Patrick Buchanan Supporting Ralph Nader For President?

[Solidarity]

Patrick Buchanan has written a book attacking the Bush government called "Where The Right Went Wrong". It will be on sale this August. And the American Conservative magazine just published a long friendly interview Buchanan conducted with Ralph Nader.

This is a clear sign that Buchanan may offer his "critical endorsement" of Nader as part of an effort by conservative Republicans to "take away" votes from George Bush in this election.

Read the full interview in the American Conservative magazine and draw your own conclusions.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

June 21, 2004 issue
The American Conservative

Ralph Nader: Conservatively Speaking

The long-time progressive makes a pitch for the disenfranchised Right.

Ralph Nader recently accepted Pat Buchanan’s invitation to sit down with us and explain why his third-party presidential bid ought to appeal to conservatives disaffected with George W. Bush. We think readers will be interested in the reflections of a man who has been a major figure in American public life for 40 years—and who now finds himself that rarest of birds, a conviction politician.

Pat Buchanan: Let me start off with foreign policy—Iraq and the Middle East. You have seen the polls indicating widespread contempt for the United States abroad. Why do they hate us?

Ralph Nader: First of all, we have been supporting despots, dictators, and oligarchs in all those states for a variety of purposes. We supported Saddam Hussein. He was our anti-Communist dictator until 1990. They think that we are on their backs, in their house, undermining their desire to overthrow their own tyrants.

TAC: You often mention corporations. What is the theory behind this or what are the alternatives to corporate economic power? I presume you are not talking about state ownership or socialism, or perhaps you are …

RN: Well, that is what representative government is for, to counteract the excesses of the monied interests, as Thomas Jefferson said. Because big business realizes that the main countervailing force against their excesses and abuses is government, their goal has been to take over the government, and they do this with money and politics. They do it by putting their top officials at the Pentagon, Treasury, and Federal Reserve, and they do it by providing job opportunities to retiring members of Congress. They have law firms that draft legislation and think-tanks that provide ready-made speeches. They also do it by threatening to leave the country. The quickest way to bring a member of Congress to his or her knees is by shifting industries abroad.

http://www.amconmag.com/2004_06_21/cover.html

[LoZoccolo]

1. Show me a poll where Nader takes votes from Bush*!

There is one Fox News one; out of every single poll, one.

[Solidarity]

6. Reform Party Endorsement Part Of That Swing Away From Bush?

The Reform Party has endorsed Ralph Nader for President.

The Reform Party ran Ross Perot for President in 1992/1996 and Buchanan in 2000.

This lends more credence to the idea that a significant number of conservative Republicans, who voted for Bush in 2000, may bolt and vote for Nader in 2004.

This is an interesting development that hasn't been picked up yet by the mainstream media. Here's the Reform Party news release:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Reform Party of the USA
420 1/2 South 22nd Ave.
Hattiesburg, MS 39401

Reform Party endorses Ralph Nader for President

(May 11, 2004) The Reform Party of the United States of America overwhelmingly
voted to endorse Ralph Nader for President of the United States.

In 1992, founder and presidential candidate Ross Perot received over 19 million votes. Four years later, Ross Perot received over 8 million votes. Today, the Reform Party USA has over 1 million active supporters. For example, in November, 2003, in Mississippi, Reform Party candidate Billy Blackburn pulled over 182,000 votes.

This year, with your help, Ralph Nader can win the office of the Presidency, since over 80 out of every 100 registered voters did not vote for Democratic or Republican candidates in the 2004 Primaries.

Reform Party USA Chairman Shawn O'Hara said, "Ralph Nader has stood up for the rights of American citizens his entire life. He is a man of peace, and with the help of every citizen who did not vote in the primaries, he can win the November presidential election. Want Reform, vote Reform, and vote for endorsed Reform Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader. On the whole, every time you go to the gas pumps, and see the high gasoline prices, look at what the Democrats and Republicans have done to you. Therefore, please vote for Ralph Nader for President."

[LoZoccolo]

8. Of course not.

There's no swing to be a part of, as I've asked you to document the swing and you as yet have shown us no swing.

Nader does not take as many votes away from Bush* as he does Kerry.

[LoZoccolo]

9. Lie.

This lends more credence to the idea that a significant number of conservative Republicans, who voted for Bush in 2000, may bolt and vote for Nader in 2004.

No it doesn't. There is only one poll that says that Nader will take 1% of the votes away from Bush* and that's it.

[Solidarity]

7. Duplicate Post

Deleted Duplicate Post

[sangh0]

30. So where's your answer Solidarity?

Yesterday you complained when I criticized you for not responding to challenges, and now you're ducking another.

[Beloved Citizen]

65. The fringes unite

I guess that means there really isn't any difference between Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader.:kick:

[tandot]

2. "clear sign that Buchanan may offer his "critical endorsement" of Nader "

says who?

Please provide a link to support your claim that Patrick Buchanan officially endorses Nader.

[LoZoccolo]

3. Yeah, Nader says he'll take away votes from Bush*...

...and one conservative magazine is curious enough about this outlandish (and as yet untrue) statement to interview him about it. That means nothing.

[tandot]

12. I guess Buchanan finds the whole thing laughable:

<snip>
PB: What are the reasons a conservative should vote for Ralph Nader?

RN: Well, largely—

PB: Rather than Kerry.

Laughter.

<snip>


Nader has the whole Republican Party laughing their a**es off.

[Solidarity]

11. Please Read More Carefully

Please try to read posts more carefully. It's always a good idea to read a post before you comment on it.

I wrote: "clear sign that Buchanan may offer his "critical endorsement" of Nader".

The operative word here is "may".

Thank you!

[LoZoccolo]

14. Weasel word.

Pat Robertson uses them all the time in his books when he's outlining conspiracy theories.

[LoZoccolo]

15. Hahahaha I just realized something.

It's a "clear sign" but it means nothing.

:eyes:

[tandot]

16. I read your post carefully and noticed the "may"

I just wanted to make it clear that this is YOUR opinion and not based on any facts.

[Solidarity]

18. Tanks A Lot!

Thanks again for clearing that up for everyone who doesn't understand what the word "may" means!

[LoZoccolo]

19. Oh I understand what "may" means...

...I also understand it as a feeble tactic to cover your ass while you say any outlandish thing you want.

Anyways, I take that as a personal attack, so...

:hi: :nuke:

[Solidarity]

20. This Is A Question Mark? Yes it is!

Personal attack? Hardly.

I'm pleased to find out that you now understand what the word "may" means.

But, I'm not so sure you also understand what a ? means.

The lead post is captioned: "Patrick Buchanan Supporting Ralph Nader For President?"

See that odd little mark at the end of that sentence and this sentence? It's called a question mark. It means that I suggested that Buchanan "may" endorse Nader but didn't know one way or another if he was going to.

If I can be of more help to you please let me know.

[LoZoccolo]

21. Solidarity may not have stopped beating his wife?

I said "may"!

There's that question mark!

Woooo hoooo!

[LoZoccolo]

25. I wasn't talking about that sentence? No I wasn't!

I wasn't calling you out on the subject line to begin with. Got another strawman?

[sangh0]

33. How can a "clear sign" be a "may be"

If it's clear, why the contingent "may"?

[tandot]

24. You are so very welcome, Solidarity

I assumed that you mean "thanks" in your subject line (not tanks)...but then...I "may" be wrong.



:evilgrin:

[Solidarity]

28. Your wrong!

I meant Tanks A Lot!

And I means it!

[Jabbery]

4. Nonsense - Buchanan has already pledged to Duke

David Duke is going to very unhappy if Pat bolts from his promise to support him. I mean, come on, Pat - the man just got out of prison!

