Nader 2012

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Douger, Aug 7, 2010.

  1. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
  2. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    Yup.

    But of course that objection also implies that those of us who voted for O BELIEVED that he would be signficantly different than the Republicans, too, does it not?

    My expectations for what Obmam would do weren't all that much better than my expectations for what McCain would have done.

    Thus far, very little that Obama has done (or NOT done) surprises me.

    I was, however, disappointed with his HC solution.

    Yes, I did expect better of him, in that issue.

    Not much better, of course, but better than this abortion he's given us.
     
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2010
  3. Middleman
    Offline

    Middleman Defender of the month

    Joined:
    May 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,907
    Thanks Received:
    289
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northwestern United States
    Ratings:
    +289
    I voted for Nader in 2004. It was a protest vote.

    I have a lot of respect for the man.
     
  4. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    "The illegal wars and occupations, the largest transference of wealth upward in American history and the egregious assault on civil liberties, all begun under George W. Bush, raise only a flicker of tepid protest when propagated by Democrats."

    Particularly when the Democrat in the White House has a black skin.

    Want some real Hope and Change?
    Ralph Nader v Ron Paul (Green v Lib) in 2012
    With the loser serving as VP.

    Obviously that can't happen with Wall Street's handmaidens, Republican AND Democrat, controlling congress; however, Republicans AND Democrats can be FLUSHED from congress starting November 2nd.

    Imagine replacing 100 Democratic House members (since Republicans want to be driving this train when it jumps its economic tracks) with 60 Greens and 40 Libs. That would begin to open American eyes to how the richest 1% of voters currently get to decide which candidates the other 99% are allowed to "choose" between.

    I'm never certain where any Libertarian stands on the question of corporate authority. Nader, however, has proven for decades which side of the class war he fights on.

    FLUSH the DC Toilet in 2010!
    America 2.0
     
  5. rightwinger
    Online

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,457
    Thanks Received:
    19,869
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,484
    Nader has been irrelevant since 2000 when he gave the Presidency to George Bush.

    For someone running on a "Green" platform, he ended up giving the Presidency to someone who set back the ecology 50 years
     
  6. georgephillip
    Offline

    georgephillip Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Messages:
    26,428
    Thanks Received:
    1,265
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Ratings:
    +2,039
    Putting aside the possibility that Kathryn Harris, Jeb Bush, and Al Gore did more to put Dubya in the White House than Ralph did, what's the relevance of making the same self-destructive "choice" between Republican or Democrat when both parties' loyalties are to Wall Street, the Pentagon, and the richest 1% of voters?
     

Share This Page