Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama just nails Ralph Nader in Ohio

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:49 PM
Original message
Obama just nails Ralph Nader in Ohio
"8 years ago, he didn't think there was any difference between GWB and Al Gore, and now, 8 years later, it's clear he didn't know what he was talking about." -Barack Obama

:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fenriswolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nice one Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. Is that the best Obama could do against Nader?
The same routine he uses against Hillary.. How presidential! :rofl:

Nader and McCain will chew him up and spit him out!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fenriswolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. i think its very relevant to anyone who is going to vote Nader
in 2000 they knew they were throwing their vote away. Also Nader did run on that platform that the two were the same. I think today alot of people would agree a gore presidency would have been alot different from the one we know today. Please stop letting your despair show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #33
210. Obama couldn't nail anyone with both hands and a hammer!
unless someone gave him a script and a teleprompter telling him what to say. Just like Bush!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #210
218. Well. . . . not like Bush . . . who after all needed an earpiece and someone transmitting
information help for his replies in debates !!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jakem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #31
43. what makes you think that Nader and Mccain will 'chew him up'
when he has buried the clintons inevitability train?


maybe he does use ' the same routine'

...seems to have worked, eh?

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electropop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #43
200. McCain would need some strong denture glue for that.
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nookiemonster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #31
51. Comedy, perhaps, is not your strong suit.
Stick to bitterness, you're quite good at it.

Post pooper.

:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuckinthebush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
54. That is silly
Nader has no chance of "chewing him up and spitting him out".

It also seems that Hillary has had a hard time doing that as well.

You can forget McCain...he's not really up to the chewing up and spitting out routine. Obama will continue to show people that he represents the future not the past. Old McCain won't be able to keep up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BobRossi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #31
62. And Hillarious said what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capn Sunshine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #31
70. Gawd.
You are the most pathetic poster in all of DU. Hands down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue State Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #31
72. Error induced dupe. Self deleted.
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 03:22 PM by ingin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue State Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
73. No venom, just truth. That's Presidential!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Fire Donating Member (588 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #31
76. Won't that be a little too much for the ol' farts dentures?
(You can pick the ol' fart of your choice!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nedsdag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
78. Gee!
I didn't know mental patients in straight jackets could type.

Is it lobotomy time?

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmic _mind Donating Member (80 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #31
79. You forgot Lee Mercer Jr.!
He will chew them up and spit them out (all three)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoadRage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
81. Ironically - if Hillary would have said those exact same words
You would have started your own OP to discuss how great she is, and how "she" is the only one who can topple Nader.

Blahh.. Blahh.. Blahh. It's tough for you right now, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geiger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #81
184. Too bad her campaign seems to consistently be a day and a dollar behind.
She's still in candidate mode; he's already acting like a President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #31
86. Just like Hillary is spitting Obama out too I presume ?
You are undaunted, I will give you that.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #31
89. Good to see you.
I'm just kidding, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #31
99. Still promoting that gutter-politics site I see?
Really, desperation doesn't suit you :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #31
103. Nader got .38% in '04.
Yep, Obama's got something to worry about now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #103
176. Except . . . it seems that it's the Democrats who fear this supposed "boogie man" . .
Edited on Mon Feb-25-08 01:55 AM by defendandprotect
Who gave you this "boogie man" . . . think about it!

You so fear an interference by third party candidates . . .
what have you done in the interim --- since 2000 to push for remedies so that we can
have barriers against third parties lifted and IRV -- Instant Runoff Voting --- ???

What have Democrats who gave you this "strawman" done for you to protect you from him?
NOTHING . . .

Because what Repugs and Dems mainly want to do is keep any third party at bay -- so that you
will really have no other choice but a corporate candidate --- and that you will SEE NO EVIL, AND HEAR NO EVIL . . . which would harm them!!!

Wake up!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #176
178. True or false:
1.There was no difference between Gore and Bush in 2000 (both "corporate"!).

2.Nader did not effectively act as a spoiler in 2000, throwing the election to Bush.

3.Nader and his dumbass supporters do not bear a significant portion of the blame for the last seven years of misrule by Bush and Cheney.

4.Nader and his dumbass supporters aren't just as wrong this time around.

If you answered "true" to any of the above, you are dumber than a sack of doorknobs. My advice: get the shoes with the velcro, because all that lace-tying is out of your league.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #178
183. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #183
190. Bingo!
You're a dumbass, all right. Enjoy your brief and pointless stay on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustDavid Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #183
199. You are right....
the dem candidates do not appeal to people like you and cannot win your votes.

They have to settle for 99.9% of the rest.

hmmmm....thats a tough one......appeal to .1% or appeal to 99.9%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #178
201. 2. is definitely an oversimplification.
Nader is more of a convenient scapegoat than a prime factor for Gore's 2000 defeat. Without the media trivializing election coverage (this is what made the "dime" myth credible in the first place), the corrupt SCOTUS decision that they won't even acknowledge as prescedent, the voter disenfranchisement in Fla, and Gore's failure to even carry his home state, Nader would have been a non-issue. Nader didn't do the Gore campaign any favors, but I have to balk at people who want to flay him for his 2% of the vote.

If you want to see a real spoiler check out Perot in '92. He is the decisive reason Clinton made it into office..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #201
211. Nader pulled 90,000 votes in Florida in 2000.
Surveys generally show significantly more Nader voters would go Dem than Rep, if there were no Nader choice. So the point is not a 'convenient scapegoat' thing so much as a verifiable reality thing.

Yes, Perot did Clinton a huge favor by syphoning off Bush voters. Perot apparently had a serious grudge against Bush I and was quite clear what he was doing and why. Can't say the same for Nader, though. It's not at all clear that he understands that he's doing the Repubs a (small, not huge) favor or, if he does understand, why he would do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #211
215. Nader is God of his own sad little world IMO.
Edited on Mon Feb-25-08 11:08 PM by D23MIURG23
His ego (and perhaps senility at this point) are causing him to compulsively defecate on his otherwise respectable resume as a public policy advocate.

I'm not disputing the fact that Nader played a verifiable role in Bush's 2000 unvictory. I just see him as one of many contributing factors to that defeat rather than a single decisive one. People often talk about Nader as though he is thee reason Gore lost, and I think that is simplistic and exaggerated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DLnyc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #215
216. Yes, many factors, including DLC cluelessness, right-wing smear-jobs,
media bias, Republican money advantage and other things made it close. But for Nader to continue campaigning in Florida--a known competitive swing-state--after other things had made it close, was either stupid or intentionally vicious.

Not THE reason, but in some ways the nail in the coffin, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #176
193. I understand your point, but Nader isn't helping.
Third parties aren't going to take off by making doomed long-shot runs at the presidency in the first place.

Any third party that is going to be viable needs to be able to channel the wealth of public dissatisfaction with the current system into a grassroots movement that builds the party from the bottom up. It will also need a sustained effort to get members elected in state and local governments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #31
104. that routine is working fairly well against Hillary, no? -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #31
108. Au contraire, Tellurian....Nader said there wasn't any difference between Gore and Bush
He WAS wrong then, did not know the fuck what he was talking about.

Furthermore, because of Nader's continued campaigning in Florida, this is the only reason why Florida was close enough to even worry about what a hanging chad was! The reason we have had 8 years of Bush-Tatorship is Ralph Nader. Thanks for nothing, Ralph!

Tellurian has said in another board to support nader if Dear Hillary does not get the nod. I find this preposterous. Obama is MUCH closer to Hillary's stands on the issues than Nader is.

The only thing I can conclude is that Tellurian really hasn't thunk this thru....

Does Tellurian really want McCain? If she thinks voting for someone who cannot win is justified and she likes Nader, why on earth didn't she support Kucinich to start with? At least Kucinich is a true Democrat instead of a candidate sponsored by the right wing like Nader is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #31
117. Is this the same Nader
that pulled about 0.3% of the vote in 2004 and hasn't been heard from since? Maybe Obama should start worrying about Judge Roy Moore and the Constitution party too. And I hear the Prohibitionists are pretty mean SOBs too...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #31
119. yoohoo, tellurian...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #31
126. oh, and I don't know
He's getting ready to spit hilly up. He's chewed her up but good. You can have her back after he's done chewing her up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #31
130. Figures SOMEONE here would find something wrong with Obama's comment...
...thankfully not too many people, but there's always a few in the bunch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
137. Is he wrong?
Do you think the modern voter is saying "Hmmm, Gore or Bush.. who would be the better president?"

I'm sure there are such people. But right now they're taking their meds and getting ready for lockdown.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #31
138. Have you seen the polls? McCain whips Hillary's ass big time!
But he loses big against Obama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angie_love Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #31
140. yeah i'm sure thats what you're hoping
keep going...you're just digging your own hole.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #31
142. Not sure McCain has enough teeth to do that...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ejbr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
143. I have nothing to add...
I just wanted to join the chain.


cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pierogi_Pincher Donating Member (323 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #143
198. Have nothing to add either,
just wanted to get in on the friendly fracas. Na s'drovje. :beer:

"GoBama!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BearSquirrel2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:59 PM
Response to Reply #31
144. Nader is yesterday ...

We appreciate what Nader has done for consumer protection. I know that he is trying to help. But ... he isn't. He could have helped throw the 2000 election to Bush (along with Rove's dirty tricks and the Supreme Court).

All Nader is doing is playing the spoiler. At this point, he is politically irrelevant. I think by now everyone knows that he is the new Lyndon LaRouche.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
book_worm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
147. what a jackass comment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
154. What he said is true
if I have a choice of being skinned, salted and boiled in oil....OR just skinned and boiled in oil....I'll take the later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ErnestoG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #31
167. Weak.
Wow, when the guy does good, he's damned. When he does better, he's damned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #31
173. .
Edited on Mon Feb-25-08 01:06 AM by D23MIURG23
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #31
174. Longest 3rd response branch EVAH!!1
Anyway, it was good enough: Clear and to the point. Obama didn't need to say anything else.

Note: I support neither Obama nor Hillary, but will vote whichever in the general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. this is one Nader thread I will not put on Igore - what a great quote!
wow. knr.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
41. Obama spoke for
all Dems this time .. Ha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NC_Nurse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. Very clear.
He will fade quickly off the map this time. Nobody cares.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. Perfect, just perfect! Nader needs to be made out to be the joke
he really is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
50. Hey is Ralph running as the candidate of the Birthday Party?
Why not, he's run on every other ticket!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nookiemonster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. ZING!
nice...

:)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geiger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
185. zingety zing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
6. Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark.
Gobama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
7. I was holding out hope that your subject line was a literal event.
Even so, Senator Obama handled this beautifully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. Game, set, and match to Obama!
:applause: :yourock: :woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tekisui Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. Perfect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
10. Nice line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
11. Kicked and recommended. Kick his BUTT Barack!
Thanks for Dumbya, the Iraq war and everything else Ralph you POS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
12. A Sen. Clinton supporter here, saying,"Thank you Sen. Obama!" Way to fight back.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oceansaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
13. TOUCHE !!..n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
14. Again I'm impressed with his rapid response team
Quick and deadly. :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoFlaJet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. sniffa
where is the Clinton response on this? I wonder if they don't secretly LIKE the idea of Nader taking votes away from Obama-it plays right into their already brewing 2012 run should McCain win in '08
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #19
102. I think that is unfair, we should all agree on this. /by
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knowledgeispwr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
15. Nice!
I think this is something Clinton and Obama supporters can agree on!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scooter24 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
16. Good one!
:woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nam78_two Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
17. Excellent
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
18. Oh. Ouch. He told the truth and didn't grovel.
Misogynist!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
writes3000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. The majority of...
Clinton supporters do NOT cry "sexism" or "misogyny" when it's unwarranted. Maybe we should stop fanning those flames unnecessarily?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. True
but bear in mind that the proportion of Obama supporters on DU who have been accused of it approaches 1.

