Democrats: Is there ANY scenario in which you would possibly vote for Nader?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

No. If the dems decided to epic fail and run John Arthur Eaves I'd vote libertarian.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Was big business pissed off about Bush stealing it in 2000 because that meant "their guy" did get in? Or were they overjoyed?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Was big business pissed off about Bush stealing it in 2000 because that meant "their guy" did get in? Or were they overjoyed?

While there is no doubt that Business preferred Bush to Gore that isn't to say they saw Gore as an evil; more like to them that Gore was the "lesser of two goods" so to speak.

Don't Believe Me? Look at these, and these show Gore's role in Occidental too. (Never his glorious hypocrisy as a 'green' campaigner.)

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=468

Or

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=465

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This shows some of his Media Hackery too.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Or to show more of his Media Hackery:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,,387690,00.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Or this: http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2613

You must be logged in to read this quote.

More Hypocrisy:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That must be why Al Gore has become the hero of the American left and has NEVER been criticized by any American leftists in the past couple years? (It's true too, I have not heard a single leftist say anything negative about Al Gore in years. He's a beloved hero through the entire American left. Meanwhile as for the American left's opinion of Nader...)

Also Nader is authoritarian, Gore is not.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

That must be why Al Gore has become the hero of the American left and has NEVER been criticized by any American leftists in the past couple years? (It's true too, I have not heard a single leftist say anything negative about Al Gore in years. He's a beloved hero through the entire American left. Meanwhile as for the American left's opinion of Nader...)

Also Nader is authoritarian, Gore is not.

Way to avoid arguement. I don't care what the American left thinks (and the American left certainly does not love Gore; the Democratic base - maybe, but Left-wing academics, The Chomskyons, The Zinnites of the left... Naahhh they always hated Al Gore. Uber-Leftist Alexander Cockburn - with whom I don't always agree - compared the choice between Bush and Gore as the choice of a man afloat at sea forced to either drink salt water or his own urine. I can't help but agree.) but the above clearly exposes Gore as a hypocrite, Media hack and major corporate whore. If not, find me reliable evidence (at least by internet standards..) which shows otherwise.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Go look at DU, a "left wing nutjob" site. Say something negative about Gore. Won't be good. Also look at the thread I linked earlier re: Nader. And Tweed, an open communist, loves Al Gore. jfern has been trashing the Democrats now, and he still considers Gore a great Democrat and a hero. Also worth nothing everyone you mentioned endorsed Kerry in 2004...

Bash Gore all you'd like, but frankly, even ignoring electability issues, I still would find him the best candidate in 2000. If there was IRV, I'd only preference him. Nader is an ass, he has a huge ego, he's very authoritarian, and a year earlier he allied with James Dobson to trash the Democrats. So we're supposed to crucify Al Gore, yet ignore Nader's alliance with Dobson and not hold him to the same standard? Furthermore Nader's flat out lie and libel in which he claimed Bush and Gore were 100% identical and they did not differ in any way and were exactly the same on every single issue alone is enough of a turn off. Nader still continues to claim that a Gore presidency would be exactly like Bush's. I'll never respect or give support to such sheer idiocy. Nader's record of union busting and buying stocks in companies that were competitors of ones he was about to write something bad about also come to mind. Nader's an egomaniac blowhard asshole, and I have no reason to like or support him. Gore was the best candidate on the ballot in 2000, period.

[Joe Republic]

Why the heck is Ralph Nader *still* being talked about?

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Go look at DU, a "left wing nutjob" site. Say something negative about Gore. Won't be good. Also look at the thread I linked earlier re: Nader. And Tweed, an open communist, loves Al Gore. jfern has been trashing the Democrats now, and he still considers Gore a great Democrat and a hero. Also worth nothing everyone you mentioned endorsed Kerry in 2004...

Bash Gore all you'd like, but frankly, even ignoring electability issues, I still would find him the best candidate in 2000. If there was IRV, I'd only preference him. Nader is an ass, he has a huge ego, he's very authoritarian, and a year earlier he allied with James Dobson to trash the Democrats. So we're supposed to crucify Al Gore, yet ignore Nader's alliance with Dobson and not hold him to the same standard? Furthermore Nader's flat out lie and libel in which he claimed Bush and Gore were 100% identical and they did not differ in any way and were exactly the same on every single issue alone is enough of a turn off. Nader still continues to claim that a Gore presidency would be exactly like Bush's. I'll never respect or give support to such sheer idiocy. Nader's record of union busting and buying stocks in companies that were competitors of ones he was about to write something bad about also come to mind. Nader's an egomaniac blowhard asshole, and I have no reason to like or support him. Gore was the best candidate on the ballot in 2000, period.

For a start DU is a hardcore Democratic\US Liberal site, but it's not neccesarily a left wing nutjob site, if you want a hardcore leftist site I recommend Zmag or for that matter, Cockburn's Own Site - Counterpunch though I admit I don't really know of any hardcore leftist forums dedicated to only politics. Btw, Counterpunch and ZMag both called for "NOTA" during the 2006 midterms, not sure about 2004.

Second of all you still haven't debunked my arguement against Gore being a hack, all you have done is ignore me totally and then have as your arguement "OMG EVERYBODY LOVES GORE!!111" and the old reliability "OMG NADER!!11". Admit it, Gore is a total schill.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Gore isn't a shill, he's a hero. He's done a hell of a lot more for the environmental movement than Nader, that's for sure.

Here's another question: If Nader were such a great activist, why did he run in 2004? What did he accomplish by running? Nothing. And there was nothing he could've accomplished, at least in 2000 he had the goal of getting the Green Party federal funds or whatever. Well he did do one thing, further the rift between him and the rest of the left. Now he's a pariah who isn't taken seriously by anyone, crippling himself as an activist. Had he not ran in 2004 and focused on mending bridges, that wouldn't necessarily be the case, but he scarified this for his ego. Nader destroyed his chances of ever accomplishing anything significant ever again so he could get 0.38% of the vote and spend most of his time fighting to get ballot access instead of promoting a message. So what was the point of 2004 run? Not to mention during that time he pretty much insulted and attacked everyone who had supported him in the past, furthering his status as a pariah, Michael Moore, the Green Party and HIS 2000 VP CANDIDATE all come to mind.

[Lief 🗽]

BRTD, whether you agree with it or not, he believes that the two-party system is ultimately bad for the American people and bad for the government. He believes that by running, by giving us a third choice, he can challenge that system. Do I agree with him? Of course not. But that doesn't make him a horrible person.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

BRTD, whether you agree with it or not, he believes that the two-party system is ultimately bad for the American people and bad for the government. He believes that by running, by giving us a third choice, he can challenge that system. Do I agree with him? Of course not. But that doesn't make him a horrible person.

He's benefiting the Republicans, he knows it, and he's openly accepting their money and support. That doesn't sound like him running as some honest third party. Plus he also keeps claiming the Democrats and Republicans are exactly the same which is obviously total bullsh!t. He was also totally dishonest when he said Gore would've invaded Iraq, even though Gore opposed it and always did.

And as I pointed out, he would've been a much more effective activist for election reform had he NOT ran in 2004. What did he accomplish through his 2004 campaign?

[Joe Biden 2020]

Absolutely not!!  I do not like his positions and while I agree anybody who is qualified on the surface can run for President, but not everyone who is qualified on the surface should.  This man should not.

Hint:  Qualified on the surface = 35 y.o. and felony-free U.S. Citizen

[Joe Republic]

What did he accomplish through his 2004 campaign?

Answer: He won dramatically less votes than he did in 1996 (in which he wasn't even the most notable third party candidate), thus returning him to the mysts of political irrelevance.  Therefore;

Why the heck is Ralph Nader *still* being talked about?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Exactly. He made himself irrelevant and destroyed any clout he had as an activist. So what was the point?

