so, i watched Ralph Nader on Democracy Now today...

[iamthebandfanman]

and while the prospect of him running scares the holy hell out of me (since im an 'any body but a republican' type of person)... i hafta say i do agree with almost everything he says...

i heard him say the following , and i hafta say i agree...
i posted a poll in GD a while back about feeling like liberals were being screwed over yet again in the election process , even tho we have basically been the backbone of the democratic party the last 8 years...

this is what he said
"So we have to get over it, and liberals especially have got to get over their easy abdication of least-worst voting for the Democrats, where they don’t put any pressure or they don’t make any demands on the Democrats, because they fear that the Republicans are worse. That sets up a system where the corporations are pulling 24/7 the Democrats in their direction to become corporate Democrats, like the corporate Republicans, and no one is pulling the other way. Why? Because they’re all freaked out by the Republicans, and they’re going for least-worst voting. All the bargaining power of progressives and liberals atrophy with that attitude.


So if they don’t want to support a small party candidate, if they don’t want to go to our website and see the reasons in that remarkable letter by my supporters that’s on that website, see the reasons why we are testing the waters, then they at least have to make demands on the Democratic Party, which they did not make in ’00 against Gore and they did not make against John Kerry. In fact, they had a moratorium on demonstrations against the war in ’04. "

i agree wit him because it is true, this is the mentality of most liberal minded people. if i dont vote democratic, im letting the absolute worst person for me get into office.

i take heart to what he said about making demands..
that if people dont want to support someone running in a third party to represent their ideas, then pressure the democratic party into accepting our demands... they must understand that we are valuable and that if they dont take our demands and wishes they seriously risk losses those who vote for them outa shear fear of what they will get if they dont!

i know alot of democrats, and people on DU, probably dont care for nader all the way to despise him... and thats just fine by me, because i understand the frustration... but looking past whatever self serving needs he might be catering too , he says alot of things that just plan make sense to me.

now would i dare vote for him ? hell no. but hes right, we need to stand up for ourselves in this party and not let them shove are agenda to the side.
im tired of liberals getting the shaft EVERY election because politicians run like hell from people who dared be labeled 'liberal'.

if u wanna check out the rest of the interview, here it is :
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/31/ralph_nader_launches_presidential_exploratory_committee

[tekisui]

1. He said he would only run if he raised $10 million.

He isn't going to run. Now way in hell he'll get 10 million. He really doesn't like Clinton and thinks Obama is playing to close to Hillary. He acknowledged that Obama knows what is right.

But, he isn't going to raise 10 million. Period.

[iamthebandfanman]

2. i dont care if he runs, that wasnt the point...

please read everything i said in the post, its not about wanting or not wanting him to run... frankly i could give a flying fuck what he does... i just took to heart some of the things he said and suggest others do the same.

[tekisui]

3. Sorry.

We do have to put pressure on our candidates to represent us. Nader called out Obama and suggested he could be pressured. We should force our candidates to represent the best, so we won't have to chose Least Bad. Things as they are in the Two-Party System.

[iamthebandfanman]

5. thats okay

i just hope others dont instantly assume thats what i was writing about and dismiss what i say...
i really think its time progressives say , guess what.... you arent gonna walk all over us after we KEPT YOU ALIVE for the past 8 years.

[Le Taz Hot]

75. May I just interject that

progressives ARE the Democratic party -- at least that's what they're supposed to be. The "new Democrats" think we should just go away until election time and when it comes time to beg for money. They've chosen to largely ignore us since '92 and the Clinton "triangulation" (read: sold my soul to the corporate devil so I and wifey could be prez).

[rox63]

4. Remember 2000

Do you really want 8 years of President McCain?

[iamthebandfanman]

6. no

but im not dillusional enough to think nader cost gore the election.

fraud and corruption did.

p.s.
youre still missing the point.
we need to DEMAND liberal ideals being followed through on by our canidates to ELEMINATE people like nader from even having a chance at being a spoiler.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

22. How can I possibly forget? Nader got some Dems to vote in a way that'd get Bush elected

I didn't forget that in any one of the years this sh*thead has been in the White House.

[RedCappedBandit]

31. Funny, cause bush *didn't* get elected

[Sarah Ibarruri]

35. Bush would never have even come close if Nader hadn't been hell-bent on destroying the Dem Party. nt

[iamthebandfanman]

44. oh please, such hatred.

for someone who hates him so much, you sure do give him alot of credit... "drestoy the democratic party" , please.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

45. You want me to feel warm fuzzies about someone who helped GOPers be elected?

Don't hold your breath.

[iamthebandfanman]

56. well we differ on that opinion

because i think other republicans got republicans elected, by any means necessary. whether that was by giving money to nader, or the fact that they STOLE ballots and changed ballots....
i dont put all the blame on stupid nader.
i tend to believe the latter helped them more tho. taking away 55,000 peoples rights to vote is pretty huge stuff. specially when you look at the margin in which gore lost florida. then you can look at all the jewish folks who 'voted' for buchanan(i think we all know THAT really didnt happen). and the dirty tricks used in poor areas to lie about polling areas and who can and can not vote.
nader ran for president, he didnt commit a crime like the GOP did to win the election, yet you wanna blame him as the chief contributor to the loss and thats just incredibly insane.
im pretty sure Gore himself even said he didnt blame nader.

but whatever, far be it from me to stop you from getting whatever high it is you get from going after anybody who says anything remotely positive about him or something hes said. whatever makes ya feel better about yourself.

the fact still remains tho, he was right. its time liberals stopped getting pushed around. our votes count to, and the democratic party better never forget it.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

59. No, actually. Any lib who campaigned to get libs to NOT vote for Dems, is a GOPer

Not complicated is it?

[iamthebandfanman]

60. thats a weird presumption

are you saying a liberal cant campaign against both parties?

you have a pretty crazy process of reasoning if you conclude that anyone that goes against the democrats is trying to get a republican elected.

sounds an aweful lot like 'youre either with us or against us'.
and we all know what that kinda mentality brings.

[DaDooRonRon]

58. Do you know what the phrase "one trick pony" means?

If not, you should look it up.

[AndyTiedye]

57. More like 2 Years of McCain and 8 Years of Fuckabee

McCain wouldn't last 4 years as President. We'd be stuck with his VP.

[Mr Rabble]

68. I do. Nader had NOTHING to do with the outcome.

It may be convenient to claim that Nader took votes from Gore, but it still does nothing to offset Bush v. Gore, and the decision that ended American Democracy.

To continue to claim that Nader has any effect, is to buy the line that the Republicans have been pushing...

[AndyTiedye]

11. Of Course He'll Run. He Just Named the Price the Repiggies Will Have to Pay Him!

[tekisui]

14. Oww. Don't say that.

I think he won't for sure if its Obama.

[blondeatlast]

39. We have a winner...

:thumbsup:

[LSparkle]

7. I wish Ralph wouldn't go into a hole and only come out every 4 years

We need to hear his voice DURING the intervening years, reminding us about taking back our party, about electing progressive candidates, etc. I've never understood why he disappears after each election and only comes back when the next one is looming. If he were REALLY interested in building an independent movement or anything other than being a spoiler, he'd stick around ...

[bbgrunt]

16. well he has been out there. I 've seen his articles

on Counterpunch quite regularly. Have you considered that the corporate media in conjunction with the party duopoly doesn its best to keep him out of sight until they can raise him like a specter at election time to make all the democraticgogues go shrieking into the night like they have confronted the face of evil incarnate?

He speaks the absolute truth. Progressives will be ignored and marginalized until they are ready to stop shrieking in fear of this man.

[demnan]

8. I get your point

this is why I'm a Kucinich supporter. I got my ass out there to get him on the ballot so we would have a say so and someone to vote for. Some of my friends worked very hard in Virginia for this effort. You have Kucinich on your ballot in Virginia partly because of me and my friends.

If you want, you can still vote for him, even though he dropped out. That might be the only way to express your opinion to the Democratic party.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. Nader should just get in his car and drive really fast into a wall

He's completely worthless and the reason we have had 8 years of fascist dictatorship that has brought us closer than ever to the downfall of this entire country.

[iamthebandfanman]

10. fraud and corruption had nothing to do with it?

....

p.s.
you didnt get the point of the post, its not a pro-nader running deal.. he just said something that i think is true... that liberals need to stand up in this party and demand our platform be put on the table for once.

[SammyWinstonJack]

12. That and the supremes sticking their noses in where they had no Constitutional right to do so.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

13. Fraud and corruption by Nader sure did. He admitted he wanted a Repuke to win....

... and he accepted money from Republicans, something he later admitted. What more proof do I need that this man is an @-hole? I used to be one of his most ardent fans. Now? Now I see he was in it to get his name in the paper. He doesn't give a damn about anyone. Certainly not those who suffer.

[iamthebandfanman]

15. so then you think hes wrong

that we need to asert our liberal ideals more firmly into the party ? and if so, is that purely based on the fact that you think hes an a-hole?
im aware of his contributions last time around, im not an idiot. but being an a-hole doesnt mean everything you say should be ignored, especially when its true. we do need to make ourselves important to the party the way that those nut-jobs on the right wing did.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

19. Nope, but it's kinda like a sociopathic killer that romances you.....

... he says "Ooh I love you!" then sticks the knife in your throat and that, as they say, is that. He uses the words we want to hear to get in the paper, then destroys our country to get in the paper again.

[iamthebandfanman]

23. thats great, but what does that have to do

with the point he made and the point i was trying to make ?
i really dont give a shit what anybody thinks of him, because i know hes well enough hated around here... i was only pointing out what he said was true.
with your point of view, you gotta admit, its pretty bad that nader has to be the one to bring this up to people.
we should be standing up for ourselves (just ignore that nader said it and get the message, thats all i was going after)

[Sarah Ibarruri]

25. I understand what you're getting at: Look only at his point, not at his deeds. That kinda thing

Problem is, I also disagree with his point. It was EXACTLY that bullshit point he used to get the Repukes to win. And he even ADMITTED PUBLICLY that he wanted the Repukes to win as a punishment to the Democrats. As far as I'm concerned Nader can just kiss my dog's @$$. Right now we need the Dems to win, period. End of story. Sure we can scream at the elected Dems, but we definitely should not be using Nader as an example of anything or any kind of guru.

I agree with you tho that we should say what we think.

[iamthebandfanman]

32. dont you realise we created him?

why doesnt the democratic party understand that as long as they push us outa the way, people like nader will exsist ? if youre so concerned that he does infact make the other side win and that he does support republicans, then why dont you care to eliminate the reason for him to even run ?
thats what im missing here.
poeple seem to object to the idea that liberals should demand our needs be met for supporting them for the last 8 years just because nader said it... and since hes an a-hole , you wont even give a thought to whats being said..
its been something ive been thinkin for some time, so when i heard him say it i was just relieved to hear it come outa someone elses mouth besides my own!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

34. I used to admire Nader. I actually thought the man was a kindly genius.

I now know that was only my imagination. I actually thought his ideas were good and mine were bad. Then I thought he changed. I began to see him as vicious. He never changed. He was always that way. I now know that the viciousness with which he went after GM for the Corvair (good, in that case) was the same viciousness with which he took money from the GOP to bring down the Democratic Party. He is definitely no humanitarian. He never cared about what happened to the most helpless people in this country under GW Bush.

[iamthebandfanman]

46. honestly

why this big conspiracy of nader wanting to single handedly 'bring down' or 'destroy' as you said in another post ? you give him way way way to much credit! hes just passionate about his beliefs and pushes them to the fullest to make whatever point hes trying to make. Sure, thats not always a good thing. I agree totally with that. But thats his deal, he shows no restraint when talking. like i say, id never dream of voting for the guy, because i agree... i think hes pretty egotistic...and its shows because as you states he can be vicious about the causes he takes up. does that mean hes a moron though ? no. does it mean he has a severe personality disorder, probably. i dont know his reasoning behind the things he pursues, but i do know hes right about liberals. we let ourselves get pushed around. we need to stand up for ourselves and get our agendas onto the table. as I said, if the democratic party would serve our needs on the left, people like nader would be marginalized SO much he would never run for office again.