People tend to react to what touches their own environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. The allegations are going to stick
until November and beyond. They'll come up in the debates and in all sorts of little problems and attacks that dog Obama for as long as he's on the national stage. The Clintons have made sure of that unfortunately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #22
110. You're right, the majority doesn't...but maybe 10% do, and they are obnoxious as hell!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
20. Hehehehehe. Perfect Response!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
21. That's my guy !! Gobama :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
23. Absolutely!!! How do you like this war we're in, Ralphie?
How about the mess the economy is in? Huh? Ralph is a caricature of himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
24. Every time Nader speaks
you will hear him begging for money from Republicans. That's all you need to know about the current mindset of Mr. Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danascot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #24
80. You have that right
"Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, speaking shortly before Nader's announcement, said Nader's past runs have shown that he usually pulls votes from the Democrat. "So naturally, Republicans would welcome his entry into the race," the former Arkansas governor said on CNN."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080224/ap_on_el_pr/nader;_ylt=Avl3.TluFhjFX02LALlbLb.s0NUE


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #80
111. Huckabee is at least honest about it....good chuckle
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
25. Duh. Obviously. Neither did anyone here who voted for Nader in 2000.
What the Hell were you thinking? We warned you for months and months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. That's the truth. We begged them, we knew Bush was going to be bad. Just had no idea how bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #25
120. The Nader voters knew perfectly well what they were doing
Why else did the practice of vote-swapping crop up in the 2000 election, whereby people living in a state expected to have a close race but wanting to have a vote cast for Nader, would swap their Nader vote for the Gore vote of someone living in a “safe” state? This only happened because the Nader voters knew that: A. voting for Nader could hurt Gore and help Bush; and B. helping Bush was bad. No such practice sprung up among Republicans in 2000, as far as I know.

Ironically, those people, who so often complain that their vote no longer makes a difference, arranged to cast their vote precisely so it WOULDN’T make a difference. The rest of us just wish they'd been a little better at rendering themselves irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Berry Cool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
28. To say what Keith Olbermann may well say tomorrow night:
"Obama--from waaay downtown--BAAANG!"

In just thirty words, he wadded up and tossed Nader's whole campaign into a wastebasket.

That's verbal economy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. He should do a special comment on Nader
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pretzel4gore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
29. not even the busheviki hadn't any idea junyer was a gibbering half wit!
this is ingenuous! The fact is WE ARE A CORRUPT CULTURE! A million dead Iraqis ...you saw how the whole damn thing was fake right from the getgo...go back to the OJ Simpson case, the stampeding of popular opinion towards a staste of mind where murdering a million innocent people is now ok. To judge Nader's leftwing anger and place in within the context of 2008, while Obama himself hints friendship towards the bush murdering bastards insofar as he tries to use bush's revealed depravity today to condemn Ralph for underestimating it in comparison with what President Gore revealed then; Gore merely had to stand firm in 2k to stop junyer dead, but NOOOOO!
If Nader was wrong for comparing the two men, then how much wronger was President Gore for letting the youngster bush claim victory when it was easy to have confronted them then? Was it because this society is rotten to the quick, and the cost Al thought was too high, not worth it?
Did ANYONE watch F911? Only ONE senate vote was all that was needed to aupport the CBCaucas and deny bush the WH!
your enemy is bush and the pigmedia. Leave Nader alone
sheeees
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #29
106. Nader is my enemy too
I even hate him worse sometimes. What's Nader say this time about upsetting another election? Does he care? Naaaaah. Everybody is equally corrupt to Ralph, because they aren't precious him. He's all that matters.

Why does Ralph act like he cares about what will happen in the future then prove he doesn't give a crap?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
34. I doubt that Nader could tell the difference between day and night.
He probably thinks there isn't a difference between analog OTA and digital OTA television broadcasting.

Or the difference between internet speed (300BPS) in the late 80's and current options available.

He has probably worn the same suit he wore back in the 70's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #34
56. Isn't he going to be about 74 this week?
The combined age of McCain and Nader iw more than 140 years old.

That is a lot of "experience" to have when you're up against a man that is about 48 years old.

This is the 21st Century ~ I'm a Senior but we need youth to shape the vision for the future "my friends."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:49 PM
Original message
Bill Maher: "YouTube vs. Feeding Tube". n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #56
160. oops
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 10:49 PM by Lost-in-FL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
35. Nice. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
36. What's so wonderful about Obama is...
...he doesn't let anyone throw him ~ he also answered the question about his patriotism brilliantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
37. Excellent! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
38. HAH!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cooolandrew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
39. Good to see Barack is forward thinking. As I say let Nader run but we can get his votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
40. Obama has nothing to worry about from Nader this year
Nader could not make any headroom in 2004 with a considerably less charismatic nominee, so I do not see his campaign having the same impact it did in 2000. Obama has way too much draw power.

If it were Clinton as the nominee, then Nader would be considerably more of a threat, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
42. Thank you...That was the worst thing Ralph ever said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. He says it every four years
and he's been saying it for decades, as have many other pundits, some with considerable credibility, like Noam Chomsky. But it's never been a particularly useful analysis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:37 PM
Response to Original message
45. Shouldnt he be telling people that he promises to completely end the
occupation in Iraq within a year of taking office (Previously, he could not promise to do so within his first term) rather than just dismissing Nader?

Lines like he just gave are not going to attract nader voters, it is telling America he will pursue a peaceful foreign policy will make a difference.

When gore and Bush had a "debate" on foreign policy, each one agreed on nearly every past military adventure... including the US invasion of Panama, the US attack in Iraq during Bush the First. Gore nodded with Bush about a dozen or so times.

So the question was, not if there is no difference, but if there is ENOUGH difference.

I am not supporting Nader, but i am damn sick and tired of the wars of Democrats and Republicans foist on the planet, their refusal to stand for human rights, their refusal to stand for nuclear disarmament (hey, Obama, are you going to start real disarmament right here at home??? are you going to say anything about the vast nuclear arsenal in the Middle East held by Israel?), i am sick of both parties pandering to corporate lobbies and lobbies for war.

To the extent he does that, he will not only win over many potential nader votes, he will also make a commitment to making the kinds of changes necessary to build a sustainable planet. We don't want someone who is just a bit better than Bush. It is not enough that he speaks English. It is not enough that he would be a better manager. We want to throw off this dirty rotten system that is literally crushing to death so many here and abroad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. Defending Nader = Ignore. Bye n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. Is this supposed to be funny?
He actually spoke to the positions that Nader takes and how that could possibly influence our nominee, or at least Sen. Obama.

I appreciate that Obama didn't let that dig from Nader go unremarked upon, however, Tom Joad brings up some good points.

