Maybe I'm superficial (Nader)

[mrgorth]

I saw Nader on CSpan last night. He looked bad. He sounded bad. I mean, he made some damned good comments, comments our guys should be making, but he was speaking in such politically technical language that it was hard to follow. My wife (smart but not very political) says to me "I don't understand what he's saying". And I know it's not about looks but dude's hair wasn't combed and then there's the eye thing. C'mon Ralph, use your influence some other way.

[RandomKoolzip]

1. I despise Nader and think he's an asshole, but....

I wouldn't pick on somebody for a lazy eye. I think that's kinda low.

But you're right about everything else. He's a slob, and his language doesn't translate to the average TV viewer, whose education is usually at the fourth grade level. Not that it's bad to be smart, but Ralph really piles it on when he gets on TV.....


Third Party Vote in 04 = Second Bush Term (possible Armaggedon)

[mrgorth]

3. Not picking on

Just doesn't make him too threatening as a candidate is all. Just being realistic.

[PsN2Wind]

8. It just might be that Nader

will be out there saying the things that our candidates are just to nice to say, afraid of being accused of being bullies. We have a problem in the party due to fear of being perceived as being "harsh", so we end up carrying a knife to a gunfight. The Republicans have NO such compunction. As an independent Nader can say anything he wants, telling truths OUR candidates are afraid to bring up. Bush will have every surrogate out there misrepresenting whoever our candidate might be, maybe we should welcome Nader in that capacity.

[hippiechick]

2. So why is everyone so afraid of him ?

He's a 70 year old dork without a political party.
One of his main platform planks is childhood obesity ?
Ummmm... WTF ??

He's going to snag maybe - MAYBE - 10,000 votes nationwide.
That is, IF he gets on ANY ballots.


Why the 'burn him at the stake' mentality ?
Shouldn't we be focussed on kicking the BFEE's ass instead ??


:shrug:

:hippie:

[RandomKoolzip]

4. Nader's third party candidacy is backed by the BFEE

making his agent provocateur platform part and parcel of the BFEE. And if you vote for him, you dissolve the hard-won unity of the Democratic Party and end up benefitting Bush. If Bush is the enemy, then Nader is a double agent, claiming to help us, but giving Bush a boost.

[hippiechick]

5. uuuhh ....... have another toke, dude .....

.... and adjust your tinfoil hat, k ? :wtf:


:hippie:

[Tinoire]

6. What hard-won unity of the Democratic Party?

The Democratic Party is being torn asunder over the war issue. Only the DLC that abandoned its antiwar base now has the absolute gumption to talk about unity. There is no unity. People are getting sick of the hypocrisy that gets more exposed every day.

And if Nader sounds tired, that's because he is and because he represents people who are tired of being taken for granted by the unity peddlers who are the first to flee when it's time to stand up for any principle.

Yeah, Nader is tired. Nader, contrary to your 10 cent evaluation, is not a tool of the BFEE and hates them more than most Democrats . You didn't see Nader or any of his supporters pushing for, enabling this war did you? The Dems who enabled this war are the tools of the BFEE! The Dems who are pushing for an occupation are the tools of the BFEE!

But blame Nader. It's a lot easier than looking in a mirror.

Maybe I'll vote 3rd party for the first time ever in my life just to not be surrounded by a bunch of people talking out of both sides of their mouths at the same time. For the first time, I perfectly well understand those who say "just bring the whole rotten house down and start again".

The garbage I've seen at DU since June leads me to total despair that anything will ever change in the Democratic Party.

[diamondsoul]

10. High Five, Tin.

I'm right there with you.

Silly me, I figured after a couple of days the fanatical hate-mongering would have at least slowed a little. I come back and I'll be damned if Nader is still the number one target of GD:2004.

Notice too that nobody is taking any offense to Mr. Terry McAuliffe ASSuming Green voters are too afraid of Bush to vote their choice in the GE. That's the kind of arrogance that will cost us the election in November and it ain't got squat to do with Nader!

[redqueen]

20. AMEN! n/t

[library_max]

7. Well, he cost us the election last time.

So we're not really happy about waiting to see what he can or can't do this time.

9/11 succeeded far beyond even Osama Bin Laden's expectations. The chances that they could do as well again are minuscule. Does that mean we're okay with Al Qaeda flying planes around in American airspace, looking for opportunities? No? Then that may help you understand the anti-Nader feelings on DU.

[hippiechick]

9. you really believe that lame old story, huh ?

Nader didn't cost 'us' the election ... Gore WON.
The SCOTUS stopped the counting and installed Bush.

Stop relying on tired scapegoats and focus on the real enemy ~ BUSH.


:hippie:

[ShaneGR]

13. Bush 'won' by 500, Nader votes in Florida 70K

You tell me.

[bowens43]

18. Florida should not have mattered.

Gore had everything going for him and manged to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

[library_max]

17. The Scalia five stole the election.

Nader and his voters in Florida left the door unlocked and the keys in the ignition.

[Tinoire]

11. Nader. Nader. Nader!

The Supreme Court had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

The Reagan Democrats who voted for Bush had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

The conservative swing voters the Democrats are always chasing had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

The Arab Americans angry at certain of the Democratic Party's stands had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

The Democrats who voted for Buchanan had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

The over 16,000 votes Diebold disappeared in Florida 2000 had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

Telling Haitians & other immigrants that the election was on the 8th had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

Massive voter purges had nothing to do with it.

Military ballots received after the deadline had nothing to do with it.

Hanging chads had nothing to do with it.

Bus-loads of bussed in Republican operatives had nothing to do with it.

Katherine Harris had nothing to do with it.

People who couldn't even be bothered to vote had nothing to do with it.

Downright "naive' people who voted for Bush and now want the Democratic party to cater to their selfish needs now had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.

===

Naw... all of that had nothing to do with giving Bush the presidency.. Let's blame Nader, it takes so much less effort.

[library_max]

19. This is old and tired.

No point in complaining about what Republicans do to put a Republican in office. They'd do it again in a heartbeat, harder and worse.

Many Nader voters from 2000 have already admitted that they made a mistake and said they won't repeat it. That's all we're asking.

But the fact remains that if Nader hadn't run, enough of his supporters would have voted for Gore instead to make it President Gore. The margin would have been enough to win the first mechanical count and every count thereafter. Scalia, Harris, busloads of Republicans, etc. etc. wouldn't have accomplished a damn thing without Nader's contribution.

[CWebster]

23. Dan straight, tinoire -

but it is useless, they buy the party spin EVERYTIME and are absolutely CLUELESS that they are being led through the nose. Without realizing that the demonization of Nader purposefully marginalizes his message, it only succeeds in promoting candidates who represent an agenda that most DUers don't support, but must compartmentalize or rationalize in order to vote for.

[bowens43]

15. No he didn't.

Gore cost us the election. It should have been an easy win and he screwed it up.

[bowens43]

14. There are still people here who blame Nader rather then

Gore's piss poor campaigning for the 2000 loss.

[Jersey Devil]

12. What's going on with his left eye? Did he have a stroke?

Maybe I was just imagining it but it seemed his left eyelid was droopy and partly closed. Has he been ill? He looked terrible.

[GreenPartyVoter]

16. He's no spring chicken anymore, to be sure :(

[fishnfla]

22. Its his right eye that is the problem

He has orbital proptosis of his right eye (it appears to "bug out" and you can see sclera above and below the eyelids) this makes his left eye seem as you describe. This is not normal, although I have never paid much attention to his visage before. The picture Drudge was running was very obvious. This is not a "lazy eye' as someone described above

He needs to have an MRI to make sure he doesnt have a compressive orbital tumour

[CWebster]

21. Kerry looks like death warmed over

Speaking of looking bad, and he has a chronic cough, speaking of sounding bad.. His color is yellowish and when he is in need of a botux tune-up it is downright scary.

At least Nader has "some damned good comments". That's more than can be said for Kerry's juvenile echoing of Bush's ignorant, arrogant "bring it on".

If we are going to be superficial about these things...

[RichM]

24. And Nader is 70 yrs old. The corpse-like Kerry is only 61. Plus, the

older of these two gentlemen tells the unvarnished truth most of the time, while the younger is busy beating his chest about his military service, launching dirty rightwing attacks on his rivals, and taking positions on both sides of burning issues.

I know it's shallow of me to think so -- but that difference ought to count for something, too.