[Le Taz Hot]

76. Speaking of sociopaths . . .

:eyes:

[John Q. Citizen]

20. Hill accepts money from Republicans. I like Nader. I wouldn't vote for him, not

after he left the Greens out to dry, but I still like him.

Of course, I wouldn't vote for Hill either.

[Ripley]

21. This is what

an Ugly American looks like. One who wishes death to an American citizen for having the gall to run for President. One who blames the criminal actions of BushCo and the complicit members in Congress of BOTH parties on one man.

Sad.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

26. He ADMITTED he wanted a Repuke to win in order to punish the Democrats!

Where were you when all this was going on??

[fascisthunter]

29. And Since It's Happened, Has the Leadership learned Anything?

Anything besides kissing corporate ass and moving the party to the right? Nope.... Nader is still the Dem leadership's whipping boy.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

33. Since it happened I learned a lot. I learned from Nader....

1) That Nader can't say that any Dem candidates are selfish, because he is one selfish, egotistical individual.
2) That Nader can't say that any Dem candidates have sold out this country because the ultimate act of selling out this country, was done by him, and HE ADMITTED IT.
3) That Nader can't say that any Dem candidate has abandoned the helpless, because he didn't care a rat's ass who would suffer under 8 years of this fascist village idiot and his evil masters, and I've seen proof of what the village idiot has done to the most helpless.
4) That no Dem candidate could EVER be as bad as a Repuke candidate.
5) That just because a candidate is a third-party candidate, doesn't mean they don't have ulterior motives, or that they're running for some altruistic ideal.
6) That until the media is disallowed from manipulating campaigns, and/or there's serious election reform, voting for a third-party candidate for president, is the same as throwing your vote into the toilet.

I'd say I learned a lot!

[fascisthunter]

37. You Learned How to Deflect

Much of what you say is true, however you won't come to terms with the fact the man is right about a lot of things. That's what I learned partisanship does to folks. You get sucked in to the point where you are defending or supporting things and people you would have never done before. I learned how to move from that place....


good luck

[Sarah Ibarruri]

40. I agree. He's right about a lot of things. I guess what I'm trying to say is this....

... lots of people are saying the same thing, but they don't go around doing horrible damage to this country because they're angry that they can't get their way right this very second.

[fascisthunter]

42. I'm Not Sure That He is Damaging this Country

in real democracies anyone/everyone should be allowed to run for office. That's how it works.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

43. Maybe not this go-round he won't damage it if he can't run for office to get another Repuke in

He sure did in the past.

[fascisthunter]

47. No He Didn't.... that Election Was Stolen

Placing the blame for that loss in 2000 on Nader is truly over-blown. There is plenty of evidence to back this up and it isn't that hard to find (example: Supreme Court, Vote flipping, FL Secretary of State, votes being thrown out over technicalities, discrepancies with exit polling, etc....)

People are Free in this country to vote for whom ever they want and blaming individuals for taking part in that legal process is a really bad cop-out. I used to say the same thing as you are right now, but after reading much of what happened in 2000 I changed my mind. I hope you do to...


peace

[Sarah Ibarruri]

49. Okay, let's make a deal and say that it was partially stolen by the GOP scumbags....

.. but that Nader ALSO turned against us and wanted to punish us by making a deal with the GOP to do exactly that. In fact, he ADMITTED it. If he hadn't admitted it, that's one thing, but he did. Even in a book he wrote.

[fascisthunter]

50. Nader Was a Political Opponent, yes...

but he can't be blamed for the loss of the election. He just didn't have that much of an effect. The problem I have with 2000 is how little our own party seemed to care. Call it political, or cowardly, nothing was done.

My take is Nader has become a boogeyman because he scares the Democratic establishment. The further they go to the right, the more they will have to fear him. I just think his role, if you can really call it that in 2000 is being generalized and blown out of proportion.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

54. I'm far more lib than he is so how could he scare me?

I'm far more lib than he ever was. However, he is an @-hole, and yes, he had an effect. Read his last book. The man was a born @-hole.

[depakid]

66. Do you have a credible link?

Because I've never heard that...

[Sarah Ibarruri]

36. Oh yeah that's it. Nader is hated for running for president. Uhuh. Yep, that's IT!

You sure figured it out!

[Tesha]

61. *THE TRUTH* is never worthless, even if it's painful to hear.

> He's completely worthless and the reason we have had
> 8 years of fascist dictatorship...

*THE TRUTH* is never worthless, even if it's painful to hear.
And he isn't the reason we'll have had eight years of fascist
dictatorship; the almost complete lack of a functioning
opposition party is the reason we've had a fascist dictatorship.

But it sure is easy to blame it all on Ralph Nader, isn't it?
By comparison, blaming it on the Democrats would be a real
let-down.

Tesha

[Echo In Light]

63. Precisely

Easier to scapegoat one that comprehend a host of criminalities, complicities, cover ups and other shenanigans that paved the dark path.

[jeffrey_X]

70. Ignorant post.

You obviously don't know the history surrounding this man.

Might want to educate yourself.

[The Stranger]

74. Did you ever come up with a link to support your claim that Nader accepts money "from the GOP"?

[Cleita]

17. Thanks for the heads up. I won't watch "Democracy Now!" today.

Nader has the words but he doesn't practice what he preaches. He's just an operative placed to disrupt our Party choices. The morlocks are afraid of Hillary and they need the wedge. I notice he doesn't threaten to run against Obama so they must feel he's defeatable.

[iamthebandfanman]

18. haha

"I notice he doesn't threaten to run against Obama so they must feel he's defeatable."

i highly doubt that. they are scared of all of us this time around. the only way they can win is through fraud.

[bpeale]

30. now you're acting just as ignorant as the republicans. grow up!

[Tesha]

62. Don't forget to clean the sand out of your ears later...

Don't forget to clean the loose sand out of your ears
later, after you've removed your head from it.

Tesha

[fascisthunter]

24. Think of all Those Progressives/Liberals the Dem Establishment

pissed and shit on us. Well, the leadership should be scared.

[iamthebandfanman]

27. i just dont understand what they dont understand

that by putting us to the side they create people like nader who run against them...
they should care more about our votes.

[fascisthunter]

28. They Split their Own Party

but they expected as much, I'm sure. Blaming Nader was always a cop-out. The democratic leadership pushed the party to the right, now all that left is the left, and we are many.

[Echo In Light]

38. A convenient patsy. Easier to blame one than a host of "conspiratorial" elements

[TahitiNut]

41. The majority of lemmings, in their headlong rush for the cliffs, always get angry ...

... at the few who try to run in another direction. :shrug:

[mmonk]

48. This part:

"i take heart to what he said about making demands..
that if people dont want to support someone running in a third party to represent their ideas, then pressure the democratic party into accepting our demands... they must understand that we are valuable and that if they dont take our demands and wishes they seriously risk losses those who vote for them outa shear fear of what they will get if they dont!"

Doesn't work. They tune us out as if we're republicans. It's not the party I grew up with. So it's the slow train to hell instead of express (express being going third party insuring the worst wins).

[bread_and_roses]

51. It's no use. Most will excuse and excuse "their" candidate,,,not confront and object

Half the threads on this board are posters justifying and excusing and explaining away the indefensible acts/statements/policies of their candidate of choice. Most seem to lack an understanding of the most elementary fact of politics - support should demand a return. And half the rest of the threads are posters excusing/explaining/justifying the plainly pusillanimous actions of the Democrats we elected in '06 - again, excusing and absolving them of any necessity to earn continued support, since we'll always be happy to find a rationale for their caving in.

All you will get is damnation of Nader for taking Republican money while Hillary stands shoulder to shoulder with Murdoch and both Hillary's and Obama's coffers sure look to be full of Corporate blood money.

Then you will get scolding admonitions about electing any D for the sake of the SCOTUS, after we've watched Ds refuse to stop, and even vote, for fanatic ideologues on the Bench who are now merrily stripping away voter and consumer rights - as could easily be predicted they would.

But good luck to you in your quest.

[nashville_brook]

53. "pusillanimous" -- word of the DAY!

rawk!

[Le Taz Hot]

77. Yeah, that one sent me running to the dictionary as well.

And it IS a great word! Especially when referring to our largely spineless "representatives."

[leftchick]

65. thank you

very well said.

:thumbsup:

[TahitiNut]

72. Amen.

It's a subject that betrays the mindless, blind, robotic and slavish partisan apologist in folks ... as though it's BAD for voters to have a CHOICE and actually vote.

[eleny]

52. It's not America when liberal thrid party candidates are the villains

I never even considered voting for Nader but he has every right to run for office. We ought to be angry at our candidates in the Dem Party when they opt toward pleasing corporations, putting the workers at their mercy. Look at what's happened since they took this path. Unions broken and workers' earning and benefits down the toilet, education costs going through the roof and the mortgage crisis gripping our families.

Here at DU people are awake and making the demands Nader talks about. Many here donate and support progressive candidates. I'm sad that Kucinich had to drop out of the race. And then Edwards followed when the money dried up. Too many Americans are sleep walking. Hopefully Nader wakes up the Rip Van Winkle's among us.

Meantime, although Obama or Clinton will get my vote in the general they won't get one thin dime from me. I'm sending my money to progressive candidates like Kucinich who are running for Congressional seats.

K&R

[LWolf]

69. Excellent points. n/t

[iamthebandfanman]

73. yup!

id never vote for the guy given how critically bad things are in the country for liberals and our ideas wont even be listened to by a republican....
but this whole hate nader thing is just crazy.

im the same as you, they wont get any money from me but ill vote for them.

i shoulda known tho some people would instantly go on the attack with the simple mention of nader and not take to heart the message i took away from what he said. which is keep fighting. keep standing up for what we believe in. make them know our vote counts.

i agree with that... if that makes me an evil bastard, so be it.

[Jim Lane]

55. I disagree with Nader's idea that we should make demands on Democratic nominees

Nader's idea seems to be that we'll get our way by holding demonstrations and threatening to vote for a third (or fourth) party if the Democratic nominee for some office dares to disagree with us on some point.

This man seems never to have heard of primaries. Progressives shouldn't be sitting back to wait to see whom the conservative/corporate Democrats choose as the nominee, and then hoping to implore or intimidate them to move a little bit left. The DLC doesn't run this party. There are open primaries. When Carol Moseley Braun thought Senator Alan Dixon was too conservative, she didn't send him irate letters or organize demonstrations objecting to his vote to confirm Clarence Thomas. She ran against him for the nomination, and beat him.

As a Kucinich supporter, I certainly know that we won't always win by pursuing an electoral strategy. We'll do better that way, though, than through Naderite petulance.

It's also more small-d democratic. Not everyone in the Democratic Party agrees with Ralph Nader about everything. We settle these differences through primaries. What arrogance the man has, to believe that there's some fundamental injustice if his beliefs don't always command majority support.

[Tesha]

64. Primaries, as presently constructed, don't work.

The Democrats have proven that the primaries, as presently
constructed, don't work. For one, the "people's choice" is
still far too driven by the media. And for two, people with
strong platforms and novel ideas tend to get selected out
as "loonies", leaving the milquetoast mainstream candidates
who then get their asses kicked in the General Election.

Tesha

[EFerrari]

67. The behavior we accept when it's directed at Dennis or Mike

in the primaries (because they aren't "mainstream")is then turned on our candidate in the GE. Skewed coverage, dirty tricks, disrespect.

[iamthebandfanman]

71. ummm

"When Carol Moseley Braun thought Senator Alan Dixon was too conservative, she didn't send him irate letters or organize demonstrations objecting to his vote to confirm Clarence Thomas. She ran against him for the nomination"

isnt that what naders doing ?


im sorry but when you have a primary system that shuts out any canidate that caters to the left, there can be no change without those letters and protests. apparently we arent as valued by our party as the right wing religious nuts are by the republicans. the only thing the democratic party is doing by not taking up more of our issues is making people like nader actually get votes from liberals.

[WinkyDink]

78. Nader somehow always focuses on Democrats.