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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

joshcryer

(62,270 posts)
Tue Jul 1, 2014, 12:32 AM Jul 2014

"we want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them" [View all]

I suggested a Bush victory would be a disaster for everything that Nader has worked for and believed in all his life, just as Ronald Reagan's had been. "With all due respect," I said, "Ralph's Tweedledee and Tweedledum argument isn't true and most people know it. By saying that the two candidates are the same, Ralph undermines his own credibility. Ralph has spent his whole life telling the truth. He doesn't need to say things in this campaign that aren't true."

Tarek interrupted me. "People get that point wrong. Ralph doesn't say there is 'no difference;' He says there is 'no major difference'." Tarek also said that lots of environmental groups say it would be easier to fund raise and increase membership under Bush than Gore.

...

I then turned to my favorite argument. I said: "There are those who say at the end of World War Two, that instead of dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. should have taken the Japanese high command out to some island and shown them what this new bomb could do. The U.S. could have demonstrated their destructive weapon without actually taking hundreds of thousands of civilian lives. Ralph could do they same thing. The large vote in the 40 or so safe states would send a real political message; the low or non Nader turnout in the close states would show that Nader sent people to Gore and that he had that kind of power. If he did this, he would be someone to be reckoned with. If Gore won, Nader would have real influence for progressive causes, and he could continue to build his movement and the Green Party. If Gore lost, Nader would have substantial credibility and power within the Democratic party. By holding back in a handful of states now, he could demonstrate his capacity to cause real damage in the future, and gain much in the short and the long run."

Tarek did not disagree with that at all. Instead, leaning toward me, with a bit of extra steel in his voice and body, but without changing his cool tone and demeanor, he simply said, "We are not going to do that." "Why not?" I said. With just a flicker of smile, Tarek said: "Because we want to punish the Democrats, we want to hurt them, wound them."

http://www.hereinstead.com/Ralph-Nader-As-Mad-Bomber.html


OK, so I really don't need a lecture about votes, about people sitting at home, about more Democrats voting for Bush than people who voted for Nader. Those arguments are fine. But that's not how it went down for us junkies.

I remember that campaign and I remember the vote switching campaigns that were happening, where Nader voters would promise to vote for Gore in swing states while Gore supporters would vote for Nader in safe states. This was pretty damn unprecedented.

The fact is there was a concerted effort by Nader's campaign to stick one to the Democrats. One of Nader's biggest philosophical talking points was that it "must get worse before it gets better," or something to that effect. He went on the attack, calling environmental supporters of Gore "servile." Don't forget the Tweedledee and Tweedledum crap.

Whether you want to remember this or rewrite history or whatever, just know that Nader focused on swing states. States where he wasn't going to get as many votes as other, safe, states. This arguably caused the Green Party to lose its ability to get federal funding for the next elections and caused the party to fall into obscurity. We had our chance and we blew it.

Nader broke his promise to not campaign in those swing states. We wanted to create a new liberal party, one that might actually have sway, like the teaparty / Libertarians have sway now. Instead what we got is a rock in a hard place and it sucks.

So please don't lecture me about that time, what matters that we got screwed over, first by Nader breaking his promise and trying to do a scorched earth strategy (which worked, btw), then by Gore doing selective recounting, then by the election board stopping the count, then the final blow by the SCOTUS that left an * stain on our history. A million or so dead Iraqi's. Billions lost to bankers. No significant climate change mitigation. The erosion of rights, NSA spying, Citizens United, Oligarchy United, and todays decision, Citizens United Against Women Health Care. We got royally screwed.
85 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Lots of leftist groups in on the $cam. "Fundraising" is much easier under Republicans. Tarheel_Dem Jul 2014 #1
Yup. And Nader's Public Citizen is one of the winners under a Rethug administration. pnwmom Jul 2014 #8
+1. It's the same reason I don't take FDL seriously anymore. Tarheel_Dem Jul 2014 #81
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Jul 2014 #2
Did I paint such a narrative? joshcryer Jul 2014 #4
Tell that to the Nader supporters who thought he was a hero. n/t pnwmom Jul 2014 #10
Nader destroyed any respect intelligent, informed people might have for him BillZBubb Jul 2014 #3
We are in a bad way, BootinUp Jul 2014 #5
Looks like they'll be eroding the EEOC next. joshcryer Jul 2014 #6
Here's a major problem with your argument. Bonobo Jul 2014 #7
So, per your last paragraph you want Democrats geek tragedy Jul 2014 #9
This is not unusual from that DU'er. nt BootinUp Jul 2014 #13
Nope. Though usually more coy. nt geek tragedy Jul 2014 #14
No, I want them to be taught the foolishness of ignoring their base. nt Bonobo Jul 2014 #16
the base of the party are minorities and women voters which are voting Dem JI7 Jul 2014 #40
Their base is African-Americans, Latinos, GLBT, Asians, younger voters, and geek tragedy Jul 2014 #80
It's about building the Green Party, not necessarily shifting Dems. joshcryer Jul 2014 #18
that's why he refused to support Paul Wellstone until very late JI7 Jul 2014 #11
Don't forget his sneering reference to "gonadal politics" geek tragedy Jul 2014 #12
People care about other issues besides just abortion betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #15
Sorry, but 308,000 Democrats voting for Bush vs 24000 for Nader is hard to overlook. progressoid Jul 2014 #17
A similar amount of Republicans voted for Gore. joshcryer Jul 2014 #19
Maybe you should straighten up and start expressing serious betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #20
I'm just trying to clear up the revisionism. joshcryer Jul 2014 #21
I don't deny Nader may have gotten votes from the left side of the democrats betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #22
I don't think he was obligated to help Gore. joshcryer Jul 2014 #29
I largely agree with you but disagree about 9/11. Jim Lane Jul 2014 #34
I think the gambit might have worked, though. joshcryer Jul 2014 #36
Trading speculations here.... Jim Lane Jul 2014 #66
You make good points. joshcryer Jul 2014 #69
Do we not have a dem potus betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #38
He had Congress for a whole 39 days. joshcryer Jul 2014 #42
He had both houses from 2008 to 2010 betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #44
Al Franken wasn't seated and Ted Kennedy died. joshcryer Jul 2014 #45
What Gore's Vp betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #46
No doubt Gore fucked that up. joshcryer Jul 2014 #48
Thank you for that? betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #49
Most Nader supporters were waffling independents. joshcryer Jul 2014 #51
Actually an activist career proves nothing betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #54
Gore's career after leaving office is untarnished. joshcryer Jul 2014 #57
He wasn't forced to accept the mandate at all betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #61
Yes he was, read Sanders' remarks on mandates. joshcryer Jul 2014 #64
Deficite Hawkery has never been compatable with progressivism betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #67
Gore failed on many fronts betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #56
It's apparant you're just googling anti-Gore stuff now. joshcryer Jul 2014 #60
Then your pretty damn cynical betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #63
Cynicism defines the political junkie. joshcryer Jul 2014 #65
How could the VP nom equal an issue exactly? BootinUp Jul 2014 #52
Well you know that VP Dick Cheney betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #55
Cheney did what Bush told/allowed him to do. Little thing called the Constitution BootinUp Jul 2014 #59
Not according to exit polls progressoid Jul 2014 #25
Similar enough. joshcryer Jul 2014 #26
8% and 13% are hardly similar. progressoid Jul 2014 #28
90% and 85% are. joshcryer Jul 2014 #30
True. I voted for Gore. Since you sort of asked. JDPriestly Jul 2014 #23
O'Connor should've recused herself. joshcryer Jul 2014 #24
And, since she realized.. "Sandra Day O’Connor Finally Realizes Bush v. Gore Ruling Was Terrible Cha Jul 2014 #31
I believe she has since said that her decision might have been wrong. Enthusiast Jul 2014 #33
Oh fuck yeah.. "TweedleDum and TweedleDee". When it's Nader who's TweedleDum and TweedleDee Cha Jul 2014 #27
yes, this is the shit that i hate, the fucking lies about no difference JI7 Jul 2014 #37
Lies.. exactly. And now naderites are using nader double speak to claim when we say "nader" we Cha Jul 2014 #39
K&R freshwest Jul 2014 #32
Kick Cha Jul 2014 #35
Nader "punished" the whole damn country. Especially the family and loved one of those Killed in Iraq Cha Jul 2014 #41
"cold shower" indeed... joshcryer Jul 2014 #43
the Law of Unintended consequences from Lying to get Votes.. and now the naders are out Cha Jul 2014 #47
I don't even care about that. joshcryer Jul 2014 #50
Oh yeah, some are grasping on to a thread of a pass for nader but it's double speak and doesn't Cha Jul 2014 #53
Why do you have such faith Gore would have kept us out of Iraq betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #58
Al Gore on September 23, 2002? joshcryer Jul 2014 #62
A position he took out of office betterdemsonly Jul 2014 #68
He appeared to be running in 2004. joshcryer Jul 2014 #70
And, Gore would have micromangaged the shit out of that August 6th memo. Cha Jul 2014 #72
+1 joshcryer Jul 2014 #75
Why do you even ask such a stupid question? Cha Jul 2014 #71
Because she doesn't want to talk about Nader? BootinUp Jul 2014 #73
Really. Distract with stupid inanity.. that's the ticket. Cha Jul 2014 #74
Sidenote: It wasn't Hiroshima and Nagasaki who broke Japan's will to fight. DetlefK Jul 2014 #76
The firebombing campaigns killed more. joshcryer Jul 2014 #77
it seems that this topic pops up from time to time, for whatever reason... Javaman Jul 2014 #78
Many DUers feel the urge to punish Democrats IronLionZion Jul 2014 #79
"Since Democratic Underground exists to bury the Democrats deep Underground." Jamaal510 Jul 2014 #84
During the 2000 election I was busy talking jaded showbiz liberals into voting for Gore over Nader Bluenorthwest Jul 2014 #82
I had a very different experience. joshcryer Jul 2014 #85
Nader could have, no, SHOULD have supported Gore Zambero Jul 2014 #83
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"we want to punish t...