Loading ...
Here’s an illustrative difference between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. These were their reactions to Ralph Nader’s announcement of another quixotic—though potentially impacting—run for the White House:
Obama: “I think the job of the Democratic Party is to be so compelling that a few percentage [points] of the vote going to another candidate is not going to make any difference.”
Clinton: “Obviously it’s not helpful to whoever our Democratic nominee is, but it’s a free country. …I don’t know what party he’ll run on. Where did he run on last time? Does anybody remember? … Was it on the Green Party? Well, you know, his being on the Green Party prevented Al Gore from being the greenest president we could have had, and I think that’s really unfortunate. I think we paid a big price for it. … This time I hope it doesn’t hurt anyone.”
Guess which one gets it?
Print This Post
How true that article is. And how true the observation about Alphabet cheerleader voters.
Vote for issues, not letters. Vote for your own best interest not blind alphabet obedience.
Spend some time at places like Democratic Underground, Americablog or Eschaton and see the Nader hate rise like a blind beast.
I recall one Escahtonian, I think she subbed for Duncan, who in 2k virtually demanded everyone vote as she did. This from an elite Texas self-proclaimed Democrat married to an elite Texas Republican pioneer!
How pathetic some of the people are. How ignorant.
Scum.
James, Scum.
Yeah, thanks for that, whatever it meant. *shrug*
The very reasons you gave for Al Gore losing the race “alienated several million voters with his arrogance, condescension and moral superiority complex” are the very same reasons I would not vote for Senator Obama. He is a great orator but the distain he looks at Hillary Clinton with through out the debates leads me to the decision that he too has much too much arrogance to be my leader. Years ago I wrote my Mother’s name on my ballot because I could not vote for anyone who was running in either party and I really now fully understand the votes “Mickey Mouse” receives.
Yeah I figured ol’ Ralphy boy would jump in at the last like usual. Fact is, he’s got zilch to offer and never has had anything but his own self-righteousnes to recommend him. Does he really think he’s tipping us to how screwed up things are? And like he could fix it all? He’s a fool and always has been. And is a has-been now.
You keep telling yourself that Nader had NO adverse impact on either election (by adverse i mean tipping the scales to BUSH) and keep telling yoursleves that YOU are NOT responsible for one million dead Iraqis, and close to 4 thousand dead American Service personnel, and keep telling yourself that it’s ok that NADER got tons of cash from republicans, and then tell me you sleep WELL at night and that ANY Democrat (excepting Lieberman) would have done a better job than BUSH
Mike, Shrug.
Why do you hate America? -fart-
Yeah right. Go ahead and throw your vote away and let McCain get into the White House. There is nothing brave about not being smart enough to see the writing on the wall. Our system is designed and fuctions as a two party system. I would love to see a legitamate multi-party system, but thats not going to happen unless we make constitutional changes. If you think you can create a multi-party system out of thin air, you are delusional. Recognize that we have only two real parties and vote accordniningly. I agree that it sucks, but that is reality not matter how far you bury your head in the sand.
“He is a great orator but the distain he looks at Hillary Clinton with through out the debates leads me to the decision that he too has much too much arrogance to be my leader.”
I’d like you to find me a single YouTube video (or wherever else) that shows Obama looking at Clinton with disdain at the debates. I know of one regrettable moment, when Obama said Hillary “was likeable enough” but he said it with disappointment, not disdain, and it was unnecessary. Haven’t seen him do or say anything even remotely like that since.
“Mike, Shrug. Why do you hate America?”
Are you at all capable of elaborating on that, or do you always troll so shitty?
Dang, Mike - you appear to have kicked over a beehive….
Machiavelli - I wonder sometimes if our two party system wasn’t intentional so much as an unfortunate example of the law of unintended consequences.
“keep telling yoursleves that YOU are NOT responsible for one million dead Iraqis, and close to 4 thousand dead American Service personnel, and keep telling yourself that it’s ok that NADER got tons of cash from republicans, and then tell me you sleep WELL at night”
That was a Michael Powell-sized leap of logic. Quit paying your taxes then, since they’re supporting the very same military who killed said Iraqis.
“And like he could fix it all? He’s a fool and always has been. And is a has-been now.”
Are you Randy Crow by chance?
Ralph who? Aren’t there enough republicans in this race already? Why do we need this Ralph person?
