Should Democratic Underground launch ad campaign against Nader and Bush

[billbuckhead]

Let's beg America not to vote for Bush? Let's beg America not to vote for Nader or anyone but the 2004Dem. We'll owe you. As many Americans as possible need to unite against this unAmerican regime.

[onehandle]

1. Bush, yes. Nader, ignore. nt

[mstrsplinter326]

2. Don't equate Bush and Nader

Why not unite and vote for Nader? Just because he as his own, non-majority, party? That's an antiquated reason to choose political views. I would wager you don't know most of Nader's view, just purely because you hate.

[DemBones DemBones]

3. We don't. Bush could win. Nader has no chance of winning.

Always vote for the best man. He is the Democrat. -- Harry Truman

[AgadorSparticus]

4. Because I don't want bush raping me another 4 years

[tomorrowsashes]

6. Oh yes, the democrats are so much more subtle when they rape you

Every vote for Nader encourages the Democratic party to move left. They cannot keep lying to, and screwing their voters. Clinton did nothing for the poor. John Kerry won't either. Why should you launch an add campaign against a person whom you agree with.

[efhmc]

10. Clinton helped the entire economy and that by the way

helps the poor.

[billbuckhead]

5. Nadir says Dems and repuKKKes are the same

It's like saying rednecks and KKKers are the same, it's like saying gays and pedophiles are the same thing, it's like saying feminists and whores are the same, it's like saying that BushCheneyBushfamilyDeLayKenLayRumsfeldLottFrischRoveSwartzeneggarFalwellReaganPNAC are the same as GoreCarterKerryClarkClintonEdwardsDeanKucinichWellstoneDLC, it's like saying Mandela and Mugabe are the same,........

[tomorrowsashes]

7. they aren't that different

from www.politicalcompass.org

The democrats, with the exception of Sharpton and Kucinich, aren't that different that the Republicans. Even if they are, they're still screwing the same people.

[mstrsplinter326]

13. Great!

I love the chart.
I like the Democrats, I like the history, I like their chances this year.
But, it's important to note that the major political sponsors of the Republicans are the major political sponsors of the Democrats.

No political party would try and win a race by proposing laws that would undermine it's supporters - unless they wanted to lose. It's important to question your leaders, especially since they indirectly control the information you can obtain about them, their friends, their enemies, and their sponsors.

[efhmc]

9. What, please? Are you really serious?

[mstrsplinter326]

11. yes

If you believe Bush = Nader, you need not post.

[mobuto]

12. Actually, I'd say you probably don't know Nader's views

Given his opposition to environmental laws, his treatment of his workers, his busting of their union, etc. Even if I did agree with him, even if I thought voting for him wouldn't mean helping Bush, even then I wouldn't vote for him.

[mstrsplinter326]

15. Missed focus

Nader should not be president. He should be in control of a representative percent of the government based on how many votes he received. But that's another issue entirely.
Nader represents an extreme. Everyone has biases and hypocrisies, but the members of the DU seem to think Nader = the Devil. This is nonsense. His 'huge effect' on the 2000 election spurred all of us (anti and pro Nader) to action and pulled the dems back left. Nader has flaws, Kerry has flaws - why is there such a unbalanced scrutiny of Nader. I think it is fear of the dems inadequacy more than anything, but that's just a guess.

[Ardee]

17. Robotic propaganda barrage from the neodemocratic right wing

Nader is the antichrist, Nader eats little children, focus on Nader ignore the betrayals of the democrats....you will not think, you will not listen, you will do as you are told.

Refute this platform all you destroyers of a fine old political party:

http://www.naderexplore04.org/issues.html



Ralph wants to know:

In the 2004 election, should these issues be part of the debate?

Full public financing of public elections with the necessary, broad changes for a more fair and representative election process, replacing present charades;

A responsive political system to expand the civic energies of the American people by, among other ways, facilitating the banding together of workers, consumers, taxpayers, small investors, and communities.

A serious drive to abolish poverty using long-known policies;
Universal health insurance -- single payer embracing prevention, quality and cost controls;

A living wage for the tens of millions of workers making less than $10 an hour -- many full time workers at $5.15, $6, $7, $8, and long overdue labor rights reform;

An adequately funded crackdown on corporate crimes, fraud and abuse that have cheated trillions of dollars from taxpayers, investors, pension holders and consumers, plus specific corporate reforms;

A comprehensive and determined nurturing of the physical and educational needs of children;

Reform of the criminal injustice system and defense of the precious pillars of our democracy -- civil liberties, civil rights and civil remedies for wrongful injuries -- which are under relentless assault by corporate interests and the present government;

A multi-faceted foreign policy to wage multilateral peace and promote arms control, plus utilizing the many assets of our country's knowledge base to lift prospects for the impoverished people abroad;

A redirected federal budget for the crucial priorities of our country and away from the massive waste, fraud and redundancy of what President Eisenhower called the "military-industrial complex," as well as the massive costs of corporate welfare;

The crisis of commercial food, water, and diet policies, in addition to agribusiness domination over dwindling, rural, small farm economies;

The need for renewable energy and energy efficiency, instead of costly oil, gas and nuclear boondoggles;

The housing problem for the millions of households who can't afford
the rents or can't escape gentrification and sprawl;

The relief of highway congestion and the promotion of modern public transit;

The pull-down effect of corporate globalization on labor, the environment, consumers and our democratic processes.

The consequences of media concentration over our public airwaves.

Let us know what you think!




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paid for by Nader 2004 Presidential Exploratory Committee, Inc.
PO Box 18002, Washington, DC 20036
[e-mail]

[HowdyDUit]

8. How much will it cost?

Will the admins provide a fund raising effort?

[RememberWellstone]

14. No. Ignore Nader.

Focus, focus, focus. Nader is not the prize. The bumbling idiot is. We cannot get sidetracked with rabbit trails that lead back to us. We must focus squarely on the target, getting rid of Bush.

[usregimechange]

16. Well, I like Nader but Bush must go.

[Moderator]

18. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. If you start a thread in the General Discussion forum, you must present your opinion in a manner that is not inflammatory, which respects differences in opinion, and which is likely to lead to respectful discussion rather than flaming. Some examples of things which should generally be avoided are: unnecessarily hot rhetoric, nicknames for prominent Democrats or their supporters, broad-brush statements about groups of people, single-sentence "drive-by" thread topics, etc.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

3. The subject line of a discussion thread may not include profanity or swear words, even if words or letters are replaced by asterisks, dashes, or abbreviations.

4. The subject line and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation.

5. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

6. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

7. Discussion topics that mention any or all of the Democratic presidential primary candidates are not permitted in the General Discussion forum, and instead must be posted in the General Discussion: 2004 Primary forum.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator