In 18 years since Naders run, what has been accomplished by complaining about it?

[ZX86]

Democrats need to stay laser focused on winning elections. We need to keep our eyes on the prize. Winning elections. I fail to see how insulting those closest to us politically furthers that goal. In fact it hampers it. Like it or not marketing is a part of politics. We need as many Americans as possible to value our brand and vote for our candidates. Insulting every group of voters we failed to convince to vote our way is counter productive.

Now is the time to emulate the actions and attitudes of MLK, Ghandi, and Mandela. Not the worst of the opposition.

[american_ideals]

1. Raising awareness of how Rove funded Nader and Putin paid Stein is important.

It shows how hatemongers in America help GOP candidates by pushing Nader and other independents.

[ZX86]

3. That's not the issue I'm talking about.

I'm all for calling out corruption, voter suppression, etc. I'm not for insulting voters we failed to convince to vote for our candidates.

[sharedvalues]

4. Distinction without a difference. Nader,Stein supported by Putin, Rove, GOP.

It's worth talking about Nader and Stein being supported by Putin, Rove and the GOP.

I know you're trying to draw a distinction between two kinds of Nader, Stein talk - but it's important to let Nader, Stein and future Naders and Steins know that they are hurting their country. As are the supporters of such candidates. If you like Putin, vote for Stein.

"Both sides are the same" is a lie pushed by Rove, Putin, and the GOP.

[ZX86]

7. "If you like Putin, vote for Stein.'

This is what I'm talking about. Bad and counterproductive marketing. That kind of comment doesn't inspire voting. It depresses it. Study after study has shown this. When more people vote Democrats win.

[sharedvalues]

8. How about natl holiday on election day, and "Putin pays Stein"

We can both increase turnout and tell the truth about the politicking in our elections.

[ZX86]

26. Just so you know.

Domestic billionaires like Koch Bros. and Walmart Family and foreign dictators like Saudi Family and Putin buy influence from who ever is selling. The issue is money in politics. Not which party was the latest to get caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

[stevenleser]

139. Yup you nailed it in 1.

This OP could have been closed down after that.

[leftstreet]

2. You don't hear GOPers still bitching about Ross Perot

Who, by the way, handed Bill Clinton the Presidency

People need to get over it

[sharedvalues]

5. Did big Dem donors support Perot? Did a foreign power pay him?

Big difference between Perot and Stein, Nader.
(mainly because there are no big Dem donors comparable to the Koches, funders of Judicial Watch, etc.)

[ZX86]

6. Is this your first time at the rodeo?

Do you really believe that this is the first election influenced by dirty money, foreign and domestic? Do you really believe we don't do the same in foreign countries?

[sharedvalues]

9. You are now using Whataboutism.

Plain and simple.

Whatabout other countries? Whatabout other elections?

Yeah, those are important. But here we are talking about Putin and Stein and Rove and Nader.

[ZX86]

18. You're saying "what about" Nader and Stein.

The issue is Democrats winning elections. Talking about Putin and Stein and Rove and Nader does not help Democrats win elections. It's inside the beltway, DC cocktail party, cable news gossip. Putin, Stein, Rove and Nader are not accused of any crimes that will land them in jail.

Meanwhile my family, friends, and neighbors are struggling to keep a roof over heads. Jobs, health care, student debt are their daily concerns. Not what Nader did 18 years ago.

[BzaDem]

101. That is laughable. Nader and Stein are the topic of this thread that YOU created.

Talking about the very topic of the thread is the exact opposite of whataboutism. If you would prefer to discuss something else, perhaps you shouldn't have posted a thread about Nader and Stein.

[bettyellen]

10. Trump said the same thing today! How interesting to hear this here. Cough cough.

[ZX86]

19. He also said Bush didn't keep us safe on 9/11.

What's your point? I must be some Putin lover because Trump occasionally says something based in reality?

[bettyellen]

39. Yeah- he's as full of shit to compare his campaigns relationship w Russian

As he is about 9/11. He is not correct to blow off what the Russians did for him as a normal regular occurrence. Far from it. I can't believe I'm reading this bullshit here.

[ZX86]

46. Corruption in politics is not a normal regular occurrence?

I think you need your bullshit meter serviced.

[bettyellen]

53. Ah that broad brush "they're all corrupt" crap that suppresses the vote as much as crosscheck does..

While being complete bullshit. I don't happen to think a farmers 27$ is more important than an urban office workers either. That shit got ridiculous, so much misinformation.

[ZX86]

60. I didn't say they are all corrupt.

The system is corrupt. Money corrupts our political system. Crosscheck is a symptom of the problem. The problem is the money.

[bettyellen]

62. Crosscheck is a GOP scam to disenfranchise voters of color and those in Dem areas, period. It has

Nothing to do with the Dems. That's crazy talk- and designed to disgust people so they don't vote.
Every senator to some extent represents their own local economic interests- whether it's building F-16s or keeping businesses in NYC after 9/11. It's naive to think millions of people should be disenfranchised because they have an office job in the tri-state area but people are actually suggesting that. Farmers and hunters are not intrinsically better human beings than urban office workers. They get unlimited pork and the NRA pushing the giv around. It's and anti Dem myth to say they're just as corrupt or profiting anywhere near what the GOP is trying to achieve w crosscheck.

[ZX86]

63. So you are completely oblivious to the direct connection

of money in politics and the behavior of Republicans? Wow!

[bettyellen]

64. You never said it was normal for the GOP- you smeared both sides with your whataboutist crap.

[ZX86]

66. Since when did criticizing money in politics

become a smear on Democrats? Money corrupts the system. Democrats and Republicans are a part of the system. This is not an "us against them" argument.

[bettyellen]

67. Which ignores the funding third part candidates get. And ignores the huge policy differences between

The GOP and Dems. The GOP wants to take out tax money and not deliver anything. Individual Dems are often going to support their local constituencies- including the military for some, including businesses you don't like. It's not the same thing as collaborating with the enemy to destroy the checks and balances and democracy itself. Different states have competing interests that you not might like, but traditionally politicians fight for their slice of the pie. That's not the same thing as trying to create a kleptocracy and dismantle the govt for profit. Not comparable at all.

[ZX86]

91. Huge policy differences?

Last edited Sat Jul 8, 2017, 07:17 PM - Edit history (1)

Like the Iraq War? Single Payer health care? $15 minimum wage? Free college? Fracking? Assault weapons ban? War on drugs? Legalizing marijuana? Making Bush tax cuts permanent? Those kind of huge policy differences?

[bettyellen]

117. Yeah, Hillary is awful for settling for 12 hour at a time when the minimum wage is being rolled back

By the GOP. No difference between supporting the biggest increase ever and slashing it- right? No doffernce in expanding Medicare and social security and totally gutting them and the ACA?

What a load of horseshit.

[ZX86]

118. This is the problem.

Measuring Democratic success by GOP standards. Accepting Republican framing of all issues. Letting conservatives shape our policy goals.

Sorry. Marginally better than Republicans isn't good enough anymore. Baby steps better than the GOP isn't cutting it. Incrementalism has failed as strategy and as policy.

They don't write songs and build statues to incrementalists. The time is now to advocate for bold policy changes like single payer. Not begging to keep Republican inspired health care plans like Romneycare.

[bettyellen]

119. Bullshit. The largest increase in minimum wage would be great! Cutting it is shit! It's you that

Measured these policies and lied saying they are only marginally different. Insuring millions of people or letting them go without healthcare is not some small difference.

Fuck songs and statues. I reject the alt left framing of needing inspiration- a heroic figure- instead of tangible gains.

We're talking about human lives, civil rights, the right to control your own body. These are only small things to the most privileged among us, only small to those who already have theirs. They gambled away the presidency hoping for a fucking jackpot, and we all lost and are suffering because of it.

[ZX86]

121. I don't consider Republican crumbs tangible gains.

Millions of people are sick and dying right now, today, in the richest country of all time. Maybe you're willing to write them off in the name of incrementalism. I'm not. I don't consider health care some "fucking jackpot" reserved for the lucky. It's a human right. When it comes to human rights you're goddamn right I'm a purist. No half stepping, no half measures, no surrender.

I step over the sick and dying living on the street everyday. I have to look in their yellowy blood shot eyes and tell them sorry I don't have any extra money today. I see them deteriorate before my very eyes from preventable and treatable injuries and disease. Then I hear the sirens of the ambulances that take them away for the last time.

Maybe that's good enough for you. Not for me. I'm a Democrat.

[bettyellen]

123. I don't believe a hyper exaggerated word you say. States have cut the minimum to 7 an hour because

Some idiots thought 12$ wasn't inspiring enough for them. Twelve had broad support in the senate, yet some claim shooting for the moon is "brilliant negotiating"

Bullshit on the yellowed eyes and sirens. I grew up in the Bronx, LOL. Who do you think you're fooling with that crap? No one.

[ZX86]

130. This is my city. This is my daily reality. Shame on you for doubting the suffering of my neighbors.

?quality=85&strip=all&strip=all
&maxh=400&maxw=667

[bettyellen]

131. And third party voters fucked those people over as bad as republicans did.

[ZX86]

132. The people who voted for universal health care candidates

screwed over poor people because the candidates against universal health care won? Is that your logic?

[bettyellen]

133. They set us on a regressive path where we're losing everything. Fuck this "not good enough"

Crap and fuck the Russian boys that push that crap.

[ZX86]

138. No. Not good enough.

I want you to look at the graphic below and then take another look at my neighbors in the pics above and tell me why you think this an acceptable state of affairs in a so-called civilized nation. The richest nation in the world. The richest nation in the history of richest nations.

No. This is not good enough. As a matter of fact it's fucking disgusting.

[sharedvalues]

122. Thank you. Exactly.

[mythology]

57. Awkwardly the largest individual donor it 2016 was Tom Steyer

https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topindivs.php

https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/toporgs.php

As this shows Democrats have large individual donors and organization donors.

[ZX86]

61. Good catch.

[pnwmom]

11. Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

So people who talk about what Nader did are trying to educate others about the historical lesson to be learned.

And yet some people voted for Nader and then Stein, out of the misguided idea that this would help progressive causes. They obviously didn't learn.

On the other hand, fewer people voted for Stein than for Nader, so some people are educable.

[ZX86]

20. Those who don't learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

And history has taught us that smug paternalism against voters doesn't win Democrats elections. This is Marketing 101. Don't insult your customers.

[pnwmom]

28. Neither Al Gore nor Hillary Clinton acted with "smug paternalism."

Gore lost by 500 votes. Nader, who'd spent the campaign lying about him being the same as Bush, drew 95K.

Hillary lost because of voter suppression, Russian meddling, and Comey's two letter bombs.

[ZX86]

30. So what are you going to do about it?

Complain until Nader says he's sorry? What's the end game here? I want Democrats to start winning elections. That's what my top priority is.

[pnwmom]

31. If that was your top priority you wouldn't worry that Democrats were hurting their cause

by being realistic about the spoiler effect Nader and Stein had on the elections of 2000 and 2006.

[ZX86]

32. You're the one not being realistic.

Nader and Stein are Americans exercising their rights as American citizens to run for office under the Constitution of the United States of America.

Complaining about how Democracy works doesn't get Democrats elected.

[pnwmom]

33. Yeah, and Jill Stein was simply exercising her right to take money from the Russians

and to help defeat HRC.

As a retired General, Flynn had to report the $45K he received for attending Putin's little get-together. As a private citizen, Jill Stein did not.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/how-putin-played-the-far-left

Perhaps the starkest case in point is Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein and her constituency. In December 2015, the Kremlin feted Stein by inviting her to the gala celebrating the 10-year anniversary of Kremlin-funded propaganda network RT. Over a year later, it remains unclear who paid for Stein’s trip to Moscow and her accommodations there. Her campaign ignored multiple questions on this score. We do know, however, that Stein sat at the same table as both Putin and Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, Trump’s soon-to-be national security adviser. She further spoke at an RT-sponsored panel, using her presence to criticize the U.S.’s “disastrous militarism.” Afterward, straddling Moscow’s Red Square, Stein described the panel as “inspiring,” going on to claim that Putin, whom she painted as a political novice, told her he “agree[d]” with her “on many issues.”

SNIP

Green Party officials across Europe slammed a “delusional” Stein for her views, with leading Russian environmental activists saying they were “deeply shocked” by her comments during her Moscow trip.

No matter. For her efforts in burnishing Kremlin conspiracy theories for American audiences, Stein was awarded not simply with an invitation to the 2015 RT gala, but RT even hosted her party’s 2016 presidential debate—a move Stein hailed as a “step towards real democracy.” RT also covered “live updates” from Stein’s reactions to the debates between Clinton and Trump, a decision Stein further praised. This mutual affection is, naturally, of a piece with RT’s broader modus operandi in the U.S.

