Nader throws support to Edwards

[oberliner]

MUSCATINE, Iowa — Ralph Nader unleashed on Hillary Rodham Clinton Monday - criticizing her for being soft on defense spending and a chum of big business - and expressed his strong support for John Edwards.

In an 11th hour effort to encourage liberal Iowans to "recognize" Edwards by "giving him a victory," the activist and former presidential contender said in an interview that Clinton will "pander to corporate interest groups" if elected.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7647.html

[TransitJohn]

1. Good for Ralph.

n/t

[More Than A Feeling]

2. Wow, I thought this was a joke post, at first.

I don't know how to feel about this. Glad, I guess, that this means Nader won't run if Edwards is the nominee.

[hayu_lol]

3. Good grief, last thing Edwards needs now is...

boat anchor Nader around his neck.

Skulduggery again by St Ralph.

This guy has to expire sometime.

[Captain Angry]

6. Come on.

The guy has spent YEARS railing against corporate candidacies. And is saying that Edwards is not a corporate candidate.

That is a pretty nice thing for him to say.

[ChiciB1]

110. Check My Post Below.... Number 103... n/t

[JPZenger]

127. Edwards Said Nader Did This on His Own

Edwards was interviewed on CNN yesterday about this endorsement. He said he had no communication with Nader in advance, and did not know any endorsement was coming. He said in effect that he treats it equally to support from any other American.

[SaveElmer]

4. Beautiful...

Go Ralph!!!

:rofl:

[journalist3072]

5. With each year, Ralph Nader makes himself so irrelevant

What has bothered me about Nadar, is that you only see him at election time. Where is he in the between times? What is he doing to make America better?

[TransitJohn]

9. You might want to read up on

Ralph's lifetime of consumer activism. He's always busy.

[journalist3072]

16. It just seems to me that you never even hear from him until election time

And I just want to know: what is he doing in those off-years? He resurfaces every 4 years to complain about this and that, and to threaten the Dems with running for POTUS.

Where is his voice all the other times?

[TransitJohn]

22. He's still active.

You only hear from him then because that's the only time the corporate media gives him any play.

[nosmokes]

42. He just doesn't get any media coverage except for every four years.

But Public Citizen is still one of the most effective consumer protection groups around. what do you do between presidential election cycles? I'll be the 2nd to admit that Nader is an asshole, Ralph would be the first. But get over the unwarranted sour grapes deal and recognize a real populist when you see one.Just for the record when you find somone who is perfect and has never made a mistake and has no ego you can bet your ass they've never spent a second in the political realm.

[Recursion]

75. Lately he's been writing books about anti-women and anti-family corporate practices

I think once he quit Public Citizen he's pretty much been writing and running for office.

[Two Americas]

132. his voice is shut out

We can't blame a person because the media doesn't cover them, can we?

I hear this about Jackson and Sharpton as well. Since the media only covers them when there is something controversial happening, people actually think "they aren't doing anything" the rest of the time.

We hear about everything that happens in the lives of some entertainment celebrities. Does that mean they are doing more?

[sniffa]

10. hmm, i'm sure someone who cares can skool you on it

he's unsafe at any speed.

[UndertheOcean]

14. He already did more than you can ever do in your lifetime.

It pisses me off that people are dissing Nader nowadays , after he dedicated his whole life to the fight against corporate America,.

[journalist3072]

17. I'm talking about NOW....

[stillcool]

34. It's really sad to see...

I guess blinded by hatred is not exclusive to the republican party.

[UndertheOcean]

35. exactly

Its all about your team winning rather than right or wrong

[mac56]

47. It pisses me off to see Naderites

trying to defend and justify his sorry ass.

Yes, he once did many great things. And subsequently pissed it all away in one grand, ego-indulgent gesture in 2000.

Ironic, isn't it, that Ralphie's 2000 folly helped enable the most anti-consumer, pro-big-business administration in decades? Oh, I forgot the "scorched earth" mentality. Ralphie sez it's gotta get worse before it can get better.

[sniffa]

67. i'm no Naderite

but if it helps you sleep at night to blame him for 2000, then who am i or anyone for that matter to tear that away from you.

[comradebillyboy]

73. he's dedicated his whole life to self promotion nt

[RufusTFirefly]

36. Are you from Mars or something?

Nader has probably done more for consumers than any other living American.

The problem with Nader that bugs people so much is that he is not a politician. He's a tenacious advocate. That's been the secret to his success in securing so many rights for consumers, but it's also been his undoing up to this point in the political realm.

I didn't vote for him, so thank you in advance for getting off my back.

Nader believed that both parties had sold their souls to corporate America. Whether you agreed with him or not, he wasn't alone. He spoke to a disaffected bloc of the population who felt the same way he did. If the Democratic Party had been smart, it would've tacked to the left and been true to its progressive roots. But it was too deeply in hock to its corporate masters. Instead, Nader was demonized and marginalized and a group of voters who should've been supporting the Democratic Party were tossed aside like used Kleenex.

Then after Al Gore let his campaign be mismanaged by a bunch of DLC types and Bush and his cronies stole Florida, blaming Nader became a convenient and truly pathetic way to avoid facing the truth. The Democrats didn't actually lose in 2000, but by blaming Nader we behaved like losers.

Al Gore has come around in the last 7 years and thrown off his DLC shackles. Gore doesn't blame Nader for 2000. Neither should you.

Ralph Nader's endorsement of Edwards addresses the very things that led short-sighted Democrats to demonize Nader in the first place.

He is supporting a Democrat, not luring votes away to a third party.

Furthermore, his endorsement of Edwards is extremely encouraging. It means that a man who has spent his lifetime fighting corporate interests has recognized that there is finally someone in the Democratic Party who has learned from 2000 and realizes that the best thing for the Party and the best thing for America is to shake off corporate domination and start working for regular people once more instead of serving as stooges for fat cats in boardrooms.

It's not at all surprising that supporters of certain candidates who are beholden to Wall Street instead of Main Street would view this encouraging development with hostility. My heart bleeds for you, you sellouts.

The reign of the DLC is coming to an end, and the Democratic Party of FDR and JFK is re-emerging.

I am a lifelong Democrat and have never voted for any other party in a Presidential election. It will be a source of relief as well as a source of great pride to unclench my teeth and take the clothespin off of my nose, knowing there's a very real chance that the vote I cast in 2008 will be for a candidate who supports the values that made our party great and that made me a Democrat in the first place.

[The River]

44. Well Said

There are far too many blame-o-holics here these days.
Must be all the time they spend calling his name
after having too many drinks.

*from a surviving Corvair driver....*

[noiretextatique]

50. excellent synopsis...SCOTUS was treasonous

what happened in florida was criminal. i never, and i will never understand the misplaced anger at nader given Florida and SCOTUS. further proof that too many americans have their heads up their asses.

[Political Heretic]

87. Um well, probably a lot more than I have, I bet more than you have

He's pretty much spent a life time devoted to consumer rights and done an incredible amount of work on that front.

[sniffa]

7. FUCK NADER

oh wait...

[LoZoccolo]

19. Seriously, fuck him, don't negotiate with terrorists.

This is a guy who threatens mass death on people if he doesn't get his way; his opinion should have no bearing on anyone's vote. Don't give in to splinterist terrorist tactics.

[sniffa]

31. you have a point

i remember when he controlled demolitioned the WTC towers in 2001. :scared:

[More Than A Feeling]

37. I remember when he mind controlled Bush and Cheney into invading Iraq.

Also, not many people know this, but they were going to call it Hurrican Ralph (instead of Katrina), but Ralph decided that would be too obvious.:sarcasm:

[Dr. Strange]

48. I always found it strange...

that Nader wasn't in the building when it went down.

Hmmmm....

[noiretextatique]

52. LOL...how fucking ridiculous: Nader is a "terrorist"

:rofl: the bush regime was installed via a stolen election and judicial coup by SCOTUS...and Nader is a terrorist! :rofl:
Nader was right: idiot america needed this criminal regime in order to wake the fuck up. unforunately, it seems many are still asleep.

[mzmolly]

68. Nader is not only asleep, he's brain dead.

There isn't one Republican candidate that won't continue this 'criminal regime' and he knows that.

To equate the murder of innocent people in Iraq/Afghanistan and those who were killed on 911 to a simple 'wake up call' is beyond disgusting. People are DEAD because of his so called 'progressive' game of chicken.

Nader equated Bush to GORE, you believed him - yet you're insinuating OTHERS were asleep?! I knew in 2000 what you did not. Gore was a good progressive and Bush was dangerous. I know today what you and Nader do not. ANY Democrat running for higher office would be a FAR cry from the Republican nominee.

I would agree with you 'some are still asleep' but those are NOT the people who voted for Al Gore in 2000.

I say this as an Edwards supporter.

[noiretextatique]

79. people are dead because of the bush regime

that was installed by SCOTUS by judicial fiat. that is TREASON. as far as i know, participating in the election process, as nader did, is still not illegal in this so-called democracy. you do realize that your argument is undemocratic, don't you?

[mzmolly]

91. And because of Ralph Nader's assistance in providing us with that regime.

That was his stated plan. Remember, you just noted his 'wake up call' mantra?

[noiretextatique]

98. SCOTUS stopped the recount, not nader

funny how you keep excusing repbulicans for their coup. not really...it's a lot easier to do that than face the ugly reality. drink up...there is always more koolaid.

[LoZoccolo]

105. Nader's role in it is understood by everyone here, whether they choose to acknowledge it or not.

There was simply no reason for him to run, and no reason for him to plant the Big Green Lie.

And even so, regardless of history, his intentions are terroristic.

[noiretextatique]

122. he ran because you can do that in a supposed democracy

what you cannot supposedly do is disenfranchise voters and make blatantly partisan judicial decisions. that you and others keep excusing that is a part of the problem.

[LoZoccolo]

126. "Because I can"? That's a reason?

And I'm not excusing anything.

[mzmolly]

106. Funny how you keep repeating the same nonsense and missing the obvious point.

Oh wait... no it's not.

[noiretextatique]

121. ditto

here's another point. the democratic party ignored voter disenfranchisement in exchange for committee chairmanships.
remember the spectacle of the black caucus imploring senators to give a fuck, and only ONE did. nader is a pimple on the ass of a much larger beast. you can continue to focus on that pimple, but i blame the beast.

[mzmolly]

129. The disenfranchisment was not well understood at the time.

Though, I do agree that Nader is akin to a pustule, however.

What I find interesting noiretblu is that you rarely, if ever seem to post here unless it's to defend Nader? Is he all you're interested in politically speaking?

[nosmokes]

43. great strategy LoZo, toss that terrorist term around like confetti.

It is New Year's Eve after all.

[jgraz]

102. No, he's very selective

For example, try criticizing the Democrats for negotiating with the true terrorists in the Cheney regime. He'll jump all over you for that.

[mzmolly]

66. Absolutely right!

Once again > :toast:

[jgraz]

101. Lame n/t

[Yael]

28. LOL!

[jpgray]

8. That really surprises me. Has Nader finally succumbed to strategizing?

Has he realized that without policymakers open to change actually -winning-, this will remain an atmosphere where any and all progressive candidates are bound to be marginalized and destroyed? I hope so. Always respected him as an activist, and this represent such an evolution in his political strategy that I think many will hate him for it.

[whatdoyouthink]

11. Nader must see the light

Took awhile - but finally found some common sense

Don't jnow if this would help - maybe he is watching the polls and wanting to be on the bang wagon

[maximusveritas]

12. He's just doing this to give himself an excuse to run when Hillary's nominated

I can't imagine this doing anything but hurting Edwards.

[oberliner]

27. You don't think his support could help Edwards?

Maybe some who would have otherwise sat it out might come out in support of Edwards.

[papau]

39. Bingo - we have a winner - it is always only about Ralph's ego n/t

[Skip Intro]

13. Nader is, or should be at this point, irrelevant - in other words

screw nader

[Pastiche423]

15. Too funny!

:rofl:

I bet johnnyboy is so proud.

[ronnykmarshall]

18. Shocker ....

NOT!

Homeboy has said that if Hillary or Obama gets the nod he's gonna run.

:puke:

I can't stand that fucker.

[Tesha]

21. Too bad for your candidate, huh?

Another reason why we shouldn't nominate Hillary
and *SHOULD* nominate Edwards: the Nader contingent
will likely vote for Edwards but *CERTAINLY* wouldn't
vote for Hillary.

Tesha

[ronnykmarshall]

23. Oh. Yeah. I. Am. Crushed.

What. Can. I. Do. Now. My. Life. Is. Over. St Ralph. Has. Spoken. I. Shant. Go. On. With. My. Life. For. It. Is. St. Ralph. That. We. All. Must. Hang. On. His. Every. Word.

Fuck that shit.

My parents owned a Corvar!!!

Suck it, Ralph!

[Cameron27]

26. !

:rofl:

[Tesha]

40. It's spelled "Corvair". And they killed many people until Ralph Nader exposed them.

Deadly cars?

"Fuck that shit."

How many people has Hillary saved?

Tesha

[ronnykmarshall]

45. He must have been asleep when the Pinto was made.

[Tesha]

49. After you read this article, you can come back and admit your mistake.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/1998/02/larsen.html

[ronnykmarshall]

51. Hold your breath, I'll get right back to ya.

[noiretextatique]

54. don't bother with actual facts

as you see, it won't make a difference to those intent on continuing their irrational hatred.

[comradebillyboy]

74. I rember the Corvair, my best friend had one

they were great little cars and a big and unusual step in the right direction for GM. "Unsafe at any Speed" was a crock. Nader has never let facts get in the way of promoting Nader.

[creeksneakers2]

29. I hate Nader too

All the problems we have now come from Ralph's previous meddling. Now the asshole is back again.

Nader will back the GOP candidate in the end no matter what. Look how Nader threatens now to help the GOP win if he can't make himself the king maker. Nader doesn't care about anything but his own ego.

Edwards denounced a labor 527 that supported Edwards. If Edwards has an ounce of decency, which is unlikely, he'll disavow Nader now.

[annie1]

20. lolololol. Sooo all those Nadar fans that were never gonna vote for hillary are...

not going to vote for edwards. Go nader!

[noiretextatique]

63. i will vote for Edwards

i would even vote for hillary if the choice was between her and one of the truly awful republican candidates. and i admire nader. :shrug:

[ozone_man]

65. Not quite.

I agree with Nader and support Edwards for exactly the same reasons.

Nader agrees with Kucinich overall politically, but of the the top tier candidates, only Edwards shows a "glimmer of hope" in standing up to corporate interests.

But I still won't vote for Hillary. :)

[lisainmilo]

24. Right On!

:)

[antiimperialist]

25. This is why I sometimes feel attracted to Hillary's side

Wingnuts and phoneys such as Nader hate her sooo much, even more so than Edwards.

[Yael]

30. And if the good Senator doesn't get the nod, Nadar is in the race

Another (albeit bizarre) reason to pull for JRE. Any port in a storm and all that.

:hi:

[Frances]

32. I like Edwards fine but I do not like Nader

[Le Taz Hot]

33. Dang, people!

Nader is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. :shrug:

[ChiciB1]

55. I Agree With You... He May Have Stirred The Pot At Times, But For

the most part... what Nader has said over the years has been "spot on" and I'm not just saying that because I support Edwards. And I was very miffed about 2000, but Nader does tell it like it is, like him or not!

I remember him from way back, and he fought very hard for many many controversial causes that MANY Democrats AND Liberals applauded! After 2000 far too many people have forgotten the "good" things he managed to advance and actually get something done!

Having said that, I DON'T want him to run for President ever again! I'm just saying he fought for the rights of many of us for many many years!

JMHO!

[Rowdyboy]

38. Even that pathetic pissant Ralph Nader can't make me give up on John Edwards.....

As was noted earlier, he is increasingly irrelevent.

[sniffa]

41. you should just welcome the endorsement

it can't hurt JE except for the screaming, irrational DUers.

[Imagevision]

46. Nader responsible for giving us Bush, why the fu*k would you believe him now...? even

if he endorsed Obama.

[noiretextatique]

53. SCOTUS, and SCOTUS alone is responsible for giving us Bush

with the help of jeb bush and katherine harris, among others.

[ChiciB1]

56. And The F--King State Of Flor-EE-DUH!! I Live Here And I Still Hear

things from friends in other states. Many still ask me if we've learned how to vote!! I usually HAVE to say NO! I live in the county that sort of LOST 18,000 plus votes in 2006!

No, it wasn't really Nader... Gore WON Florida! It was the Bushies and their corrupt followers!! And Katherine Harris GOT HERSELF elected as my Representative for two terms, and NADER had NOTHING to do with that!!!

[noiretextatique]

57. in a sane country, the fact that Florida

the state that decided the election, which was rife with election "glitches" and was governed by one candidate's brother...in a sane country that should have been a major issue. not here, of course. let's blame Nader instead :crazy:

[ChiciB1]

58. You Are Correct & I Made My Point VERY CLEAR!! I Seriously Wonder

why I always vote, because, and I say this HONESTLY and TRULY... I'm NOT SURE what the outcome will be, or IF my vote even counted! Even trying to question or contest ANY election is a very distressing and overwhelming project! And it takes GOBS AND GOBS of money! I finally had to stop helping Jennings out because she constantly needed more money, and I didn't have anymore to give!

[noiretextatique]

59. your point was very clear

and i got it :D i just hope some others did.

[ChiciB1]

60. GOOD... And Thanks!!

:toast:

[ChiciB1]

61. GOOD... And Thanks!!

:toast:

[ChiciB1]

62. GOOD... And Thanks!!

:toast:

[ChiciB1]

64. Sorry... My PC Went HayWire Or Something! I Didn't Post This Three Times... n/t

[mzmolly]

71. Without Nader there would have been no recount.

Gore would have won beyond a doubt. Nader promised to run only in 'safe states' he lied. He is a self described political opponent of the Democratic Party, yet I am to tip toe around holding him accountable for his contribution to this hell we find ourselves in? Piff!

[noiretextatique]

76. the issue here is a disenfranchisement, lies, and treason

you know, all those pesky criminal, undemocratic "gliches" that the republicans used to STEAL the election. the recount was stopped by SCOTUS. if that did not happened, if SCOTUS didn't commit TREASON, Gore would have been president, as he should have been.
i find it unbelievable that people continue to harp on nader, who did nothing illegal, given the illegal, immoral, treasonous actions of the republicans in florida and on SCOTUS.
it was a COUP, you damn fools...THAT is what you should be angry about!!!! :argh:

[mzmolly]

84. I can be angry WITH MORE THAN ONE PERSON. And I AM!

The only difference is that no one here defends BUSH, HARRIS and the gang, yet some insist on defending Nader - who by the way is now being funded by Blackwater gearing up for 2008!

Nader LIED and he's a hypocrite. I have yet to call him a criminal, but he is an 'accomplice'.

[noiretextatique]

96. sure you defend them

you excuse them, and their criminal actions by blaming nader, who did nothing that was illegal or immoral, and they did.
you hate democracy when it doesn't suit your purposes...i get that, but you don't seem to understand that. winning at all costs...it works both ways.

[mzmolly]

107. Pure bologna.

Though, I'm not surprised. I was immoral for Nader to lie and say he was running in safe states. It was immoral for him to run on a platform of global responsibility and help elect Bush. It was immoral of him to literally risk the lives of citizens of the globe in order to stroke his boundless ego. And, it is immoral of him to 'threaten' the people of this world again with his pseudo endorsement of John Edwards.

As for excusing any of the 'players' I have not. Once again, the only ONE of them being defended HERE is the fool on the left.

[noiretextatique]

124. no it wasn't

it was politics. did you have a problem with perot taking votes from the republican frontrunner? was he immoral? will you have an issue with ron paul if he runs as an independent? will that be immoral too? or do you only have a problem with the democratic process when democrats are threatened? it seems so.

[mzmolly]

131. Perot didn't siphon votes from Republicans -

http://www.leinsdorf.com/perot.htm However, if he did I'd send him a Thankyou card.

Again, I don't have a problem with the Democratic process. Your apparently want ot pretend that Nader is not open to criticism because to do so is anti-democratic?

[noiretextatique]

100. i only care about the rules

and nader didn't disenfranchise voters, or create a only time only law for bush, and commit treason while doing so...all supposedly illegal acts. that is the REALITY of what actually happened, and all the blame belongs to the republican party, and their minions, not nader who did nothing illegal. you can stay in your fantasy "what if" world all you want, but i know gore won the election and SCOTUS is the entity that is responsible for installing bush, inc. period, end of story.

[mzmolly]

109. Nader DID lie. I only care about the truth.

AGAIN, there is more than one person responsible for the 2000 fiasco, Nader being among them.

[noiretextatique]

125. clinton lied also

do you have a problem with what he did? he he had kept it in his pants, or at least had the decency to resign for the good of the party, gore might have had an even bigger win.

[mzmolly]

128. Yes I do have a problem with Clinton's actions.

But, he isn't denying his role and again, he's not being defended in the context of the 2000 election.

[ChiciB1]

83. I'm Not So Sure About That... I FIRMLY Believe The "Fix" Was In

anyway! Anyone remember that "butterfly" ballot? Did NADER do that?? And as I said earlier, there have been elections since then that I feel had "dirty fingers" stirring the pot! I seem to recall a man who was asked to work on computers, can't remember his name, but he testified before Congress and TOLD them that he was ASKED to rig the machines. That was BEFORE the election!

If anyone remembers his name, please let me know. I could try to Google but I'm not sure where to start.

[mzmolly]

86. I am sure about that. The fix was limited and would not have worked without the

lying, egomanical Ralph Nader.

Here is but one recap/analysis to this effect:

Gore won Florida by all fair, full vote counts. However, Nader's "spoiler" efforts there - culminating in his last-ditch, last minute campaign swings - handed Bush the White House by drawing enough votes to cost Gore a clear victory.

Nader pulled a net estimated 22,422 votes from Gore. That turned a Gore 21,885 vote win into the "official" 537 vote "loss." Gore lost New Hampshire (by 7,211 votes, 1.3%). Nader took triple that margin.

Gore would have won Florida's 25 electoral votes - and probably New Hampshire's 4 - if Nader hadn't run, or if he hadn't run intentionally helping Bush. Either state's electoral votes added to Gore's 266 "official" total would have given Gore enough to win the White House - 270 (with New Hampshire's) 291 (with Florida's) or 295 with both.

...

At the very least, Nader cost Gore Florida's 25 electoral votes. At worst, he cost Gore the 95 electoral votes of as many as nine states. If not for Nader, Gore might have won a mandate for the center / left - a crushing electoral landslide: Gore 361 vs. Bush 176.

http://www.mikehersh.com/Did_Nader_Help_or_Hurt_Al_Gore.shtml

[cynthia]

114. clint curtis

There was once a report about him on Brad Blog

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=1025

edit to include link

[ChiciB1]

119. Thank You Very Much... Just Saw This... I'll Check It Out Again! n/t

[mzmolly]

70. BULLCRAP! The SCOTUS entered in with the help of Nader who proclaimed

"I will only run in safe states" while collecting money from those who believed his lies.

Had Nader not run in Florida, the SCOTUS would not have been a factor! You know that, I know that and thoughtful analysis proves it.

[noiretextatique]

77. SCOTUS STOPPED THE RECOUNT!!!!

and republicans, and the media painted the time-honored process of recounting as some sort of illegal plot to steal the election. and by doing so, THEY STOLE THE ELECTION. SCOTUS sealed it with their treasonous, immoral decision.

[mzmolly]

81. THE RECOUNT THAT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED!

"They" stole the election with the help of Mr. Nader.

[noiretextatique]

82. that is something you cannot possibly know

you can fool yourself about that all you want, but even if nader wasn't in the race, considering all the republicans did to steal the election, it's entirely possible there would have been a recount. and, you cannot possibly know how people would have voted if nader wasn't in the race.
you can continue your fantasy all you want, but the FACT is that there was a coup in 2000, and SCOTUS was ultimately to blame for that. and that should be more important to everyone than nader.

[mzmolly]

88. The heck I can't know.

And, I'm not the only one who 'knows'.

http://www.mikehersh.com/Did_Nader_Help_or_Hurt_Al_Gore.shtml

Further, if this thread was about the SCOTUS decision not ONE person here would be defending that decision. No one HERE defends Harris and the gang. The difference is, a handful of Nader voters continue to defend HIM - HERE.

[noiretextatique]

97. the SCOTUS decision stopped the recount

that would have proved Gore won the election. it was a blatantly partisan decision that had no precedent in common sense or law. which means it was a coup. i know it is easier to blame nader than except that, but that is why bush regime is in power now.

[mzmolly]

108. Once again - there would have been no RECOUNT were it not for the assistance

of "Ralf" NadIr.

[noiretextatique]

123. ok, ms cleo

nice fantasy. the reality is a lot harsher to accept...a coup, and a supine, non-existent opposition to it. keep dreaming.

[mzmolly]

130. Actually, it's an issue of polling and accounting not psychic ability.

The reality IS harsh. You were lied to, you believed that Gore = Bush and instead of admitting that you'll go to your grave pretending otherwise.

So, in hindsight, did Gore = Bush noiretblu?

[Infinite Hope]

69. K&R n/t

[mzmolly]

72. As an Edwards supporter, I say Nader can keep his so called 'support'.

:(

[paulk]

80. I don't possibly see how this could help Edwards

Edwards could do best by telling Nader where he could put his "endorsement".

And having Nader trash on you actually helps Hillary, not hurts.

[ChiciB1]

85. I'm Not Saying Nader Will Help Edwards, Especially Because He Has

been tagged as the one who cost Gore the election. I AM saying that I honestly believe the outcome would have been the same, Nader or NO NADER!!

Unfrotunately.... Nader comes with baggage that's derogatory! Too many people don't know about Nader from BEFORE the election. Younger people especially!

[mzmolly]

90. I don't either. Nader is generally a 'Johnny come lately' to the Democratic primary race.

How very 'bold' of him to follow Tim Robbins huh? What happened to Dennis Kucinich?

Edwards, whom I support - voted for the war, he voted for the bankruptcy bill etc... I can understand why progressives are leary of him. Yet Nader sees it prudent to forget his former criticism of Edwards and demand that those supporting another non perfect candidates support Edwards or else?

Nader ran against the Edwards ticket in 04! The man is senile. ;)

[Myrina]

78. oh shit.

And I really had hope for Edwards ... but an endorsement from Nader is the kiss of death. Sigh. :(

[JackORoses]

89. Is this an Albatross around Edward's neck? Will Edwards be the Nader of the Dem Primaries?

[ChiciB1]

92. Maybe We Could Whisper LOUD Enough So That John Edwards Will

say "thanks, but no thanks" just don't know how gracious it would be! And IF Nader really didn't like Edwards in 04, he might be pulling a "set-up!"

Shall we start something here?? Even though I have a different take on Nader and Florida, I do realize what many will think! Would something like that even be possible? Tell Nader to BUTT OUT??

[western mass]

93. Ah, the battle cry of the DLC! Nader Nader Nader....

Corporate democrats are 100% responsible for 8 years of Bush.

It's truly an amazing thing to see so many liberals fall for their talking points.

We all know that it was Nader who:
1) gave us a Lieberman ticket!
2) gave us the spineless, incompetant Gore & Kerry campaigns
3) alienated the left to pander to the right (what a successful strategy!)
4) ordered first Gore and then Kerry to back down when the GOP stole the elections
4) forced Clinton (and the rest of the sorry, cowardly lot) to enable Bush's war
etc. etc. ad nauseum.

It was Nader who did all of that, RIGHT??

"Nader" is to corporate dems what "Clinton" is to the Republicans.

[mdmc]

99. kick

:kick:

[eroded47095]

94. Great Progressive Endorsement

But no need to go stabbing other Good Democrats in the back on the world stage.

Would be better to look on the positive side, instead of doing the work of the Tyrannical and Extreme Right Wing.

[BrightKnight]

95. .

[ChiciB1]

103. Edwards Was Just On CNN & I Think He Handled The Nader Endorsement

very very well. Said he had not talked with Nader and basically dismissed the endorsement. Also said he had some issues from the 2000 election. When asked if he would invite Nader to campaign with him, that's when he said he had not even talked to Nader and was focused on getting his message out to the people.

He also stated that the endorsements weren't the most important part of a campaign, but reaching out to people and letting them know where he stands on the issues.

It was well done! Didn't "dis" Nader, but didn't embrace him either.

[krabigirl]

104. I agree, he handled it well.

[polichick]

111. Yep, he handled that very well I thought.

This is all sort of weird though ~ Nader really likes Kucinich best, and Kucinich tells his Iowa supporters to go for Obama as a second choice.

Wonder if there's bad blood between DK and JE.

[ChiciB1]

112. I Have No Idea... But I've Been At This Most Of The Day & My Fingers

are beginning to hurt. Seems everything is going a bit topsy-turvy and Obama is really making me feel "hinky!" I have one more post to make and I've got to stop!

Go, Johnny, GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[Dawgs]

113. Unfortunately, most people won't see Edwards remarks.

They'll only see that Nader endorsed Edwards.

[ChiciB1]

115. Maybe Just As A Foot Note... Today Is Jan. 1 And IF Edwards Plays It

as he just did today... it won't go too far! UNLESS, some dirty pool starts getting played!! Which isn't out of the question!!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

116. Edwards is the best candidate, but Nader's endorsement makes me regret having to admit that.

Ralph Nader gave the world George Bush. He should not be forgiven for that.

[ChiciB1]

118. I Don't Think Edwards Is All That Crazy About It... He Can't Ignore It

but he did address it and he did it quite well. Let's not make too much of it and make a wish that it doesn't get too much coverage.

I do wonder what's up though! Nader's name just evokes all kind of crap! Even though the man has done some very very good things for America, he will ALWAYS be remembered as the man who gave the election to The Idiot, Decider!

[laureloak]

117. Nader did the right thing this time.

[mac56]

120. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.