Ralph jumps in
 

John Kerry may yet regret all his waffling now that Nader is in.

At least the problem of who I should vote for in the general election is solved.

I don't know how I feel about this....I really see the appeal of independent...I'm not a fan of either the democratic or republican parties at this point BUT I'm in the "get Bush out of office" boat and I just don't think Nader has the backing to do that...so it comes down to the main worry of many demos/ex-Nader supporters....will his running take votes aways from the dems making it less likely to un-seat Bush?

I'm not saying my views are set in stone by any means...I'm still mulling everything over in my head....just thought I'd throw in my little thought :D

I understand the soul searching. It is something I had to do when the rumblings that he might run again started. After seeing him on Meet the Press, I was reminded why I voted for him last time. And why I should vote for him again.

When you decide to vote for Nader, it isn't because you think he's going to win. It's because he represents what you believe in. So if the Democratic Party is going to continue ignoring those issues you believe in, why should you give them your vote? By doing that you're contributing to the perpetuation of the corruption of Washington. Ralph is right when he says that Washington is corporate-occupied territory. Ultimately voting for Bush or Kerry (if he gets the nomination) doesn't make a huge difference. Yes, the democrats are going to say of course there's a difference. Look what happened last time. Keep in mind these are the same democrats who voted for everything Bush wanted. Kerry never saw a Bush bill that he didn't like, as evidenced by his voting record.

The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is who gives away the most the fastest. This is clear from the Clinton administration's record. The Clintonites pushed Nafta, welfare reform and their FCC gave away the farm. Megamergers got way out of control during the Clinton years. If we're being honest, we have to recognize that despite the oral-sex sideshow of the Clinton years, the country was already veering dangerously to the right. The groundwork was laid for Bush, whose administration by the way likes to point out that regime change in Iraq was a policy hatched up by the Clintonites.

Do I want to see Bush get reelected? No. Do I want Kerry? Not really, though I can see he's better. Yet, putting a Democrat in the White House in 2004 is only going to prolong the huge need we have in this country for real change. Because all we'll ever get from the corporate-bought Democrats is mediocre centrism, which is really right-wing policies desguised as Democratic programs. No thanks. I'll take the four more years of pain that might just be the thing that finally wakes people up in this country.

Carne - I agree with most of what you say.

But, my problem with Nader is while I think he is saying the rights things about corp. fraud etc. I am unsure if an immediate end to that would be good for us. I mean let's say he won and the first day in office he puts in 25 bills which the effective end of which is that all corps. no longer have tax shelters effective immediately. Corps. must make up that money somehow and I think that somehow will be in the reduction of workforce. Morevoer, Nader would be looked on as a joke because there is no way the R and D controlled Congress would agree to his stuff. So, I cannot vote for him even though I believe in what he is saying. I guess I look at it from a practicle point of view and Nader's stuff is just not immediately practicle, although I think it could be done over say a five to ten year period with gradual reductions, etc.

My $0.02

Well...
 

guess I will be voting for no-one this coming November because I do not believe any of the believed candidates (I somewhat like Sen.Edwards, but he isnt going to win the Democratic nomination) for the parties stand for what I believe in...

Brian "The more things change the more they stay the same...Especially in the corrupt world of politics" j.

LOL..this thread is going to mess with my head even more!! hahaha...no but seriously....you made some really good points Strand...I think that is generally the boat I am in...I like what the man has to say, I'm just not sure how effective a president he would be...esp. with Congress to consider...lol...I work in news..but as you can see politics is NOt my forte :)

I love Nader and I voted for him in the last election, but I just have to be practical this year. Our country cannot survive another four years of ChimpCo and it's as simple as that. We can't do it. At this point, I have to vote for the candidate who has the best shot at beating Bush. Voting for Nader would be a waste. I despise Bush and his administration and need to show support with the Democrats to get him OUT. Regardless of whether or not I like Nader better than Edwards or Kerry, it would be a waste to support him; he'll be lucky if he gets 1% this time around. My goal is to oust Bush and that is my only goal. Yes, Kerry f*cked up too many times to count (and I disagree with him on many, many things), but stack him up next to Bush and he's the lesser of the two evils. The fact is that it's either Bush or Kerry who is going to be president and the question that needs to be asked is who do you prefer and consider the lesser of the two evils? My vote goes to Kerry; it will go to him on Super Tuesday and it will go to him in November. He's our last salvation to getting ChimpCo out.

Anyone But Bush

Re: Ralph jumps in
 

A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.:)

P.S. Why won't Nader release his tax returns?

:laugh:

He probably hasn't paid taxes in years. ;)

Nader...
 

is a basket-case IMHO...And I agree, He will take votes away from the Democratic candidate moreso than he believes.

Brian "I.Been Had for Prez in 2004" j.

It's hard to be perfect. Don't become a Kerry apologist. Kerry will make a damn fine president. I will support him proudly and you should too.
:)

Re: Nader...
 

How about if Clark is VP?

Re: Re: Nader...
 

Ya mean the same Clark who ONLY won the state of Oklahoma because Kerry offended the liberal left with his "I'm a conservative...More conservative than the conservative candidate." remark??? Uh, No thanks...I'll pass!!!

Brian "I.Been Had & I.P.Freely in 2004" j.

ANYONE, even John "I can't make up my mind what I want to be" :cool: Kerry would be better than this tripe we have now. The only thing he did well enough IMO was the tax cuts and he even screwed those up with his outrageous spending.

To paraphrase an old Southern Expression, "I'd piss on a sparkplug" if I thought it would help not reelect that idiot. :laugh:

Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

Bull****. A vote for Nader is a vote for Nader. A vote for Bush is a vote for Bush.

Re: Re: Re: Nader...
 

What do you know about Ralph Nader? How can you just dismiss a great American who has done more for you and me than any of the corporate-bought Washington types can ever hope to achieve by calling him a "basket case?"

Re: Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

Touche' AND if the candidates were strong enough Nader would be irrelevant. Interestingly, the talking heads and television pundits are indicating that Nader may siphon more votes from W than Kerry because the D's apparently are united and the thrule fiscally conservative "old school" R's are furious at W for his D'esq. spending.

Also, I think there is more to the whole "a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" thought process. I mean you (Carne) live in New York. Historically, the D's win New York by a healthy margin. So, uyour vote for Nader is irrelevant to the D's winning N Y. Conversly, your vote for Nader helps in a little way toward making the U.S. less of a corp. controlled two party system, a laudable goal IMO.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

Thank you. And you inadvertently point to another perverse little reality. In winner-take-all states your vote counts for nothing if you vote for the losing party.

The system is broken. That being the case, I am voting my conscience.

Once again, I will be voting for Nader. and thank goodness for me because I was actually thinking of voting for Bush, which would have been my first time ever voting Republican in a presidential election...

See - there is one vote W is not getting because of Nader!!!! :wavey:

Oh, I'm not turning into an apologist; I think he will make a damn fine president. :laugh: I was just saying that while I disagree with him on many issues, he's still the best man for the job. No one will sway me of that opinion, doll. :D

I adore Nader; if I didn't, I wouldn't have voted for him in '00. But I don't want to waste my vote this time and run the risk of ChimpCo residing in the White House for four more years. It ain't happening.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

Very good point, I must say. I'm in MA and there's no way in hell this state will vote Republican, so I guess it wouldn't matter if I voted for Nader again. But still, I have to have a hand in getting Shrub out. :laugh:

:eek:

You considered voting for Bush?! Crack is whack! :laugh: :wavey: j/k

Re: Re: Re: Re: Nader...
 

What I know is that anyone who believes he isn't going to take votes away from the Democratic candidate, In a race he knows for a fact he cannot win, Is a basketcase in my eyes...Nothin' more, But then again I doubt he will even be on most of the ballots come November.

As far I see, The Democrats/Republicans of this country all they have done for me is alienate me from believing ANYTHING either party has to say!!! (They both reach common ground on 2 goals: #1-All they care about is $$$ & #2-They are full of s--t!) I guess the saying is true "Unless you live on the East/West Coasts politicians could care less what you would like to see done, Unless it is time for elections...Then all they care about is your vote and nothing more."

Brian "Independent til the end!" j.

ps-I agree he may have done alot for consumers (I read up on him awhile back mind you), But I feel he shouldnt jump into the election now...Personally, I think he SHOULD'VE jumped in earlier just to see what he could've done with the independent voters who don't like either parties stance (I accidently deleted what was written here before while posting it, My bad.)

dissention...I do not vote based on the fact I want to get rid of someone...so the whole Howard Dean thing never hooked me. I try to vote for someone not just against somebody else.

Edwards is a little to green and and his charm too slick for me though his message speaks to me and I do find him attractive being the "typical" middle-aged housewife demographic.

but John Kerry does flipflop on issues and he is part of the system so for me is part of the problem. so I'm having quite a bit of trouble feeling supportive enough to pull the lever for him...

not to reiterate old debates but I supported Bush and still do for his strong stand on terrorism regardless of how many countries it has pissed off...most countries never liked us so we just found out again who our true allies/friends are. I've traveled abroad several times since the mid-80's and I've always heard Anti-American rhetoric on each and every trip...which is why I was
"leaning"

I'm basically of the mind that the whole world has the maturity of a schoolyard so politically I try to be an anarchist who votes...and I'm definetely an anti-corprite so Nader's my vote so far!!!

That's the best...
 

Statement I have heard anyone say to describe their view of the political world...

So, I guess I am an anarchist too...

Brian j.

If Bush was tough on terrorism, I'd agree with you. But he isn't and one issue shouldn't be the deciding in a particular vote, IMO. What has Bush done, really? Not much, except for making some of his right-wing zealots happy. He's run this country down the toilet, as evidenced by the abnormally large deficit. And the latest thing with his constitutional ban on gay marriage is the final straw. It's insulting, just like his administration and the man himself. He's practically anti-social programs, so that's enough to vote him out right there. Everything he's promised to do either hasn't been done or has been so under-funded that the goal can't be accomplished. Now, our soldiers in Iraq are going to be without any funds from September to January. What's he doing with all this money???

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Nader...
 

Oh, I see. But then in the same post:



And Ralph says:

Quote:

The lack of substantive response from both the DNC and the RNC to important subjects and necessities facing Americans reinforced the need for an alternative choice to the two major parties in the presidential race. The two-party duopoly has demonstrated again that they will not engage in a simple discussion of the issues about the future direction of key policies that will shape the nation.

And you say:

Quote:

ps-I agree he may have done alot for consumers (I read up on him awhile back mind you), But I feel he shouldnt jump into the election now...Personally, I think he SHOULD'VE jumped in earlier.

So who's the basket case? Give me your address, I'll send you a mirror and you'll be able to answer that in no time.

Whatever God...
 

oh wait it's CarneVaca...I am so intimidated...LMAO!!! I guess people arent allowed to make mistakes whle posting a reply huh?

Re: Whatever God...
 

No reason for intimidation. You classified a whole group of people, myself included, calling us basket cases... then you proceeded to make a seemingly irrational, irreconcilable statement.

Let's not turn this into a pissing match between posters, as so often happens around here. Let's deal with the merits of the topic without degrading it with gratuitous insults.

Edit: Brian has since edited his post to make it less irrational. :laugh:

That's okay...
 

according to Oklahoma Liberal Democrats Nader is a "Basket-case" for running as an independent candidate, So being I'm an "Independent" guess I'm a "Basket-case" too...LOL!!!

Brian "Basket-case & Mirror Breaker" j.

Re: That's okay...
 

:laugh:

Let's see...
 

we have 3 candidates:

1.The Shrub...To quote an Everly Bros. song "Bye Bye Shrub" :)

2.The "Basket-case"

& 3.Kerry (For some reason he has no nickname)

Brian j.

Re: Let's see...
 

I've seen him referred to as Franken-kerry. :laugh: :wavey:

Re: Re: Let's see...
 

Does that mean he's part Al Franken? ;)

I really think he does look like a real version of the breakfast cereal character "Franken-berry"...

Brian j.

yes, the whole anti-gay marriage amendment proposal would be our second constititutional infringement on basic civil liberties (prohibition being the first) and is definetely not the path this experiment in democracy should be taking...there are enough oppressed people in the world already.

and the whole deficit thing gives me a "been there, done that" headache, but then again very few administrations have handled our tax money in a responsible manner...either we get more taxes or get more deficit...

but I originally said I was "leaning"; security and a willingness to "stand up" to the bullies attitude were my main reasons. I personally don't want a perception of weakness from my president. and believe me, Middle Eastern and many other cultures are still big on a "man being a man" to the point that being a rational and compassionate man is considered being a "weak" man. and I do believe that Bush's "crazy Texan" personna has given terrorists and other dictators pause...

I don't like it, I personally like my men to be smart, kind and mushy on the inside but reality bites...and in all the interviews I've seen over the years with Ralph Nader, he has never come off as weak...and if we do elect a new president, you can always count on that he too will be tested by the bullies in this world.

ACK!! I know....this is really ticking me off....I just want to vomit when I see shrub's smug ass face talking about how "disturbing" gay marriage is....

My thing is this...if he and all other opponents of gay marriage could give me some good solid reasoning that IS NOT religious or personal opinion, then I would be happy to listen to their reasoning....bah...I'm just going to start rambling.....so there I'll stop.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

He will be. He'll have a hard time getting on the ballot in a lot of places being an Independent.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ralph jumps in
 

Don't get me wrong, I think even though he may be right on alot of things, Nader is way too far out there and think no one should vote for him - he would be 100% ineffective as I mentioned above. He is FAR more effective as a private citizen.

I agree he may not even get on some states' ballots, which brings an interesting equal protection claim :eek: :eek: