Bush Backers buy Ads for Nader in Swing States!

[jpgpenn]

BUSH BACKERS BUY ADS FOR NADER IN SWING STATES

Ralph Nader's goal to get George W. Bush elected got a push from a pro-Bush committee yesterday, the Republican Leadership Council. According to a 10/27/00 AP story, the RLC has made an ad consisting of footageof Nader attacking Gore and is buying $10,000 worth of ad time to be used to keep the Bush lead in Oregon and to move Bush ahead in Washington and Wisconsin, two states that are up for grabs. The ads will begin Monday. "Advertising experts say they can't recall another time when a major party organization has run ads helpful to a minor party candidate." The RLC hopes to make similar ad buys for Nader in Minnesota, Michigan, and Maine, three other states that Bush hopes to win with Nader's help. This new Republican strategy to elect Bush by backing Nader is believed to be a winning idea, according to the AP: "In this extraordinarily tight national race, one or two states could make the difference in who is elected."

The AP also noted that the RLC ad buy for Nader comes at a very good time for the Green Party candidate, since he doesn't have the money to afford the cost of the ad campaign the Republicans are launching for him: "Nader, running a low-budget campaign, is not currently airing any television commercials of his own and it's possible that the RLC will end up spending more on pro-Nader media than Nader himself." The AP reports that "The Gore campaign labeled the ads deceptive. Vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman said he was confident the public won't be fooled. 'For Republicans to be putting Ralph Nader on television in a paid ad, certainly might lead your average observer to be cyncial,' he said." According to Mark Miller, the executive director of the Republican Leadership Council, "the ads are partly a response to commercials being run by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League." The AP reports that when asked about the ads Nader said that outside groups have the right to run them. Nader's lukewarm response to news of the ads is seen by some as giving further credence to the charge that a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. --Politex, 10/28/00

http://www.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=408


Hey, so what if Nader isn't a Democrat, right?:puke:

[AntiCoup2K4]

1. There's an RLC now too?

So if the DLC are really Republicans (and they are), then what would the RLC really be? The New National Socialist Party of the Fourth Reich, perhaps?

BTW, under normal circumstances, Junior wouldn't have a prayer in Washington state. But if Kerry's the nominee..... :scared:

[Protagoras]

8. The DLC are republicans? Nah.

I loath their positions on most issues...far away from my own...and antithetical to my own liberal leanings which are to the left of Teddy Kennedy.

But republicans? Really...aside from Zell Miller...who's a democrat in the DLC who actually has a voting record as bad as *any* major republican? They may not define the left...but that doesn't make them republicans...they are at worst, highly compromised corporate moderates (sellouts).

Anyway let's give the republicans for being the actual right wing creeps they are, which is very different from the DLC by just about any measure.

Many Democrats, especially those in the DLC may not be what we could be or should be...but there are still lots of differences between them and repugs...check out both liberal and conservative scorecards...there is a pretty clear line between the two sides.

[lurk_no_more]

12. DLC are really Republicans

Ooga Booga,Ooga Booga,Ooga Booga,Ooga Booga,Ooga Booga,



And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[wyldwolf]

36. Clinton is a republican? Dean WAS a republican? Gore? Kerry?

?

[GreenPartyVoter]

38. Read Michael Moore's "Stupid White Men" chapter on Bill C.

[mouse7]

2. Can Nader refuse permission?

What are the legalities on that?

[jpgpenn]

4. LOL

[SerpentX]

24. Probably not.

The Fair Use doctrine would probably cover the use of short clips.

[yowzayowzayowza]

3. Did Nader ever comment on this?

n/t

[lancdem]

5. This is from 2000

but I wouldn't be surprised if it happened again.

[jpgpenn]

7. Of course!

Hell, it worked the first time!

[mouse7]

6. DOH! n/t

[rockymountaindem]

9. Bush is ahead in Oregon?

That's news to me.

[Mick Knox]

10. Mathews Spanked him to pieces yesterday...

I almost felt sorry for the guy. If you cant hold your own verse mathews.. you damn sure cant play with the big boys.

[jpgpenn]

11. He has turned into a sorry piece of ...

shit hasn't he!?

edit, text adjustment!

[LandOLincoln]

13. He always was a sorry piece of

shit.

[jpgpenn]

14. WOW where are all the NonDemocratic supporters at now?

[orwell]

15. Hidden Agenda

People are mad enough about Ralphie Boy without adding fuel to the fire. It seems deceptive to quote something written in 2000.

O

[jpgpenn]

16. why? i need to be able to read for others now?

GET REAL! It's listed on the link! Reading is fundamental!

[The Magistrate]

17. The Same Thing Will Be Done This Year, Sir

Do not deceive yourself. All campaigns attempt to raise turn-out by their supporters, and depress turn out by the opponents. Wrecker Nader is a ready-made tool in the hand of Republican stategists aiming at the latter goal: they will do what they can to enhance his effect. They will make "grass-roots" operatives available to him for ballot petitions, and monies available by a variety of covert channels, for organizational expenses and advertising. Since both the Republicans and Wrecker Nader share a common goal, namely the destruction of the Democratic Party, their practical alliance is a genuine one, built on a commonality of interest.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Old and In the Way]

19. You smoked this out pretty good.

It's a well known fact that jpgpenn is, are you ready for this?, supporting the Democratic nominee. I'm sure this pisses the anti-DLC faction on this board to be reminded of the facts with regards to the Nader-Republican Alliance, but think of it as a PSA for those that may not know.

[jpgpenn]

18. KICK! for all the NonDemocrats at DU!

[HFishbine]

37. As one of the "NonDemocrats" (sic)

I thought the dems were interested in attracting independents, or do you think it's better to vilify those who haven't pledged allegiance to The Party and to try to somehow win with the 36% of voters who are dems?

[NNN0LHI]

20. This is interesting. Not surprising though n/t

[Dookus]

21. C'mon...

I hate Nader as much as anyone here, but presenting a 4 year old article as today's news isn't the honorable way to oppose him.

[NNN0LHI]

22. This ain't LBN Dookus and the date is plain in the article

I think remembering what happened back then is a good thing. Be good to see Nader address this issue. He has not in over 3 years that I am aware of. I am sure it will come up along the campaign trail.

Don

[Dookus]

23. I'm not arguing DU rules

I'm arguing about what's right.

It would be honest and easy to post the news with a headline that indicates the article refers to 2000.

As it is, the headline falsely implies that it's happening now. I like fair, honest debate. This is dishonest.

[jpgpenn]

30. Open your eyes!

History will repeat itself! Although it wont have anywhere near the effect it had the first time around. Nader's name will be worthless after this election!

[Dookus]

31. My eyes are wide open

My objection is that your title is misleading. We can oppose Ralph Nader without being dishonest about it.

[Forkboy]

25. When you get something from this year post it

[Adjoran]

26. It is the same now

as it was then: a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush. And if a RWer votes for Libertarian or other fringe party, it's a vote for the Democratic nominee. The winner will be either the Democrat or repub, and everything else is a sideshow.

Sometimes the sideshow geeks determine who wins, but they never win themselves.

[NNN0LHI]

27. Thanks for the post jpgpenn. Plenty current enough for me

I remember when this happened. At the time I thought Nader would have come out against this and raise all kinds of hell about it. I don't think Nader said anything about it? He may have, but I sure don't remember anything he said.

Don

[jpgpenn]

29. No Problem!

[jpgpenn]

28. KICK!

:kick:

[IconoclastIlene]

32. Nothing they (the Republican Party does)

Nothing that the Republicans do would surprise me, really. They play dirty all the time and seem quite proud about it, at least to me.

[GreenPartyVoter]

33. Without decent election reform, anyone can buy ads about anyone

What a sucky system we have.

I know. Let's change it!

[redqueen]

34. Too bad the DNC hasn't learned anything

from the past three elections.

[jpgpenn]

35. KICK!

:kick: