Ralph Nader News Conference On C-Span Today 1:00 PM EST

[Solidarity]

Ralph Nader will speak today before the National Press Club on "Breaking the two-party system." The speech, part of the News Maker Series, of the Press Club will be covered by CSPAN at 1:00 EST.

CSPAN plans to play the speech live unless activity in the House and Senate prevents it.

[Armstead]

1. Yeah, that jackass will break the two-party system...

and replace it with a one-party system if he hands the election to Bush and the Republicans.

Ralph, it's time to retire.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. So then convince Kerry to put some real election reform in place

A lot of third party voters would back him now if they knew that their votes would really count in the future.

[Armstead]

3. I agree with that but....

I believe we ought to have instant runoff voiting and reforms in financing so that elections are won, not purchased. I defended Nader's run in 2000 here.

But this timne, if Nader and the Greens manage to steal enough votes from Kerry, we won't have to worry about election reform, because basic politics will in jeopardy.

Greens and Nader ought to see the forest for the trees. This is not the year to empower the GOP, if you really mean it about saving democracy.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. Condorcet is better than IRV, and I object to the term "stealing" votes

BUT, like you I am worried about what the world would be like after 4 years with a * who isn't worried about getting re-elected.

So I am trying to talk everyone I meet regardless of party affiliation into voting Dem at the federal level. We need Kerry and a Dem congress to undo what * has done. (Or at least undo what CAN be undone.)

[Armstead]

6. Good, that's what we need

I fully support what the Green Party is trying to do in a larger, long term sense.

But given the reality of two-party politics, at this point they ought to bypass the federal level and join in a common front to Stop Bush and the GOP from taking complete control of the government.

I think it would also be in your party's own best interest to do so. Supporting the GOP by diluting votes right now will burn bridges with a lot of people who would support you otherwise on otehr levels.

[Solidarity]

8. Who Enabled The Bush Government?

The Bush government has been "enabled" by many so-called "liberals" in Congress.

Without the support of John Kerry, other "centrist" Democrats and the DLC the Bush government was able to invade Iraq, continue the occupation of Iraq, implement so-called free trade agreements, attack our democratic rights (the Patriot Act), expand it's union busting operations with the establishment of a "union-free" Department of Homeland Security, etc.,

John Kerry has not indicated he intends to undo all or even most of the damage caused by the Bush government. Many think that if John Kerry is elected we will have a continuation of Bushism without Bush.

It seems that those voices in the Democratic Party who are truly progressive and have tried to fight George Bush from day one have been pretty much marginalized by the DLC. And it looks like the slogan "Anybody But Bush" has pretty much stampeded most liberals and progressives into Kerry's camp so DLC'ers can continue to move the Democratic Party farther to the right without worrying about muted whimpers of protests by a few discouraged liberals.

That's my take on it.

[Solidarity]

7. Nader Stole Votes?

How in the world did the Green Party "steal" votes from anyone in 2000? The only attempt made to "steal" votes and the 2000 election was made by the Bush campaign. And the Supreme Court than refused to permit a vote recount and handed the presidency to George Bush.

I really get irritated when I hear some people claim that Ralph Nader will once again either "steal votes" or "take away" votes from the Democratic Party candidate for President.

They never ask themselves how many votes John Kerry will "take away" from Ralph Nader as if it's a one way street! But, if John Kerry is not trying to win votes away from potential Nader supporters that would explain it.

Nobody is automatically entitled to receive votes. They have to be won. It seems that John Kerry is not interested in trying to convince potential Nader voters to vote for himself. If Kerry wanted to win votes away from Nader he would oppose efforts to deny voters the right to vote for Nader. Lawsuits and other disruption efforts designed to deny Ralph Nader and the Green Party ballot access reminds us of the "dirty tricks" played by the Nixon administration and FBI to sabotage the election campaigns of progressives, independent candidates and socialists in the 1960's and 70's.

I hope that John Kerry disavows similiar efforts now underway that are challenging and undermining democratic elections. Every voter should have the right to vote for the candidate of their choice and every vote should be counted even if they are not votes for John Kerry.

[demnan]

4. I wish Ralph would just sit this one out

Once the Bushes are gone it would be alright to tout a third party.

[trumad]

9. Cracking me up

If Ralph Nader talks is anybody listening... Seems he's lost a whole bunch of his buddies....

[Solidarity]

10. I Understand Your Point

I understand your point but what about hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of people who hate Bush and do not want to vote for John Kerry? I think they should have a choice and it shouldn't be only a choice on the right like the Libertarian candidate.

And Kerry, if he wants to, can try and convince progessives, liberals, socialists, independents, moderate Republicans, Greens and Nader supporters to vote for him, and not Nader.

That's called democracy. Votes have to be won, they cannot be simply stolen or taken away from other candidates. Every real vote that a candidate receives in an election is won and earned.

And again I'd like to see John Kerry repudiate efforts to disrupt the democratic election process by supporters who are engaged in Nixon style dirty tricks against people who support Ralph Nader. There can be no good political excuse or justification for such unseemly and anti-democratic behavior.