump on the truthiness* train.

Here is the Politico video where not once does Nader make the claim that Bloomberg would be the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests.

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001

*Truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or that it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts

[Drale]

9. Nader needs to take the hint and

GO THE FUCK AWAY!!

[chill_wind]

10. This makes

zero sense. Zero.

[leveymg]

11. Hizzoner, Mike Bloomberg IS the Corporate State & the Establishment. Nader must have Alzheimer's.

The perfect guy to "take them on?" Cheez Louis. What a perfectly daft thing for Ralph to utter. Utterly stupid.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Except he never said what the OP claims he said.

Watch the damn video.

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001

[leveymg]

73. You're right, the header & opening sentence of the story is a bit misleading

The second sentence is completely accurate: "Mr. Nader made his comments about the Mayor in a new video posted on Politico today. His call to draft Mayor Bloomberg isn’t so much an endorsement as it is a desire to see a third party candidate emerge in this year’s race."

Most people don't read that far.

But, Ralph did a lot a damage in '00, particularly in FL, and a lot of folks around here still haven't forgiven him. Personally, I have some stomach acid problems about 3rd Party candidates who, even for the best of reasons, throw elections to the GOP. I also agree with Ralph's main point that we're trapped into a 2 Party Corporate Dictatorship in America.

[Lizzie Poppet]

13. Ralph, go back to sleep.

And while you're snoozing, FFS please don't dream of another vanity candidacy. Last time you did that, you got us W. Given all you've done for the people, that can be forgiven...once. Twice? Don't push your luck.

[lunatica]

14. Wow! Talk about an alternate reality!

In what universe Nader?

[mmonk]

15. He has jumped the shark.

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. I think NOT! Are you fucking kidding me, Ralph? BLOOMBERG? You can't do better than that?

:puke:

[Luminous Animal]

20. Except he never said what the OP or Politck NY claims he said.

Do people not take the time to confirm anything anymore?

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001

[in_cog_ni_to]

42. At the 4:10 mark he said: "I'd like to see Bloomberg Run" He most certainly DID say it.

Do people not take the time to confirm anything anymore before they correct others?

[Luminous Animal]

48. What the fuck? Did I claim he never said that? No I did not.

I have consistently challenged two fabrications.

#1 The title of the OP : "Nader throws out the name of Mayor Bloomberg as ideal candidate to take on corporate interests" Nader never said tha.

and

#2 The first paragraph of the OP (quoted from Politicker) "Former Green Party candidate Ralph Nader wants Mike Bloomberg to jump into this year’s Presidential race, because he believes New York City’s billionaire Mayor is the ideal person to take on “the establishment” and “the corporate state.”"

Both make claims that are flat out lies.

[in_cog_ni_to]

53. Watch the video again. Starting at 1.:04 to about the 2:25 mark he discusses the

establishment and corporations and how it will take someone with money, like Ross Perot....to fight it. You're just parsing words. He said pretty much the same thing the OP said he said...just in a different way.

[WilliamPitt]

17. Ow. My brain.

This is the guy who said last week that "We have to support the banks."

Um...Ralph? Love ya, buddy, but I think you cinched that seatbelt a little too tight.

[RegieRocker]

94. Dementia

[Luminous Animal]

18. Nader says no such thing. Watch the damn Politico video. Not once does Nader

claim that Bloomberg would be an ideal candidate to take on "corporate interests" let alone "the establishment" or "the corporate state".

Politcker NY quite simply fabricated their entire 1st paragraph.

[WinkyDink]

32. Where was this video from 2001--2008? He's pushing a PRIMARY CHALLENGE. WHERE WAS THIS IN

2004?

[SkyDaddy7]

19. Where are all the Nader Worshipers?

I guess they are doing the mental gymnastics to come up with a way to say Nader is on the little guys side...I wonder how many will still argue their vote for him in 2000 was the correct thing to do? (Instead of the "Right" thing to do!)


...I am still SICK & DISGUSTED that Nader did what he did in 2000...He literally changed the world & this country for the worse! FUCK!!! And now we know why! He is a Right Wing hack!

[Luminous Animal]

22. Instead of falling all over myself and believe the blatent fabrication stated in the OPs

link, I watched the Politico video.

