REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Nader Announces New Bid for White House!

POSTED BY: SKYWALKEN
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 09:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1809
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:17 AM

SKYWALKEN


Quote:

Ralph Nader said Sunday he will run for president as a third-party candidate, criticizing the top White House contenders as too close to big business and pledging to repeat a bid that will "shift the power from the few to the many."

Nader, 73, said most people are disenchanted with the Democratic and Republican parties due to a prolonged Iraq war and a shaky economy. The consumer advocate also blamed tax and other corporate-friendly policies under the Bush administration that he said have left many lower- and middle-class people in debt.



http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080224/D8V0QN100.html

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 10:10 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Love his comment to the question as to whether his running in 2000 cost AlGore the election by taking away votes that would have gone to Gore..

" Get over it ! "



It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 2:16 PM

RIVERLOVE


Why would Nader decide to run? I mean really, he's just another Paul/Kucinich 4% fringe-vote getter, and his running will just hurt the Democrat nominee. I guess his over-inflated ego, and desperation to be a newsmaking semi-celebrity cloud any rational judgement to do the right thing and stay out.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 5:52 PM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by Riverlove:
Why would Nader decide to run? I mean really, he's just another Paul/Kucinich 4% fringe-vote getter, and his running will just hurt the Democrat nominee.



Your insinuation that this about the his ego and vanity couldn't be further off the mark. He's doing this for a very specific reason. His goal is the same as Ron Paul's, even if their politics are fundamentally different. Each is trying to remind his respective party of it's philosophical roots. Each of the major parties have lost touch with their core political philosophies.

The thing is, both parties have given up their 'sweet spots'. In my opinion, it's a lot better, maybe even crucial, for liberals to be good liberals and conservatives to be good conservatives. Both parties have been so enthusiastic about moving to the middle, that they've forgotten about the good things they once stood for. Liberals should be fighting for fairness and defending our civil liberties. Conservatives should keep the budget restrained and keep the government out of intrusive social engineering projects.

But over the last twenty years, the two parties have each veered toward the middle. They've reached the point where they differ very little on the fundamental concerns. They both believe that big powerful government is a good thing, as long as they're in charge.

People like Nadar, and Paul, and Kucinich, are the only candidates that really deserve our attention in the first place, because they clearly aren't egomaniacs looking for personal power. They're fighting for values that they truly believe in. They're promoting awareness of important issues and fighting for ideals that might just save our country.



SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 7:10 PM

BADKARMA00


You know, until I read SergeantX's post, I was gonna post something witty, (well I thought it was witty)

But he's made so very valid and accurate points. Maybe it's time to take a closer look at so called 'fringe' candidates. AND the reasons they're running.

Thanks Sarge.


Bad_karma
Great and Exalted Grand Pooba, International Brotherhood of Moonshiners, Rednecks, and Good Old Boys.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 7:50 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Well said, Sarge. Well said.

People are so entrenched in partisan politics that they fear, yes, fear third party candidates who "steal" votes from theirs. What they don't see is that the entire system is designed to corner voters into choosing the lesser of two perceived evils, rather than empowering voters to choose their ideals. If it weren't manipulating votes, the system would allow run-off voting where 3rd party candidates would be a welcome option.

--------------------------
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
--H. L. Mencken

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:23 PM

HKCAVALIER


"What they don't see is that the entire system is designed to corner voters into choosing the lesser of two perceived evils..."

I'm not so sure the voters are being exactly cornered. Our system is all about finding the "winner." America loves a winner right now, more than she loves liberty, virtue and humanity combined. The question is no longer, who shares my position on issues, but who can I back to win. People want to back a winner more than anything. More than anything. They want their team to win. It is the enemy of democracy and it's as American as apple pie.

On the other hand, one thing I like to see in a President is the ability to show good, pragmatic, humane judgement. This ability (or lack thereof) can be observed at any point in the election process. Nader says Obama "lacks substance" and Obama praises him as an "heroic figure." Clinton does nothing but demean Nader in her comments. I say Obama wins the point for good, pragmatic and humane judgement. And I see that guy making these points every day. I'm with Nader: if Obama can't walk away with this election, then the dems should simply disband.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, February 24, 2008 9:34 PM

HKCAVALIER


Oh crap! On the google homepage there's an article about Castro's son and the picture is of Nader. Yeah, that's a mistake...

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 2:02 AM

FREMDFIRMA


To be honest I think both the Dem and Rep parties and their whole organisations should be subjected to prosecution under the RICO acts.

Just sayin that will prolly sent Hero into a tack spitting frenzy, but they do in fact meet the criteria for a RICO case, let him try to deny that, heh.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 2:40 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
To be honest I think both the Dem and Rep parties and their whole organisations should be subjected to prosecution under the RICO acts.



Hear, hear! RICO their asses. LOL.

(I guess I lost that point for "sound, humane judgement." But I petitioned on the streets to get our Libertarian candidate on the ballot while pregnant, through rain and shine, and then got rejected because we got only 15K instead of 16K signatures required--and it wasn't all our fault--so I feel some right to be judgmental.)

--------------------------
Any fool can make a rule
And any fool will mind it.
--Henry David Thoreau

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 3:52 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
To be honest I think both the Dem and Rep parties and their whole organisations should be subjected to prosecution under the RICO acts.

Just sayin that will prolly sent Hero into a tack spitting frenzy, but they do in fact meet the criteria for a RICO case, let him try to deny that, heh.


I think your half right...Democrats anyway...

That said...I think you have no clue about what RICO really is or how it works.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 4:12 AM

ANTIMASON


Quote:

Riverlove- Why would Nader decide to run? I mean really, he's just another Paul/Kucinich 4% fringe-vote getter, and his running will just hurt the Democrat nominee. I guess his over-inflated ego, and desperation to be a newsmaking semi-celebrity cloud any rational judgement to do the right thing and stay out.


any split of the democrat vote is a good thing isnt it? hes likely not to steal any would-be Paul supporters, so as far as im concerned its a good thing. and as everyone has stated, it sends a good message to the establishment that we may have finally woken up to the charade

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 5:40 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Zero, why do you always make it so easy for me ?

So, if you got two crooks on your docket, one from each party, both guilty as sin, you'd decline to prosecute the Republican ?

So much for equal justice, right ?

Or is it that you believe Republicans do not commit crimes ?
I'd love to watch you try to argue that one.

And yes, I *DO* know how RICO works, and both parties and their leadership could indeed be effectively prosecuted under the act for both it's direct violation and conspiracy to violate under Section 1962(d)

Let's see...

Fraud.
Bribery.
Embezzlement.
Money Laundering.
Securities Fraud.
Bankruptcy Fraud.
Blackmail.
Extortion.
Extortion under Color of official right - 1962(c)III
(Swiping property under Eminent Domain for the financial gain of contributors/participants)
Drug Trafficking.
Actions Detrimental to Interstate Commerce.
Bringing, or aiding and abetting the entry of illegal immigrants for profit of self and/or contributors/participants.

Golly gee, you think I can find the TWO of those needful to prosecute, hmm, lemme think here...

And that's the SHORT list.

No one would ever have the balls to do it, but most assuredly you could nail both mainstream parties, and probably a couple of third parties, to the wall on that stuff.

Hell, you could nail most police depts - didn't they bust like, the whole Key West PD under it back in the mid-80s ?

That's the problem with cooking up shit so vague it could mean ANYTHING, and then using it as a lever against those you don't like....

Some day, someone can point that weapon at YOU.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 6:20 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Let's see...

Fraud.
Bribery.
Embezzlement.
Money Laundering.
Securities Fraud.
Bankruptcy Fraud.
Blackmail.
Extortion.
Extortion under Color of official right - 1962(c)III
(Swiping property under Eminent Domain for the financial gain of contributors/participants)
Drug Trafficking.
Actions Detrimental to Interstate Commerce.
Bringing, or aiding and abetting the entry of illegal immigrants for profit of self and/or contributors/participants.

Golly gee, you think I can find the TWO of those needful to prosecute, hmm, lemme think here...

Hell, you could nail most police depts - didn't they bust like, the whole Key West PD under it back in the mid-80s ?


Which just shoes you simply don't have a clue as to how RICO really works. I'd explain it to you, but you'd have to pay me...cause it'll take some time.

On the subject of Nader, I for one am glad he's running. As a life long Republican and someone very concerned about the enviroment I can't help but be overjoyed that once more Mr. Nader will help sweep my party into power thus delaying the greatest threat to this country's business enviroment and economic climate...the Democratic Party.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 6:29 AM

DEADLOCKVICTIM


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:

As a life long Republican and someone very concerned about the enviroment]



ROTFLMAO.....

we should start every Monday off with jokes like that..



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 7:49 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Nice dodge, I notice you didn't answer any of the posed questions, but I never expected you to.

It does, however, really take the thunder out of my mullicrusher here when I try to make you look like an ass, and you deprive me of that by beating me to the punch yourself.

You and I both know the RICO act was written with provisions so vague you could probably indict the Boy Scouts with it, and this was done deliberately to avoid all that nasty letter of the law and due process hassle when the Government decided to eliminate it's free enterprise competitor - the Mafia.

Of the two, some days I wonder if they wouldn't have done a better job, at least they're up front about the graft and what you get for it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 8:20 AM

ANTIMASON


Quote:

Hero- On the subject of Nader, I for one am glad he's running. As a life long Republican and someone very concerned about the enviroment I can't help but be overjoyed that once more Mr. Nader will help sweep my party into power thus delaying the greatest threat to this country's business enviroment and economic climate...the Democratic Party.


im sort of torn on this issue, because should McCain win the nomination, his presidency will just further undermine the growing constitutional movement going on in the party; most republicans will just rally behind McCain and go back to business as usual. besides, he would guarantee a loss 4 yrs from now, after 12 yrs of republican 'rule' in the WH(the dems would have a field day).

McCain has both the Bushs endorsements for crying out loud... no body likes Bush because hes proven that he was never a real conservative, and we've lost control of the house and senate in response. we dont need another fake, CFR conservative running the country into the ground.. let the democrats take the blame next

i dont know if its good to remain in control at this point, i am tempted to believe we need a loss, to further galvanize the party, in hopes that it will return to its roots(similar to the Republican congress under Clinton). we're just offering more of the same with McCain, itll only empower liberals who dont understand real conservatism and continue to degrade the party platform. another pseudo-con in the white house isnt gonna happen, the democrats will tear him apart, theyd much rather have a professed liberal then an isle jumper


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 8:38 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Is Nader's job to steal votes from Billary and Obama, or steal votes from Ron Paul?

Why didn't Nader enter the race ealier?

Would a Ron Paul / Ralph Nader ticket win the general election?

I was Nader's chauffeur and interviewer, once upon a time. But the Green Party of Knoxville TN fired me after 24 hours, for posting Nader's speech on the new official website I posted the week of the election. So the Green Party was totally controlled by the Jewish/Italian mafia running garbage/nuke/cartheft/chopshop cartel in 2000.
http://www.geocities.com/ralph_nader_interview

Nader was right that the Demorats and Republicons are the same NAFTA Party.



The Summer Glau Chronicles: Free download of all episodes
http://www.fox.com/fod/player.htm?show=tscc

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 2:07 PM

ANTIMASON


Quote:

Originally posted by piratenews:
Is Nader's job to steal votes from Billary and Obama, or steal votes from Ron Paul?



initially i was suspicious of his entry, i assumed it was an establishment attempt to dilute the Paul vote, but it wont work like that. the Paul supporters are likely to stay put, since they are probably the most informed electorate of any candidate or party. Nader can really only steal votes from McCain and the two socialists, since the establishment candidates have made this a debate of semantics, just differing forms of collectivism. im not sure Naders views, but hes likely only to reach disenchanted democrats



Quote:



Would a Ron Paul / Ralph Nader ticket win the general election?



i get the impression Nader would hurt Paul, i dont think they're ideologically consistent.. but maybe you know Naders policies better then i. ill have to check him out again

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, February 25, 2008 7:05 PM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:


The thing is, both parties have given up their 'sweet spots'. In my opinion, it's a lot better, maybe even crucial, for liberals to be good liberals and conservatives to be good conservatives. Both parties have been so enthusiastic about moving to the middle, that they've forgotten about the good things they once stood for. Liberals should be fighting for fairness and defending our civil liberties. Conservatives should keep the budget restrained and keep the government out of intrusive social engineering projects.

But over the last twenty years, the two parties have each veered toward the middle. They've reached the point where they differ very little on the fundamental concerns. They both believe that big powerful government is a good thing, as long as they're in charge.




Well, there's a reason for that and it's that the middle is where the votes are. How many people do you know who would like a conservative economic policy without the government being in their bedrooms or preaching in their schools? How many folks would want some level of safety net for the truly unfortunate but don't want a socialist superstate? Real America lives in the space between the activist wings of the two main parties. To get elected you need that middle vote and part of that is convincing folks that if you get elected you won't let your wingnuts mess with their lives.

That's why both parties exist in that middle space. Tell middleclass America that you will legislate the morality of a small group of religious nutjobs and you see how many votes you get. tell middleclass America that you'll tax them into oblivion and see how many votes you'd get. Of course YOU won't tell them that, but that is all your opponent is doing and so your only real recourse is to appear as bland and unthreatening as possible.






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:10 AM

JONGSSTRAW


Ralph Nader in 2000 = 2.7% of Presidential vote
Ralph Nader in 2004 = 0.4% of Presidential vote

So who the heck does this guy think he is? He hasn't really done anything significant since he railroaded the Chevrolet Corvair out of production back in the early 1960's. He's made a living, and earned a reputation based on lies and fudged statistics. He's just another irrelevent lunatic-fringe magnet.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 4:04 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Well, there's a reason for that and it's that the middle is where the votes are. How many people do you know who would like a conservative economic policy without the government being in their bedrooms or preaching in their schools? How many folks would want some level of safety net for the truly unfortunate but don't want a socialist superstate? Real America lives in the space between the activist wings of the two main parties.