I'm going to assume it was meant to be an ironic zinger of some sort.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. Nope, he is on ignore
All I have to do is think of all of the maimed and dead Iraqis and American soldiers who would not have died if Nader hadnt run against Gore telling people that Gore and Bush were all the same. I'm NOT listening to that shit again, OK? I am not listening to anyone trying to spin Nader in a positive light. No one who does holds even the slightest bit of interest for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Black Adder Donating Member (102 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #53
100. SPOT ON................
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #52
57. Some people can't handle a progressive anitwar view
I do think many Obama voters do want real change, and will demand it.

During the Clinton years, we saw hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children die of starvation, while clinton/gore were keeping the sanctions on. We saw Iraq bombed and clinton sign a law authorizing "regime change in Iraq"-- that is unacceptable.

We saw telecommunication companies have their dream realized with the Telecommunications Act.

We saw the end of the promise of economic support for the nations poorest ended with "welfare reform"... the end of the New Deal.

All i am saying is that many of us would want much more of Obama. I don't care if Nader is running or not.

The best thing about Obama is that he is inspiring a movement. I think it will push President Obama to do things that he may not have thought possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #57
84. Your post and then the knee jerk reaction were so disconnected that at first I thought
it had to be for humor's sake, due to the absurd combination.

Apparently, introducing a different facet into the ongoing discussion was cause for attack rather than speculation.

I liked you post, it gave me pause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #49
55. I was supporting the end of the Occupation of Iraq.
Perhaps you do not agree. No matter.

I do know that many Obama supporters do want real change, not just incremental change. My hope is that they will make sure that Obama is held accountable to those standards. You probably won't be one of those people. Most of us will not tolerate 4 more years of any US occupation in Iraq. They will make sure Obama gets all the troops out no matter if he has said previously that he could not promise to do so.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pretzel4gore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #49
113. don't be silly, Steve
save your vitriol for the reactionarkies. Nader's a leftist. His error was tactical, at worst. Blaming him for the bush horrorshow might feel good, but ...there was a body of rightwing activists who have been schemeing since Goldwater era to overthrow representative democracy in the US, and outside of Nader's tactical involvement in the 2k coup d'etat (which Ralph will tell you was going to occur regardless) and the Gore candidacy was just a stalking horse, or cover, for the bush family seizing power in broad daylight. Hating Nader just wastes your mean-ness, which pleases the bushies; it means less hate for them.
I wish it was a simple as you Nader haders like to say it is.... but Ralph Nader's an honest leftist, and he shouldn't be the bullseye on the dartboards here. next thing you guys will be dissing General Secretary Stalin! :( :( :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #113
204. Unfortunately, it is as simple as I said it is
when you take money from Republicans to tell Rove-like lies against the Democratic nominee, diluting his support, and this makes an election close enough to steal, it IS your fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earthlover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #45
112. "Lines like he just gave are not going to attract nader voters"
There are less than 1% of Nader voters, assuming everyone who voted for him last time even remember his name....

Nader is an egoist. Obama was exactly right. Nader lacks credibility. He is a joke, a caricature of himself. In short, he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Obama said it all in one breath. Cheers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:40 PM
Response to Original message
46. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #46
47. We're hopelessly dull as well.
Always include back-of-the-hand character assassination when dismisssing several thousand people on one swoop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. ,
:spray:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #46
59. This is Democratic Underground, not Naderite Underground.
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 02:13 PM by backscatter712
If you're going to push for a spoiler candidate that contributed to Bushie victories in the past, get your own forums.

Your efforts at promoting extremist candidates are ultimately counterproductive. I'm choosing to do what it takes to promote the candidate that is most likely to actually bring a progressive agenda to fruition. Obama's the one who can actually get some actions made. Nader will never, ever get past the "make some noise and get 2% of the vote" doldrums into action territory, and he poaches votes from the people who can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #59
82. Touche, what fringe candidate backers fail to acknowledge is getting elected is job 1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lautremont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #59
105. It always amuses me when people say Nader can't get votes,
and at the same time is this monsterous vote-stealing gravitational force who just ought to keep quiet.

I'm not advocating that he be voted for rather than the Democratic candidate, and if I was I wouldn't post it at Democratic Underground. But Nader is used so often as an obvious scapegoat by people who know in their heart of hearts that they themselves bear some blame for Bush by themselves not recognizing the danger of Bush back in 2000. I'm certainly not singling you out, because how could I know, but I have met such people.

As for Obama's zinger, it's on the weak side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #46
101. Like the choice we didn't get back in 2000, when Nader and all the morons
who voted for him made it possible for Bush to steal the presidency?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Charogne Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #101
186. You mean, there once were people on the left...
Who didn't vote out of complete fear but instead a desire for real change? Amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #186
191. They were idiots.
And a portion of the blame for the current disaster lies with them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VotesForWomen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
58. obama doesn't want nader to show people what a real progressive is like. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #58
165. Nader is not a real progressive, info on his dark side:

http://www.realchange.org/nader.htm

...
His organizations allow no public input, intimidate foes and journalists, bust unions, hide almost all details of their finances (to the point of breaking laws), and have amassed millions of dollars - all under Nader's direct and autocratic control. Meanwhile, Ralph has gotten rich off of investments in stock; in other words, by owning and profiting off the very corporations he is attacking.
...
but he runs his carefully concealed empire with an iron grip. Of 19 groups associated with Nader, the most powerful and important groups are all directly controlled by Nader or completely under his influence and no one else's. With some groups, Nader is the only contributor; others are controlled by his sister, Laura Nader Milleron, or his cousin.
...
And there is nothing democratic about Nader's groups -- citizens have no power at all. Of 19 groups in Nader's network, only one relatively minor one is a membership organization, which would allow individuals to vote and challenge the decisions of the small elite running them. The groups' managers operate in strict secrecy, releasing the absolute legal minimum of information, and sometimes not even that. And when Nader IS challenged, he gets vindictive and often attacks his questioner.
...
Back in 1996, we noted that Nader had long earned hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in speaking fees -- over $250,000 annually even in the mid-1970s -- played the stock market and carefully avoided making details of his finances public, even as he demanded that various corporations and other politicans reveal their money dealings.
...


and there's so much more.

Nader's a phoney, a hyprocrite, and a liar.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
60. He calmly speaks the truth and makes Nader look like an idiot.
Gobama! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
61. Obama just nails Ralph Nader in Ohio
Now that's a celebrity sex I would like to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SKKY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #61
67. Awwww dude. Come on! I just ate!
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
djp2 Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
63. Where does Nader's money come from?
Besides the geen-niks I bet there is a large sum (untraceable of course) from the repugs. He must be a deep cover repug operative, only coming out of the muck when the repugs are in trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #63
83. You don't have to bet, it was documented by The Village Voice in '04
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freida5 Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
64. And BO gave a speech at a peace rally and he has all lthe judgement to be President
Just ask Tony Rezko.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillrockin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
65. Anyone who votes for Nader is key-ray-zee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cloudythescribbler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
66. interesting anecdote on point: in 2000 as a caller into WBAI, I was one of the few who INSISTED ...
that there was a HUGE difference between Gore and Bush -- that we ABSOLUTELY didn't want another, stupider and smirkier Bush in the White House. Almost every utterance on the subject on that station at the time was pro-Nader, or at least anti-Gore.

I admitted Gore was not the most magnetic candidate, but stuck to my position

At that time, the VERY SAME people who felt Gore unworthy of support against W Bush were, on WBAI, gung-ho for Hillary in her campaign for the senate, even after nemesis-to-progressives Giuliani had dropped out.

When Nader held a MAJOR rally in DC, the audience was described as almost totally white -- not a very good sign for a progressive ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
messiah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
68. Obama Cheany and Bush are related
funny man :rofl: presidential bloodlines continue :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marlakay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
69. Good come back!
I like it. Shows he is not going to ignore or whimp out about Nadar running.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue State Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
71. The Truth Hurts, Don't It Ralph.
With all due respect...

If you want to help fix the country,

and to be taken seriously, find a nitch,

and stop shitting on everybody elses!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KingOfLostSouls Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
74. Naderites, I'd like to take this time...
to thank you for 8 years of this















seriously guys, thanks. especially after everything good that Al Gore has done, its easy to see now how wrong nader and his supporters are. its really become apparent that naderites and other assorted "greener than thou" types "true progressive agenda" is really code speak for "get republicans elected."

thanks guys

thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PlanetBev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #74
107.  O Mighty King of Lost Souls, you are a great truth-teller
Your post layed out the naked, unvarnished truth for all to see...

Ralph, permit me to shove a Covair up your ass, and ignite it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Binka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #107
133. DUzy award for sure! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #74
158. ...
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Highway61 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
75. Ouch...
Great statement from a class act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sonnenschein Donating Member (251 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
77. I wouldn't be surprised if Karl Rove is giving Nader money for him to jump in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unca Jim Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
85. Yep.
That says it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Martin Eden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
87. Short and to the point. YES, Barack nailed him.
Ralph Nader is right about a lot of things and I wish the Democratic platform was more like his.

But Nader was DEAD WRONG in 2000 about there being "no difference" between the Republican and Democratic candidates.

Obama is right about that, and Nader was about as wrong as he could be.

That GW Bush became president in January 2001 instead of Al Gore is one of the greatest disasters ever to befall our nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
88. Obama just scored MAJOR points with me.
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #88
91. Agree. It was a well-controlled retort to Nader but it packed a huge wallop.
That issue has been one of Ralphie's "trump cards" for a while now.

Obama just torched it.

Hiya, good person.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #91
92. Hiya, back.
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 04:29 PM by mzmolly
I agree. Nader should not be given another free pass by our Democratic Candidates. I am delighted to see Obama address his nonsense head on.

Also, I was just reading your awesome and amusing reply in the Nader thread Rasputin started, thanks once again for the chuckle. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #92
93. Poor Ralph. Smart guy, but playing at a game he can't win.
Hope you're doin' well these days, mzmolly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #93
95. Thanks OC.
I'm doing very well these days. I hope you're doing well, as well? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saltpoint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #95
96. Yep -- thanks. Last night we put on Petula Clark, the Beatles, and James
Taylor, with a bit of Bach thrown in there at the end.

Not a bad night at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #96
98. Very nice
selection for a Saturday evening. :pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BringBigDogBack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
90. Nice.
Also true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
94. The irony is Obama is making many of the same attacks on the Clinton era that Nader makes
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #94
109. That's not irony.
At all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
97. Great!
Senator Obama has a wonderful way with words!

Thank you for posting this. Nominated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
114. Perfect. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
List left Donating Member (71 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
115. Nailed it
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBInMaine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
116. Nader is a non-issue and really pretty much of a joke.
Progressives can agree with him on many issues, but this nonsense about perpetual Presidential bids is nothing more than fodder for the late night comedians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ekwhite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #116
153. Agreed
Ralph Nader has become the Harold Stassen of the 21st century. :tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
118. This from a guy who criticized the Alito filibuster
who apparently felt that it wasn't important enough to use his high powered rhetorical skills to oppose one of the most extreme (and unethical) judges to ever be nominated for the bench.

That's precisely the sort of behavior that Nader was talking about....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
121. Unrebuttable.
There was a difference, all right, and an even bigger one now. We can thank Ralph, in part, for contributing to Gore's evolution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Olney Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
122. This is exactly the way to handle Nader. You don't tell him
not to run, you expose him for his lack of credibility.

Good play, Senator Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cottonseed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
123. Did Nader just announce on Meet the Press?
Funny that he'd be doing this on a show considered the White House's biggest mouthpiece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosetta627 Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
124. Obama is a guy who may actually be both progressive
And tough.

He said he wouldn't be swift boated and he meant it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gravity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #124
127. He is what this party needs
He doesn't hesitate to call out his opponents on their BS. I've been waiting forever for a democrat to do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemGa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
125. Is this the NEW politics??
'Cause to me, it looks like a guy smarting-off. I thought Obama was "above" this sort of thing. Think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stark6935 Donating Member (255 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #125
128. I don't think its smarting off...
He can't just ignore Nader, but I feel both Clinton, and Obama would rather not have to deal with this irrelevant man. Wait, I guess he is relevant to the repukes though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #125
131. With this post of yours.........
....clearly we won't ever see YOU "smarting" off! Intellectually impossible in your case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
129. ah, even more pathetic Nader-hate here.
..from people who think Obama (or Clinton, for that matter) have any real interest in ending the war, controlling corporate corruption or protecting the middle class. About all Obama is good for is witty quips, fawned over by his cult of personality. As far as what Nader had to say, if you really think there's no truth to it, I invite you to examine the record of most prominent national Democrats from September 2001 onwards. They did nothing as Bush invaded Iraq, launched attacks against his enemies (Valerie Plame), approved of torture, raised taxes on the middle class, passed the Patriot Act and numerous other draconian laws that make inroads on our personal freedoms, ruined our international reputation and other sins too numerous to document.