Nader makes zero claims that Bloomberg would be the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests. Zero.

http://videoshare.politico.com/largevideobox.php?bcpid=15202024001&bckey=AQ~~,AAAAAETmrZQ~,EVFEM4AKJdTuyIpuP1qAGTXNjTDbKHvZ&bclid=1201016315&bctid=1206959564001

[WinkyDink]

33. He says exactly that Bloomberg would make a good 3rd-Party candidate. AND says, "I'd like to see

Bloomberg run." Then he throws in other names, except he spends no time on them.

[Luminous Animal]

43. And nowhere did he claim this,"Nader throws out the name of Mayor Bloomberg as ideal candidate to

take on corporate interests".

Nor does he say this: "Nader wants Mike Bloomberg to jump into this year’s Presidential race, because he believes New York City’s billionaire Mayor is the ideal person to take on “the establishment” and “the corporate state.”

The above claims are nowhere in the video.

The OP and the linked articles are flat out fabrications.

He says Bloomberg would be a good 3rd party candidate solely because he could self-finance a national campaign to challenge the two party system.

[SomethingFishy]

58. Well I worship no one but I voted for Nader in 2000

Gore looked like a complete fucking idiot in his campaign. I spoke to him a few years after and he admitted he lost because he ran a shitty campaign. So blaming the 2000 Supreme Court decision on Nader is bizarre to say the least.

The other thing I don't get is what is the obsession with him here? THere seems to be a post every day trying to convince people that Nader is some Evil Overlord. He's just another fucking guy. About as useful as Joe The Plumber these days.

[SkyDaddy7]

66. Had Gore been selected by the SCOTUS...

Everyone would have said he ran a good campaign...That is how all campaigns go.

Nader is nothing more than an attention whore...And he fooled a lot of people in 2000...Or should I say Nader fooled "enough people" in 2000.

[SomethingFishy]

75. I agree about the "attention whore" thing but that could be

said of all politicians. And no one will ever say Gore ran a good campaign, including Gore himself. Had he dumped his loser handlers, and been himself he would have won easily. He actually did win. The guy got more votes than his opponent. A legal recount of the Florida votes was stopped by the Supreme Court and the election was handed to Bush. It had nothing to do with Nader.

I find it funny that Obama's most ardent supporters are all for "moving forward" on things like prosecuting Wall Street criminals or Bush administration War Criminals but when it comes to Nader and an 11 year old election moving forward is not an option.

[undeterred]

24. RONALD MCDONALD should take on the corporate interests.

Oh, wait.

:blush:

[WinkyDink]

25. HE is OUT of it! He also thinks RON PAUL SHOULD RUN. EARTH to RALPH: Paul IS!

[EdMaven]

27. .

[truebrit71]

29. Further proof that Ralphie is getting senile...

...

[backwoodsbob]

35. GODDAMNIT people

the OP is BS!

Wake up

[WinkyDink]

37. I'm watching it right now. Sorry, these claims of BS are the BS.

[Luminous Animal]

44. So, at what minute and second does he make this claim:

Mayor Bloomberg an ideal candidate to take on corporate interests

or this

""Nader wants Mike Bloomberg to jump into this year’s Presidential race, because he believes New York City’s billionaire Mayor is the ideal person to take on “the establishment” and “the corporate state.”"

Both statements are fabrications.

[in_cog_ni_to]

47. 4:10....check it out. n/t

[Luminous Animal]

52. Does he say at 4:10 that Bloomberg is the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests?

Does he state at 4:10 that Bloomberg is the ideal candidate to take on the corporate state?

No he does not. The title of the OP and the 1st paragraph are made up out of whole cloth.


What Nader says is that only a wealthy person like Bloomberg would be able to mount a national campaign to take on the 2 party system. That is all.

[in_cog_ni_to]

59. The OP didn't say he said that. That's the OP's opinion of what he said.

And it's all the same difference because that's basically what he said in the video.

[Luminous Animal]

63. And Al Gore invented the internet. Opinions can be challenged for their veracity

and I challenge the OP.

The only thing that Nader came close to claiming that Bloomberg would be ideal for is having enough money to mount a viable national campaign to challenge the entrenched two party system.

He never even hinted that Bloomberg would take on corporate interests, ideally or otherwise.

[in_cog_ni_to]

45. BULLSHIT! Go watch the video. Fast forward to 4:10 mark where Nader says:

"I would like to see Bloomberg run." He said it.

[Luminous Animal]

54. Jeesus. My compaint is with the fabricated title of the OP and the fabricated

1st paragraph.

