“You’re not Christ. You’re not Prince Hamlet.”

Veteran political activist and consumer champion Ralph Nader, blamed by the Democrats for costing them the tight 2000 elections…is mulling a 2008 bid for the White House.

He told AFP that he had launched a presidential exploratory committee “to test the waters to see if we can get enough contributions and resources, such as skilled staff” to run as an independent candidate.

Nader told AFP he wanted to fight “the injustices, deprivations and insolutions that the candidates are ignoring” such as failing to address the need for a living wage, health care for all and the “enormous, bloated, wasteful military budget…” and vehemently rejected the title of “spoiler.”

“It is a title that is never applied to a Democrat or a Republican. It is only applied to a third party candidate,” he said.

Which is a crock.

Independents are free to express themselves inside – and outside – the two establishment political parties. After eight years of Bush League rule, the last thing we need is another messiah.




  1. UncommonSense says:

    #23 — “I think Al Gore would have made a GREAT president — certainly a gazillion times better than Bush Jr.”

    >> And I’m taller than Verne Troyer. Big deal.

    #24 — “90,000 pea-brains voted for Nader in Florida in 2000.”

    >> I voted for Nader. Twice. I wouldn’t have voted for either of the others, because I don’t believe in casting my vote for someone who sucks. Gore, for all the positive image spin since 2000, was uncharismatic and advocating uninspiring policy. Not every Nader vote belonged to Gore. I would have voted for McCain that year over Nader had he been on the ballot, and McCain over Gore too, but any sensible person could tell Bush was an idiot. Think about that apparent conflict in where my vote would have gone until your illogical ass-u-mptions implode. Nader is far from a perfect candidate, but he represents the people and he is a patriot.

    #26 – “Is there a Republican or Conservative in the race?”

    >>I don’t know. Is there a real financial conservative left in the Republican party? The “Conservatives” voted the largest entitlement program in history through a Republican Congress (The new Medicare prescription drug benefit plan, for those of you who weren’t paying attention. Social Security as a revenue drain will be dwarfed by Medicare, and manifest sooner.)

    The answer to the spoiler problem? Instant-runoff elections: Rank candidates in order of preference. Candidates who get the least number of #1 votes get kicked out, and those that voted for that person have their second choice applied. Rinse, Repeat.

  2. Calin says:

    I would have voted for McCain that year over Nader had he been on the ballot, and McCain over Gore too, but any sensible person could tell Bush was an idiot.

    But McCain wasn’t in the race. The question is, if Nader wasn’t in the race, would you have voted for Bush, or Gore?

    I don’t know. Is there a real financial conservative left in the Republican party?

    Hell, I’ll take that a step further. Is there a real financial conservative left in the entire city of Washington??

  3. Nader Myth 2000: The Democratic Party uses the Nader Myth to cover up the fact that Al Gore abandoned his supporters and all voters in Florida. Diebold delivered on it’s promise.

    Nader Myth 2004:Utilizing the Democrats’ stigma, Bush’s campaign makes support calls for Nader the spoiler. Once again Ralph is targeted for being Ralph, especially when educated Democrats hear the news.

    Ralph Nader’s legacy encompasses the spectrum of his life long work, especially his presidential candidacies. He has started a presidential exploratory committee http://www.naderexplore08.com

    My political and civic identity was born through exposure to the candidate for whom I caucused for in Nevada, Congressman Dennis Kucinich.

    Not only was I going on a limb, scrambling to educate myself on his record, bio, the issues, his campaign style not to mention volunteering for a political campaign, calling radio shows, canvassing, going to a town conference, and attending a free speech rally where I was interviewed for a published newspaper article.

    Wooo!

    A lot to absorb and digest to say the least.

    Part of this process was owning my power as a citizen.

    I, after 31 years, affirm:

    * Politicians are public servants. They are elected to serve the public. We are the public. We are their Boss.

    * When does a Boss grovel at the feet of their employee?

    * A vote cast is duty. The highest level of civic participation in this democratic republic. The highest level of critical thinking is a mandatory prerequisite.

    * The media’s power lies within the scope of communicative channels of distribution. The more channels accessed produces the variety of information and opinion necessary to serve as background information. Independent research is equally necessary.

    Our future, the future of my three boys, everyone, everywhere is deeply affected by civic, social administration and control; in simpler terms, politics and government.

    If we are to honor our existence and our time on Earth than we must participate.

    Fight off all urges or coercion to be satisfied with the role of spectator.

    A long comment, I know.

    I strongly support Ralph Nader as an activist, and as a President candidate.

  4. joseph1949 says:

    [Message deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]

  5. Mister Catshit says:

    #5, john,

    If it comes down to Obama and McCain, or Billary and McCain–who would be able to tell the difference?

    McCain is the flat chested, bald, light skinned one.

  6. bac says:

    Why is everyone blaming Nader? The ballot in the state of Florida for 2004 had other names on it like Badnarik (Libertarian) and Cobb (Green Party). This truly shows you the psychology running through the USA. It is better to blame other people for your own incompetents.

