I agree with Nader on more issues than I do Kerry

[skjpm]

That this is possible seems to elude people. I don't agree with Kerry on that much, regardless of whether he's a Democrat. I want universal health care now. I think the war in Iraq is wrong, period, not a right thing done the wrong way. I don't think there are "good points" in the Patriot Act. I don't think No Child Left Behind needs to be changed--it needs to be thrown out.

If Bush weren't an issue, I would never vote for Kerry over Nader. The only reason I might not vote what I believe is because I don't want Bush to win. But I'm not happy with the Democrats for giving me such a lousy choice.

[slinkerwink]

1. same here either....

[mhr]

2. Agree Completely, Dennis Is My Man!

eom

[POed_Ex_Repub]

3. I'm sure for a great many of us

This is going to be a vote against Bush rather than a vote for someone.

But on the other hand, the only guy who I agree on all the issues is POed_Ex_Repub... and he isn't running.

Or is he? :evilgrin:

[skjpm]

5. And I resent those who think my beliefs are unimportant

This "just get over it and vote for Kerry" attitude really annoys me. I didn't support Dean because I thought he was a neat guy--I wanted certain things to happen in this county which are not going to happen with Kerry. Some things which are very important to me, such as health care, are not going to happen under Kerry. I don't see why I have to give up my beliefs just because they are inconvenient for the DLC.

[POed_Ex_Repub]

24. I supported Dean

Donated $25 to his campaign (Keep in mind I'm unemployed and can't afford the $25, but I did it anyway) Would love to see him as president.

But that was the primaries... already passed in my state.

When it comes down where to put the vote... someone who's got 4% + my vote.. Or someone who I don't completely agree with, but is in a tight race with Bush (and ideologically much closer than Bush), and has a good chance to beat him?

Notice I didn't say Kerry, it's whichever Dem (Okay maybe not LaRouche). Edwards still might squeak in there, I really like him too.

Hey, it's your vote, do what you want to it. I'm just looking at the next 4 years, and likely a couple of supreme court justices. I think of what shrub has done so far, and what he'll do in a second term (where he doesn't have to worry about re-election). It's not an ideal situation, but personally I take the lesser of two evils.

[jpgray]

4. I agree, man--investing in Raytheon and Halliburton is too cool!

When GWB gets elected again, your great liberal hero will profit! Ooh, and he'll also help keep slaves a-workin' with his Wal-Mart investments! And the military industrial complex loves his investments in General Dynamics.

Nader is such a joke. Do people really still support the guy? :D

[Eric J in MN]

8. where is evidence that Nader owns Halliburton stock? nt

nt

[jpgray]

13. I'll do you one better--I'll show you his hypocritical quotes!

Here:

"I'm quite aware of how the arms race is driven by corporate demands for contracts, whether it's General Dynamics or Lockheed Martin," Nader told the Progressive in April. "They drive it through Congress. They drive it by hiring Pentagon officials in the Washington military industrial complex, as Eisenhower phrased it."

The Fidelity Magellan fund owns 2,041,800 shares of General Dynamics.

"Both parties are terrible on antitrust," Nader told CNN in August. "Look, we have Boeing now, one aircraft company, manufacturer after the McDonnell Douglas merger." In a June press release, Nader expressed disappointment in the Clinton administration's Justice Department to challenge the merger of British Petroleum with Amoco, or Exxon's merger with Mobil.

The Fidelity Magellan fund owns 2,908,600 shares of Boeing, 24,753,870 shares of British Petroleum-Amoco and 28,751,268 shares of Exxon-Mobil. The fund also owns stock in Shell, Sunoco, Texaco and Chevron -- on whose board Bush advisor Condoleezza Rice serves.

Nader runs on being BETTER on these issues than the Democrats, not being equally bad. In hypocrisy, and in profiting from corporatism, he is equally guilty.

[spooky3]

36. I think this is the paragraph you meant to include

from the preceding page of the link, an article published in 2000 (not sure if he still owns these shares).

"In the financial disclosure form Nader filed on June 14, the Green Party presidential candidate revealed that he owns between $100,000 and $250,000 worth of shares in the Fidelity Magellan Fund. The fund controls 4,321,400 shares of Occidental Petroleum stock."

[skjpm]

9. This isn't about Nader the person

It's about issues and who works for the same issues. Maybe Nader is a jerk and joke, but I agree with him on more issues. Kerry could be the greatest guy in the world, but I still don't agree with him.