I ask you this, those of you who still carry venom towards Nader: if Democrats at the national level, including Mr. Gore, are so much different from the Republicans, why have they done so little to prevent the deterioration of the country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #129
145. The question is
If Gore had been president, what "deterioration" would there have been that needed preventing in the first place? Be specific, please. Causing something and not preventing it are two very different things, last time I checked.

And where has Nader's voice been on any of the issues you mention for the last 8 years? Nader, who had nothing to lose and no restrictions on what he could say? Why should we believe that he could do anything about them as president when he hasn't even said, let alone done, anything about them all during Bush's reign?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #145
161. The nation was howling for blood after 9/11..
I'd make a good wager, if such things were possible, that a re-write of history with Gore as president would, at the very least, include the disastrous invasion of Afghanistan. In addition, there would still be the policy of doing very little substantive to improve the middle class, give people health care, or take care of a wide-range of issues of interest to
the wider population. I will grant you this: he would've been much better than Bush, but then again, so would a wide range of Republicans, and that's saying something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #161
182. Typical Naderite
In one breath you spout the same old lame rationalization that there would have been no difference between Gore and Bush, and then when you're challenged to support that assertion up with actual facts, you back down and admit that Gore would have been much better. And as far as whether any other Republican would have been better than Bush, who cares? Since Gore wasn't running for president against any other Republican, that's a completely irrelevant attempt to distract from the facts. He was running against Bush, who every Nader voter knew would be a disaster but who they still didn't care if they enabled with their anti-Gore vote.

And did you ever stop to consider that one of the reasons that Afghanistan has turned out so badly is that we diverted so many resources from there to pursue a useless and destructive invasion and occupation of Iraq, based on lies that Al Gore never would have promulgated? Many people against the invasion of Iraq DID support action in Afghanistan, since that country actually had something to do with 9/11.

Give it up..no one is drinking the Nader Kool-Aid this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #182
196. Make sweeping generalizations much?
First off, I'm not even a Naderite. I'm a Democrat who thinks the party needs to move past the blame we put on the man for our failure in 2000. We lost 2000 for the same reason we lost 2004: skullduggery by Bush, combined with squishy-soft candidates who let themselves get smeared by Republican witch hunts.

Your assertion I "backed down" is laughable. I put the question first: if Gore would have been so much better, then why did national Democratic leaders, who ostensibly support the same things Gore does, do nothing to stop the president? If you think we wouldn't have gotten into many of the same kinds of messes (assuming 9/11 still would have happened), you're dreaming. If anything, the capitulation of the Democrats at the national level shows they can be just as opportunistic to enact stupid policies as the Bushies. If they would govern so different, why don't they? The dodge, sir, is by people of your beliefs, not mine.

As far as Afghanistan goes, I can't see any scenario where invasion would have led to a safe, stable country. Even if we hadn't diverted any resources to Iraq, we're talking about trying to stabilize a country full of weapons and angry at being a battlezone and a haven for foreign occupiers. It was foolish for Bush to go there and it was foolish for our leadership to approve, much less continue the thing into the farce it is today. If we really wanted to get after a country that was involved with 9/11, we should have attacked Saudi Arabia..but that, of course, will never happen.

The only Kool-Aid being drunk around here, friend, is by you and other Democrats, who conveniently forget about the capitulation of our party when election time comes around, as if someone who talks about "the audacity of hope" is going to significantly change how things are done in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #196
205. More misdirection and nonsense
For someone who's not a Naderite, you certainly seem to have a deep-seeded need to defend him.

First of all, NO ONE has ever claimed that Nader's candidacy was the only reason Gore lost in 2000, but it was a sufficient reason in and of itself, and it WAS the only reason that Nader and his supporters had complete control over, control which they declined to exercise, out of ego and self-indulgence alone. And why do you keep trying to conflate "national Democratic leaders" and "a wide range of Republicans" with the one person who was running for president as a Democrat in 2000? What other Democrats have done or what other Republicans might have done since that election is irrelevant to whether Gore would have been a better president than Bush. I'm not blind to the flaws of the Democrats, nor will you find anyone else on the board who is, but any sane person knows that the Republicans are FAR worse in every imaginable way.

When I asked you to cite specific examples of how this country would have deteriorated under Gore like it has under Bush, all you could offer up was your unsupported, self-serving, crystal ball prediction that Gore would have invaded Afghanistan after 9/11. If that was the only destructive thing Bush had done in his term, the country would be doing great. Would Al Gore have supported torture, secret prisons, illegal renditions, violations of habeus corpus, violations of FISA, political persecution of US attorneys, blatant violations of the 1st and 6th Amendments, etc., etc....you know the list as well as I do, so look into your crystal ball and tell me confidently that Gore would have done all those things too.

And do you still dispute the fact that causing something and not preventing it are two VERY different things? Answer that question first if you're going to waste my time with another weasely response.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #129
149. As opposed to Nader, who has a direct line to GE whenever he wants to
go on MTP.

He is lifting practically verbatim Kucinich's words and voting record, oops, forgot, Nader would never work for a constiuency,and while Kucinich is marginalized, Russert brings Nader on to play "trash the Dems".


Go ahead, please tell us again how the Dems are exactly the same as the R's. Nader is playing us.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #149
175. Evidently, you don't realize that it's just the reverse . . . !!!
Good Heavens . . . find out something about Ralph Nader ---
The Platform he ran on in 2000 which was even superior to the Green Party Platform ---
and you might come to understand how comprehensive and complete the things have talked about
for decades has been --- you have no idea of this at all!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #175
187. I used to admire him tremendously. He is espousing almost exactly Rep Kucinich platform.
Except, he's never held public office, he has no voting record AND he is able to get free air time whenever he pleases, unlike Kucinich.

I was also disappointed that while he decried the two party he did nothing after 2000 to throw his sterling reputation and name recognition, not to mention his solid following, into beginning to build a viable third party from the grass roots up.

Instead, he writes books and gives speeches,for which he's paid quite well, and then calls Russert and voila, free time on MTP. All without the hassle of having to participate in the early debates or campaigning. All without the work of getting the structure on the ground in the various states.

And, he immediately launched attacks, not only on Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton, but on the DEMOCRATIC Congress while he was on MTP, including a questioning whether Sen. Obama had the "moral courage" to get things done.

Hubris thine name is Nader. He was great, once.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #187
203. MLK never held public office --- had no voting record ---
And since when does Nader "get free air time whenever he wants" ---
what is this . . . r-w talking points?

Build a viable third party?
Evidently, you don't understand that the Repugs AND Democrats are blocking third parties --?
They don't want them --- they don't want the kinds of discussions which third party candidates
raise!!!

Nader is working --- I believe he has a lawsuit --- to prevent this blocking.
Let me suggest that you read some of Nader's books ---
and perhaps you'll come to understand that there is NOTHING that either Kucinich nor Edwards
has ever discussed that Nader hasn't brought to America's attention FIRST.

I'd don't know that you've noticed . . . but right here at DU, we have people "launching attacks on both Obama and Clinton" --- and I might add, on the Democratic Party and its leadership---!!!

In fact, Hillary is launching attacks on Obama --- !!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #203
207. You lost me at Nader=MLK
:wtf:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #207
212. You lost me at Kucinich = Nader
You'll find that when you take your fingers out of your ears, or your hands from in front of your eyes, you can learn that Nader's positions are what Kucinich is spouting.

Nader built the Green Party which was going no where ---
and yes, it continues to work from the ground up --

There is no law which says that we have to have this campaign insanity going on for a year and more --- nor that we have to live with privatized corporate running of our debates! These are all the issues which Nader --- and NOT Democrats --- challenges.

In many respects the GOP Swiftboating/Smears of so many have succeeded not only because of the cooperation of corporate-media . . . but because of the failure of so many Americans to do any thinking that challenges r-w propaganda.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #129
159. Nader only comes around every 4 years...
What have he done during these 7 years to prevent the "deterioration" of America? I only hear crickets...

Do you really think he cares??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #159
162. Do you keep up with any of Nader's organizations?
I have no idea what he's done during this time. Perhaps it's nothing. Then again, Ralph Nader has not been a prominent member of the opposition party to the Republicans, one which has done nothing to stop our nation from going in the toilet, even when they had the majority in both houses of Congress. The fault for not stopping Bush lies with our leaders, not with third-party mavens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost-in-FL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #162
164. He is a Republican by money contributions...
cause he was financed by Republicans and was put in the ballots with Republican signatures. And Nader is the cause this country its going down the toilet, he has blood in his hands. If it makes you feel better keep blaming the "opposition party" to the Republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #164
171. Nader doesn't deserve such a label.
Nader ran in a single election of import, one that was closely contested not because of his existence, but because the vice-president of a hugely popular president ran an ineffective, weak campaign where he let Republicans dictate the tempo at every turn. Do you hold such ire for the International World Worker's Party, whose votes, if given to Gore, would have allowed him to win Florida? Do you hold, in equal contempt, the appeasement of our national leaders, who have had infinitely more power than Nader to stop the president? When are you, and other on this board, going to accept it's the fault of our national leadership for not stopping the president, and not Ralph Nader?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #171
188. You can defend him all you want. It won't change the fact that he has become a shill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackDragna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #188
195. That may even be true..
..and I won't dispute it. The issue in question, however, lies in the truth of Obama's statement, which is the issue at hand. It's an unfair characterization of Nader and always has been, even when it was just a epithet hurled at the man by members of our party upset with his candidacy in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
parkeradison Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
132. Ralph Nader
I think that Ralph just wants a little attention too. Maybe he'd be happy if he could play the role of a spoiler again. I guess keeping his name somewhat prominent is more important to him than actually electing someone with similar values to his own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
134. I've spent the last 7 years defending Nader even though I have never voted for him.
My state of Indiana went about 99 to 1 for GWB in 2000, and I voted for Gore. Florida was stolen from Gore, but Nader no doubt enabled that to happen.

My defense of Nader has amounted to, roughly: "George Bush was a joke of a candidate. A clear boob. Gore trailed Bush the entire election cycle but managed only to make it close enough at the end for the Supreme Court to steal. Don't blame Nader, blame Gore."

I saw Nader on MTP today, and he started acting like universal health was always and is now his greatest passion and may fuel the fire for his candidacy. I gave the tv the finger, accompanied it with a hearty "Fuck you, Nader," and I have turned my back on him forever.

He truly is an attention whore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snotcicles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
135. I Doubled Dog Dare Obama to debate Nader. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #135
136. Why? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
139. No sh!t. Good one, Obama. Thing is, Nader did a lot of good before his massive
ego took over and forced him to continually run for president.

I remember when he used to say he could do more good by not holding office. He was right.

He should have stuck with what was working--attacking the corportocracy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 08:52 PM
Response to Original message
141. say it over and over again, Obama
P L E A S E
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RememberWellstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
146. Love that gutter
Nice one Obamanational....go lower, it helps the race.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #146
169. ?
he is speaking the absolute truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
148. soooo correct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
150. He needs to come out swinging more against Nader.
Edited on Sun Feb-24-08 10:03 PM by cat_girl25
I hate that ass and what he did to the Democratic party!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snotcicles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #150
152. Yeah he needs to debate him and really make him look like an ass. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hay rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 09:34 PM
Response to Original message
151. Nader's obituary
Florida 2000. Sorry, all the other stuff doesn't count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
New Dawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
155. I do not find that statement to be very convincing
And I voted for Obama at the caucus.

Let us not forget that Al Gore had Joseph Lieberman as his VP candidate. The fact is, both Dick Cheney and Joseph Lieberman wanted to start the exact same war in the Middle East. The Neocons simply could have assassinated President Gore and then the new President Lieberman would have blamed it on Iraq and invaded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Infinite Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
156. Damn. Great one! He's good at refuting opponents in a way that resonates with average voters.
He's more like Bill Clinton than Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Infinite Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
157. Do you have a link to that quote somewhere btw? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Colobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #157
170. I copied it just after he said it on CNN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InvisibleTouch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
163. Well said! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain_Nemo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-24-08 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
166. Nader is going to nail him on his lobbyists and his corporate money. Get real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GainesT1958 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:31 AM
Response to Original message
168. I thought Ralphie Boy was only going to run...
If Hillary was the nominee-apparent. Wonder what changed his mind? How many Repubs does he want to help become president, anyhow?