    One way to look at the situation is that Gore stole some of Badnarik’s votes because of the ignorant notion of some people not wanting to waste their vote. If you do not vote for the person you think would be a good president then you have wasted your vote. It is a self fulfilling prophecy by not voting for the candidate you want to win because you think he/she won’t win.

  7. UncommonSense says:

    #32 (Calin) –

    But McCain wasn’t in the race. The question is, if Nader wasn’t in the race, would you have voted for Bush, or Gore?

    >> Failing any other candidate on the ballot I believed would make a good President, I would have left it blank. Fully 50% of the slots on my ballot some years is blank. (Inflated by the number of local judges I don’t end up finding time to know anything about — who typically run unopposed anyhow.) I cast votes for people I believe in. The only exception is the county water inspector. I don’t know anything about the unopposed guy who does that boring job, but as long as he’s the only guy who wants to every year, I give him the benefit of the doubt.

    #34 (joseph1949) –
    I’ll be the first to say he’s not my ideal candidate — but I do not accept your premise. You must be one of those folks sporting a “Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos” bumper sticker. No wait, I take that back… getting that reference might show an appreciation for creativity and humor. That just can’t be in line with such an unoriginal and juvenile response.

    This country is off, as the pollsters say “on the wrong track.” It’s time to get back to the days when being religious meant loving your neighbors and treating people with basic human respect, when freedom was more than a rallying cry for war but also something average people stood on principle to defend against all freedom’s enemies — both foreign and domestic. I believe as long as the two-party system in this country asks me to choose between the evil of two lessors (Or, as an amusing political writer put it, the lessor of “who cares?”), then I will reject the premise of that system.

    My wife gets a letter from the White House every year regarding a MIA-presumed dead family member. We know what it means to sacrifice in service to the public. American politics needs more public servants, and I’ll keep voting for those people, and only them, quixotic as it may seem to most of you.

  8. Mister Catshit says:

    #8, Calin,

    According to Duverger’s law, single-member district plurality voting systems almost always result in two “broker” parties. Which is what we have.

    Not true. Duverger admitted that this will usually happen, but also identified where and when it won’t. Mature countries, such as America, gravitate to the two party system. Extremist and newer views are usually swallowed by the major parties.

    The more homogenized the country, the more apt it is to have just two political parties, a conservative and liberal party. When a country is divergent, then regional and extremist parties have a much stronger probability of succeeding.

    Italy has several parties, for example. There is very little in common between someone from rural Calabria compared to someone from industrial Lombardy other than language and religion, and even there they don’t agree. The industrial areas support more socialist candidates while the rural support conservative candidates. This allows extremist candidates such as communists and fascists to exist.

    Canada is another example where cultural differences have allowed a unique French Canadian party to exist. As well, the sparse population allowed such extreme regional parties as the Social Credit and New Democrat Party to grow.

    Currently Belgium is an excellent example of the influences of both culture, economics, and specific interest groups, in the formation of successful political parties, at about 16 parties.

    The US has a fairly uniform culture and very uniform language. This has marginalized the extremist parties. It has also usually allowed the upstart parties to be absorbed by the larger parties.

    Great Britain was a two party nation until the upheaval of post WW I and regional nationalism brought in some fragmentation. As long as the regional differences were kept under control, there were only two parties.

  9. Mister Catshit says:

    #15, Calin,

    I’m wondering how many will understand your reference. Yes, this concerned one of America’s all time greatest Presidents, a total sell out President, and another great President.

    Good point though.

  10. Rick says:

    Nader is commended for his auto safety initiatives. But that doesn’t entitle him to be president.

  11. TheGlobalWarmingNemesis says:

    #35 – Are you sure he doesn’t have man-boobs?

    #31 – There are some scenarios in that kind of runoff where some people’s votes count more than others. A better way is a pure ranking election. Total the ranks received from every person. Lowest combined total wins.

  12. Calin says:

    Not true. Duverger admitted that this will usually happen, but also identified where and when it won’t.

    That’s why I put the almost before the always. It seemed stronger than sometimes. In my reading I was lead to believe that it will happen the majority of the time. Sometimes seems more like a minority.

    The point is valid as it pertains to the U.S. We have become a fully two party system. Both parties are broker parties, therefore we are stuck with that. If any smaller party comes forward with an idea that gains greater support, either the Dems or the Repubs will pick it up and run with it…whether they agree or not.

  13. joseph1949 says:

    [Message deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]

  14. joseph1949 says:

    [Message deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]

  15. Mister Catshit says:

    #42, Calin,

    Sheeeiiit !!! You did and I even copied it. My apologies sir, you are quite correct and I did err. Ok, to make it up to you, I’ll give you a buck. So remember, you’ll never be broke as long as I owe you money, which translates to “you’ll never be broke”.

  16. Jurgen Vsych says:

    Nader’s campaign filmmaker, Jurgen Vsych, has just released her new book about the 2004 campaign, “What Was Ralph Nader Thinking?” Special price $19.95 (List price: $24.95) http://thewomandirector.com

  17. joseph1949 says:

    [Message deleted – Violation of Posting Guidelines. – ed.]


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 13737 access attempts in the last 7 days.