[ZX86]

37. You don't like Jill Stein. Got it.

How does this help get Democrats get elected because that's what I'm laser focused on. Inside the the beltway, DC cocktail circuit, cable news gossip about the dinner engagements of some aging hippie chick running for office on a third party ticket isn't inspiring Americans to vote for Democrats

[Demsrule86]

86. Minimize the terrible affect the of the Greens...so people will understand voting for them is a vote

for the Republicans...you want to win vote for the candidate with the 'D' next to his/her name...and show up in mid terms.

[Raster]

52. Nader did NOT hand Florida to Bush*...

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/03/ralph-nader-did-not-hand-2000-election

<snip>

It is true that approximately 95,000 Florida ballots were cast for Nader in 2000, and assuming every single one of those votes went instead to then-Vice President Al Gore (which is an incorrect assumption, but we'll get to that later), Gore would have been easily able to supplant the 537 vote differential in the Sunshine State that gave Bush the presidency.

What that oft-cited factoid leaves out are the inconvenient truths laid out by Jim Hightower in Salon way back when, including the fact that only about 24,000 registered Democrats voted for Nader in Florida, whereas about 308,000 Democrats voted for (wait for it...) Bush! Further, approximately 191,000 self-identified "liberals" voted for Bush, as opposed to the fewer than 34,000 who went with Nader.

<snip,more>

OVER 300,00 FLORIDA DEMOCRATS voted for Bush*.

[pnwmom]

55. Every single one of the 95K Nader voters would NOT have had to vote for Gore

to result in his winning -- just a fraction of them would have changed the election.

The registered "Democrats" who voted for Bush had largely ceased voting as Democrats long before -- especially during the Reagan Presidency. Those weren't votes Gore ever expected to get.

But any voter with real progressive goals should have voted for Gore, and not been duped into voting for Nader.

[ZX86]

65. Let me see if I have this straight.

Nader voters who vote for Nader = Bad!

Democrats who vote for Bush = Okay....whatever!

[pnwmom]

69. They were former Democrats who hadn't bothered to change the registrations

from years, even decades, ago.

The south used to be heavily Democratic. In recent times it's become Republican -- but many people haven't changed their registrations to reflect their current voting preferences.

Why should they? Most people don't vote in primaries, so to many people their party registration is unimportant.

[ZX86]

72. So it's okay for lazy Democrats to vote for Republicans

just as long as they've been lazy for long periods of time?

[pnwmom]

73. They aren't lazy Democrats. They're Republicans who haven't bothered to

change their old registrations.

[ZX86]

75. Republicans who haven't bothered to change their old registrations.....

because they were......wait for it.......lazy!

[pnwmom]

76. Yes. Lazy Republicans who haven't voted Democratic since Reagan,

if not before.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-voter-registration-gains-probably-arent-gains-at-all/

Party registration can often be a lagging, rather than leading, indicator. As southern states, Florida and North Carolina are home to large numbers of registered Democrats who have nonetheless already been voting Republican for years.

[ZX86]

83. Well that's just not the way it works.

If you're registered as a Democrat you're a Democrat. Period! Case closed! Just like you can't run around and call yourself single when registered at City Hall as married. "Yeah your honor, see, I wasn't really married to first wife when I married my second wife, I mean I was registered and all but I really wasn't feeling it in my heart so it doesn't count."

[Demsrule86]

87. That is exactly how it works...if you ever participated in GOTV you would know that...

I went to homes with registered Democrats that had confederate flags flying in their yards...and McCain, Romney and Trump signs depending on the year...one guy threatened me with his fucking dog...but I had pepper spray...when I went out in rural Ohio...my daughter stayed in the car ready to call 9-11 because although we were only calling on Democrats...you never knew if they were still Democrats and the GOP voters were generally belligerent and nasty...it could be dangerous at times...Ohio has open primaries and some had changed their politics but not their registration.

[pnwmom]

94. Thanks for the reality check, Demsrule86 . n/t

[Demsrule86]

109. It is a trip getting out the vote in Ohio sometimes...

they send me out because I am willing to go...many aren't haha...hubs gets so irritated and goes with me when he is home...My only rule is ...I won't knock on the door if they have a confederate flag...the office got a chuckle when I noted C.F. on my paperwork ...confederate flag. Seriously, I have been threatened more than once, but our area went for Hills ...proud of that...in a sea of red.

[pnwmom]

93. Tell that to 538 and the professional pollsters.

They recognize how fluid party affiliation is, even if you don't. It's one of the challenges in making their predictions.

Many people have been voting for Republicans for so long they don't even remember that years ago they first registered as Democrats.

[JI7]

100. some of this is also because of local and state politics. remember that disgusting Kim Davis was a

registered democrat as was much of kentucky. but there was no way a democrat was going to win that state in a presidential election and they have been voting for republicans.

[BzaDem]

105. Nader falsely claims to have progressive goals. Bush does not.

Of course people are going to call out Nader when he pretends he does not want Republicans to win. (Likewise, of course people are going to call out his voters, who either themselves do not desire progressive policy, or are very poorly educated in how the world works.)

The reason people don't complain the same way about Bush, or about Democrats voting for Bush, is because Bush (and Bush voters) do not claim to have progressive goals. Of course, people will attack Bush (and his voters) for many OTHER reasons -- namely, the substantive policies they support. But they don't attack him for pretending to be progressive, because he doesn't pretend to be progressive.

[JI7]

12. the Greens are not close to us. the purpose of the Green Party is to help republicans win

nothing else.

[TheBlackAdder]

13. Meanwhile, Gary Johnson took 3X the amount of Reps from Trump, than what Stein took from Dems.

.

If both Johnson and Stein didn't run, Trump would have won by a larger margin.

.

[JI7]

14. none of that changes the fact about the goal of greens being to help republicans

[ZX86]

24. None of that changes the fact that

Complaining about how Democracy works doesn't win Democrats elections.

[JI7]

43. Greens aren't winning

Democrats have won more than greens.

[ZX86]

70. That's like bragging about stealing candy from a baby.

This is what concerns me.

[JI7]

92. Is a backlash against minorities gaining power. When we had more seats it was conservative democrats

That held them.

If we win they back it will take conservative democrats unless is a place where there are more non white people moving I like virginia.

[ZX86]

116. So we should complain more about Ralph Nader?

That will fix the problem?

[JI7]

129. Most of us can talk about many things

[pnwmom]

29. So? Gary isn't pretending to be a progressive, unlike Stein. n/t

[ZX86]

22. More Democrats vote Republican before breakfast

than Green Party members even exist.

[JI7]

44. We don't pretend they are liberals

[stevenleser]

124. That is a meaningless statistic because there is no test to register for any of the major parties

People who are in fact Republicans register Democratic all the time for various reasons. I am sure the reverse happens too.

[Demsrule86]

15. Nader gave us United, two wars, a rightie court, Katrina deaths and in the end an economy that was

destroyed...I will never stop reminding people about Nader...hopefully with the horrible example of Kremlin Jill, the Greens who help only the GOP will lose all backing a disappear. They are spoilers.

[ZX86]

23. Nader participated in the Democratic process.

It's his right as an American. Complaining about how Democracy works doesn't win Democrats elections.

[Demsrule86]

25. We have a two party system...Nader deliberately helped the GOP. Fuck him and all Green traitors.

[ZX86]

27. We have a Democracy where every American has a right to run for office.

That's not changing. The two party system is not mandated by our Constitution. The ability for any American to run for political office is. You're just going to have to get over that.

Complaining about how Democracy works doesn't win Democrats elections.

[Demsrule86]

34. Greens have a right well so do Republicans...and I despise both...they are the same. Fuck the

Green traitors who can never win anything but only help the GOP.

[JI7]

45. Nobody is banning them running.

[ZX86]

47. Then what's the point of blaming them for losing?

[JHan]

51. because their fuckery led to worse outcomes for people..

Their fuckery leads to outcomes which are the opposite of what they claim to care about....

I will never take a single one of them seriously ( matter of fact I hope their nonsense continues to be highlighted) until they can show they care more than just spoiling presidential elections - And they are WORSE than Libertarians - at least Libertarians understand game theory.

[kysrsoze]

107. I feel the exact same way.

If you possess true Democratic principles, you don't shit all over Democratic Party candidates and pretend there's no consequence to voting and campaigning against them. Anyone who feels the opposite should take a good hard look at that photo of Jill Stein at the dinner table with Putin. On his most subversive day, Bernie Sanders never went that far. To absolute hell with the Green Party for never attempting to push their agenda in way that would actually work and for actively campaigning against Democratic candidates. It was never an effort against Republicans. It was always that bullshit about both parties being the same, when anyone with even a shred of critical thought knew that wasn't true. Their shallow, absolutist approach never benefitted anyone but Republican candidates.