This is the line they sell us. And it's exactly what I'm calling bullshit on. The middle, the one that both parties have moved to, is exactly the opposite of "economically conservative and socially liberal". It seems the one thing the two major parties can agree on is that they need more power to spend our money and interfere in our lives. What we want isn't in the space between the two major parties and we've got to break out of that dead-end notion.



SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 8:02 AM

FLETCH2


Quote:

Originally posted by SergeantX:


This is the line they sell us. And it's exactly what I'm calling bullshit on. The middle, the one that both parties have moved to, is exactly the opposite of "economically conservative and socially liberal".



SergeantX





Ok my bad, I was in a hurry and thought I was being clearer than I ended up being. I wasn't saying that all of "the middle" had a common set of values different from those of the major parties, if that was true then making a 3rd party would be a no brainer. What I was trying to say is that real Americans fail the ideological purity test as applied by the activist wings of the major parties.

For example there are liberal gun owners that want to uphold gun rights, there are people on the left that are prolife. There are folks on the right who favor some types of social safety net and who want to keep religion out of schools. Real people sit in the middle and are presented with two imperfect choices that they have to decide between.

In reality although the "middle" doesnt have a consensus view on much they generally favour stability over chaos. IF things are ok for them they are less likely to want a radical change that could make things worse. In that climate the radical activist ideas of both major parties are likely to get a rough reception in favour of teh status quo. No party is likely to want to appear too radical compared to the other, they both camp out in the same middle area looking for the same voters.

Now if things go bad, if the middle no longer finds the status quo comfortable then we would potentially see interest in voting for more radical solutions. We're not at that point...yet.

One thing that folks in the big/small/no government debate often ignore is that most voters don't care. They elect governments to ensure their economic and personal security not for any huge ideological reason. A guy that gets a part of his income from welfare isn't likely to vote for a party that would cut it, you can assume he will act in his own economic self interest. On the other hand a guy that pays high taxation is likely to vote for a party that promises to cut taxes out of his self interest. Government is a service industry, something you really want to contract to look after certain things for you and then forget about while you get on with living your life.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:36 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:

Originally posted by Fletch2:
For example there are liberal gun owners that want to uphold gun rights, there are people on the left that are prolife. There are folks on the right who favor some types of social safety net and who want to keep religion out of schools. Real people sit in the middle and are presented with two imperfect choices that they have to decide between.



Is see. In that case, we're much closer to agreeing than not. I think a large part of the problem is the way we've framed the debate. By focusing merely on 'right and left' we ignore any other axis of comparison. That's why I think things like the Nolan chart are so important to bring into the discussion. I'm assuming you've seen it, or will go look it up, but essentially it adds another axis to the political map and tracks the leanings of parties toward powerful, authoritarian government as opposed to the smaller, constitutionally limited variety.

I think getting away from they myopic attention to the leftness or rightness of a position would shed light on some things that are out of balance. For instance, I believe that if the current situation were represented on a Nolan chart, we would find that both parties are much further up the authoritarian ladder than most people are comfortable with.

You're right that the consensus is never likely to favor any radical ideology (though I would submit it certainly HAS before and that that was a key element in the founding of our nation). But by squeezing everything into the left/right spectrum and ignoring all the other ways of looking at it, our press does us a grave disservice, and obscures real imbalances and dangerous trends.

Quote:

One thing that folks in the big/small/no government debate often ignore is that most voters don't care.


I guess this follows on my previous point. I think they'd care a great deal if the authoritarian vs. libertarian aspect of things recieved as much attention as left/right divide does. But most people are never going to think much about stuff that isn't covered by mainstream media. So in that sense, they decide what matters and we're stuck with it.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, March 28, 2024 02:07 - 3408 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Wed, March 27, 2024 23:21 - 987 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, March 27, 2024 22:19 - 2069 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Wed, March 27, 2024 15:03 - 824 posts
NBC News: Behind the scenes, Biden has grown angry and anxious about re-election effort
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:58 - 2 posts
BUILD BACK BETTER!
Wed, March 27, 2024 14:45 - 5 posts
RFK Jr. Destroys His Candidacy With VP Pick?
Wed, March 27, 2024 11:59 - 16 posts
Russia says 60 dead, 145 injured in concert hall raid; Islamic State group claims responsibility
Wed, March 27, 2024 10:57 - 49 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Wed, March 27, 2024 07:58 - 6153 posts
Ha. Haha! HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!
Tue, March 26, 2024 21:26 - 1 posts
You can't take the sky from me, a tribute to Firefly
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:26 - 293 posts
Tucker Carlson
Tue, March 26, 2024 16:24 - 132 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL