Naderheads: "Our Goal"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nakedemperor, Oct 30, 2004.

  1. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    Nader spokesman Kevin Zeese, a few days ago: "Our goal has always been the same: To remove George Bush from office."

    GAAHHH!! :wtf: :cuckoo: :alco:
     
  2. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    I strongly advocate that any libs on here vote for Nader. He is the obvious candidate of the honest lib. John Kerry's multiple sellouts to corporations and willingness to go along with bush's fascism should make him undesirable in the mind of any lib.


    Nader/Camejo '04
     
  3. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,542
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,157
    Something ive never understood. if libs were so concerned about Nader taking the vote, and they dont like Kerry, why not just give their vote to Nader instead. I mean if everyone who voted for Kerry voted for Nader maybe they would have a chance but i still doubt it.
     
  4. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    Nihilism - disbelief in objective truth: the belief that there is no objective basis for truth.

    The objective truth is that a vote for Nader is mostly likely a vote for Bush. Precisely the person that Naderists would least like to see in the White House.

    This may be very important in Florida, as it was in 2000.
     
  5. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    Its a logistical fact that if Nader hadn't been on the Florida ballot in 2000 we wouldn't have had to suffer through 4 years of Bush.

    Bush won by 500+ votes. Nader got 90,000 votes in the state. ~70% of Nader voters would have voter for Gore had Nader not been on the ballot.

    That's wha makes this statement so freakin' bizarre to me. Nader used to be a great public advocate and an upstanding figure. But now that he's accetepted logistical and financial help from his ideological antithesis, he's completely lost all credibility in my book. Its not longer about his cause, its about Ralph Nader.
     
  6. Hemi_man
    Offline

    Hemi_man Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2004
    Messages:
    5
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Maineville, Ohio
    Ratings:
    +1
    Its a logistical fact that if Nader hadn't been on the Florida ballot in 2000 we wouldn't have had to suffer through 4 years of Bush.



    If Gore would have won his home state he would have been Pres. That says something when your home state doenst support you.
     
  7. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    True. There's enough of that 90,000 that would have voted for Gore to give him the win. But while you're thinking about Nader and his whopping 5%, think about this.

    If Ross Perot hadn't run in 1992 there's enough of his 19% that would have voted for George H.W. Bush that Bush would have won a second term. With that, we wouldn't have had Bubba for two terms, at best Hilary might be a little known senator from Arkansas, people still wouldn't know John Kerry from Bob Kerrey, and we could conceivably be wrapping up the second term of President Dole. I'll also add that it was his father's loss in 1992 that spurred George W. Bush to want to run for President. Without that loss, George W. Bush might still be in baseball.
     
  8. nakedemperor
    Offline

    nakedemperor Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Messages:
    1,437
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +150
    Well yeah. Obviously there are a ton of woulda/coulda/shouldas, but I was talking about Nader re: his spokesman's bewildering comment about keeping Bush out of office.
     
  9. Jimmyeatworld
    Offline

    Jimmyeatworld Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,239
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Location:
    America
    Ratings:
    +223
    Yeah, I saw the original post, and I think Naders spokesman is delusional. I'm sure they would like to think they have a chance to win, but only being on the ballot in something like 30 states should be enough to write him off. Not that he would stand a chance of winning if he were on all ballots.
     
  10. Merlin1047
    Offline

    Merlin1047 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,500
    Thanks Received:
    449
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    AL
    Ratings:
    +450
    LOL - you lefties were not at all unhappy when Perot was siphoning votes from Bush Sr.

    Nader used to be a lib icon and darling of the "we know better" crowd. But now that Nader may be competing with your guy, you see him in a different light.

    Looking for sympathy? It's in the dictionary somewhere between sex and syphilis
     

Share This Page