[JohnKleeb]

13. Pat may be an right wing nut or even racist but he wouldnt support Duke

You tell me, why would a Catholic like Buchanan support a former Klan leader like Duke, remember the Klan hates Catholics too.

[Cleita]

5. It would be no surprise, two ex-Republicans backing each other.

eom

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

10. One nobody former Pres. candidate supports another

How touching.... :puke:

[Rebellious Republican]

17. Take it from one former Republican, others will not vote for......

Nader. He scares the hell out of them, Kerry would be the logical choice for most moderate repubs. Nader has a clear track record of being to radically left for most repubs. That only leaves Ultra libs, greens and progressives to draw from. Basically stealing votes from the democrats such as Kuchinck and Dean supporters who believe Kerry is to far right. If you believe that BS then I have some prime swampland down here in Florida that I would love to sell you.

[Solidarity]

22. Interesting Point

You've raised an interesting point.

But, what about those many conservative and current Republicans who are opposed to the Iraq occupation, the Patriot Act, NAFTA, etc.,? I can't imagine them voting for John Kerry. They might hold their noses and vote for George Bush unless Ralph Nader is on the ballot.

[LoZoccolo]

23. I can't imagine them voting for Nader.

And every poll but one bears me out on that.

[Solidarity]

26. Nader Could Get Many Votes Of Conservatives

If conservative organizations, individuals and publications like those named in this string campaign hard for Nader I can see him easily getting a million votes or more from people who would otherwise vote for Bush.

Those conservatives would be in agreement with Nader's opposition to the Patriot Act, Iraq Invasion, so-called "free trade" agreements and other issues. But, they will never vote for a Democratic presidential candidate who supports those measures.

They could very well decide to not support Bush and to vote for Nader instead.

Don't you want to see that happen?

[LoZoccolo]

27. There's not a shred of evidence that will happen.

And Pat Buchanan could do it himself with no risk of taking more votes from Kerry, which, as we seen in every poll but one, is the result of a Nader candidacy. Why aren't you working for Pat instead? Have you written Pat a letter encouraging him to run?

There is not even a shred of campaigning for Nader aimed at conservatives from conservatives. This interview contains not a bit of it.

[Solidarity]

37. Reform Party Is Not Conservative?

"There is not even a shred of campaigning for Nader aimed at conservatives from conservatives."

So do you think the Reform Party endorsement of Nader is aimed at left-wing radicals from left-wing liberals?

Now get serious!

[sangh0]

40. Not a shred of evidence in your post

A question is not evidence of anything beside the fact that the questioner has a question

ANd the Reform party hasn't endorsed Nader

[LoZoccolo]

52. I haven't seen much campaigning from them at all really.

Sure they talk about him on the website, but you'd have to be somewhat into the Reform Party to end up there. A lot of Reform Party stuff is way bipartisan anyways - campaign finance reform, balanced budgets - it doesn't seem to really draw conservatives distinctly. Plus the left stuff Nader wants seems very left. And you know what? People know that and that's why conservatives don't vote for Nader.

When's that drop-dead date?

[LoZoccolo]

29. There's no reason to play chicken either.

I take it one week before the election if Nader is still showing that he doesn't take more votes from Bush* you'll be proposing the theory that all those conservatives could change their mind within a week?

[LoZoccolo]

31. Yeah actually tell me that.

When's your drop-dead date for the Nader candidacy if he still isn't taking more votes away from Bush*?

[LoZoccolo]

32. And...

...has Nader announced such a drop-dead date? Why not?

[sangh0]

34. And is there ANY evidence that Repukes will vote for Nader?

Solidarity keeps claiming they will, but whenever he's asked for evidence, he NEVER provides it. But he will complain if you point that out.

[Solidarity]

35. Do You Think The Reform Party Is Radical Left-wing?

Well, unless you consider the Reform Party to be some kind of "far-left" organization that's one bit of hard evidence that conservatives are turning away from Bush and will vote for Ralph Nader.

It still early. More may follow.

[sangh0]

36. And is there ANY evidence that Repukes will vote for Nader?

A question is not an answer to another question.

Why are you so afraid to answer questions?

[Solidarity]

38. Yes

Yes. I just gave you some evidence and it seems you don't understand it.

That's not my fault!

If your not familiar with the Reform Party let me know and I'd be happy to bring you up to speed on that.

[sangh0]

41. What does the Reform Party have to do with Nadir?

They haven't endorsed Nadir

WHen will you provide ONE SHRED of evidence that Repukes will vote for Nader?

[Solidarity]

43. Your Mistaken Again

" What does the Reform Party have to do with Nadir? They haven't endorsed Nadir"

The Reform Party has endorsed Ralph Nader.

And your response is .......

[sangh0]

44. Where is the evidence that Repukes will vote for Nadir?

Why won't you answer the question?

I misspoke. I meant Buchanon

[LoZoccolo]

48. Where is the evidence that Nader will take more votes away from Bush*...

...than Kerry?

[LoZoccolo]

49. And why would the far left vote for Nader...

...if he's so right-wing?

[Rebellious Republican]

46. Those would not be republicans, those would be liberals.....

Show me some conservatives that are "opposed to the Iraq occupation, the Patriot Act, NAFTA, etc.,". Most conservatives that I know are more concerned about the poor economy under this administration, say like Lou Dobbs,Lou Dobbs Tonight provides viewers with in-depth news coverage, political and economic analysis, and debate and opinion on the most important issues of the day affecting the quality of life and standard of living of Americans. Drawing from his 20-plus years in the broadcasting industry, Lou Dobbs, the nation's preeminent business news journalist, reports and comments each weeknight on the most pressing developments in business news, government policy, Wall Street, corporate crime, science, education and technology.

LOU DOBBS TONIGHT Republican Revolt Over Skyrocketing Budget?;http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0401/30/ldt.00.html or 'Exporting America' http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/lou.dobbs.tonight/ or....
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=Lou+Dobbs+Exporting+America&btnG=Google+Search

Some are concerned about War Crimes being committed like John McCain "There are, of course, some enemies who will never be constrained by the Geneva Conventions, and who will never permit ICRC access to captured Americans. If al Qaeda beheads kidnapped Americans, some argue, why must we be bound to treat detained members of al Qaeda humanely? When the principle of reciprocity does not apply, we must instead remember the principles by which our nation conducts its affairs. America is a nation of laws, and we hold ourselves to a higher standard than those of the terrorists. We distinguish ourselves from our enemies by our treatment of our enemies. Were we to abandon the principles of wartime conduct to which we have freely committed ourselves, we would lose the moral standing that has made America unique in the world"<snip
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/m-news+article+storyid-1125.html

or committing Treason as in the Plame outing for political gain like, An ABC-Washington Post poll found 69 percent of Americans, including 52 percent of Republicans, believe a special counsel should be appointed. A substantial majority, 72 percent, said it's likely that someone in the White House leaked the classified information. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/03/national/main576407.shtml

Then there are personal friends of mine that have been forced to give up what some call their "Mom and Pop" business's because of sky rocketing Workers Comp that they are required to have but can not afford and Health insurance for employees. Add the fact that average Americans have less to spend and competition from huge corporations have also hurt the little republican businessman. They all know Dubya is about Big Business, which brings me to another sore point, one corporate scandal after another, and that list is to long to even begin to discuss.

So Solidarity you just keep talking those right wing talking points, There are many issues at stake here and that my friend is the reason Bush is having trouble, they have a huge disconnect with there base!

So you say you are an expert on the Republican Party! Don't forget I used to be one, what party affiliations do you have?

[Nadienne]

39. Some of the appeal of the Republican party

is the inherint distrust some people have for an oligarch - of a government-run oligarch like Stalin's USSR.

