Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Ralph "Thanks for 2000" Nader:Hillary Clinton needs challenger from the left [View all]sofa king
(10,857 posts)104. Ralph needs to retire to some beachfront property...
... So that I can watch all of his hopes and dreams subside underneath the rising seas, thanks to the policies of the Republicans he got elected.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
111 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Ralph "Thanks for 2000" Nader:Hillary Clinton needs challenger from the left [View all]
Freddie Stubbs
Jul 2013
OP
Nader has accomplished more to destroy progressive causes than anyone I can name
Coyotl
Jul 2013
#47
+1000.....Everything positive he accomplished has long been overwhelmed by the evil he has allowed
Rowdyboy
Jul 2013
#63
He'll get no quarter here...I'll despise his raunchy ass until he draws his final useless breath.
Rowdyboy
Jul 2013
#97
IMO, primaries should provide choice among ideas and people, so of course,
HereSince1628
Jul 2013
#2
D*mn right, I was NEVER a Bill Clinton voter....why would I EVER vote for Hillary.....
a kennedy
Jul 2013
#27
Yeah, if Nader ever did anything good, that more than tarnished it. No diff between Bush and Gore
stevenleser
Jul 2013
#10
SCOTUS wouldn't have been able to do it without Nader drawing so many votes away in FLA
Hekate
Jul 2013
#92
I blame Gore for 2000. He violated the first precept of American politics which is that
HardTimes99
Jul 2013
#109
At the time, it was a relatively unknown GW Bush vs. Gore and his sidekick, Lieberman.
Marr
Jul 2013
#103
"Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush"
klook
Jul 2013
#11
Which might matter if one could control how everyone registered. You can register GOP if you want
stevenleser
Jul 2013
#16
My point is, continuing to focus on Nader as the sole reason we lost the 2000 election is inaccurate
klook
Jul 2013
#28
My point is that Nader deserves some of the blame and the exculpatory reasoning you provided doesnt
stevenleser
Jul 2013
#39
he's not the sole reason, obviously (ie SCOTUS), but to say he wasn't a factor is silly.
dionysus
Jul 2013
#52
If Nader committed a 'crime against humanity,' then why did Gore concede? No one
HardTimes99
Jul 2013
#45
Oh, puh-leeze. Without Hillary's and Kerry's assent (and the assent of many other prominent Dems),
HardTimes99
Jul 2013
#102
Not that he's necessarily wrong here, but why does Nader never attack the Republicans this same way?
WinkyDink
Jul 2013
#18
Ah, so it's only perceived hypocrisy, not policies, he is against. Okay, then.
WinkyDink
Jul 2013
#55
If I had reservations about Hillary, and I do, Nader's opposition to her only increases the.....
Tarheel_Dem
Jul 2013
#81