Address those two blatant lies or leave me alone.

And how convenient of you to leave bolster your argument with a snip that serves to change Nader's point.

""“I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run … I’d like to see Ron Paul, or someone who is a libertarian Tea Party type run, because the Tea Party in a way reflected the conservative wing of the Republican Party that have been disrespected by the corporate wing.”"

[in_cog_ni_to]

62. Your beef with that paragraph isn't in quotes. It's the OP's opinion.

The parts in quotes are what he did say. Now I'll leave you alone. Buh bye. :hi:

[Luminous Animal]

64. I love sweet surrender.

[in_cog_ni_to]

78. You misconstrued.

No surrender. I'm right. You're wrong. :evilgrin: :hi:

[Luminous Animal]

56. To give voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg, run...Hightower run...McKibben run...

"“I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run … I’d like to see Ron Paul, or someone who is a libertarian Tea Party type run, because the Tea Party in a way reflected the conservative wing of the Republican Party that have been disrespected by the corporate wing.”

[JVS]

36. I guess if one follows the logic that to defy the corporate interests one should BE one.

I'm not too keen on that idea.

[backscatter712]

38. This is pants-on-head fucking stupid!

Bloomberg?

[Rambis]

39. That was my skull I'm so wasted!

[WinkyDink]

40. Pro-Naders are disputing exact quotes. The GIST = NADER WANTS A PRIMARY CHALLENGE.

So where was he from 2001--2008???

[Luminous Animal]

46. Democratically participating in our national electoral politics.

[fascisthunter]

49. um... is he feeling ok?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

50. THIS is the guy that they want to have debating Obama

from the left? Huh?

:wtf:

[Luminous Animal]

60. Except he never said that Bloomberg would be the ideal candidate to take on corporate interests.

Not once.

Nor does he state that Bloomberg would be the ideal candidate to take on the establishment or the corporate state.

Not once.

The title and the first paragraph of the OP are utter and complete fabrications.

So :wtf: right back at you.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

74. O.k. I admit that I didn't read the entire article

No need to get all nasty about it though. :shrug:

[Better Believe It]

51. Nader would also like to see Jim Hightower run, Dr. Quentin Young run, etc.,

"“I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run … I’d like to see Ron Paul, or someone who is a libertarian Tea Party type run, because the Tea Party in a way reflected the conservative wing of the Republican Party that have been disrespected by the corporate wing.”

I think Nader believes someone like Bloomberg with a big campaign fund would split the Republican vote. While that certainly would, I don't think that any progressives should advocate that. It makes more sense for someone like Hightower to run because they would certainly advocate a progressive agenda.

[Motown_Johnny]

55. Also nominates Fox to guard hen house

[Better Believe It]

57. And who nominated Tim Geithner to protect Wall Street fat cats?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

61. Bloomberg is the richest person in New York.

He's not even the 1%. He's the .000000001%. :rofl:

Nader's an idiot.

[ProSense]

65. .

“In area after area, you know, whether it’s consumer fairness, single payer health insurance, full medicare for all, for example, cracking down on corporate crime, a really new kind of tax system, the two parties are too hooked into the establishment, the corporate state that they can’t change. And so, if you ever put that agenda out in front of people it would be spectacular, especially if the candidate had enough money to reach those people. … Let’s say a Bloomberg runs, it would be a three way race in every sense of the term, because he could write a check for $500 million.”

:rofl:

[Luminous Animal]

67. Hmmm? Maybe you can go back and fill in that ellipsis.

[ProSense]

68. Um

"Hmmm? Maybe you can go back and fill in that ellipsis."

...why, to hear more justification for Nader's absurd point?

Why the hell is he even mentioning Bloomberg? (and that bullshit about making the process more democratic doesn't fly). There are a bunch of Republicans running and none of them are doing or have any intention of doing anything to advance democracy.

On edit: Your defense of Nader is basically accusing people of not listening to the video, which is really not a defense.

[Luminous Animal]

71. My defense of Nader is pointing out that he did not say what the OP claims he said.

The only way to verify that is to listen to the video.

[ProSense]

72. Well

"My defense of Nader is pointing out that he did not say what the OP claims he said."

...that's not a good defense. Nader made a case and threw out Bloomberg's name as someone who he'd like to see run. What the hell for?

[Luminous Animal]

76. In the same breath he said he'd like to see Jim Hightower run, Bill McKibben, & Dr. Young.

Nader wasn't talking about Bloomberg, per se, he was talking about third party and primary challenges.

"“I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run …

[ProSense]

77. Hmmm?

"Nader wasn't talking about Bloomberg, per se, he was talking about third party and primary challenges."

He said he'd like to see him run, it was a definitive statement and he mentioned why: money.

Is he recruiting Republican candidates as good for the country?

Why mention Bloomberg?

[Luminous Animal]

81. Actually, when he was referring to someone with money, he said "A" Bloomberg.

He could have used any fat cat as an illustration and who knows, maybe the interviewer was the 1st to throw the name Bloomberg out there in a question we never get to hear. His name has certainly been bandied about in the "No Labels" movement.

It is clear from the video that Bloomberg was not presented as a champion in any way shape or form but rather, used illustratively in that it takes a vast amount of personal wealth to mount a credible 3rd party challenge.

[ProSense]

87. Look

He could have used any fat cat as an illustration and who knows, maybe the interviewer was the 1st to throw the name Bloomberg out there in a question we never get to hear. His name has certainly been bandied about in the "No Labels" movement.

It is clear from the video that Bloomberg was not presented as a champion in any way shape or form but rather, used illustratively in that it takes a vast amount of personal wealth to mount a credible 3rd party challenge.

...Nader sucks, and nothing can justify promoting Bloomberg as a candidate.

Steve Benen

* NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) doesn’t want any tax increases on the wealthy and has been an opponent of the Occupy Wall Street movement. So naturally, Ralph Nader, a few weeks after praising Sarah Palin’s intelligence, is advocating a Bloomberg presidential campaign. I don’t think it’s my imagination that Nader is getting crazier.

I almost forgot about the Palin praise:

“I think she’s a lot smarter than most people credit her,” says Nader. “Judging by her comments, she is squarely in the camp of conservative populism, opposed to corporatism and its corporate state.”

:rofl:

[Luminous Animal]

89. I see your truthiness. I see your snipped together quote stringing separate thoughts together

in an attempt to create a situation that does not exist. I see that every Nader critic uses the same snipped together quote and I reject such tactics that serve to obfuscate rather than illuminate.

[Cali_Democrat]

69. What a douchebag. n/t

[mdmc]

70. Oh SNAP!

Bloomie in the house!

[Number23]

79. The desperate attempts to spin this thread as lies ("LIES!!one) are almost as hilarious as Nader's

endorsement of Michael freaking Bloomberg.

:rofl: :rofl: Oh Lord, my sides. :rofl:

[Luminous Animal]

82. How about you come up with examples to support the OPs "opinion". Nobody else can.

[Number23]

84. Do yourself a favor. Hit "Hide Thread" on this thread and find something else to do.

[Luminous Animal]

86. No.

[Number23]

90. Your choice. (shrugs) Just means alot more unintentional comedy for the rest of us.

[Luminous Animal]

91. How about you come up with examples to support the OPs "opinion". Nobody else can.

Looking forward to your surrender screed when all you have left is to tell me that you look forward to my tombstone.

[Number23]

92. You are arguing with everyone in this thread AS USUAL

demanding things that only YOU care about.

No one is under any obligation to tailor their comments to fit your deranged world view. Like I said, you need to hit Hide Thread and find something else to do.

[Number23]

83. Oh Lord, this just gets better and better

"I’d almost like to see anybody run, just to give the voters more choices. I’d like to see Bloomberg run, I’d like to see Jim Hightower run. I’d like to see Bill McKibben run, I’d like to see the champion of single payer, Dr. Quentin Young, run … I’d like to see Ron Paul, or someone who is a libertarian Tea Party type run, because the Tea Party in a way reflected the conservative wing of the Republican Party that have been disrespected by the corporate wing.”

Qualifications be damned! Step right up and run for president. You're already Ralph Nader's ideal candidate just cuz you're running! :rofl:

And Ralph, Ron Paul IS running you big duffus!

Oh Lord, my sides!!!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[mdmc]

93. this is what democracy looks like

the dlc is all scared of any change to the corporate two party system..

[Donnachaidh]

95. that's it -- Nader's a schitzophrenic

Gloomberg an ideal candidate? Oh my -- someone needs an adjustment to his meds - stat.

[JNelson6563]

96. Nader once again revealing he's out of touch with reality.

And yet the usual cadre of DUers still swoon at the mention of his name.

Julie