Reply #126: Never said he wasn't credible. Just that he didn't use the right strategy...

[cascadiance]

I've always liked Nader's voice, and feel it should be heard in a real democracy.

I was just saying that pragmatically, the first problem for third party voices to fight the duopoly of power we have now would be to break down that power structure directly. He has an ability to affect elections and therefore throw a dent in to the power wishes of the Democrats. But with our current system, he can't really realistically win an office like president the way it is set up. That is why I think that had he really pushed more of a single issue like instant runoff voting as his pivotal issue, perhaps it might have been dealt with so that we can get something like that put in place and help break the corrupt system we have down a notch or two. Then, even if he didn't win an election, he will help us win another battle in the war against corporatist plutocracy.

Without pushing for instant runoff voting as his big issue, he opens himself up to criticism that he's running for vanity that his critics have made of him, instead of having some achievable goals, which perhaps if done correctly instant runoff voting might be.