And if they become aware that the oligarch they fear could come when big business links with government, that pro-big business is the same as pro-big government, disenfranchised republicans might look to a third party.

It's not impossible.

[sangh0]

42. So what?

Saying they might vote for a third party is NOT evidence tha tthey will vote for Nader.

[Solidarity]

45. What About The Reform Party Conservatives?

The Reform Party endorsement of Nader (which you deny ever happened) is certainly hard evidence that many conservative Republicans will vote for Nader rather than Bush in this election.

Are you still going to claim that the Reform Party did not endorse Ralph Nader or will you now conveniently drop that assertion?

[sangh0]

47. Where is the evidence?

A question is not evidence Republicans will vote for Nadir.

The Reform Party endorsement of Nader (which you deny ever happened) is certainly hard evidence that many conservative Republicans will vote for Nader rather than Bush in this election.

Really? Reform Party members are not Republicans.

[Solidarity]

53. Buchanan Is A Democrat?

Buchanan is not a Republican!!!!!!! Really. And few if any of those people who voted for the Reform Party presidential candidate in 1992, 1996 and 2000 were Republicans? Wow .... that's news!

I didn't know they were all liberal Democrats. Thanks for the info!

Oh. Is the American Conservative magazine mainly a liberal Democratic publication?

[sangh0]

55. Card Stacking - Buchanon isn't a Repuke either

He belongs to the Reform Party.

http://www.mapinc.org/propaganda/propaganda/proptech.htm#card_stacking_techniques

Card stacking or selective omission. This is the process of choosing from a variety of facts only those which support the propagandist's purpose. In using this technique, facts are selected and presented which most effectively strengthen and authenticate the point of view of the propagandist. It includes the collection of all available material pertaining to a subject and the selection of that material which most effectively supports the propaganda line. Card stacking, case making, and censorship are all forms of selection. Success or failure depends on how successful the propagandist is in selecting facts or "cards" and presenting or "stacking" them.
Increase prestige. In time of armed conflict, leading personalities, economic and social systems, and other institutions making up a nation are constantly subjected to propaganda attacks. Card stacking is used to counter these attacks by publicizing and reiterating the best qualities of the institutions, concepts, or persons being attacked. Like most propaganda techniques, card stacking is used to supplement other methods.

The technique may also be used to describe a subject as virtuous or evil and to give simple answers to a complicated subject.

An intelligent propagandist makes his case by imaginative selection of facts. The work of the card stacker in using selected facts is divided into two main phases:
- First, the propagandist selects only favorable facts and presents them to the target in such a manner as to obtain a desired reaction.
- Second, the propagandist uses these facts as a basis for conclusions, trying to lead the audience into accepting the conclusions by accepting the facts presented.

[sangh0]

56. Where is the evidence that Republcians will vote for Nadir?

And you said the Repukes voting for Nadir would outnumber the Dems voting for Nadir. Where's your evidence?

[sangh0]

57. Insinuation

http://www.mapinc.org/propaganda/propaganda/proptech.htm#insinuation_devices

Insinuation devices. A number of devices are available to exploit these and similar vulnerabilities:

- Leading questions: The propagandist may ask questions which suggest only one possible answer. Thus, the question, "What is there to do now that your unit is surrounded and you are completely cut off?" insinuates that surrender or desertion is the only reasonable alternative to annihilation.

...

[Solidarity]

50. How About A Serious Discussion?

Do you really want to engage in a serious discussion on this matter sangh0?

I've answered all of your questions even though it appears they were not intended to be part of an honest exchange of views. They were designed to provoke rather than enlighten. Isn't that right?

[sangh0]

51. Where is the evidence that Republicans will vote for Nadir?

A question is not evidence of how Repukes will vote.

And the question has nothing to do with how Reform Party members might vote.

Why are you afraid to answer the question?

[sangh0]

54. Transfer

http://www.mapinc.org/propaganda/propaganda/proptech.htm#self_evident_technique

Transfer. This is a technique of projecting positive or negative qualities (praise or blame) of a person, entity, object, or value (an individual, group, organization, nation, patriotism, etc.) to another in order to make the second more acceptable or to discredit it. This technique is generally used to transfer blame from one member of a conflict to another. It evokes an emotional response which stimulates the target to identify with recognized authorities

[Solidarity]

58. Your Not Here To Debate Or Discuss

And your method of argument is ridicule, not genuine debate and discussion. We certainly can't have scholarly debate and discussion on DU. That's something you flatly reject. It's seems that an insult board would fit your needs and talents more than this democratic discussion board.

As you so clearly explained to everyone on DU in other posts:


sangh0 Tue Jun-15-04 11:57 AM

"Ridicule demonstrates one's opinions more effectively than scholarly debate."

sangh0 Tue Jun-15-04 03:47 PM

"I ridicule because it's effective ...., Ridicule is an effective way to make a point."

You've made no points here. The attempt at having a discussion with you is over.

[sangh0]

59. Where is the evidence that more Repukes will vote for Nadir than Dems?

You've made no points here.

That's right. I've asked question instead, and will continue to do so until you answer my question.

Where is the evidence that more Repukes will vote for Nadir than Dems?

[Solidarity]

61. Sorry Kid

You'll have to play your games somewhere else.

Your attempt at being an effective propagandist has flopped!

[sangh0]

62. Where is the evidence that more Repukes will vote for Nadir than Dems?

It's a question. Since you believe that Nadir will atract more repuke votes, you should be eager to provide evidence for it.

But you won't.

And don't think your evasions can be made less obvious by withdrawing from this thread. You will have to continue making your assertions in order to argue for Nadir, and so I will be able to keep asking you for evidence to support your assertion.

[LoZoccolo]

63. Hahahaha.

You realize that it doesn't matter what you say; any sane Democrat would come to this thread and see vice-versa. I don't think we'll convince you to stop posting anti-Kerry stuff here, but I think we may (there's that word again) keep some people from believing it.

[sangha]

69. "You realize that it doesn't matter what you say"

Maybe Solidarity doesn't realize that this is not merely a talk between two people. Other people, mostly Dems, might come and read this and see how he has not answered the question. Mayeb he thinks a thread linking Nadir to Buchanon is something that will help Nadir on DU. That might be a clear sign that Nadirites may not be very bright.

[sangh0]

60. Name-calling

http://www.mapinc.org/propaganda/propaganda/proptech.htm#name_calling_technique

Name Calling or Substitutions of Names or Moral Labels. This technique attempts to arouse prejudices in an audience by labeling the object of the propaganda campaign as something the target audience fears, hates, loathes, or finds undesirable.

[LoZoccolo]

64. Hey what's the other thread got to do with this?

:hi: :nuke:

[sangha]

70. It MIGHT be because I've been asking him

"Where is the evidence that Nadir will get more Repuke votes than Dem votes?" and he feels ridiculous because he can't provide any?

[Rebellious Republican]

66. Did you give up on me, hard to talk RW talking points with a ......

former republican? Especially a middle aged southern white male ex-military ex 24 years long republican. Hmmmm go figure!

:kick:

[Solidarity]

67. Not At All!

I'm not a member of any political party right now. Just picked up my spouse from work and getting ready for dinner and a Cubs game on mlb.com

So I'm done posting for the day. Send me an im tomorrow so I'll remember to get back to you. It seems we can have a civil discussion on this question. OK?

Take Care

[Rebellious Republican]

68. Its your thead, bookmark it if you would like to reply! N/T

[gulliver]

71. Pat has to endorse Nader

Pat is the 2000 presidentical candidate of the Reform Party. The Reform Party endorsed Nader. How can Pat not count himself as an endorser of Nader? Pat's not a Republican; he's in the Reform Party.