Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)


(32,324 posts)
Fri Nov 29, 2013, 06:39 PM Nov 2013

Questions for those Dems who think Nader and Third Party Voters are [View all]

The big reason that we lost in 2000 and 2004.

First of all, some 6 to 18% of all voters are voters who consider themselves allied to progressive causes. Even at 6%, that is a lot for a party to lose to Nader or some other third party progressive candidate.

So here's my questions -

1) Since the republican efforts to secure new gerrymandered districts have indeed thrown more than 6% of elected offices to the Republicans why aren't the Democrat Party Leaders on this issue like white on rice?

Here's the citation for damage being done to the Democratic Party via Republican gerrymandering in a recent Rolling Stone magazine article:


2) Why aren't there any damn bones, even little ones, thrown to those of us on the progressive side? If the Party needs that 6% of us, then why not concede a little bit here and there?

Almost everything that Congress and the President have refused to do on major items, including socking tough regulations at the Banking Crowd, and refusal in honoring promises not to target medical marijuana clinics and users in California, somehow does get done for the Things The Dem Leaders Hold Sacred.

Example: Obama refused to hold forth on a bully pulpit on the issue of public option, during the health care reform debate months, but totally held forth on the bully pulpit when it came to Syria. Senator Reid refused to go nuclear option on the issue of the majority vote and the filibuster when it came to the public option (Which would have easily passed if 51 was a majority!) but suddenly is inspired to do this with regards to allowing Obama to have Federal Appointments be made.

We were promised by Obama in 2008 that he would somehow see to it that there was transparency. However, there is nothing at all transparent about a Heath Care Reform piece of legislation that comes in at over 2,000 pages.

Maybe there is no way that an American President could actually bring us around to transparency, but isn't there someone somewhere who can do this?

Worse still, in the good old days of the 1980's, a person could call their Senator or Congressional rep's office and usually a staffer could explain the meaning of any piece of legislation.

Now if you call for help in understanding a bill, the staffer will immediately give you the dot gov URl for that piece of legislation.

And that is where understanding ends. You are royally screwed. Once at the URL, there is little way to know what the bill means, as usually by paragraph three, you are reading legalese like this:

"In this section, HR 25677 Section Eighteen included in sub section 42 will be amended to divert those funds from that program to the program represented by HR 21222 Section Five Subsection 31, but reduced by 10%."

Unless you are somehow able to "crack the code" on this, you have little better understanding of what a bill means than before you went and visited the appropriate URL. Of course, in the matter of the ACA, we can visit different web sites and get different points of view, but in less important pieces of legislation, we will never know much more than the Title of the new piece of enacted legislation and what it says in forty pages of legalese over at the dot gov URL.

