Title: The Nader Question
JamesAquila - February 23, 2008 05:25 PM (GMT)
Damn the man!
| QUOTE |
The Nader Question
By Sarah Wheaton
Ralph Nader is scheduled to appear on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, sparking speculation that he is planning another third-party run for the White House.
The consumer advocate announced the appearance in an e-mail message today to supporters of his exploratory committee, formed in January, encouraging them to watch and donate money to his effort.
“Who will pick up these issues and put them back on the table?” the message asks, after listing causes like single-payer health care and impeaching President Bush that have been “pulled off the table by the corporatized political machines in this momentous election year.”
“We’re not in the position to really be able to say anything until after ‘Meet the Press,’” said Chris Driscoll, the interim media director for the exploratory committee.
Mr. Nader announced his independent 2004 bid on Tim Russert’s program. That year, he received 0.3 percent of the vote nationwide, appearing on the ballot in only 34 states. Some Democrats have yet to forgive him for his 2000 run on the Green Party ticket, when he earned 2.7 percent of the vote and, some believe, cost Al Gore the election.
In January, Mr. Nader told reporters that he was forming an exploratory committee in response to Representative Dennis J. Kucinich’s withdrawal from the Democratic race and that he would run if he believed he could raise $10 million.
His spokesman declined to say how much the campaign had raised to date.
Here’s the full text of today’s message to supporters:
Ralph Nader will be on NBC’s Meet the Press with Tim Russert this Sunday, February 24, 2008.
As you know, we’ve been exploring the possibilities in recent weeks.
And here’s one question that keeps coming up:
What’s been pulled off the table by the corporatized political machines in this momentous election year?
Answer:
Cutting the huge, bloated and wasteful military budget, adopting a single payer Canadian-style national health insurance system, impeaching Bush/Cheney, opposing nuclear power - among many others.
Who will pick up these issues and put them back on the table?
Hope you get a chance to tune in to watch Ralph Nader this Sunday on Meet the Press.
Please tell your friends and family.
And thank you for your ongoing and generous support.
Onward
The Nader Team |
earthmother - February 23, 2008 07:03 PM (GMT)
It's impossible to even know how to respond to this. Well, I can think of some things, but the ideas aren't suitable for public discussion. :mad:
JamesAquila - February 24, 2008 03:35 PM (GMT)
The bastard did it. He's running again. :mad:
Patsy - February 24, 2008 04:00 PM (GMT)
Nader just needs his four year fix. He knows that he is a spoiler, and that's his fifteen minutes of fame. But, I do not believe that he will be a factor this time. His time has come and gone.
earthmother - February 24, 2008 05:21 PM (GMT)
Unfortunately, with things in this country being split pretty much down the middle the way they are, if Nader gets the 1-3% of the vote that he's likely to get, it could be enough to cause another 2000 scenario. Even if nationally Hillary and Obama are polling higher than McCain, the electoral college is all that matters, and if Nader syphons off important votes from Dems. in any state, it could be enough to throw the election to the Reps.
The only thing I can see now that might make things more interesting and make it a real horse race is if a couple of other Independents get in as well. I'm thinking Bloomberg, obviously, but I also wonder if somehow, some way, there isn't some justification for Gore to get in at that point. I'm sure there isn't, but geez, what a mess this election season is! :wacko:
ALGOREismylife - February 24, 2008 05:41 PM (GMT)
Why does this pain in the ass keep running for president when he knows damn well, HE CAN NOT WIN???????????? :angry: :angry: :angry:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../wuspols124.xmlRalph Nader joins US presidential raceBy Megan Levy and agencies
Last Updated: 3:07pm GMT 24/02/2008
Independent candidate Ralph Nader has announced that he is entering the US presidential race, a move which many Democrats fear could deprive their party of vital votes.
Mr Nader was accused by supporters of Al Gore of handing the 2000 election to George W Bush by attracting voters who would otherwise have backed their candidate.
Mr Nader's run could prove a blow to the Democrats
The consumer rights activist announced on NBC television's Meet the Press that he was launching a third-party campaign for the White House because voters were disenchanted with the Democratic and Republican parties.
The 73-year-old believes none of the presidential contenders are addressing ways to stem corporate crime and Pentagon waste and promote labour rights.
Emerging Democratic frontrunner Barack Obama's "better instincts and his knowledge have been censored by himself," Mr Nader said, while Republican heir apparent John McCain was "the candidate for perpetual war."
He called Washington "corporate occupied territory" that turns the government against the interest of its own people.
"In that context I have decided to run for president," Mr Nader said.
advertisementMr Nader's run could prove a a further blow to the Democrats' campaign after a bitter fight between Mr Obama and Hillary Clinton. In contrast, John McCain has had a virtually clear run to the Republican nomination.
In 2000, in the tightest presidential race in American history, Mr Nader ruthlessly targeted the liberal activist wing of the Democratic Party, picking up votes from disillusioned environmentalists, opponents of globalisation and radical feminists.
In all, Mr Nader gained 2.78 million votes in a contest that was eventually won by a margin of 537 votes.
In Florida, where a controversial recount gripped the attention of the world, 97,488 votes were punched in his favour.
The trauma of Mr Gore's defeat in 2000 led to the creation of a "Repentant Nader voter" website, on which disconsolate Democrats confessed to voting for a candidate who had no chance of winning.
While Democrats have never forgiven him for splitting the liberal vote, Mr Nader refused to accept that his candidacy may have handed the presidency to George W Bush.
earthmother - February 24, 2008 06:06 PM (GMT)
I'm telling you, with Nader in, for some reason I'm seeing some way for Gore to enter the race now. Don't ask me how (that's not my job!). But I could see something happening. Maybe Obama decides he can't win with Nader syphoning off votes from the Dems, so he talks to Gore, who agrees to run as president on an Independent ticket with Obama as his veep? Or, Hillary gets the nomination (unlikely, I know), and Obama and Gore decide she can't win, especially with Nader in the race, so they run as an Independent team with Gore in the top slot? I could see it, and I could see justification for it now. Before Nader got in, no, it would only have pissed people off and split the vote between Gore and whomever the Dem. nominee turned out to be. But now? It's not only justifiable from the standpoint of that an Independent ticket with Gore at the top and Obama in the veep slot would be a sure winner, it also would allow Gore to address the fact that no one is making global warming the priority it needs to be, so he could get in for that reason as well.
If he wanted to, he could . . .
scalbers - February 24, 2008 09:13 PM (GMT)
Yes, it would be nice if this stirs the pot enough to get Al Gore off the political sidelines. There still is the more traditional scenario I see possible. Knowing that Obama scores better against McCain than Hillary, Democrats will be smart enough to nominate Obama. However the Nader factor would still make things uncomfortably close. Therefore Obama may need Gore's stature (even in the VP slot) to help ensure a comfortable margin against McCain?
The Paraclete - February 24, 2008 10:21 PM (GMT)
All I SEE this in this meandering Poppinjay entering the race is to make a total 'fool' of himself! I don't even see him getting 1% of the vote or that much is all...there's a whole bunch of these losers that run in every state taking 1% to 2% a piece each...The Principle Of Diminishing Returns will take care of Nader...each year less & less vote for him because more & more figure out that a vote for Nader is a vote for the BU$H-McCain WAR MACHINE! The military-industrial complex along with Cheney, Rove, and the RAND Corp. MADE there choice! And THAT choice is 'MORE TROOPS' McCain!
What DEMOCRATS NEED TO ADDRESS is the FACT that GAS & DIESEL are at over $3 a GALLON!...That OIL has TOPPED $100 a BARREL!...that the IRAQ WAR has COST this Nation over $467 BILLION DOLLARS TO DATE!...and it's ALL thanx to BU$H!...THE GOP!...THE NEOCONS!...THE RIGHT WING ECHO CHAMBER! & PRE-EMPTIVE WAR POLICIES!
MCCAIN WANTS TO BOMB!BOMB!BOMB!...BOMB! BOMB!...IRAN! AND KEEP U.S. TROOPS IN IRAQ FOR 100 YEARS! WE NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT THAT! HOW WOULD THE US ECONOMY FAIR WHEN WE ARE PAYING $6 DOLLARS A GALLON FOR FUEL! WITH MCCAIN THAT IS A CERTAINTY! :!:
VOTE AGAINST WAR! VOTE DEMOCRAT!
JamesAquila - February 24, 2008 10:22 PM (GMT)
Let's remember that in 2004 Nader got only 0.38% of the popular vote. He wasn't a factor then and won't be a factor now. His whole shtick that there is no difference between the parties has been rendered moot by Bush.
earthmother - February 24, 2008 10:26 PM (GMT)
| QUOTE (scalbers @ Feb 24 2008, 09:13 PM) |
| Therefore Obama may need Gore's stature (even in the VP slot) to help ensure a comfortable margin against McCain? |
Yes, it would be a huge advantage for Obama's candidacy, but Gore is on record as saying that if he ever got into politics again it would only be to run for president.
The Paraclete - February 24, 2008 10:29 PM (GMT)
EM...Here's the point...when Reagan put us deep into debt with SDI and MX missles...eight years of deficits were NOT enough!...we STILL GOT 4 MORE years of George HW BU$H!...it took 12 YEARS of misfinancing and malefeasance by the GOP before Clinton-Gore took over in 1992 and started FIXING things! I don't want to SEE us go through ANOTHER 12 YEARS of War....misfinancing...and malefeasance before Democrats take control again...I just don't THINK the nation can STAND 4 MORE YEARS OF WAR!...and yet ANOTHER conflict in Iran to contend with!...If Mr. Gore was in position in 2012...what would he HAVE left to govern? :?:
Dubya has put us into a 'morass' 1000 times deeper than his father and Reagan combined! I THINK we have enough momentum from the 2006 Victory for the Democratic Party to pull it off, as long as WE keep the people FOCUSED on what matters! ENDING THE WAR IN IRAQ! BRING BACK THE BOOM OF THE 90S!
:good:
OBAMA! CLINTON! GORE! VOTE DEMOCRAT! BRING BACK THE BOOM!
:clap: :clap: :clap:
Nagasakee - February 25, 2008 05:41 PM (GMT)
Earthmother we must be on the same wavelength..I TOO thought, OMG Al could possibly get in now...and his justification would be as a defense against Nader, Nader is the third party candidate, Gore would be the 4th.
Is Gore/Bloomberg still a theorectical possibility? The funding would be there...
Anyway I would love to see Al get in and actually win, to get in an lose would destroy years of his efforts to rebuild himself...it must be tough to be Al now.
Sorry to see "fancy" back again attacking you btw. Some things never change.
earthmother - February 25, 2008 05:48 PM (GMT)
Realistically, Nagasakee, I can't see Gore doing the third-party thing. Well, I sort of can, under certain circumstances. Certainly it would be possible to do so now without the same kinds of accusations he'd have hurled at him if there weren't another third-party candidate running.
As for Gore/Bloomberg, I doubt it. A Democrat turned Republican turned Independent? Well, stranger things have happened, I suppose. The entire election has been turned on its head this year. What a mess.