It seems to me that Nader decided to get in the race not a moment too soon

[Walt Starr]

For DemocraticUnderground at any rate. In fact, I'd say he's damn near a week late!

Ralph Nader appears to have now replaced Howard Dean as the favorite whipping boy for DU.

You know what? IT CRACKS ME UP!!!!

I, for one, sign EVERY petition to get a measure on the ballot or get a candidate on the ballot. I signed to get Nader on the ballot in 2000 and I'll sign again this year because that's democratic principles at work. If The Ham Sandwich (D) is to win, it must win against all candidates in the free marketplace of ideas, else, The Ham Sandwich (D) is not electable and does not deserve to be president.

So, either you believe in the Democratic Party's ability to defeat all comers, or you're terrified of some potential competition. If you truly believe that one of the two remaining potential nominees is actually electable, you should welcome Nader's hat into the ring.

For me, the blame Nader game is the biggest joke I've ever seen. The REAL voter's to blame for Bush being in office are those 50 million idiots who didn't vote. Maybe you all need to be reminded that Nader's followers didn't even amount to 2.8% of those morans (sic).

Talk about Bush refusing to be accountable for what he's done, the Democrats who blame Nader are more to blame than Nader and his followers in my book. If you want to win and you believe that the nominee is a good man, get out and get some non-voters to vote this year and Nader won't even be a blip on the radar screen. If not, you can always sit on your collective asses an bitch about it on internet message boards.

:shrug:

[Iverson]

1. premature?

Nader has not announced his candidacy, and he may not. In fact, I hope he does not, but not for reasons of centrist orthodoxy.
However, he has always been a favorite whipping boy around here.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

2. WRONG! Nader replaced Kerry as DU's favorite whipping boy.

.

[Padraig18]

7. Kerry's tenure as 'whipping boy' was so short as to be laughable.

Ask a Dean supporter if you wanna talk to someone with REAL whip weals.

[chief joseph]

3. Are you concerned about democracy, or are you

as happy as a clam to just poke your finger in everyone's eye? I suspect the latter is true. Your (insight?) defies logic.

[Walt Starr]

5. I'm concerned about democracy

that's why I welcome ALL candidates into the General Election.

[eileen_d]

8. Even Kerry?

Et tu, Walt Starr?

[Walt Starr]

9. I'm voting for The Ham Sandwich (D) come November 2nd

and I welcome ALL candidates besides The Ham Sandwich (D), too. I would love to see an entire page of potential candidates to thumb through on November 2nd!

[Scott Lee]

25. Me too! Ham will change America!

[silver state d]

10. nice catch.

[Walt Starr]

12. What catch?

???

[silver state d]

6. Well said joseph.....

Ps welcome to the DU!!!!

[mzmolly]

4. This is a Democracy and Nader has a right to run, but taking $$ from

Republicans should clue in us *liberals* as to what is really at play here. You can bet we are like sheep being led to the slaughter, fighting for Naders democratic rights as he helps the Republican agenda.

Goal # 1. Take down Dean
Goal # 2. Insert Nader
Goal # 3. Paperless voting machines
Goal # 4. Toby Keith to play at Bush inaguration

I'd say things are going according to plan.

[GreenPartyVoter]

11. Great post, Walt

[poskonig]

13. Republicans give Nader credit.

Go Nader!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1082873/posts

(imagine Asscroft and Rumsfeld giving each other high-fives)

[Walt Starr]

16. If you're scared of Nader, then the nominee is not electable

If the nominee is electable, you should be saying, "Welcome to the fray, Ralph, you're going to lose SO FUCKING BAD you'll be lucky to average a hundred votes per state!"

You should welcome him into the race because this one will destroy any potential future run.

[poskonig]

17. I don't care if Kerry or Edwards deserve to win.

If Bush gets a victory, I'm fucked. I'll be working low wage jobs without benefits living with my parents. And I get endless wars and a theocracy on top of it.

I want the good'ol Clinton days back, when I was actually making decent money living on my own. Don't you?

[Walt Starr]

19. Shhhhh, here's a secret

I've actually not done bad under Bush. My pay hasn't gone up a lot but I was upper middle class to begin with and my taxes have dropped dramatically.

Of course I want the fuckwad out, but if Nader doesn't run this year he or somebody else will only fuck the Democrats later.

And I also honestly believe most of the people who voted for Nader in 2000 wouldn't have voted at all if Nader wasn't in the race, and they're the same ones who will vote for him again this year. The disaffected Democrats and real Greens who voted for him in 2000 know the stakes this year and will be like me. They'll cast a ballot for The Ham Sandwich (D).

[poskonig]

22. I voted for Nader in 2000.

I was 21 at the time, i.e. my first presidential election. I bought the "they're the same" bullshit, and now we have an occupation in Iraq, hemmoraging jobs all over the place, attacks on our environment, and extremist judicial appointments.

Get used to this guy because we may be seeing him as Chief Justice for a long time.



Got theocracy?

[Doogie]

23. Shhh, don't say that

Don't you know, that'll get ya banned!!

Actually, I'm unemployed at the moment, thanks to the bubble, and I know that my predicament has nothing to do with the president (the bubble and 9/11 would've happened and wiped me out anyways).

But ya still can't say that here!

[dawn]

34. You're wrong on one account.

My younger brother always votes, and he voted for Nader in 2000 because he believed what Ralph was telling him.

He regrets that decision every day. After graduating from college into the most dismal job market in 10 years, he switched to the Democratic party and won't vote 3rd party for the forseeable future.

It's nice to know that you've done well under Bush*. Many of us haven't.

[Young Socialist]

21. sorry to burst your bubble pal

but the good old clinton days were a sham built on the internet speculation. that was going to end regardless of who won the 2000 eection.

[poskonig]

24. These guys are *deliberately* outsourcing us.

I'd rather have people like Robert Reich formulating economic policy, not the guy (Bush) who has taken more money from Enron alone than Kerry has from all his liberal lobbyists during his entire career.

[brentspeak]

30. I thought Nader's not getting 2% of the popular vote

already nixed a future run. Wasn't that one of the reasons why Nadarites voted for him - so that the Green Party would be eligible for future federal campaign funds?

brentspeak

[Walt Starr]

31. You don't have to be eligible for federal matching funds to run

but it helps.

Perot's party had it, but Buchanan pissed it away.

Nader went for it for the Greens, but in the end didn't cut the mustard, which tells me he had no real effect on th outcome of the 2000 election. It's just media hype and, as always, people fell for the hype that Nader cost Gore the election.

[brentspeak]

32. No, it is not hype

It is an absolute fact. Exit polls revealed that almost half of the Nader voters in the Nadar-factor states would have voted for Gore had Nadar not run.

brentspeak

[Walt Starr]

37. I call bullshit

You ASSUME that Gore was entitled to the Nader votes.

No candidate is entitled to any vote.

Go after the 50 million non-voters. There's more votes there than the 1.4 million Nader voters.

[regnaD kciN]

36. And that really is the point...

Nader is going to get creamed this year. I'd be surprised if he gets 20% of the votes he got last time. I might even be surprised if he gets 10% of them, for that matter.

That's why I'm completely un-alarmed by the news of Nader's candidacy (always expected it myself), and refuse to get worked up about it, despite the sky-is-falling cries from Blank-Check-Man's supporters. Let me put it this way: if, seeing what happened after voting for Ralphie last time, one votes for him again, it's a pretty sure bet that that voter was never going to cast a ballot for a Democratic candidate (any Democratic candidate), no matter what.

[woo me with science]

14. excellent post

Me, I intend to vote for the tuna on rye. But I welcome a wide array of deli selections. :o)

[lancdem]

15. The problem I have, Walt

is that Nader is obviously no progressive, because if he were, he'd spend his time bitching about Bush, the real enemy, than whining about the Dems. Many fellow liberals and previous Nader supporters asked him not to run, but no, he won't listen to them. He'd much rather hang out with Grover Norquist. The man is a joke, plain and simple. And it's a shame, really, compared to what he used to be.

[kher-heb]

18. I am freaked out

I have never seen so much blind extreme partisan fascism on the left until I found this site.
All I see is people demanding that everyone obey, get in line, as if the Democratic party is more important than life itself.

[Eloriel]

35. Yeah, that's kinda how I see it too

Welceome to DU anyway. Not all of us are like that. But the loyalty oaths will be starting very soon.

[jonnyblitz]

39. I agree.

creepy as shit.

[brentspeak]

20. Nader lied to his followers, and his followers bought it up

I had numerous discussions with Naderites prior to the 2000 election. No matter how hard I tried to explain to them the differences between Gore and Bush, they replied with the same "Tweedle Dee/Tweedle Dum" argument. More often than not, they simply parroted Nader's soundbites like Dittoheads parrot Rush. Though they did seem to have knowledge about globalization and environmental issues, they knew next to nothing about basic issues like Social Security and the national debt - and had no interest in learning about them. And of course, they all claimed that voting for Nader would NOT enable Bush to get into office, something I bet their local Green party organizers believed as well. There was absolutely no getting through to them; their heads were completely in the sand.

After the election, the excuse they made was that we all voted in the state of NJ, and that it was the fault of those Nader voters in other states. So in a way, you're right: it's best to concentrate on non-voters, because it's simply a waste of time to expend any energy on those on the far left who are as brain-dead as those on the far right.



brentspeak

[Bonobo]

26. Walt, I agree 100%. Nader hatred is badly misplaced.

Although I am against his running this year.

[Old and In the Way]

27. Hey, I'm sure if Howard Dean was the candidate you'd still be posting

this and all of Howard's supporters would think it's just great to support 3rd Party drains on the Democratic nominee.

It's all a big game. Whoopee, way to go.

[Walt Starr]

28. Actually, if Howard Dean was the nominee

Nader would not be running.

Now doesn't that bit of information CRACK YOU UP?

[candy331]

29. Maybe the so called enlightened voters {my 1000th post

in Iowa and NH were not as enlightened as they were thought to be. Someone should have enlightened them to the fact that they had been had. "Oh! what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive".

[KFC]

33. Just vote for Bush and get over it

Nice play, but I don't buy it.

I'm thinking that any Democrat will be better than Bush.

Convince me otherwise, if you are so inclined.

[Walt Starr]

38. I'm voting for The Ham Sandwich (D)

Your false assumptions notwithstanding.

[LizW]

40. Yes, it cracks me up

I'm cracked up by how much time is being spent here ranting about Nader after weeks on end of hearing how supremely electable Kerry is.
He's oh, so electable, but just in case he loses, there's Dean to blame for "damaging" him so much in the primary. And Dean voters who aren't loyal, blah, blah, blah. And now, apparently it isn't enough to have Dean to blame if Kerry loses. A backup whipping boy is needed. Voila. Nader hysteria 24/7.

Wait a minute, that doesn't crack me up anymore. It now scares the shit out of me. :scared:

[Liberal Veteran]

41. Well, if anything Bush proved that Nader was wrong...

...when Nader said that there is no difference between the democrats and republicans. Does anyone honestly believe that we would be in the same place we are right now if Gore had been president the last 4 years? Would we honestly have broken the record of deficit spending? Would we have unleashed "shock and awe" on Iraq? Would we have wasted 200 billion dollars cleaning up the mess that is Iraq? Would we have massive troop deployments? Would we have backed out of several treaties? Would we have a president throwing his weight behind a constitutional amendment to make gays second class citizens? Would we have court appointees that make Scalia look moderate? Would Tommy Chong be in jail for selling pipes? Would we be worried about sneak and peak searches?

This idiotic notion that the two parties are exactly the same is one that only appeals to the fringe elements on both sides.

[Rooktoven]

42. I look forward to be asked to sign a Nader petition

So I can tell that person to go to hell. (And I _have_ signed petitions for Greens before...)