Should Nader get out?
Find a Conversation
Should Nader get out?
| Tue, 07-20-2004 - 8:38pm |
Since realistically Ralph Nader has no chance of winning, do you think he should get out of the presidential race?
To me he is a silly egotist that is proving nothing and doing nothing constructive to promote the causes he believes in.
I also believe he is a liar. He says there is no difference between Kerry and Bush, Republicans and Democrats. That is a blatant lie! Nader also said he will take votes mainly from the Republicans, that moderate or environmentally aware Republicans will back him. That is also a lie.
In my opinion, Nader should get out of the race. Sure he has the right to run for president, but he is serving no purpose other than distorting the potential outcome of the election.
To me he is a silly egotist that is proving nothing and doing nothing constructive to promote the causes he believes in.
I also believe he is a liar. He says there is no difference between Kerry and Bush, Republicans and Democrats. That is a blatant lie! Nader also said he will take votes mainly from the Republicans, that moderate or environmentally aware Republicans will back him. That is also a lie.
In my opinion, Nader should get out of the race. Sure he has the right to run for president, but he is serving no purpose other than distorting the potential outcome of the election.

Pages
Hey, bridgettao! It's good to see you're back!
I think Nader's point about both parties being the refers to both being equally beholden to special interests and corporate influence.
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
I understand that Wrhen, and yes both parties are "bought" it takes a great deal of money to get elected these days.
Nader though goes further than that and says that, in his words "there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them". True the two major political parties have some similarities, and they don't often actually govern as different as they talk on the campaign trail, but there are some differences. Also there are differences in the individual personalities and they have had different life experiences, which can make for different decision making, and they of course pick different advisors and cabinet members.
It's an extreme exageration on Nader's part to say it is irrelevant whether you vote for Kerry or Bush. I still contend that Nader's run for president is worthless this time and actually hurts his reputation and the causes he supposedly represents.
I understand that nobody that votes for him thinks he will actually win, and that it is a vote to get a third party involved in the debates, and funding for other political parties, and to bring about awareness. Right now, awareness has to wait... people are dying in the name of $$$ under the guise of freedom. it is sick.
I agree with you, Ralph Nader is wasting out time- and his own time-
not merely becausae he has no chance to win,
but because many of us remember Ralph Nader's interview
the day after Election 2000, when Mr. Nader gave as rude a speech any loser ever made,
whining mostly because his total votes was not half the votes needed to obtain those
"matching funds" ... and, likely that same speech shall be replayed on television,
to remind voters exactly what Mr. Nader's whining sounds like!
ForeverHugs,
--Genie
I think if you listened to him outline what he considers to be the vast similarities between the DNC/GOP, you'd be convinced he's telling the truth.
Don't expect him to dropout of the race. On that same note, don't expect him to draw anymore than 2% of the popular vote.
With the Electoral College (however antiquated it is), not only is it impossible for the "3rd" candidate to win, but it allows the 3rd candidate to disrupt the results of each state. In general, if Ms. Voter is so fed up with the current administration that she want them out, no matter what, a vote for a 3rd party is a truly wasted vote. Her vote gets lost into oblivion and, in a close race, the incumbent often wins (because there are those that will blindly vote for the incumbent just because "he's our president"...this goes for both parties and most elections we've had). This would NOT represent Ms. Voter's wish; but by default, her vote has strengthened the incumbent’s chances.
OT: Before you start yelling that the ABB attitude is faulty, realize that ALL 1-term presidents have lost only because of the "anybody but" mentality. It's like the analogy someone posted about the menu items: Given 2 choices on a menu, do you pick the item you've tasted and hated, or do you pick the new menu item that you've never tried before?
Not all people who are against Bush are as smart as the rest of us! ;)
I think he's more concerned about changing 'the system' or 'the rules' that both parties play by than with specific political positions.
He's not interested in joining the game; he wants to change it to one of those new agey pc games where no one's feelings gets hurt because there are no winners or loosers, IMHO.
Renee ~~~
Renee ~~~
A. How many people who voted for Gore in 2000, plan to vote for Bush in 2004?
B. How many people who voted for Bush in 2000 plan not to vote for him in 2004?
Right now, B > A
Hell, find me one person who fits into the "A Group" and I'll provide you proof that Bush served his complete term in the National Guard.
Pages