Nader is in

[kjoe]

Originally posted by J_Train@Feb 20 2004, 05:18 PM
You know, you would think the dems would have learned something from the last election in which Nader "ruined" the vote for their guy. But they havent. Instead of getting back to principles they are concerned only with electability. It's a shame.
It may just come back to bite them again.

Have I learned something, or has the democrat party? I voted for Clinton in 1992, for an extremely honorable reason. As much disdain as I had for him, I thought it was dangerous for the country to have Dan Quayle as Vice President. Perhaps ironically, eight years later I refused to vote for Quayle's opponent in the 1992 election. I did not consider Al Gore to be dangerous, (nor did I think that of Bush). I just totally despised him. No one buys my point of view about Nader's presence in the 2000 election. (republicans sometimes pretend to, for their qwn reasons). I thought he moved the debate of issues toward a direction which helped Al Gore and hurt Bush. I thought he energized more people who ended up switching to Gore than he took away from Gore. I think he got 97,000 votes in Florida, and that stands as proof in most people's minds that he cost Gore the election. That kind of math is easy---the kind that takes into account the way in which issues are framed and the extent to which the electorate is actually energized is not so simple. Be careful what you wish for, republicans. The democrats have learned that they need someone better than Gore. Kerry is, and I will vote for him, even if Nader is available. I would rather have the chance that the democrats have to beat Bush this year, than I would the chance to re-elect Gore. He would be in more trouble at this point than Bush is now.

[J_Train]

You know, you would think the dems would have learned something from the last election in which Nader "ruined" the vote for their guy. But they havent. Instead of getting back to principles they are concerned only with electability. It's a shame.
It may just come back to bite them again.

[J_Train]

The only place I have seen this is on Foxnews.com so who knows if it's true. Every other source only reports that he is going to be on Meet the Press Sunday to announce his decision.

If Dean or Edwards were the Dem's guy I doubt Nader would consider running.
Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

[hkyfan]

Originally posted by pgrote@Feb 20 2004, 05:05 PM
This is awesome news for the country.

I just sent him $25.00 through his website and sent him a nice email encouraging him to run and run hard.

That probably brings his political contributions to well over $100.

After seeing what their votes help do in 2000 I'm not guessing that many liberals will throw another vote away in 04.

As Dubya might say:

Bring It On!

[pgrote]

This is awesome news for the country.

I just sent him $25.00 through his website and sent him a nice email encouraging him to run and run hard.

[dredbyrd]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Feb 20 2004, 02:17 PM
Moe,

I just know there is zero chance of that happening if the public continues to reward them for playing Republican.

It's not like the public has a say.

Privatized public office, remember?

[SLUBLUE]

I'd like to see Republicans go back to being republicans.


In camps.

[Moe_Szyslak]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Feb 20 2004, 02:17 PM
Moe,

I just know there is zero chance of that happening if the public continues to reward them for playing Republican.

Irony is they're settling for less, as they'd be likely to steamroll W if fully able to expose/exploit his inordinate favoritisim toward corporations and the wealthy...

Moe

[Damtoft]

Send me a PM and I'll give you the latest skinny.

[Soocrates]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Feb 20 2004, 02:11 PM
Tailor,

I believe there actually should be a choice.

Vive le Nader!

Vive le Miller!

Democrats should get back to being Democrats.

Point taken and well respected. However, in this day and age, it is extremely difficult for any 3rd party to gain inroads. The 2 Parties (Powers) to be have pretty much passed laws that totally protects them from any 3rd party competition. That being said, one must choose between the lesser of 2 evils. I know a lot of Libertarians that vote Repub because of that. Some even vote Demo for the civil liberties platform. It's a shame but it is true. Myself I am leaning Demo for the ouster of our esteem AG and his diligence to the Pat Act 1 & support for #2.

You are very much correct in that it is better to have choices, but when those choices never really matter it is disheartening. Peace buddy..

The Tailor

PS I am about ready to pony up and join the faction. How does one go about this? If I dust off Kaiser will this get me in???

[BurnKU]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Feb 20 2004, 02:11 PM

Democrats should get back to being Democrats.

I'd like to see republicans get back to being republicans too.

[Damtoft]

Moe,

I just know there is zero chance of that happening if the public continues to reward them for playing Republican.

[BurnKU]

Just because you don't believe in handouts doesn't mean you are anti little guy or anti poor. But I guess whatever works to buy votes.

well, you can call it that, only because you're a dick.

I believe that you don't look at someone that doesn't have health insurance and say....'tough shit...go die somewhere else'. [/quote]
I don't believe if I didn't have something, I'd walk up to someone that makes more money than me and tell them they are responsible for buying it for me.

[Moe_Szyslak]

Originally posted by Damtoft@Feb 20 2004, 02:11 PM


Democrats should get back to being Democrats.

On this, we agree, JD.

Moe

[SLUBLUE]

Originally posted by BurnKU+Feb 20 2004, 02:08 PM-->

QUOTE(BurnKU @ Feb 20 2004, 02:08 PM)