Ralph Nader: The Democrats are unable to defend the US
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:04:03 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Ralph Nader: The Democrats are unable to defend the US
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Ralph Nader: The Democrats are unable to defend the US  (Read 2179 times)
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2017, 10:09:31 PM »

I did not find myself disagreeing with much Nader said - especially towards the end, where these Democrats in leadership should feel enough shame when they get big losses to resign and let new leaders come in.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2017, 10:20:39 PM »

No, third parties like in 2000 and in 16 took away the Dems chances for victory, that's the fact.

Why were those elections so close anyway? And why were many likely Democratic voters so willing to cast their vote for a third party? Obviously, it was because the Democratic candidate was uninspiring.

You know, i would be ok with this if this election had been Rubio vs Clinton or Jeb vs Clinton. But this excuse doesn't fly when the GOP nominee is Donald ****ing Trump.

You can thank the Hiillary campaign and the DNC for elevating "pied piper" Donald Trump.
Logged
Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin
Runeghost
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,367


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2017, 11:16:51 PM »

No, third parties like in 2000 and in 16 took away the Dems chances for victory, that's the fact.

Why were those elections so close anyway? And why were many likely Democratic voters so willing to cast their vote for a third party? Obviously, it was because the Democratic candidate was uninspiring.

You know, i would be ok with this if this election had been Rubio vs Clinton or Jeb vs Clinton. But this excuse doesn't fly when the GOP nominee is Donald ****ing Trump.

You can thank the Hiillary campaign and the DNC for elevating "pied piper" Donald Trump.

I'm not sure that helping to hype Trump would have been *that* bad an idea, IF Hillary had either been able to present herself as a average-quality candidate, or if she'd helmed an average campaign. When she turned out poorly as both and candidate and campaigner, and Trump stole the GOP's crop of the desperate and the foolish to found his own little cult, it all went to pieces.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 25, 2017, 11:28:52 PM »

You can thank the Hiillary campaign and the DNC for elevating "pied piper" Donald Trump.

Actually, if the Democratic nominee wasn't an awful candidate, the 'pied piper' idea probably would have paid dividends. It's not like people liked Trump - he was really unpopular during and now after the election, it's just Hillary was almost as unpopular as he was.

But let's step for a minute here. First, did they even make any real efforts to get Trump selected? I know it was talked about, and perhaps they made a couple moves here and there, but it seems like Trump won the nomination for reasons unrelated to any liberal scheming.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: June 25, 2017, 11:54:22 PM »

What a great man.

Lincoln's Republican Party was far more vicious.

This made my day.

It's time for another civil war. You guys are going to have to start it, since that's the only way a significant portion of the military will side with us.

Are you interpreting me as a neoconfederate? I assure you, the opposite is true.

You're a modern day Sherman/Lincoln who wants to destroy/burn the South and suspend habeas corpus?
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,201
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: June 26, 2017, 06:31:23 AM »

Yet here we all are, talking about him.
That says more about how pathetic we are than how relevant Nader is.

This.
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: June 26, 2017, 10:45:10 PM »

Doubtful. It was always a high-risk strategy that put politics ahead of the well-being of the country, and it's not as if Trump winning the Republican nomination and losing wasn't likely to have horrifying consequences.

Well of course from a moral standpoint, even subjecting America to just the risk of Donald Trump is pretty deplorable, but if you think he'd have fared the same against most or even any other Democratic candidate, I wholeheartedly have to disagree. I'd be willing to accept that a landslide was never guaranteed and maybe not even possible, but I think Trump's own weaknesses are far too often discounted because he managed to barely beat the 2nd most unpopular candidate in history.
Logged
Doimper
Doctor Imperialism
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,030


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: June 27, 2017, 03:35:09 AM »

No, third parties like in 2000 and in 16 took away the Dems chances for victory, that's the fact.

Why were those elections so close anyway? And why were many likely Democratic voters so willing to cast their vote for a third party? Obviously, it was because the Democratic candidate was uninspiring.

You know, i would be ok with this if this election had been Rubio vs Clinton or Jeb vs Clinton. But this excuse doesn't fly when the GOP nominee is Donald ****ing Trump.

You can thank the Hiillary campaign and the DNC for elevating "pied piper" Donald Trump.

Are you capable of posting anything on this forum that isn't a single sentence bleating about Hillary Clinton?
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: June 27, 2017, 05:19:25 AM »
« Edited: June 27, 2017, 05:21:27 AM by Phony Moderate »

No, third parties like in 2000 and in 16 took away the Dems chances for victory, that's the fact.

Why were those elections so close anyway? And why were many likely Democratic voters so willing to cast their vote for a third party? Obviously, it was because the Democratic candidate was uninspiring.

You know, i would be ok with this if this election had been Rubio vs Clinton or Jeb vs Clinton. But this excuse doesn't fly when the GOP nominee is Donald ****ing Trump.

You can thank the Hiillary campaign and the DNC for elevating "pied piper" Donald Trump.

Are you capable of posting anything on this forum that isn't a single sentence bleating about Hillary Clinton?

If the uneducated masses of the Democratic Party electorate hadn't voted for her then your country wouldn't be in the sh**thole that it is. Jferns aren't the reason for this mess.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.036 seconds with 12 queries.