Hey, lets bat around this idea

[tavalon]

I can't claim it - my partner (who might ought to be a Kerry campaign adviser) came up with an interesting idea the other day. He said that Kerry should ask Nader to debate, since Bush is unwilling to do more than three debates. Now, my first response was that doing that would confer legitimacy on a campaign that should have none. However, he said it would be highly unlikely and that Kerry could use the opportunity for not only further explaining his positions but elucidating the differences between him and Bush and probably even induce Nader to hand him some great straight lines to help that along.

It might be a win/win because if Nader refuses, the few hold outs might consider that childish and if Nader says yes, see above.

Now, I know this has holes (point 'em out) and there are probably some complications that neither of us has thought about so lets talk about it.

[Blayde Starrfyre]

1. Here's a hole

Ever heard the old addage "the only bad publicity is no publicity?" Nader would be much better served with any kind of publicity, including getting destroyed by Kerry in a debate, than with being ignored. And I don't think Kerry would take Nader to the cleaners the way he will do to Bush.

[tavalon]

4. Nope

The point isn't to take Nader to the cleaners - it is to get that publicity and have a forum in which they will likely both be bashing the same fellow, a fellow who isn't present - Incurious George.

[newyawker99]

10. Hi tavalon!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[21winner]

2. The only reason Nader is running is to line his pockets.

He lives by taking money for speeches. He has to be in the news so that people remember him and cheer his message. Corporations are really bad!(unless he owns the stock). It plays well with rice farmers in Death Valley. They have principles!

[tavalon]

6. This

is so incredibly sad. I remember when Nader was a worthwhile, even stellar human being. What the hell rotted that man's brain?

[Cronus Protagonist]

8. I used to admire him too

And he's still a firecracker in a debate, but I'm afraid he's just become a republican shill these days.

You might be a Republican if...
http://cronus.com/quiz

Commentary by a Republican...
http://cronus.com/republican

The REAL Republican Platform...
http://cronus.com/platform

Bush's Illustrated Resume
http://cronus.com/bushresume

Isn't That Strange?
http://cronus.com/oil

:)

[Cronus Protagonist]

3. It would lose voters to Nader and keep Bush in power, IMHO

Not a good strategy, but I maybe you should recommend it to the GOP and have George debate Nader. That would do us ALL a lot of good.

http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13

[tavalon]

5. Won't happen

If George's handlers could get away with it, they wouldn't have him debate anyone. When he opens his mouth, stupid, inane and potentially damaging things come out. LOL.

[Cronus Protagonist]

7. I know they wouldn't - for the same reason that Kerry wouldn't

It will siphon votes from the leading candidate and hand them to Nader.

Neither side will debate Nader, which is a shame, I think, because it would be interesting TV, but there is too much at stake this election to spend much time even thinking about it.

We have a mission, and that mission is to take the country back. I don't see a place for Nader in that, particulalry since he's batting for the other side.

You might be a Republican if...
http://cronus.com/quiz

Commentary by a Republican...
http://cronus.com/republican

The REAL Republican Platform...
http://cronus.com/platform

Bush's Illustrated Resume
http://cronus.com/bushresume

Isn't That Strange?
http://cronus.com/oil

:)

[shockingelk]

9. This BI-lateral commission on debates ...

Dems and Repubs don't want more than two.

[AP]

11. Yeah, I wouldn't mind seeing that myself. Kerry would have to bring an

A game more sophisticated than the one he'll need to beat Bush, but I think he could do it.

What makes this hard is not that Kerry doesn't have the answers for Nader, but that you're trying to do something very different with that kind of debate.

A good way to look at this would be to take a look at the CA recall debates.

Now, the greens in that debate weren't above throwing a vew low blows at Democrats.

But, the Dems definitely have a lot of good explanations for why they take positions more moderate than the greens and than Nader. And the Dems have earned the right to demand credit where credit is due from the far left. In the CA debate, Bustamante had actually said some great things about the tax code for which Camejo did not credit him. Bustamante should have demanded credit.

For eg, Kerry wouldn't be hurt by having to explain why you can't pull up stakes and leave Iraq on the day he's inaugurated. It would help him explain why a slow deliberate withdrawal makes more sense.