one word Nitram Nov 2013 #1
Two additional words Gothmog Nov 2013 #3
Seven words. liberal_at_heart Dec 2013 #35
Two SCOTUS opinions Gothmog Dec 2013 #37
Or if Gore had the entire state of Floriday recounted. nt ZombieHorde Dec 2013 #60
The recount would not have needed but for Nader's sabotage Gothmog Dec 2013 #65
Al Gore did everything he could on the recount. creeksneakers2 Dec 2013 #105
Two additional idiots who not be on the Federal Circuit Courts without Nader Gothmog Dec 2013 #38
Two more words... SidDithers Dec 2013 #136
I realized a while ago that he's 2001's Snowden MisterP Nov 2013 #2
This will go well. bvar22 Nov 2013 #4
When you place the blame for YOUR failures on someone else, you never get to fix the problem. sabrina 1 Nov 2013 #17
is all that straw really relevant to the OP's questions? hfojvt Dec 2013 #95
Straw?... I think not. bvar22 Dec 2013 #103
"Loyal Democrat" creeksneakers2 Dec 2013 #104
But Nader took money from RNC Donors so that shows you he was paid for. Tigress DEM Dec 2013 #127
Republicans wet dream is to split the democratic vote. B Calm Dec 2013 #131
Pay attention to what they *do*, not what they *say*. Obama didn't want a Public Option, for example Romulox Nov 2013 #5
Not true. nt jazzimov Nov 2013 #8
This is simply wrong Gothmog Dec 2013 #39
That's revisionist history. ACA passed with 60 votes in the Senate. Only 51 were needed to end the Romulox Dec 2013 #43
You are wrong Gothmog Dec 2013 #45
Nope. Senate rules can be (and just were) changed on majority vote. Very recent history proves it. Romulox Dec 2013 #53
You are wrong Gothmog Dec 2013 #64
THANK YOU for pointing this out. "we only had 59 votes" is going around lately, too. DireStrike Dec 2013 #59
The margin in FL in '00 was so small that it is clear Nader voters made the difference. Motown_Johnny Nov 2013 #6
Okay MoTown Johnny - truedelphi Nov 2013 #7
Excuse me, I live in Tennessee. jazzimov Nov 2013 #9
If third party votes matter, then the Democratic Party needs to truedelphi Nov 2013 #10
At least in part because Nader was lying to progressives, pnwmom Nov 2013 #19
From what you say, it sounds like Gore goofed by not campaigning in Tennessee Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #75
Forget Tennesee and Florida One of the 99 Nov 2013 #12
Good post Gothmog Dec 2013 #40
Gore's full-throated support of NAFTA was enough to kill enthusiasm for him, all by itself. Romulox Dec 2013 #44
They should stop worrying about the registered Dems who voted for Nader ... dawg Nov 2013 #11
I hear you about the cetnrist Democrats who voted for Bush - truedelphi Nov 2013 #13
Or those that didn't volunteer. Chathamization Dec 2013 #62
Why do Nader voters refuse to take responsibility for their actions? One of the 99 Nov 2013 #14
Don't put this back on Nader voters - Gerrymandering is a far bigger concern - and truedelphi Nov 2013 #15
What Dem leaders? One of the 99 Nov 2013 #16
My OP brought up the idea that I have heard it said again and again truedelphi Nov 2013 #24
You haven't answered my question. Guess you can't One of the 99 Nov 2013 #29
Nader took money from Bush donors. riqster Nov 2013 #28
Very true. One of the 99 Nov 2013 #30
Zealotry is not always based on religion. nt riqster Nov 2013 #33
This is true, and by the way hold up a mirror and you'll find it there too 2banon Dec 2013 #114
Care to refute my points? nt riqster Dec 2013 #117
I agree with the point that Zealotry isn't necessarily based on a religious pov 2banon Dec 2013 #119
I was referring to his being funded by the Bushies, riqster Dec 2013 #120
hmm. 2banon Dec 2013 #124
Typical. riqster Dec 2013 #130
Facts? Got 'em. riqster Dec 2013 #135
The Democrats are fighting gerrymandering Gothmog Dec 2013 #41
Counter productive to Blame the Voters bvar22 Nov 2013 #22
Not blaming anyone. One of the 99 Nov 2013 #32
No. Of course you aren't. bvar22 Dec 2013 #46
Thanks. ;-) nt One of the 99 Dec 2013 #47
presumably if a person gets blamed for doing something awful hfojvt Dec 2013 #99
308,000 registered Florida Democrats voted for Bush. You were saying? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #48
And how many registered Florida Republicans voted for Gore? One of the 99 Dec 2013 #113
i know Nader voters personally who didnt care beachbum bob Dec 2013 #54
Nader voters, not Bush, responsible for Iraq War --beachbum bob, 2013 DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #125
Why? Because the Rethugs aren't pretending to be progressives. pnwmom Nov 2013 #18
Fuck Ralph and his Republican enabling apologists. (nt) great white snark Nov 2013 #20
The 3rd Way experts would rather whine about Nader than seek progresse/left votes. Tierra_y_Libertad Nov 2013 #21
Nicely stated. truedelphi Nov 2013 #23
Great post! bigwillq Nov 2013 #26
damn right. liberal_at_heart Dec 2013 #36
So tellbus why Nader lost using your definition Skidmore Dec 2013 #66
So, why did voters vote for him rather than Gore? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #68
A huge plus one! nt Enthusiast Dec 2013 #118
Fucking Nader trumad Nov 2013 #25
Agreed Gothmog Dec 2013 #42
And those 308,000 registered Florida Democrats who voted for Bush? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #49
Fuck Nader trumad Dec 2013 #63
Lame. No argument, just invective. Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #126
Fucking Nader trumad Dec 2013 #132
There are no "Democrat Party Leaders" because there is no "Democrat Party" Agnosticsherbet Nov 2013 #27
Yes, I found that rather telling as well. JNelson6563 Dec 2013 #51
It was a typo for Pete's sake. n/t truedelphi Dec 2013 #122
"There will be no typographical errors with the name of this Party" Agnosticsherbet Dec 2013 #123
No third party can win the Presidential election. upaloopa Nov 2013 #31
Exactly Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Dec 2013 #55
What about those electronic touch screen voting machines, in both 2000 and 2004, without any real RC Dec 2013 #34
A party should have to get 25% of the vote in primaries to get on the general ballots. CorrectOfCenter Dec 2013 #50
Are Greens still getting Rethug funding? JNelson6563 Dec 2013 #52
Green Party = Best GOP campaign expediture EVER. nt arely staircase Dec 2013 #57
I'll say! JNelson6563 Dec 2013 #58
Maybe people wouldn't feel the need to go to a third party if the democratic party represented liberal_at_heart Dec 2013 #69
I was blaming the politicians arely staircase Dec 2013 #73
The GOP got their money worth Gothmog Dec 2013 #79
Nuck Fader arely staircase Dec 2013 #56
Majority demographics usually believe they are entitled to their privilage in some way. ZombieHorde Dec 2013 #61
I love how Nader voters keep trying to justify their complicity in Iraq... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #67
So, would you vote for Hillary and the other Democrats who supported the war in Iraq? Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #71
"He didn't". And here's hoping the next candidate won't cater to it's extreme.... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #77
Well, if he didn't "cater" to them he shouldn't squawk about not getting their votes. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #83
Did Gore "squawk"? I thought that was the o.p. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #84
OK. Then you shouldn't squawk because he failed to attract their votes. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #87
I'm a Democrat, posting on Democratic website. Fuck all the other noise. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #91
No one dictates how I vote. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #93
Then why do you post here? Given that the rules clearly say: Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #96
It beats working for a living. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2013 #98
Tell Thomas J, I didn't make up the rules for DU. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #100
So no blame falls upon the 29 cowardly Senate Dems who voted for the Iraq War? Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #76
And if the purists had the sense God gave a lizard, Iraq would never have happened. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #78
In real life (the one where the Supreme Court appointed Bush), you know, Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #85
You mean the Supreme Court that Bush later appointed Alito & Roberts to? Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #89
Roberts and Alioto whom the Senate Dems voted for Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #94
They weren't given much choice because of the Nader forces. I wish you... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #97
Nader didn't force the Senate Dems to approve Alioto and Roberts, Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #106
You're almost irrelevant. Win a f**in primary. I can see it all now..... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #108
And your remark is irrelevant to Senators who were Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #110
Well, you've been loads of laughs, but I'm bored now. And remember..... Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #112
YOU'RE bored? Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #115
And everyone who voted for Clinton G_j Dec 2013 #81
No one died! Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #82
then you DO take responsibility for G_j Dec 2013 #88
Exhibit A. Who says false equivalency is only for the right? Tarheel_Dem Dec 2013 #90
? G_j Dec 2013 #92
It's worth saying again sagat Dec 2013 #70
Democratic Establishment officials treat their left wing like Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #72
If the Democrats didn't keep trying to push progressives out NuclearDem Dec 2013 #74
Jesse Ventura marlakay Dec 2013 #80
Note that three days before the election, 1/3 of voters were undecided Lydia Leftcoast Dec 2013 #86
Funny how nobody ever seems to blame the butterfly ballot Revanchist Dec 2013 #101
or Katherine Harris, or the *admitted fraud* (it was on Time's front cover August 2001!) MisterP Dec 2013 #116
funny how people just re-hash Nader arguments hfojvt Dec 2013 #102
My guess is that Bernie Sanders (I) can run as a Democrat... WhaTHellsgoingonhere Dec 2013 #107
Nader was the only option Riftaxe Dec 2013 #109
And in any event, gerrymandering, an issue apparently ignored by truedelphi Dec 2013 #121
Nader has the blood of thousands on his hands. Drunken Irishman Dec 2013 #129
What a waste of an OP. If you don't get the damage that fools voting like idiots caused in bluestate10 Dec 2013 #111
Nader is a liar who is just as responsible for the dead soldiers as anyone who voted for Bush... Drunken Irishman Dec 2013 #128
why did GOP throw dollars at nader's campaign in 2000 and 2004? beachbum bob Dec 2013 #133
An aside: Ever wonder why we are "Dems" but Republicans are always "Republicans"? WinkyDink Dec 2013 #134
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Questions for those Dems ...