Should Nader Run?

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:33 pm

Should he? He's about to decide and I know
for a fact that he reads this board.
What do you say?

Bloomfield · Post by **Bloomfield** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:43 pm

So it's election year.

But it's only election year in the US, not everywhere. And it's only February and I am already so sick of the partisan running-off-at-the-mouth.

Can we perhaps pace ourselves with party-politics threads?

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:04 pm

Don't see this as partisan. There are some pretty
interesting issues, in fact, and he's
about to decide. It's plain that Gore
would now be pres if Nader hadn't run,
and the Dem National Committee is appealing
to Nader not to run. Nader responds in some interesting
ways: 'They presume they have the right to
citizen's votes.' It has to do with third parties
in American politics and the thread
on the dem primary is moribund. If this isn't for you, Bloomie,
the thread is marked OT, its subject is obvious,
and there's the tried and true method
of not reading it. Best

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:09 pm

Bloomfield wrote:So it's election year.

But it's only election year in the US, not everywhere. And it's only February and I am already so sick of the partisan running-off-at-the-mouth.

Can we perhaps pace ourselves with party-politics threads?

Yeah, that'll happen.

elendil · Post by **elendil** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:12 pm

But it's only election year in the US, not everywhere. And it's only February and I am already so sick of the partisan running-off-at-the-mouth.

Please, some restraints, gentlemen!

But seriously, Jim, what's the point of this thread? Isn't it a self answering question? Seems that way to me.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:35 pm

No, it isn't self-answering to me.

There are people who think
the two parties are essentially the same,
and another voice is desperately needed.
There are others who think that what matters
most is defeating Bush, or whoever the bad
guy is. There are others who think that if
you believe in something that nobody else
represents, and you can run on it, then do,
and don't be blackmailed by the party that
says--'but you'll cost US the election!
Don't be a 'spoiler.' Nader is responding:
'Who are these people who think they
have a right to be elected, and call me
a spoiler because people voted for me?'
What's the truth?

Strikes me as interesting, but if nobody else
is interested, the thread will die. Nader is reading this, you know. Best

Post by **Dale** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:03 pm

Well, from my perspective and bias, Nader should not run for the same reason I wish like hell he hadn't in 2000. I would like to see Mr. Bush move on to his next venture and Nader can only hurt the chances of that happening.

For people who want Bush re-elected, send money and encouraging notes to Nader.

Lorenzo · Post by **Lorenzo** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:07 pm

Yes, Jim, I am reading this. I think it's important that the American people be faced with a choice that opens their eyes and reveals the stark reality of how similar the two-party system has become. I don't mean any harm to the Democratic party, which I use to support, but if my presence on the ticket causes Bush to win again, I hope this will be the last time it is necessary for me to actively campaign for the presidency, in hopes that the Democratic party will seperate itself entirely from all resemblance of the Republicans, seeing what a disaster the last four years have been.

IDAwHOa · Post by **IDAwHOa** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:10 pm

I have always despised the "two party"
way of doing things and the assuption of the public
that that is how it should be.

I admit that I have been at least
partially caught up in this method of thinking;
voting for my favored of the two
mainstream parties instead of the one I wanted to to
keep the "evil" party out of power.

It makes me wonder how many others
are out there that are acting the same way. I also
wonder how things would
be if all of us would quit being afraid
and voted our conscience instead of the lesser
of two evils all the time.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:31 pm

When I was in Louisiana and David Duke ran for Gov
against Edwards, I simply didn't vote. For this I
was upbraided by my colleagues--'A vote for neither
is a vote for Duke!' I might have asked 'If that's so
and I vote for Duke, is that two votes for Duke?'
I didn't vote for Edwards, because he was pro-abortion,
as was Duke, and I long ago decided that
the best hope of influencing people politically
on this issue which is very important to me personally
was to make it as sure as death and taxes
that I won't vote for pro-choicers.

People then
said I was a single-issue voter. But that
isn't true; my friends didn't vote for Duke
because he is a segregationist. They won't
vote for any segregationist. Does that make
them single issue voters? (I wouldn't vote for
a pro-life segregationist, either.)

If I cared a lot about the things Nader stands for,
like national health insurance, I would vote for him
and damn the torpedoes, I reckon. As long as the
major parties can count on people's votes when
they don't represent their views, they won't
represent their views. I agree that this 'lesser of
two evils' is a bad argument. I expect Nader
will run. Best

glauber · Post by **glauber** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 9:34 pm

The US needs true direct ellections for President, with multiple parties and 2 rounds of votes. You have no idea how much fun it is!

Chuck_Clark · Post by **Chuck_Clark** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 10:23 pm

Bloomfield wrote:So it's election year.

But it's only election year in the US, not everywhere. And it's only February and I am already so sick of the partisan running-off-at-the-mouth.

Can we perhaps pace ourselves with party-politics threads?

I'd happily support a moratorium, even though I have on occasion gotten into it.

Truth be told, it's a large part of why I don't come around much anymore. I find I can't always bite my tongue (fingers?) hard enough to stifle a retort, even though I can't remember a single time I didn't regret it later.

slowair · Post by **slowair** » Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:18 pm

Believe it or not, someone from this board sent me this URL.

Take a look...can't hurt.

Mike

http://www.ralphdontrun.net/

slowair · Post by **slowair** » Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:22 pm

Oops!

Never mind.

He has decided to run.

Mike

Chuck_Clark · Post by **Chuck_Clark** » Sun Feb 22, 2004 5:35 pm

slowair wrote:Oops!

Never mind.

He has decided to run.

Mike

Yep. Nader-Bush '04 is now underway.