[jpgray]

15. Investing in the worst of the corporate crop is just 'personal'?

Would refusing to allow his workers to unionize be personal too?

[alittlelark]

12. The people who support him are ideologues

reminiscent of Fundie ideologues. They will vote against their interests rather than face logical conclusions.

[jonnyblitz]

6. me too. n/t

[frogbison]

7. For cryin' out loud!!!

Vote your heart in the primary. That's what it's all about! Dennis Kucinich has a plan for everything you care about, from universal health care to bringing all our troops home. Please! go to www.kucinich.us/ read, and vote. The primaries are for your heart.

(edited for spelling)

[skjpm]

14. I will look at Kucinich

You're right--I probably haven't given him enough consideration. I like John Edwards style and I basically trust him, though I don't agree with him on much either. But maybe I should try Kucinich since he's choosing to stay in the race.

[saltpoint]

10. I thought Bush would be terrible for the country --

-- after the election in 2000, but I had no idea he and his cabinet could be so remorselessly damaging.

Bush has got to go.

[tedoll78]

11. Me too.

But I'll be voting with my brain rather than my non-brain.

edit translation: head over heart

[frogbison]

17. Primaries are for heart!

Then support the nominee in the general election!

[Arugula Latte]

16. SK, You make very valid points and the misplaced hatred for Nader is ...

hard to understand. Dems need to be as brave Nader is. I don't think many of us would put ourselves up to as much more scorn as Nader knew he'd encounter by running again. It's nt ego; it's patriotism.

I, too, will plug my nose and vote for Kerry -- even though he supported the illegeal Iraq invasion -- but agree more with Ralph, a true hero who has changed our lives for the better over the last 40 years than anyone else. Cleaner air, cleaner water, safer cars, safer factories -- the list goes on.

I know, I can hear it now: "He changed our lives in the last four years by giving us Bush." Not so, you many DU-ers who may spew this by rote. Gore lost because he ran a horrible campaign. And because the Supreme Court was not supreme at all. Gore lost because he couldn't tap into the 50 percent of Americans who don't vote, many of whom came out and actually voted for Nader because they saw a candidate they believed in; that is, many of those who voted for Nader in 2000 would have stayed home otherwise. The facts back this up. Had Gore won a fraction of the thousands of registered Dems in Fla. who voted for Bush, he would have won. And what about his home state. Anyway all of this has been well-documented.

I wrote to Nader and asked him not to run. But now -- now that he's said he'd drop out if the race is too close to call -- I'm glad he's running. With Dean forced out by the media and DLC, more than ever we need a progressive voice in the race to force Kerry to act like a real Dem.

Thank you SK for your reasoned commentary.

[skjpm]

19. I didn't believe Nader then--I do now

Seeing the Democratic party in action this primary season has convinced me that Nader was right all along. Those in power in our party just aren't that different from the Republicans. If Bush was a normal Republican and not a neocon Fascist, this election wouldn't matter much. Because I'm afraid of a dictatorship, I'll vote against Bush. But if it were Dole or McCain or Guliani or some old-fashioned Republican who didn't threaten this country's core, I'd vote for Nader over Kerry.

[morgan2]

18. the biggest thing that would cause me to vote for Nader

is the poor showing of Kucinich in the Dem. primaries. It shows that most Democratic voters are either terrified to vote for a real candidate or don't know what a good one looks like. Seems people still don't get it.

[jpgray]

20. If you have liberal values, you are working for DK in the primaries

For me it's that simple. I've been evangelizing on his behalf all over the Twin Cities. :D But really, I have very little respect for Nader due to his hypocrisy.

[morgan2]

25. but thats just the thing

so many people say they agree with dennis, but wont vote for him in the primaries because they think he can't win. As long as that kind of self-fulfilling negativeness permiates the left, Nader serves a purpose. Without Nader, Gore would have won and would have governed just like Clinton. He would have pushed further and further to the center, because he had no one to lose on the left. Nader has forced the Democratic party to at least pay lip service to Kucinich now, maybe after another loss people will realize that kissing up to corporations is not the way to win.

[jpgray]

27. Well, you'll have to make your own mind up on that one

I don't have anything to tell you that isn't an equally subjective interpretation. Personally, I will vote for Kucinich in my caucus, and the nominee in the general election. I don't want to "heighten the contradictions", because that philosophy uses suffering and death for political gain--the worst kind of "end justifies the means" rhetoric. Since I don't want the country to move left because of a disaster, the only way I can move it left is by replacing conservative Republicans with the most liberal Democrats available. I want Dennis to be the nominee, but if not, I will vote Kerry or Edwards.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. What is Nader's JOBS program?

[Tinoire]

22. Here's a GREAT choice for you! & Nader agrees with him.

He walks the talk - Count on Kucinich
for democracy, social and economic justice, peace, and for the people

Since the Supreme Court’s stunning decision of 2000, millions of Americans watched in disbelief as our political leadership chose corporate globalization over the welfare of our citizens. We embarked upon oil-enriching wars which endanger the lives of innocent people who echo our anguished cry from September 11: “Why do they hate us?”

While we were asking this question, the Bush administration used our grief and anger to propel us into war. Millions have lost jobs. Living from pay-check to pay-check in the wealthiest nation, we are suddenly fearful of losing everything. Unimaginable figures like $87 billion for the continued occupation of Iraq have become reality. Only two candidates, Kucinich and Sharpton, unequivocally said NO to the $87 billion aid package stating that the money was needed to take care of domestic programs at home, rather than to occupy nations and enrich corporations.

Kucinich, Co-Chair of the Progressive Caucus, has been a staunch, consistent, and outspoken leader in the opposition to the Bush Administration and its agenda of war, fear, and greed. He is the only candidate who has presented a clear, detailed and workable plan for ending the conflict while committing money for reparations and US help in reconstruction. US military casualties in Iraq have now exceeded 500, and the media has begun comparing the figure to the number of US dead in Vietnam in 1965 prior to the significant expansion of US operations there. We are out $155 billion already with hundreds of billions at stake if we remain there. Our continued occupation does not bode well for families with loved ones presently serving or with children approaching the draft age. Kucinich sees the solution to the quagmire in which ‘Operation Iraqi freedom’ has trapped us. Kucinich’s plan will phase our troops out and international peace-keeping troops in within 90 days of its implementation and return Iraq to a peaceful order. "US out/UN in"!

For over a year now Kucinich has been telling us that every dollar spent oppressing the Iraqi people to enrich Halliburton is one more dollar taken from the average American’s dinner-table. $87 Billion is money stolen from inner city schools so that the Pentagon can embark on it’s never ending cycle of self-justification. $87 Billion is a lot of money when you can’t find a few million for job retraining programs.

Our domestic programs and safety nets are in disarray. Kucinich proposes a 15% cut in the Pentagon’s swollen budget in order to fully fund domestic priorities here at home. Beginning with what is an undisputed right in almost all industrialized countries-- a universal, single-payer health care plan in which no American would be left behind. Under Kucinich’s plan, phased in over a ten-year period, medical care will be privately delivered but publicly funded. Kucinich is the candidate whose health care plan has been endorsed by the Physicians for National Health Care Program (which published the first major single payer proposal in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1989). The PNHP and Congressman Jim McDermott requested detailed plans from every candidate and examined them- Kucinich’s plan was singled out as "by far the most comprehensive, because it guarantees coverage to all Americans and overhauls the health care finance system. It would also do the best job of controlling costs among the Presidential contenders’ plans." It has also received one of the 2 passing marks from JustHealthCare.

Our trade policies have caused tragic effects on workers, environment and the job market on a global scale. America alone has lost an estimated 3 million jobs to NAFTA and WTO policy. Kucinich is the sole candidate planning to replace NAFTA and the WTO with bilateral trade agreements. Kucinich also addresses economic exploitation in the United States with a proposal to repeal Taft-Hartley: "Workers’ rights are truly human rights whether they be in the Maquila region of Mexico, Saipan or Chinatown in New York City." (Interview, July 25, 2003)

Like John F. Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich grew up in a Catholic home and his position on reproductive rights is one of the most complex and worthy of respect than any of the candidates’. He has nailed women’s rights issues and garnered the support of women’s rights activists and feminists all over the country. He has a true legislative commitment to the concept of "justice." He recognizes that it isn’t "justice" to force women to bear children in the worst of circumstances by removing the final safety net to prevent such a situation. He recognizes that, for women to be truly equal, they must be free to determine when and if they are able to bear and provide for a child. He knows that the current system for caring for unwanted and mistreated children is ineffective and overloaded. What Kucinich understands is that first we must take care of and meet the needs of those who are here, right now, today; we must meet that challenge before moving on to philosophical discussions about the morality of abortion. Ironically, Kucinich was the first candidate pledging not to appoint any judges who will not uphold Roe vs. Wade. (Kerry has since stated the same intention).

Kucinich is the leader we have searched for. He resonates with Truth. He has revived trust and enthused Americans with HOPE. The great American dream we once had is but a memory now; only one candidate has a realistic platform to recapture that dream for all people. His website, www.kucinich.us reads like an encyclopedia of solutions.

No chains are needed around our ankles as long as they can chain our minds and imprison our hopes. No acetylene torch is needed to free ourselves from the chains of our country’s current situation. We can snap the chains, walk through the bars. All we have to do is decide to do it.

Vote Kucinich

But don't confuse caring for weakness
You can't put that label on me
The truth is my weapon of mass protection
And I believe truth sets you free

What Ever Happened to Peace on Earth – Willy Nelson



A collaborative effort by: DiamondSoul, Dover, Dweller, JohnKleeb, Lwolf, Mairead, Rucky, Sweetheart, and Tinoire

[George_Bonanza]

23. Then Kucinich, and only Kucinich, is the ideal choice

DK is pretty much lock-step with Nader on everything. I hope you will see Kerry as the liberal he is, but until he is the nominee, go with your heart and vote Kucinich.

[Gman]

26. All we're asking is

to just hold your nose while you vote for the Democratic nominee.

[legin]

28. Two things that annoy me

1. is the sheer inability of the Democratic Party to take responsibility for any of its actions. Every decision the Party makes is perfect and anybody who disagrees then there must be something wrong with them.

It is not as though we havn't been here before. One example Cynthia, stands up against bush*, gets dumped by the Democratic Party for her efforts, thinks about running for the Greens, "How can she possibly think about doing such a thing, I just don't understand it at all."

Everybody here knows why Nader is running for President however hard they try to kid themselves and others.

2. The fact that it is so obvious that the only way the Democratic Party hangs on to it's left wing is by force, we don't get anything out of the deal. We spend two and a bit years fighting to prevent this war and what do we get as our new leader ? Somebody who voted for it. Well we didn't get Lieberman i suppose that was a slight concession to the Left. The only reason I'd ever vote Dem is by moral blackmail, "Do you want another 4 years of bush*", which gets pulled out of the holster on every occasion possible.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Piperay]

31. Especially as to

putting chimp in for another 4 years, yup.

[POed_Ex_Repub]

30. kick

[Gore1FL]

32. I agree with a lot of people more than I do Kerry

Problem is, like Nader, they don't stand a chance in hell of ending up in the oval office.

[CWebster]

33. Oh don't bring that up

No fair pointing out the obvious truth. Don't you know we are all supposed to line up and throw our support behind the candidate deemed "most electable" for us by a media bankrolling said candidate's campaign? The candidate who supported what we are all supposed to be voting against and whose dirty tricks and media connected insider status destroyed the candidate who most vocally challenged what we are supposed to be voting against. You see, we are all required to line up and vote for the most "electable" candidate who supported what we are supposed to be voting against and we are supposed to demonize and despise the messenger who suggests who we are supposed to be voting against should be impeached not supported.

What is wrong with this picture?

[PVnRT]

34. Agree completely

My only vote this November is against Bush. I really don't see a whole hell of a lot to actually vote "for." This makes me a bad Democrat, I know, but I can't help having ideals.

[edzontar]

35. Last night about 1/3 of the repondents in a DUpoll would have you BANNED

For admitting that.

That is how much they are afraid of Nader.

More importantly--that is how much they are afraid of ISSUES.

The DNC ABB cabal is afraid og Nader because they KNOW that the issues raised by Dean and Kucinich, etc., which they thought thay had managed to sweep under the rug, are still out there, and that Nader could prove all to willing and effective by taking up those themes.

I think Ralph will go nowhere this time myself--I certainly will not support hima nd will encorage everyone i know not to weaste a vote on his spolier candidacy-- but i can't help enjoying-for a few moments at least--the panic and rage that has ben exploding from the ABB entitlement camp.

These folks trashed me and my candidate for months, and from now on they will have only themselves to blame if their little plan fails to pan out the way they hoped.

[emulatorloo]

37. Funny, Nader agrees w Kerry on more issues than not

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=385356