Talking about Nader here turns DUers into Freepers

[Michael Costello]

There are many threads on Nader here, but most of what people say about Nader is either Freeper-like foaming, or two unexplained mantras:

- For some reason, unlike other elections, THIS election is super-important and people have to put aside what they'd normally do and vote for Kerry in 2004.
- Nader lost Florida, and thus the presidency, for Gore

As far as this election being super-important, why it is more important than other elections is not explained. I don't think the 2004 election is more important than other elections, if elections are that important to begin with compared with other work. I also think its shortsighted to be so narrowly focused on Kerry beating Bush in November as opposed to longer term, broader goals.

As far as Nader losing Florida for Gore - I think two things combine to debunk this. One is that 49% of voters do not vote. Two is that Gore, a DLC "pro-business", pro-NAFTA, let's move the Democrats to the right on labor/trade/business went too far right for some people. He crossed a line over which some pro-labor people would not vote for him in an attempt to grab people on the other side of that line. Which failed. So he sold out labor and still lost. When you stand by principles and lose, that's one thing, but when you sell out your principles and still lose, what have you got?

As far as that 49%, Bush is going for anti-labor people, Gore is going for the "middle class" (which in my estimation is about 20-30% of the US, 70-80% of people being in the working class)

Kerry voted for NAFTA, is taking money from big corporations, is a multi-millionaire himself. He seems as alien to me as he does to all of the working class conservatives who will vote for Bush this year. Of course Bush is the same, but that's the point, I guess they'll vote for the one they think prays more. More important are the 49% of eligible non-voters, who the Democratic Party and Kerry do not speak to, and who thus will not vote.

And what I see here is the same losing mentality. People say Nader or Cobb (in my case Nader) speaks more to them then Kerry and they don't really have an answer, they just get mad. I'm especially angered by how Democrats across the US are trying to sabotage Nader and Cobb getting on the ballots so people don't have a choice - this makes me think of there being one big "Republicrat" party more than anything. People just seem to get mad at Nader/Cobb people, don't say anything and I guess those people will just vote for Nader/Cobb again. I guess there really aren't good arguments - Kerry is a multi-millionaire NAFTA voter who gets money from big companies, George Soros and so forth, and working class people are just not part of the party and thus should look elsewhere. I see Kerry as good cop to Bush's bad cop.

Anyhow, the Greens endorsed Cobb, which I'm glad because I think it will help destroy the Greens - I like some things about them, but a number of things I don't and perhaps the next popular left alternative party will be better. Or maybe it would be better if workers organized in methods other than political parties. I will be spending time trying to get Nader on the ballot in my state. It seems such a waste of effort for people to try to get Nader on the ballot, try to get Cobb on the ballot and then work separately for Nader, Cobb and Kerry. A lot of local activists are working for Nader or Cobb, which means very little of Kerry's support will be from activists - I guess he'll have little grassroots support, will take money from corporations to buy ads and voter turnout will be low despite the supposed "stakes". The Greens have imploded and crazy Zell Miller may have been right - the Democrats might go the way of the Whig Party sooner or later.

[GreenPartyVoter]

1. Sorry, but I disagree with you. The Greens will regroup

[Walt Starr]

2. Thank Elad fgor that wonderful X

Buh bye, flamebait thread.

:evilgrin:

[LittleApple81]

3. ditto. n/t

[natrat]

40. "...if elections are that important to begin with..."

that about sums it up there slick

[Bunny]

4. Yawn.

I can't tell when you joined, because you don't have a profile, but this is just more of the same old same old. I've been reading this Nader crap here since January 2001. If four more years of Bush are okay with you, we've got nothing more to discuss. Call us freepers if you want...

[vetwife]

6. Nader is the freeper ! He has sniffed one exhaust fume too many

His ego has inflated and we won't let it explode on us !

[ShaneGR]

5. Michael Moore is fat and a "Beachball"

Nader said that in response to a question concerning the success of Fahrenheit 911.

Speaks volume about his character. To Ralph Nader his campaign is about Ralph Nader, not the American people.

[genxpundit]

15. And many here call * a chimp, shrub, etc.

This doesn't seem like the Democratic party I grew up with. I think we need to stop the all name calling and stick to the issues. If people here are free to call * whatever they want, Nader can say what he wants, Kerry can say what he wants, etc.

I haven't been on this board for long, but a number of posts make me wonder what is happening to my grandfather's party and my father's party. Maybe I'm old fashioned.

[bhunt70]

26. good point.

[natrat]

41. bad point

[Rowdyboy]

28. Believe me, the name-calling has been around for awhile...

I saw vicious smears against Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Nixon has been "Tricky Dick", Jimmy Carter was "Peanut", and I'm sure you remember "Slick Willie".

Its just gotten more hateful since Bush II was selected.

[Michael Costello]

29. Individuals not that important

If the individual being voted for was important I'd call Bush names too. He isn't though, the party, and what drives the party are what's important. The only people who seem to be concerned more with "character" or whatever over issues are the religious right. Since I see this being a representative democracy, they are just there to do what I want them to, and I'd put a monkey in there if it could do that.

[Cat Atomic]

38. Whatever, Zell.

Don't you have an appointment at Fox?

[MundoQueGanar]

7. purpose of the dems.

The democratic party is basically there to keep dissent within the bounds of what's permissable to the people who run this country. Read this and TELL me it's not true:

"On the other hand, here are the Democrats at the top of this pyramid (on the so-called "left"). Who are the people that they try to appeal to--not that the Democrats represent their interests, but who are the people that the Democrats try to appeal to at the base, on the other side of this pyramid, so to speak? All the people who stand for progressive kinds of things, all the people who are oppressed in this society. For the Democrats, a big part of their role is to keep all those people confined within the bourgeois, the mainstream, electoral process...and to get them back into it when they have drifted away from--or broken out of--that framework. Because those people at the base are always alienated and angry at what happens with the elections, for the reason I was talking about earlier: they are always betrayed by the Democratic Party, which talks about "the little man" and poor people and the people who are discriminated against, and so on. And at times they'll even use the word oppression. But then they just sell out these people every time --because they don't represent their interests. They represent the interests of the system and of its ruling class. But they have a certain role of always trying to get people who are oppressed, alienated and angry back into the elections. You know: "Come on in, come on in--it's not as bad as you think, you can vote, it's OK." This is one of the main roles they play. But the thing about them is that they are very afraid of calling into the streets this base of people that they appeal to, to vote for them. The last thing in the world they want to do is to call these masses of people into the streets to protest or to battle against this right-wing force that's being built up."

"The Pyramid of Power And the Struggle to Turn This Whole Thing Upside Down"
by Bob Avakian, Chairman of the RCP,USA
http://rwor.org/a/1237/ba-pyramid2.htm

[Michael Costello]

30. Bob Avakian

Ah, Bob Avakian, RCP head...is he still in exile in France? Anyhow, of all those RCP type groups, I think the RCP does a useful service by having their bookstores where you can buy all kinds of books. They really push the Avakian literature, which due to the salesmanship (saleswomanship actually), I've actually read. I don't know if I agree with everything, although I do agree that the peasants in Peru and Nepal are being treated shabbily, and that things there should change.

[MundoQueGanar]

45. Avakian snippet

So what did you think of the quote? I'm curious b/c a lot of the people here seem truly frustrated with the Democrats, and for good reason. I think in this article Avakian nails exactly why people are (and should be!) frustrated with them, and describes to a tee the role the Dems play in American political life.

[RummyTheDummy]

8. Nader accepts money from Repukes and Repuke operatives

How exactly does that co-exist with his virtuous image?

I'm sure he needs the money for his campaign, but he's either so naive and stupid he doesn't really know why they give it to him, or he's a cheap two-bit whore. In case one, he's too much of a dim bulb to be president. In case two, he's willingly aiding BushCo. knowing all the while it's hurting the only realistic alternative to Bush. It's sickening.

Now I await the typical holier than thou, Kerry is no different screed from the Nader supporters. Flame away! This entire subject is as tired as one of Ralph's suits.

[Michael Costello]

20. Nader money

Well, I do not think the Greens are perfect, and I'll take your word that Nader is taking money from wealthy people - but Kerry is taking money from wealthy people and big corporations as well.

It may be true that only Kerry can oust Bush in November, but I think this is short-term thinking. If it goes this way, who can beat the Republican in 2008? 2012? How will the Republicans be beaten in the Congressional elections.

I see my concern as being a member of the working class, not as a Democrat. It seems to me the Democrats have been moving away from the working class for a while, e.g. the majority of Americans (70-80%). 49% of voters don't vote, and many working class people vote Republican. And the Democrat is a millionaire, who takes money from big corporations, and the Democratic leadership does not define labor over business, which alienates them from me.

To me the real question is not how to save the Democratic party but how to save the working class people of the US. I think when DLC DINOs take over the party, at some point you have to consider whether to stay and fight or form another party. It's a crazy battle - you have to fight your own party before fighting another party? Everyone in the same party should be pretty much on the same page. I'm against gun control, but I can live with gun control Democrats, I can not live with DLC Democrats.

I consider big business to be the touch of death in a campaign, so in terms of your tainted metaphor, that's what I consider tainted. I consider Kerry tainted. If I want someone untainted, not only am I not going to find no mass movement, but I will not find anything that could even become a mass movement if I demand aboslute purity. Nader isn't important, making connections with the people who rally around Nader is. The party is what's important, not the person.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jobycom]

10. Some points

First, Nader is as rich or richer than Kerry. Kerry's wife is rich, but Kerry has no access to that money without begging.

Second, Nader is running against Kerry, and the majority on DU are Democrats, so it's no wonder people here oppose Nader as strongly as they oppose Bush. He's the enemy, until he drops out.

Third, many people dislike Nader and believe he behaved badly in 2000, but still don't blame him for Gore's "loss."

Fourth, the old mantra that only half of eligible voters vote is debunked. The statistics used to determine this percentage considers only voting age, not voting elligiblity. Due to incarceration rates (some states don't even let former felons vote) and immigration rates, the number of people old enough but ineligible to vote has been increasing since the 60s. When adjusted, statistics show that over 60% of eligible voters vote, with a few point swing depending on the interest in the election that cycle. This number has remained steady for as long as people have been keeping track of voter turnout.
http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm

Well thought out post, though.

[Michael Costello]

23. voter turnout

1) I won't fully reiterate what I've said in other replies, but even if Nader isn't "pure", I'm more interested in the party that would form around Nader than Nader himself. A party that hopefully Republican-voting and nonvoting working class people would vote for.

2) As far as people here being Democrats, what does that mean exactly? Someone whose voted down-the-line Democrat in every election since 1972 (or whenever they've become eligible to vote?) I'd think that's a small minority of eligible voters. Usually a dozen or so offices are being elected at each election, and I usually vote Democratic, although I might vote Green. Hillary Clinton ran on Working Families and Democratic in New York and I voted for her on the WF line.

4) That is an interesting analysis, I have not seen it before. Relative to 1972, we have a much larger number of disenfranchised adults.

[jobycom]

39. Won't happen

Nader won't form a party around himself, or at least not a viable one, and if he did it wouldn't attract Republicans, not while retaining its base, anyway. Nader is out of touch with all constiuencies, even his own, though not all of them have realized that yet.

If Nader is lucky, he'll go down as this decade's Ross Perot. If he keeps going this way, he'll go down as Lyndon LaRouche.

As for what I mean by most people hear being Democrat, I mean the obvious. Most people here are voting for the Democrat for president. The straw man silliness about voting only Democrat since 1972 makes no sense. I haven't even been voting since 1972.

[checks-n-balances]

11. Too bad, since some of us hoped that freepers would turn into DUers

eom

[Rowdyboy]

12. 3 or more Supreme court justices will almost certainly retire

during the next 4 years. Three are 80 or older. Bush will try to replace them with young, radical-right minorities so the Democratic minority will be unable to effectively oppose. Kerry would replace them with moderate/liberals.

The Supreme Court is about to be remade and anyone who refuses to realize how extraordinarily important that is, has their head buried in the sand. Look at the trash Bush has tried to stack of the circuit courts. Do you want a Supreme Court Justice Pickering or Pryor. How about Chief Justice Scalia or Thomas or Estrada?

Yes, this is the most important election in a long time. I've been watching elections since 1964 and voting since 1972 and I have never seen one quite as important. We had strong majorities in congress then, and could rein in a president. Now, since we have little chance to take the Senate and virtually none to take the House, the presidency is our one shot at blocking the right from stacking the court for many, many years to come.

Nader and Cobb are irrelevant. Neither will be elected, so neither is a serious factor. Kerry is a factor, like him or not.

If you care about gay rights, abortion rights, free speech and freedom from governmental surveillance, you might reconsider your choice. It's your decision, though, and you'll have to live with the consequences.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I Don't Think Nad(i)r Cares About Gay Or Reproductive Rights...

The man's a seventy year old virgin....

That explains his weirdness....

[QC]

21. Living Saints are above mere "gonadal politics." n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. All I Have To Say

is if Nad(i)r delevers another election to the Pukes I am going to be physically ill.


I'd compare him to swine but at least you can get ham from a pig....

[Dob Bole]

16. Comparing Nader and Zell Miller

Both of these people were once progressive heroes, and now their egos are trying to destroy us. Because of Zell Miller, people can go to college for free in Georgia. Because of Nader, I can wear a seatbelt.

But these two men are shells of their former selves and are no longer on our side. The Greens have nominated someone else, so get over it.

[WilliamPitt]

17. Mmm, yup, it's all one-sided

"Fuck it. I'm voting for Nader.

Maybe it's time for the Democratic party to just finally merge with the Republican party and end the confusion. I'm voting for Nader.

For all the rest, vote Skull and Bones in 2004.

You have no choice."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1891365

[sendero]

18. Nader does not work....

.... in the interests of Dems or "progressives".

He is easily disliked because of his own actions. Oh, only freepers can get pissed off at a liar and a fraud. Bullshit bucko.

[Raskolnik]

19. Bunk

If you can't see why this election comes at a tipping point for the country, I don't think you're paying attention. If we re-elect W, we are saying to the rest of the planet that we support his vision for the world. That's no small matter.

Nader has the distinct advantage of never having held an elected office. He can safely throw invective against compromise and pragmatism because he has NEVER had to actually acomplish anything in a legislative setting, and he knows he never will.

By making the perfect the enemy of the good, Nader sets back all the causes he ostensibly champions. Its that simple.

[leftyandproud]

22. WHAT THE HELL does Nader think this is? A democracy?? *NT*

[JPZenger]

24. Nader Can't Even Get Statewide Coordinators

I just visited Nader's official website. They are still looking for a volunteer in many states to run their campaign to get on the ballot. He's still not on the ballot in most states - such as Pennsylvania, Missouri, Oregon, Florida, etc. Some reports said that he could get on the ballot in a few states because of his endorsement from the Reform Party, but I haven't seen any confirmation.

If Nader had any sense of decency, he would only run in the states that are not competitive, such as Texas. Instead, that bastard in 2000 spent the last few weeks of the campaign running hard in the swing states, such as Florida.

[Shakespeare]

25. If you don't understand why this race is so important....

Then you are beyond hope. Period.

If that offends, so be it. This is perhaps the most critical episode this country has ever faced--if you don't understand that, then that makes you Unclear On The Concept.

You want a laundry list of reasons why? Pick any number of threads on this site at random and figure it out yourself.

[sangh0]

35. My thoughts exactly

"For some reason..." my ass.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

27. Now THERE'S fifteen wasted seconds I'll never get back.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

31. not to mention the bloodthirsty mood people get in when they hear his name

many a DUer resorts to the petty freeper-esque tactic of openly wishing for ralph to have a heart attack in some of the threads here

another sad one is the people who refer to ralph as a republican. just because you repeat a falsehood multip[le times doesn't make it any more true

[wyldwolf]

32. Oh, c'mon

If you're going to post fiction, please have the decency to identify it as such.

[Nlighten1]

33. I agree completely...

[Zorra]

34. We suspected that Bu$h was a fascist in 2000

Now we know it. Bu$h has proven to be 5 times worse than Reagan, and will eliminate democracy and destroy America if he gets four more years.

That is the answer to why this is the most important election in history. If Bu$h remains in power, there will be no more free elections.

Any more questions?

[robbedvoter]

36. If you miss the point on the stakes of this election, what the Cheney

are you even doing on DU? :shrug:

[ibegurpard]

37. Don't expect anyone to actually read your post

They'll stop at the headline and go into knee-jerk mode. Most of the posts here have kind of proved your point.

[mellowinman]

42. Who's this "Nader" person?

I feel like I've heard that name before somewhere, but all it makes me think of is the Chevy Corvair.

[ButterflyBlood]

43. NADER IS A FUCKING FASCIST

yes, I said it. and yes, I believe it. He's a Repuke operative.

He's in Karl Rove's back pocket. Voting for him is supporting Rove.

NADER IS JUST AS MUCH THE ENEMY AS *

[natrat]

44. and he is

creepy

[kaiso]

46. Read this ---->>> Watchdog Group Complains About Nader Aid

Watchdog Group Complains About Nader Aid
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040630/ap_on_el_pr/nader_4

[pandason]

47. you are

like a nader to my gore

[onecitizen]

48. It still astonishes me when.........

I see posts like this. Can you not see what this will mean to this country? Really? Can you NOT see this? Please, please read the posts before mine and take it to heart. If bush wins this election you will not know this country in 4 years!