If you find this diatribe unacceptable, you're welcome to start your own website; www.greenunderground.com, perhaps? Just don't expect anyone here to support your lack of support for our efforts.

[JI7]

59. Same reason we can complain about republicans in solid red areas we will never beat

We can talk about the harm they do and their intentions

[ZX86]

74. "we will never beat"

Which is more insulting? People in rural areas are too stupid learn or Democratic policies and powers of persuasion are so weak we can't even convince hillbillies to vote for them.

[JI7]

77. Solid red areas are people who have right wing views

You are the one making comments about their intelligence and where they live.

I don't question their intelligence. They are voting for exactly what they want.

And greens can't get their support either. Even less than democrats.

[ZX86]

80. I'm not the one insisting they are ridgid and unchangable.

You are.

[JI7]

81. Nope. They can change if they want to

But they don't.

[BzaDem]

104. Because their (legal) run caused the R victory? Is this really that difficult? n/t

[ZX86]

112. Complaing about how the Democratic process works

doesn't win elections for Democrats. Is this really that difficult?

[BzaDem]

127. I think you are confused about what people are arguing.

I generally don't see people arguing for the repeal of laws that permit third parties to run. Instead, I see people rightfully exposing that Nader and his enablers are not motivated by a desire to enact progressive policy. Exposing the real motives of candidates is an important and essential part of political campaigning. In Nader's case, it has been devastatingly effective (causing Nader's vote share to drop by 90% from 2000 to 2004.)

You like to pretend that people are not doing this, and instead "complaining about the democratic process," because creating and then attacking arguments that people aren't making is the best you can do. But that says a lot more about your argument than it does about what you are critiquing.

[ZX86]

134. Exposing the real motives of candidates is an important and essential part of political campaigning"

Uhm....no it isn't. Democrats have lost the White House, the Senate, Congress, State houses, and Governors. Demonstrably your assertion is false.

[BzaDem]

142. Let's see where that type of third grade logic leads.

"Challenging Hillary from the left is a good idea." "Uhm....no it isn't. Democrats have lost the White House, the Senate, Congress, State houses, and Governors. Demonstrably your assertion is false."

"Trying to push Hillary to the left after her nomination is a good idea." "Uhm....no it isn't. Democrats have lost the White House, the Senate, Congress, State houses, and Governors. Demonstrably your assertion is false."

"Preventing Republicans from enacting the Ryan Budget is a good idea." "Uhm....no it isn't. Democrats have lost the White House, the Senate, Congress, State houses, and Governors. Demonstrably your assertion is false."

"Deciding not to nuke all of Europe is a good idea." "Uhm....no it isn't. Democrats have lost the White House, the Senate, Congress, State houses, and Governors. Demonstrably your assertion is false."

Feel free to try again

[BzaDem]

103. You want to know who else participated in the Democratic process? Trump, Bush, McCain, and Romney.

Are you saying we shouldn't be complaining about them?

[ZX86]

113. Yes. Exactly. Spot on!

Stop with the complaining and start with Democratic policy positions that affect and improve the lives of Americans. Sell them and sell them hard. Relentless campaigning laying out the specifics of how voting Democratic will create jobs, bring universal health care, eliminate student debt, etc.

[BzaDem]

128. So if Romney and Ryan want to end Medicare as we know it, we should not attack them?

I am very happy that your view of how campaigns should be run has zero influence over how campaigns are conducted.

[ZX86]

137. Attack them with what?

Grand bargain? Making Bush tax cuts permanent? Killing the public option? Reaching across the aisle for bi-partisan consensus?

[BzaDem]

141. If you can't defend your "don't attack the other side" view without changing the subject

then that might be a signal that you have no argument.

[milestogo]

16. He became a scapegoat.

[Skidmore]

17. Wrong. He became a pariah. nt

[Demsrule86]

21. No he was a spoiler...and became a pariah as he should have.

[G_j]

35. Whatever one thinks of Nader, if you continue to ignore THIS

Last edited Sat Jul 8, 2017, 12:28 PM - Edit history (1)

it's an insult to the CBC, and to all of us.

[ZX86]

40. Where was all the love and support for Auntie Maxine back then?

[jobycom]

36. How can we know? If we could go back 18 years and not complain about it, would things be different?

Politics isn't about sitting around a room waiting to run to a voting booth to cast a ballot we've known our whole lives we would cast. It's about the discussion. I'm not the same person I was 18 years ago, and that's largely because of the arguments I've had with Nader supporters, and Bush supporters, and Obama supporters, as much as with Republicans.

My views on race and gender, always liberal, have changed by hearing the complaints of non-white people, and non-male people. I remember arguing about gay rights here ten years ago with a gay friend, and leaving feeling like he just didn't get it (it was over method of gaining rights, not over whether rights should be gained). Now I look back on that argument in shame, knowing I was 100% wrong, even if my intentions were good. If I had never had that argument, I never would have grown past my short-sightedness then. I've had similar moments on race, gender, and even on degrees of left-ism.

We should complain about Nader. And Clinton. And Obama. And everyone else who we think is wrong. We should complain, fight, listen, and learn. Maybe we are the ones who are right. Maybe we aren't, and will learn that. And maybe over time the amount of information we take in during these arguments will make us better people, having heard the views of others and therefore better understood our own.

We aren't winning elections because we are divided. Maybe the coalition of voters the Democrats are trying to get isn't workable. We haven't found a way to unite the needs of Black Lives Matter with southern moderate white voters with blue collar union workers with feminist voters with Naderites with whomever. We're not hitting a message of justice, equality, and prosperity for all that all voters understand. Our goals are right, but our message is fragmented.

And the only way I know of to fix that is to argue until we all hear each other and work together. Or rather, until a candidate and that candidate's campaign structure hears us and gives us a message we can all embrace.

The worst part is, we're not even losing elections. The last Republican to take the White House with a popular victory was Bush in 1988. Some states have more Democrats voting for representatives and legislators, but wind up with more Republicans in office because of the districts that have been drawn. We don't have a fair democracy in the US.

So to me, the ways to win are to 1) argue until we come to a consensus, 2) reform the Electoral College and the way our elections are structured to better reflect the views of the people, and 3) find a way to show the majority that the same issue that drives Black Lives Matter also drives Labor, Feminism, the Middle Class, and even many people who think they are conservative now. Human dignity. Human rights. Justice. Equality. Whatever we want to call it. We are right on the issue, but we are terrible at explaining it.

[ZX86]

42. You're missing my point.

Call Nader out all you want. My issue is blaming the Democratic process for losing elections. There will always be third party candidates. If the mere existence of third party candidates determine we will automatically lose we're in for a lot of losses.

[jobycom]

98. Oh.

You mean I typed all those words for nothing? Dang.

[ms liberty]

111. I'll jump in right here...

To say that you did not type those words for nothing; while I agree somewhat with the OP, I think your post was great, and I agree with what you've posted 100%.
By the time I got to the fourth paragraph, I knew I was going to be telling you that this deserves to be an OP itself - I'd rec it!

[kcr]

114. This should be an OP

Particularly the last two paragraphs, but all of it is well said.

[YCHDT]

38. awareness

[Foamfollower]

41. I actually used it as an example of what happens when you vote Green to a person contemplating...

voting for Stein last year, and was successful, too!

[ZX86]

49. Uhm....no you weren't.

Hillary lost. We also lost the Senate, the Congress, most state houses, and governors.

[Foamfollower]

54. Um, yes I WAS!

The person I convinced became active in working for Hillary.

Others weren't successful because OTHERS forgot the lesson off Nader.

[rock]

48. And in those 18 years how many times did Nader run again?

[ZX86]

50. The goal is not to keep Nader from running for office.

It's getting Democrats elected.

[rock]

58. Your're question was

"What has been accomplished by complaining about it?" I gave you a well-implied answer. You now raise another question.

[brutus smith]

82. You have more patience than me

conversing with some of these people. I sometimes wonder if the deplorables infiltrated this site.

[JI7]

90. As had been said nobody is trying to keep him from running

[pnwmom]

95. How many times did his Green party push a candidate for President? nt

[DanTex]

56. Promoting awareness of the fact that the Green Party is a GOP ally.

I for one intend to continue to make sure that people don't forget that fact. You can keep apologizing for them if you want, but not me.

[ZX86]

79. By your definition

Everyone who isn't Democrat is a GOP ally. If I'm wrong please list all competing political parties you consider allies of Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

85. All competing political parties are allies of Republicans in a two party system.

[BzaDem]

102. Of course anyone who doesn't vote for Democrats is a GOP ally. Is that even remotely controversial?

[ZX86]

115. So all Americans not presently Democrats are our enemy?

The gun toting, rebel flag waving, racist, bigot is the same as a tree hugging, hippie girl? We should treat them exactly the same because they are enemy?

[BzaDem]

126. People who enable GOP victories (that harm millions of their fellow citizens) are GOP enablers.

I'm not going to address your juvenile characterization of what I said. I am just going to repeat what I said. If someone knowingly and willfully helps ensure Republican victories through their voting behavior, that says all I need to know about them. Any claim that they are motivated by progressive ideals is often false and in any case irrelevant to the harm they cause. They are exercising their political power to harm millions of their fellow citizens.

Do they have the absolute right to harm millions of their fellow citizens in this way? Of course. No one is arguing otherwise, and the fact that you keep disputing what no one is asserting should be a hint to you that your position is badly lacking in logic and coherence.

I know that speaking the truth might make certain people uncomfortable. That is precisely the point. Again, there is a reason that Nader's vote share dropped by 90% from 2000 to 2004, and (breaking news) it isn't because we had a more progressive nominee. You may not like the fact that it is effective, and might even prefer that others stop focusing on it. Your concern will continue to be noted and ignored, because most people here prefer to take action to further Democratic victories, and your strategy runs counter to that goal (whether you have figured that out yet or not).

[DanTex]

110. Huh? No, that's not my definition at all.

The Libertarians, for example, tend to draw equally from both parties, or if anything they draw more GOP votes than Dem votes.

Why do I call the Greens GOP allies? It's simple really. They campaign against Democrats, and help Republicans get elected. By any conceivable definition, that makes them GOP allies.

[Orsino]

68. Heh. n/t

[ismnotwasm]

71. Not enough. Clearly

Should have complained louder.

[sfwriter]

78. Apparently, there is growing disquiet on the left.

Nobody owes us a vote. We earn them every cycle.

[ZX86]

84. Looks like we're going to have to start earning those votes the hard way

from here on out. Rich donors flashing cash around just doesn't bring in those votes like they used to. Looks like we're going to have to address issues that actually affect everyday working Americans of all ages, races, genders, and economic groups.

[Demsrule86]

88. When Obama went into office he banned lobbyist which included some rich Dem voters...bad move.

It has been rescinded...we need money to win.

[Demsrule86]

89. If the left thinks they will get a better deal with Republicans that is up to them...I would say

they are not left but more libertarian...because no true lefty would vote Republican or Green.

[lovemydogs]

96. I don't see the sense in rehashing and rehashing something 20 years old

[Owl]

97. That these 3rd party runs generally F-up Democrats.

[BzaDem]

99. A lot has been accomplished. Nader's share dropped by 90% in 04, and remained low in 08/12.

This is despite an arguably less progressive candidate in '04.

Explaining to someone how their actions are self-destructive is necessary, if one's goal is to end the self-destructive behavior. However, such explanations, even if necessary, are not always sufficient. Any parent with a five year old can attest to that. Sometimes, it takes absorbing all of the negative consequences of one's actions before people start thinking clearly.

Saying we should stop complaining about Nader is like telling a parent to stop telling their toddler not to touch the hot stove. It is an absurd suggestion, even if such reminders are not always sufficient to change the problematic behavior by themselves.

[susanna]

106. You first (re: actions of MLK, Ghandi, Mandela).

Like not pissing on the party you're trying to work with.

So far, you're zero for zero.

[ZX86]

120. Your post is offensive.

To accuse a life long Democrat of "pissing on the party" is disgusting. I've voted for enough Democrats to fill a jumbo jet. Consider self deleting.

[bettyellen]

125. Exactly this. Claiming 12$ minimum wage is "republican crumbs" is total bullshit.

Anti Dem trolling to dismiss the ACA and ignore the reasons it isn't better. It's the GOP's fault.

[ZX86]

140. Yes. Republican crumbs.

If you work a full time job as an American citizen you should be able to afford an apartment.

[bettyellen]

143. The memes give you away. They're part of the slime Dems starter pack.

Looks like you need some new ones- maybe the ones minimizing Putins influence? Those are newer.

[democratisphere]

108. Unite as a political party or die as a political party. The redumbliCONs

already figured this out. The entire left of center needs to come together.

[Gothmog]

135. Nader and the greens gave us the Iraq War, citizens United and Shelby County

The gutting of the voting rights act due to he Shelby County case is really affecting my state. We have a horrible voter id law and some extreme gerrymandering due to Nader and the Green parties.

It is hard to forget this

[H2O Man]

136. Recommended.

Thank you.