Furthermore, Nader didn't challenge or damage the two-party system, he SOLIDIFIED it. Nader destroyed any possibility of a strong third party candidacy similar to Perot for 20 years at leasts.

[John Dibble]

No. None, period.

What if he was the only other option against any of the following:

Bush
Hitler
Kim Jong Il

Would you vote for him then?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

No. I'd just refuse to vote. I doubt he'd be any different than Kim Jong-Il honestly, he has the same personality.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

OK, we all agree DU is to the left of this forum, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3514799

Hmmm, let's compare results...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

OK, we all agree DU is to the left of this forum, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3514799

Hmmm, let's compare results...

Nobody cares.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Furthermore, Nader didn't challenge or damage the two-party system, he SOLIDIFIED it. Nader destroyed any possibility of a strong third party candidacy similar to Perot for 20 years at leasts.

Rubbish. Arrogant, complacent rubbish. The only thing, and I mean the only thing, standing in the way of a strong insurgent candidate of some form is the fact that the two-party system is institutionalised and that breaking through it requires a great deal of money (and other things).

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Furthermore, Nader didn't challenge or damage the two-party system, he SOLIDIFIED it. Nader destroyed any possibility of a strong third party candidacy similar to Perot for 20 years at leasts.

Rubbish. Arrogant, complacent rubbish. The only thing, and I mean the only thing, standing in the way of a strong insurgent candidate of some form is the fact that the two-party system is institutionalised and that breaking through it requires a great deal of money (and other things).

Aye. The current approval ratings given to Congress and the incumbent President seem to show this fair enough - I suspect this is why Bloomberg intended to run at one point.

OK, we all agree DU is to the left of this forum, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3514799

Hmmm, let's compare results...

Do you even read my posts? I said DU was mostly full of kids playing politics and is very partizanly democratic\American-Liberal but does equate it being ultra left-wing. There is a huge difference.

[bgwah]

Probably not... though, if Hillary had a wide lead in Washington and my vote was not important and there were no other third party candidates, I would consider it. But that won't happen.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Furthermore, Nader didn't challenge or damage the two-party system, he SOLIDIFIED it. Nader destroyed any possibility of a strong third party candidacy similar to Perot for 20 years at leasts.

Rubbish. Arrogant, complacent rubbish. The only thing, and I mean the only thing, standing in the way of a strong insurgent candidate of some form is the fact that the two-party system is institutionalised and that breaking through it requires a great deal of money (and other things).

That's the ONLY thing? FPTP has nothing to do with it?

Do you even read my posts? I said DU was mostly full of kids playing politics and is very partizanly democratic\American-Liberal but does equate it being ultra left-wing. There is a huge difference.

The average age on DU is much higher than on here and Democrats get bashed all the time. I can bring up plenty of examples. And American Liberal is the same thing as left wing.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Furthermore, Nader didn't challenge or damage the two-party system, he SOLIDIFIED it. Nader destroyed any possibility of a strong third party candidacy similar to Perot for 20 years at leasts.

Rubbish. Arrogant, complacent rubbish. The only thing, and I mean the only thing, standing in the way of a strong insurgent candidate of some form is the fact that the two-party system is institutionalised and that breaking through it requires a great deal of money (and other things).

That's the ONLY thing? FPTP has nothing to do with it?

Do you even read my posts? I said DU was mostly full of kids playing politics and is very partizanly democratic\American-Liberal but does equate it being ultra left-wing. There is a huge difference.

The average age on DU is much higher than on here and Democrats get bashed all the time. I can bring up plenty of examples. And American Liberal is the same thing as left wing.

American Liberal is only part of the left-wing umbrella. I doubt the guys at www.libcom.org would describe themselves as liberals in any sense of the word.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Do you think they would be supporters of James Dobson?