Seriously, the voters rejected Dennis Kucinich and John Edwards. Ralph has nothing to offer this race.
“If you think you can create a multi-party system out of thin air, you are delusional.”
Let me guess, you didn’t have this venom in you when Perot helped Bubba into the Oval Office, eh? Yeah, thought not.
Holy shit, someone else noticed that St. Albert fucked up in 2000. I thought it was just me.
“Dang, Mike - you appear to have kicked over a beehive”
I’m just shaking my head at watching the bees all sting each other.
“Holy shit, someone else noticed that St. Albert fucked up in 2000. I thought it was just me.”
Had Al Gore been Al Gore in 2000, Al Gore would’ve won handily.
Obama’s learned from history. A few others evidently haven’t.
Sorry, but in a closely divided country, where small differences in the vote can decide the presidency, Ralph Nader indeed has the potential to be a big spoiler for the Democratic party.
Now if he’d jumped into the primaries and campaigned like any respectable candidate, taken his licks at debates, my view would be different.
And I appreciate his view that all candidates are too corporate-centric. (It was interesting to see democrats reject Edwards so soundly.)
But principle, and practicality, can be two different things.
So…now that Nader’s ‘running,’ what, exactly, are his policies? And even more critically, how would he get Congress to implement them?
Or is it just more fiery rhetoric from a campaign already awash in empty words?
Your article is fine.
Oh, I’m sorry…I actually have watched each debate as they happened, so I can’t tell you where the distain is on youtube. (I thought youtube was all about houses decorated with Christmas lights set to Russian symphonies. My mistake. lol)
I saw the looks during the last debate especially, like she is a lowly non-entity who really doesn’t belong next to him. They are side glancing slight lip smurking looks that say volumns about the man to me.
cc, fixed your comment for ya.
“I saw the looks during the last debate especially, like she is a lowly non-entity who really doesn’t belong next to him. They are side glancing slight lip smurking looks that say volumns about the man to me.”
Karen, anyone can interpret looks any way they want to; some shallow negative opinions of Obama no doubt have been bolstered by CNN’s unflattering still shot of Obama they use every time they project him winning a state. He looks like he’s smelling his own piss. Awful… thanks CNN. At any rate, Karen, you oughta judge him on what he says and does, not how he looks. Regardless, as I’ve seen most of the debates as well, I think he learned from the disrespectful way he said Hillary was “likeable enough” and has been a gentleman to her since.
Yeah, thanks for that. *shrug*
Seriously? I’d love a 3rd party candidate that inserted him or herself into the mix early and took a fair chance at swinging the voters but then as so many have already done, set aside when the numbers show that it is IMPOSSIBLE for then to win the presidency. Nader ONLY wants to raise his issues in the public’s eye, which by the way, if your reading this Ralph… you may want to add a little more substance to your website, I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and learn more about your positions today but instead found bullet points with no links to details. Please visit Mr. Obama’s website to understand how one details their positions. Good luck!
Do I regret voting for Nadar? Probably. Wonder how many dead people, including innocent children and babies in Iraq might be alive. Maybe Gore would have helped green the US. Do not recall why I did no like him. If Hillary Clinton were not running I might back Cynthia McKinney this year. With Hillary and the Republicans already planning to bomb, bomb, bomb; bomb Iran~I see Obama as my only choice. If Hillary’s lies and acting skills gets her the Dem bid, it will give me perverse pleasure to vote for McCain. Either way my grandchildren lose.
Nader? I think he should have backed Obama. It seems he is playing devils advocate. I know Obama supporters that will probably vote Nader. May have went for, oh, Kucinich if Hillary had not been allowed in the race~husband should automatically disqualify her, methinks. Romney~Huckabee supporters think we are in a Holy War~they may take those southern states where Obama or Clinton did well. Obama needs every vote he can get. I do like his confidence, but this election is crucial.
As far as whining supporters? I nominate Paul and Kucinich’s supporters. I do like Dennis and Elizabeth and almost voted for him in my primary. The USA is too conservative and I can not tolerate even the thought of this year with our corrupt government. Out with the old and in with the new.
Karen’s comment has me laughing.
She sits furiously writing with her lips curled into her trademark smirk and stops to laugh when he has the audacity to point out the obvious to her. “Get Real”??? She insults governors, senators, Pulitzer and Nobel prize winners, mayors, past long time government officials, Maria Shriver, the daughter of JFK and the widow of Bobby? I think Obama did a good smack down on her constant and relentless attacks on him. She has been patronizing and talk about condescending looks? She makes her I am superior to you boy feelings well known with the tone of her voice and her facial expressions. “Shame on you”? “Gimmie a break” red faced Bill Clinton angrily declares.
I have been watching the debates at You Tube. She laughs when asked about her Iraqi war vote. What is funny about the torture of other human beings and deaths of children?
Truly, Karen, she is too low and too dirty to sit at the table next to him. He has complicated her from, um, day one (she is smart and has good work ethics), before he goes into his victory speech he asks his audience to applaud her for her hard work, he asks them again to congratulate her when she wins. Always a gentlemen to her shrew.
I wish the debate people would ask her why she voted yes on the Iran Resolution and to explain why she did not mention her conflict of interest in Dubai even when she blew the whistle on GWB. Her relation is much closer (Bill) to Bush’s (brother Neil).
anyone who takes either the democrats or republicans seriously is incredibly naive.
It’s getting pretty goddamn tiresome to hear lectures on “democracy” for a constituency clearly satisfied to hand the election over a Bush clone, who will perpetuate every policy instituted by this criminal in the White House.
I also voted for Nader in 2000. Do I regret it? Absolutely. The reason is that it inflated his already hyper-inflated ego so that here and now, on the cusp of too many major crises to count, he’s once again planning to draw votes away from McCain’s opponent.
So you’re right, it isn’t Nader’s fault. It’s the Nader voters’ fault.
The problem with Nader supporters isn’t that they vote for Nader. That’s their prerogative. The problem is that they refuse to accept accountability for the consequences of their actions. To deny that not Nader, but rather Nader voters handed the election to Bush in Florida in 2000 is sophomoric. You are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own facts: those 90,000 votes would have lead to a Gore presidency, and anyone who would doubt that this entire planet would be in a far better place as a result is simply not paying attention.
If Nader supporters were held accountable, maybe they would think twice. But they so easily write themselves a pass and absolve themselves of all accountability, it’s easy for them to throw the election to the Republicans — it’s always someone else’s fault — anyone else’s but theirs.
So go right ahead and vote for Nader, McKinney, or Rasputin for all I care. But this time, for once, act like full fledged adults and step up and assume responsibility for the consequences, not deny them like a bunch of emotionally fragile little schoolgirls who act like someone dipped their hair in the inkwell whenever reminded of their clear and unambiguous role in 2000.
Nader can’t win, he has proven that.
The only thing he can do is pollute the real debate.
If you don’t vote for some one who can win you may be left feeling superior but you have done as little to elect the next president as sitting on your hands and staying home.
Yes, a vote for a candidate who cant possibly win is a wasted vote.
My be it makes you feel good to waist your vote in making some form of political protest but honistly, if you feel that neither of the two candidates are to your liking you are better of going for a walk instead of voting, it will do you more good in the long run.
It is sad that delusional and irrational people think its more important to make a secret statement to them selves, (for in the us how you personally voted is secret), rather than actually participating in democracy and affecting the global outcome of this nation and ultimately the human race..
“So go right ahead and vote for Nader, McKinney, or Rasputin for all I care. But this time, for once, act like full fledged adults and step up and assume responsibility for the consequences, not deny them like a bunch of emotionally fragile little schoolgirls who act like someone dipped their hair in the inkwell whenever reminded of their clear and unambiguous role in 2000.”
So I’m expecting that you’re neither a Clinton or Edwards supporter, since they were *directly* responsible for the authority given to George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq and kill all those people. Right? Let me guess, you’re a Kucinich man or an Obama voter, yes? Or are ya just another shit-talking disgruntled establishment tool…
“It is sad that delusional and irrational people think its more important to make a secret statement to them selves, (for in the us how you personally voted is secret), rather than actually participating in democracy and affecting the global outcome of this nation and ultimately the human race.”
Last time I checked, voting *is* actually participating in democracy. You people with your hindsight judgmentalism and apologist fervor for the corrupt two-party system Nader talks about… *you’re* the problem. This seems to be the only history you give a shit about, as though everything before November 2000 in this country was peachy.
Please read Marty Kaplan’s post on Huffington post, pretty much echos my views.
For Nader to refuse to acknowledge his role as a spoiler (regardless of whether Gore didn’t use Bill enough…note that Hillary used him TOO much) removes any and all credibiltiy from him, which is a shame considering most progressives agree with many of his positions. Electability people. Don’t echo the old canard that ‘there really was no difference between Gore and Bush’. That’s what Nader and his supporters said. How untrue was that?
As ‘legit’ as Obama or Clinton? Naw. Ralph just bides his time in between and then jumps in using organizations that put in the work month after month, year after year and he just shows up every fourth and uses them for his own ego driven purposes.
If Nader bothered to start a party or would stay involved in the political process in between presidential elections I might take him seriously. He has the right to run and I have the right to ignore him.
“Unrepentant Liberal”
Hard to disagree with what you say. Fair criticisms.
“Or are ya just another shit-talking disgruntled establishment tool…”
Do you have an argument to make against the truth I posted, or just a torrent of childish epithets?
The simple fact is: Nader voters fall into two categories: those that accept responsibility for the consequences and hence learned from their mistakes, and those who haven’t. You haven’t. And you have the balls to lecture other people about “democracy?” Not today, bubba.
Further, you can’t even take honest critique, so your position that Bush’s ascendancy is everyone else’s fault but the Nader voters’ is not surprising, but, like your scatological reference, is a bit too grade-school to be persuasive, don’t you think?
Like Clinton claiming she learned something from her Iraq vote and then votes for Kyl-Lieberman, you’ve learned nothing, and you’re just pissed off that you’ve been called on it, that’s all.
Hey, I made a mistake. I admit it. I won’t do that again. Period. That’s my position. I’m not posting it here for your approval, because I frankly don’t live for your love.
So, you just go right ahead and vote for Nader, and continue to blame everyone else for the consequences of your actions. Hey, it’s your blog. You win and I’m just a shit-talker. Congratulations.
“Nader voters fall into two categories: those that accept responsibility for the consequences and hence learned from their mistakes, and those who haven’t. You haven’t”
This post isn’t about Nader voters. It’s about whiny, pissy, arrogant, sour-grape-sucking, acrimonious, divisive establishment Democrats who cannot reconcile their stunted worldview with the fact that Al Gore lost in 2000 because AL GORE LOST. To blame his lack of backbone and his inability to compel Americans from all walks of life to support him (including SEVEN MILLION DEMOCRATS who voted for Bush!) on some third-partier who scored a tiny fraction of the vote reveals everything we need to know about you.
Where is this righteous anger of yours against Ross Perot? How about the injustice he served with his vanity run on George H. W. Bush? The man had a party created in his wake that he then abandoned. How is he any different than Nader? Oh yeah… Perot benefited the Democrats and got Bubba elected! Of course. That’s different.
And by the way if you’d read my whole post or previous posts, you’d know I’m solidly behind Obama.
“I’’m just a shit-talker”
Thank you for playing.
“Yes, I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000. Do I regret it? Absolutely not.”
I hope 7 years of Bush “leadership” did hurt you economically and politically. This deserves you right for your stupidity.
“I hope 7 years of Bush “leadership†did hurt you economically and politically. This deserves you right for your stupidity.”
Keep sucking on them sour grapes, Gray. And start emailing the 7 million Democrats that voted for Bush in 2000.
“Al Gore lost in 2000 because AL GORE LOST”
That’s what you call logic? Al Gore lost, even though he was clearly the better candidate, because too many people let themselves be fooled by the media, which was openly hostile. And others, like maybe you, vote fpr Nader out of ideological reasons, knowing very well that he ain’t got no chance in hell to win. A Nader candidacy doesn’t change anything, because other candidates don’t care for his lunatic program. And he isn’t “as valid a candidate as Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and John McCain”. He is not even as vaild a candidate as Denis Kucinich, who at least influenced the other campaigns with his candidacy.
Nader won’t become president, McCain or Obama (maybe Clinton) will. And if you can’t make a reasonable decision between those two sides, you can’t be helped.
“And start emailing the 7 million Democrats that voted for Bush in 2000.”
Why should I? They already know by now that they totally screwed up with their vote.
Nader did not hand the white house to bush. Diebold and the felonious 5 on the supreme court handed Bush the white house. Gore won. Don’t bash Nader because the american electorate is stupid and chooses from the same one party, two sided coin every damn time and sits by complacently as election after election is stolen.
“Nader won’t become president, McCain or Obama (maybe Clinton) will. And if you can’t make a reasonable decision between those two sides, you can’t be helped.” - “’And start emailing the 7 million Democrats that voted for Bush in 2000.’ - Why should I? They already know by now that they totally screwed up with their vote.”
For someone who claims to know what seven million people think, you can’t be bothered to read my full post or my previous comments or posts, in which I clearly express my full support for Barack Obama, should he be the Dem nominee come November.
“For someone who claims to know what seven million people think”
I read the polls, like everybody else. Bush is down to about 30%, so it’s reasonable to think he lost every independent and cross party voter, and is down to the GOP hardcore base.
“I clearly express my full support for Barack Obama, should he be the Dem nominee come November.”
My point focussed on the mindset that made no difference between Gore and Bush and saw no problem in wasting the vote on Nader. Obviously, you see no difference between Clinton and McCain, too. Wasting time and energy on wishful thinking instead of supporting reasonable steps that will lead to an improvment is the real problem. A vote for Nader is unreasonable, but it seems to make you comfortable, so you take this into consideration. That’s voting by guts, but not by brain. And, maybe, once the media starts to ridicule Obama, like they did with Gore, your guts may turn against him. Who knows.
Oh yes, the jack-in-the-box is BACK. Every 4 years Nader gives us poor Americans a dose of his genius only to disappear for 4 more years until the next election. Why has Nader not been in Bush’s face about turning America into a fascist state??? SILENCE
Please Ralph, do us all a favor and just keep your ass in Washington where you belong because there are not enough of us out here that think you are real. Does the word opportunistic come to your mind, if not, it should. STFU we don’t care what you are saying because you never said it for the last 4 years. You are as bad as Bush.
“A vote for Nader is unreasonable, but it seems to make you comfortable, so you take this into consideration. That’s voting by guts, but not by brain. And, maybe, once the media starts to ridicule Obama, like they did with Gore, your guts may turn against him. Who knows”
Dude, first you claim to know what I think, and it’s obvious you don’t, then you claim to know what seven million people think, then point to polls which sample a thousand or so at most, then you say “Who knows.” Flip, flop… now fly. It’s been fun, but now it’s tiresome. Peace.
“Had Al Gore been Al Gore in 2000, Al Gore would’ve won handily.”
One other example, where a more rational decision making would have led to other results. I mean, is it rational to believe that Al Gore was a different person during the campaign 2000? Of course not. What kind of guy he was, reasonable, but not without passions, with a focus on both technological improvements and safeguarding the environment, was very well known by then. Those idiotic camapign managers and advisers tried to change his image into what they thought would be more popular, ok, but everybody who really cared to look for informations about the man couldn’t be fooled. And Bush wasn’t in the same league at all, not even close. Every real progressive should have had no problems in deciding who was the better choice for the US. Wasting the vote on a candidate who had no chance, but looked even more progressive, was no rational decision. If you disagree, I recommend reading some stuff about game theory. Voting for Nader was no winning move, under any circumstances.
“point to polls which sample a thousand or so at most”
I also recommend reading some stuff about the theory behind polls.
|-(
Gray said:
“I hope 7 years of Bush “leadership†did hurt you economically and politically. This deserves you right for your stupidity.”
That wasn’t very nice to wish bad things to happen to other people. Karma is a bitch.
Although I disagree with 85% of the content of this blog, I would never dream of wishing ill to anyone, even of the folks who slammed me at every turn. Even though the philosophies of this group are of diametric opposition to my core values, I respect each and every person associated with this site. Their approaches differ with mine, but they’re all patriotic Americans that want the best for this great country(as misguided as I might find them). Different opinions…..as well as they’re well thought out, logical, and rational are something I respect and will heartily debate. I don’t respect wishing anyone bad fortune as it’s just plain bad manners.
Jeff
“
Try working for Nader and see how compassionate and inspiring he is! And yeah, how MUCH cash did he get for drawing votes away from Gore? He lives in or near Washington, D.C., which means he must be seriously on the take, like everyone else. The one thing Gore did that really knocked him down was his refusal to embrace Clinton as his one time friend and president. Gore has as much baggage in D.C. as anyone else. No, YOU look it up.
The author doesn’t have clue. Of course Nader was a factor in the 2000 election. His supporter base was clearly democratic. In Florida, he represented thousands of votes, and Gore only lost by 500 or so.