Not gonna happen this time, Ralph!:eyes:

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #168
177. Here's one of the reasons Nader mentioned . . .
Nader, from page 2 of the MTP transcript:

I give you the example, the Palestinian-Israeli issue, which is a real off the table issue for the candidates. So don't touch that, even though it's central to our security and to, to the situation in the Middle East. He was pro-Palestinian when he was in Illinois before he ran for the state Senate, during he ran--during the state Senate. Now he's, he's supporting the Israeli destruction of the tiny section called Gaza with a million and a half people. He doesn't have any sympathy for a civilian death ratio of about 300-to-1; 300 Palestinians to one Israeli. He's not taking a leadership position in supporting the Israeli peace movement, which represents former Cabinet ministers, people in the Knesset, former generals, former security officials, in addition to mayors and leading intellectuals. One would think he would at least say, "Let's have a hearing for the Israeli peace movement in the Congress," so we don't just have a monotone support of the Israeli government's attitude toward the Palestinians and their illegal occupation of Palestine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 02:48 AM
Response to Reply #177
179. Nader nails Obama there, but the same can be said for most other politicians
AIPAC has most under their thumb these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #179
181. BUT IT CAN'T BE SAID OF NADER . . . !!!
That's the point -- !!

Where else do you hear a candidate discussing something like this --- ?

Maybe Kucinich . . . maybe even Edwards --

Look at the idiotic questions being asked in the debates ---

That's why it was so necessary to keep Kucinich and Edwards in there ---
we still have a year to go ---

Now, you've given them Obama as a sole target ---

and they can concentrate on their next steal!!!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the other one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
172. Oh Oh I can't stop laughing
Welcome to Ignore
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 03:50 AM
Response to Original message
180. And most grown up understood what Nader was saying about corporate
takeovers of our political parties . . .

Gore had a career long relationship with Occidental Petroleum --

Have you ever heard Gore call for nationalizing oil ---

For Electric Cars ---

He's telling you about changing light bulbs --- !!!

Wake up!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #180
189. Get back to me when Nader has more than mere words to offer up. And, if GE thought Nader had a
chance in hell of winning, they would censor him as they did with first Kucinich and then Edwards. He has no chance to win, but he sure can stir the sh**.

Did you see the soft ball questions Russert lobbed at him? He is the darling of GE right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #189
202. Get back to me when you can tell me that we have corporate-fascism
and war in Iraq despite the Democrats standing against it --- !!!

Nader is coming into the race to do what Kucinich and Edwards were doing ---
bringing common sense to issues --- widening the discussions of issues ---
talking about things that the two parties don't want to talk about ---
in ways that they don't want to talk about them or have them understood.

GE is now and always has been fanatically right-wing --
they were the original "defrauders" of government on arms production costs.

So you're saying that GE "censored Kucinich and Edwards" and would have the power to block Nader, as well -- but the Democrats don't know this? Do they even mention the corporate-media issue?

Presumably you also think that the Democrats KNOW that Nader was the cause of Gore's "loss" in 2000 and is a threat in 2008 . . . but they have done nothing about it in .... 8 years????

How often do Democrats mention the Supreme Court steal?
The fascist GOP rally outside Miami-Dade HQs to STOP the vote counting?
The fact that Gore actually won the 2000 election?

How happy are you with the Reid/Pelosi/Hoyer positions since 2006?










Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #202
206. I know I saw Nader given star billing on MTP. Edwards was on rarely, and
Kucinich never, even thought they had formally entered the primaries and been campaigning and, later debating, for months.

Nader had enough credibility to effect the election in 2000. He could have done so much to reform the political system, behind the scenes, and as an advocate of a truly progressive party.

As disappointed as I am in our Democratic congress, he could have been declaring his presidency with a party that had reps at least in local precincts and perhaps up to the State Senate level all the way to possible Congressional Reps.

The Green Party was ready and waiting. He would have been a powerful force for giving us a truly viable third party, which he claimed was what we should have in 2000.

He took his passion and interest elsewhere.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #206
213. Your argument should be with the treatment of Edwards and Kucinich . . .
and not with Nader ---

He's running for president --- why shouldn't he be covered?

Gore WON in 2000 --- and there were many third party candidates --- including Buchanan who took
a large pool of votes in Florida due to the "butterfly" ballot --- set up by Teresa La Pore . ..
later traced to a realtionship with Repugs!

NADER HAS worked to reform the system --- he has steadily fought for third parties and IRV voting --
he has a lawsuit currently for third party access.
Nader built the Green party which was going no where --
and the Greens work from the local levels up!

The GREEN PARTY --- and I am a member of it --- ran off frightened like a rabbit when the SWIFTBOATING/SMEAR of Nader began in 2000.

It was the Green Party which rejected Nader --- !!!!

The Democrats have done nothing for you to amend the situation --
these election steals began in the mid-1960's . . .
See: VOTESCAM -- The Stealing of America
a book written by two journalists --- Jim & Ken Collier --
the website is kept going by their family to keep the book, which was suppressed, available
for the public.

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #213
214. I'm done arguing about Nader's merits with you. He has the money and connections to
hang in during this race.

Support him all you want. I'm done hearing about St. Nader. Since he got GM to look at the Corvair, what has he done for us lately?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-26-08 02:18 AM
Response to Reply #214
217. That you have to ask what Nader has done lately indicates what is obvious ---
you know very little about Nader and his 30/40 years of informing America ---

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igetnocards Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
192. Obama better than Clinton better than Nader better than Obama
Lot of bickering here. Seems to me yeh, Nader killed our chances in FL, but apparently we need better choices. How about Campaign Finance Reform. Real Reform. We should be able to figure this out right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
194. Actually I cannot think of anything more striking for anyone to say.
That should be the tagline everytime Nader shows his foolish face. And I am a Clinton supporter so I am not just touting Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
windbreeze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
197. Now what was is it about Obama saying nothing of substance that I keep hearing?
seems he sure put those words where they were needed most....3 cheers!! That's the first time he's impressed me...wb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freida5 Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
208. What he lied about the Nader record also!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PretzelWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-25-08 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
209. Rock ON, OBAMA! you nailed it.
P.S. Non Obama supporters. There is actually direct and smart shit like this that draws us toward him as a candidate. It isn't just his "aura".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC