Michael Moore apologizes to Al Gore for supporting Nader

[wyldwolf]

Gore's call was one of the show's highlights. Moore, who supported independent candidate Ralph Nader in the 2000 election, had a few words to say to the Democratic nominee who won the popular vote but still lost the election to George W. Bush. "We're really sorry, Al." Moore mumbled. Gore paused for a beat, then asked, "For what, Michael?" Moore then launched into a long, winding explanation of how he himself had not campaigned for Nader in swing states. Gore again paused, then added politely, "What are you saying?"

http://www.tribnet.com/entertainment/story/4922537p-4855813c.html

Anyone with a sould clip of this?

[aquart]

1. Gore's a gentleman. With a very dry wit.

Michael Moore can apologize from now to doomsday. He's still dirt to me.

[NightTrain]

3. That's mighty liberal of you!

:eyes:

[liberalhistorian]

7. In all fairness to Moore,

he recognizes now what the consequences of a Nader vote was, and that there truly was and is a major difference between the two parties. He recognizes that Nader's just an arrogant egotistical self-serving elitist who doesn't care about the future of the country, and he's doing everything he can to get people to vote for the Dem nominee and not Nader.

He's redeemed himself, as far as I'm concerned. And you have to admit, not even those of us who knew Shrub would be bad had any idea of just HOW bad things would be!

[NightTrain]

11. You're reading an awful lot into Moore's brief apology.

<<He recognizes that Nader's just an arrogant egotistical self-serving elitist who doesn't care about the future of the country>>

You obviously know nothing about Nader's background. The man grew up in the working-class shithole of Winsted, Connecticut, with parents who both encouraged him to love and serve his country, and not to have a big ego.

Say what you will about Nader, but the man legitimately believes that he's helping the country out by running for president. I disagree with him this time around, but what are you gonna do? Besides vote for Kerry, that is!

[wyldwolf]

13. If Nader wants to help the country...

..why does he only seem to get the urge every 4 years?

[NightTrain]

17. Wrong again!

Just because Nader doesn't get press coverage between elections, that doesn't mean he isn't out there doing his thing.

When he isn't wasting his time running for president, Nader oversees his Private Citizen organization. He also was instrumental in the formation of the youth activist organization, Democracy Rising, after the 2000 "election." And he tours the country, lending his name to fund-raisers for dozens of different grass-roots organizations.

Meanwhile, what has Al Gore done since 2000? Hang out with Letterman, teach journalism at Columbia University, and unsuccessfully attempt to become a TV mogul.

I know which man has earned my respect!

[wyldwolf]

38. Wrong Again? When was I wrong about this the first time?

'For some time now, Nader has made it perfectly clear that his campaign isn't about trying to pull the Democrats back to the left. Rather, his strategy is the Leninist one of "heightening the contradictions". It's not just that Nader is willing to take a chance of being personally responsible for electing Bush. It's that he's actively trying to elect Bush because he thinks that social conditions in American need to get worse before they can better.

Nader often makes this "the worse, the better" point on the stump in relation to Republicans and the environment. He says that the Reagan-era interior secretary James Watt was useful because he was a "provocateur" for change, noting that Watt spurred a massive boost in the Sierra Club's membership. More recently, Nader applied the same logic to Bush himself. Here's the Los Angeles Times' account of a speech Nader gave at Chapman University in Orange, California, last week: "After lambasting Gore as part of a do-nothing Clinton administration, Nader said, 'If it were a choice between a provocateur and an anaesthetiser, I'd rather have a provocateur. It would mobilise us.'"

Lest this remark be considered an aberration, Nader has said similar things before. "When {the Democrats} lose, they say it's because they are not appealing to the Republican voters," Nader told an audience in Madison, Wisconsin, a few months ago, according to a story in the Nation. "We want them to say they lost because a progressive movement took away votes."'

That might make it sound like Nader's goal is to defeat Gore in order to shift the Democratic party to the left. But in a more recent interview with David Moberg in the socialist paper In These Times, Nader made it clear that his real mission is to destroy and then replace the Democratic party altogether. According to Moberg, Nader talked "about leading the Greens into a 'death struggle' with the Democratic party to determine which will be the majority party". Nader further and shockingly explained that he hopes in the future to run Green party candidates around the country, including against such progressive Democrats as Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin, and Representative Henry Waxman of California. "I hate to use military analogies," Nader said, "but this is war on the two parties."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,393674,00.html

'Last Thursday morning CNN showed Nader voters ecstatic and unapologetic about their part in the election mess. "I'm a part of history," burbled one woman.'
'Along with that woman CNN showed another Naderite who shrugged off the prospect of a Bush presidency with the following: "I believe things have to get worse before they get better."'
'That seems to me to adequately sum up the belief of Ellen Willis who, in a Salon piece supporting Nader last week, wrote: "More and more I am coming to the conviction that Roe vs. Wade, in the guise of a great victory, has been in some respects a disaster for feminism. We might be better off today if it had never happened, and we had had to continue a state-by-state political fight. Roe vs. Wade resulted in a lot of women declaring victory and going home."'
Source: http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/15/nader /

'When asked if someone put a gun to his head and told him to vote for either Gore or Bush, which he would choose, Nader answered without hesitation: "Bush."'
"If you want the parties to diverge from one another, have Bush win." - Nader
http://www.outsidemag.com/magazine/200008/200008camp_nader1.html

The only prominent Democrat who Nader seems to believe offers the party any chance for redemption is Russ Feingold, the maverick senator from Wisconsin who cast a lonely vote against the Bush Administration's antiterrorism legislation. Feingold is a rare Democrat who consistently says things like, "Ralph Nader is talking about issues Democrats should be talking about." But the mutual admiration goes only so far. Nader rejects the idea of backing a Feingold run for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. "I'll say a lot of good things about him, but we're not trying to build the same party," he says.

Nader admits he experiences "lots" of frustration with the Greens. He warns that the party is not running enough candidates to achieve critical mass at election time, and he says it must do so--even where that means challenging relatively liberal Democrats.

Does Nader worry, even just a little bit, that another candidacy might divide progressives and produce another Bush presidency? "Look, I'd rather be engaged in the nonpartisan work of building a civil society. For me, there has been a gradual commitment to getting involved in the electoral process, and I still cling to this civic, nonpartisan vision of how to do things," Nader says. "But if you do an acute analysis of why things don't change in this country, you come back to what has happened to the Democratic Party. When I look at how the Democrats have responded to Enron so far, it seems to me that we all have a responsibility to try to jolt them into an understanding of what is at stake. If Democrats respond effectively, there will not be much point to me or anyone else challenging them. But if they do not, something has to give. People realize that. People know what the Enron scandal means. This is a test. Are Democrats capable of addressing massive corporate crimes effectively? If Democrats cannot, if they are in such a routinized rut that they are incapable of responding, then how could anyone make a case that they should be given deference at the ballot box?"
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020225&s=nichols

Regarding Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Paul Wellstone (D-MN), Nader said that he is willing to sacrifice them because "that's the price they're going to have to bear for letting their party go astray."
In an interview with In the Times, 10-30-2000

In a recent Time magazine interview, when asked if he felt any regret about the 2000 election, Nader responded, "No, because it could have been worse. You could have had a Republican Congress with Gore and Lieberman." -- Time magazine, 8-05-02

"Let's see what really happens. Ashcroft is going to be a prisoner of bureaucracy." -- Common Dreams 4-03-2001

"I'm just amazed that people think I should be concerned about this stuff. It's absolutely amazing. Not a minute's sleep do I lose, about something like this - because I feel sorry for them. It's just so foolish, the way they have been behaving. Why should I worry?" -- Common Dreams 4-03-2001
http://www.damnedbigdifference.org/quotes

There was also a recent discussion over Nader's union busting and unfair labor practices within his own company.

In contrast with Gore... At Fisk University, Middle Tennessee State University and the University of California Los Angeles, Gore teaches a new academic discipline that he has helped create, called “Family Centered Community Building”, which trains people to plan communities based on human, rather than purely economic needs.

In January 2002, Al Gore launched “Leadership ‘02”, a Political Action Committee that aides Democratic candidates running for office.

He has given several widely covered policy speeches...

I know which man gets my respect!

[NightTrain]

47. Whoops! Must've had you confused with another poster.

Sorry 'bout that! Hey, I'm not perfect. :hi:

[MUAD_DIB]

78. Would you waste your time voting for him then?

[NightTrain]

79. Not this time around

I'm well aware of how much is stake in the 2004 election. As such, I won't be using my vote as a statement against our woefully inadequate two-party system. I just hope that if Kerry becomes the next president, he proves worthy of my vote!

[liberalhistorian]

18. I wasn't going by that

apology, Dean, I was going by other articles and interviews Moore's given where he's said just that.

And Nader may pretend by living simply, but he's really quite well-off; his corporate stock ownership alone is worth quite a lot. I believe he cared about the country at one time, and wanted to make things better, but he really doesn't anymore. If he did, he'd quit bashing Dems and stay the hell out of the race.

[NightTrain]

22. Are you aware that Nader donates a lot of his money...

...to progressive causes?

And since when does having money keep you from giving a shit about the country? Going by that logic, you'd also have to believe that Al Gore and John Kerry don't care about anything but their own egos.

Finally, I'd like some verifiable proof of your assertion that Nader no longer cares about the country. Perhaps a link or two?

[DemLikr]

56. Ummm, he would need to donate a few $$$$Trillion to make up for

ushering Shrub into the White House, don't you think?

[Selwynn]

14. Agreed - but not for tha particular reason.

[Shoedogg]

2. Don't have it, but I heard it...

It was great. Moore was sincere yet amusing in his apology. Gore was funny as well, acting as if he had no idea about what Moore was apologizing for while allowing the tone of his voice to indicate that he knew EXACTLY what the apology was for.

Definitely worth a listen if you can find it.

[DIKB]

4. So ?

Al Gore got an apology, what about us ?

He should be apologising to the people.

[NightTrain]

6. You're right; Al Gore *should* apologize to the people.

If he hadn't been such a pussy about the Florida recount, Gore would be president right now!

[liberalhistorian]

10. That's definitely a good point, Dean,

and he should have fought much harder in Florida than he did. The problem was, the fix was in so strongly that I'm not sure it would have mattered much. It still would have ended up in the Supreme Court, and Shrub still would have been selected by the felonious five.

[NightTrain]

12. Unfortuantely, we'll never know.

Guess all we can do now is to do everything in our power to get John Kerry into the White House. The man's not perfect, but he'll be a vast improvement over what we're stuck with now!

[NMDemDist2]

41. didnt fight??? They were clogging the streets, but the Miami

police wouldn't let them anywhere near the recount offices.

[Lisa]

74. I suspect Gore might have been worried about people being injured

And not necessarily Dems smacking some Freeper with a "Sore Loserman" sign. Remember that episode where GOP aides from D.C. posed as Florida Republicans and assaulted that guy on the recount team? Imagine if someone had instigated a street brawl where a Republican was hurt or even killed, in order to make the Dems look like thugs. Their spinners were already hinting that Gore was trying to pull off a coup. (Never mind that Bush was the one who took the thing to the Supreme Court.)

Knowing what we know now, this doesn't seem outside of the realm of possibility. Some of the Democratic Party top brass were organizing busloads of protesters, and I seem to recall that Gore was the one asking them to keep things low-key. In his situation, I probably would have done the same.

[tabasco]

45. What was Gore supposed to do?

Secretly install a Justice-bot on the Supreme Court? Shrub ran to the courthouse and the judges put him in office. Wasn't a damn thing Gore could do.

[NightTrain]

49. Well, he could've initiated a constitutional crisis.

Granted, that might've seemed extreme, but it was Gore's right to have done so. But he chose not to. Whether or not it was the right decision is open to debate.

If you haven't done so already, I'd recommend that you read John Nichols' book, JEWS FOR BUCHANAN: DID YOU HEAR THE ONE ABOUT THE THEFT OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY? Also, check out the "Election 2000" chapter of Greg Palast's book, THE BEST DEMOCRACY MONEY CAN BUY. Both books provide an eye-opening look into the debacle that was Selection 2000!

[DemLikr]

58. Oh, this country would have survived the "constitutional Crisis" just fine

Crisis! Crisis! was Cokie "is it time for the Inaugural Ball yet?" Roberts' basic theme throughout the recount.

I recall her saying on the Sunday shows, "well, this can't just GO ON and on, you know..."

What an insider Beltway Bitch.

[DemLikr]

57. Totally, totally, totally. Thank you for stating the all too seldom stated

obvious, Night Train.

[bagnana]

75. pussy? where were you in 2000?

he fought all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which shut down the voting and any hopes for an elected president. What the hell was he supposed to do, act like a republican and bus in an "anti-mob" of democrats to beat the crap out of the repub. thugs who shut down the vote? Jesus. He was pummeled the entire election for being a liar, or too sedate or too smug or too aggressive.

[LiberalBushFan]

5. dumb article doesn't even have the facts right

"The comedian Al Franken even named his three-hour show the "The O'Franken Report," to tweak his conservative nemesis, Bill O'Reilly, yet his maiden show this week proved to be oddly subdued and, at times, defensive."

O'Franken Report? Journalists are getting dumber and dumber.

[wyldwolf]

8. sounds like a simple mistake

...and other DU'ers have confirmed the Gore/Moore portion, so ALL the facts aren't wrong.

[Must_B_Free]

9. The O'Franken Factor

Not the Matt "Packed Fudge" Drudge Report

[wryter2000]

23. What planet does that guy live on?

"Subdued?" "Defensive?"

Would that part have been when G. Gordon Liddy got on and they both made fun of O'Reilly telling people to shut up? Would it be the part where they locked Ann Couler in the green room and turned up the heat? Maybe the part where Franken yelled "LIEEEEEES!" Or maybe, "In a bunker x feet under Dick Cheney's bunker." Or "Satire is protected speech, even if the target of the satire doesn't get it."

Spare me from clueless "reporters."

[NightTrain]

24. As Ed Helms recently said on THE DAILY SHOW...

"The first rule of journalism: fact-checking is for pussies!"

[TrueAmerican]

15. The Nader supporters owe Al, America, and the World an apology

If it wasn't for them, the world wouldn't be as fucked up as it is now.

[NightTrain]

21. Same old tired bullshit.

GOP: Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, Clinton!!!

Democracts: Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader, Nader!!!

Give it up already! It's gotten old.

[TrueAmerican]

25. If you don't have anything constructive to add to this thread

than I advise you to not post anything. This is a serious discussion on how Nader and his supporters rather see Bush and the republicans runnning things than the Democrats. It gives them a false sense of importance.

[KG]

27. funny, looked like this was a thread about moore and gore.

please do not presume to instruct others what they can post. last i checked, the admins and mods held that authority.

[TrueAmerican]

30. funny, how you are trying to instruct me what I can post

Last I checked, the admins and mods held that authority.

Fuck Nader and his supporters!

[NightTrain]

31. That was how it started out...

...until the Nader-haters hijacked it.

And I'm quite glad that I don't allow irrational hatred and blind devotion to a political party to fuel my worldview!

[NightTrain]

29. I take it you haven't read my other posts to this thread.

And it's a lie that Nader and his supporters are undercover Republicans!

The "Democrats can do no wrong" crowd want to project the party's inadequacies and failures onto a grizzled senior citizen and those who supported him, because it's easier to blame "the other" than it is to attempt to reform the Democratic party from within.

So you go ahead and keep bitching and moaning about Nader. And I'll try to reform the Democratic Party from within. And I'll be in Scotland before ye!

[KG]

36. give it up, dean.

they've built their treehouse in the back yard, let 'em play in it. who are we to mess with thier fantasy world?

[TrueAmerican]

40. The backyard is on DU property

You are the ones living in a fantansy world. DU property is for pro Democratic Party. Not the trash you Nader fans spiel.

[NightTrain]

44. I do believe you're right.

As the '70s funk band New Birth so eloquently put it: "I wash my hands of the whole damned deal!"

[KG]

50. play that funky music, white boy!

:)

[Tinoire]

64. Give it up. You've got several "Reagan Democrats" in this thread

who think it's just dandy to have voted for Reagan, Bush 1 and to have been "mis-led" into voting for Bush 2, his Patriot Act, his wars, his "No Child Left Behind". All sins of wayward Democrats who supported the nedo-cons are to be ignored.

They need an enemy badly lest the furor of loyal Democrats be turned on them.

Join the band-wagon. Stone Nader. ;)

Praise the School of the Americas. Stone Nader.

Praise the NED. But stone Nader.

Praise the war. Remember to stone Nader when you do because the war is his fault (never mind that Clinton and Gore starved, sanctioned & bombed Iraq for 8 straight years).

Suggest McCain for VP. Never mind that he's not a Democrat. Just don't forget to stone Nader when you do.

Rave about what a "Liberal" Harold Ford is. Stone Nader.

Whatever you do though, don't forget to stone Nader! And get ready for it to get even worse because Kerry is running an impressively lousy and uninspiring campaign & putting everyone to sleep. Once again it will be Nader's fault -the DLC, the Reagan Democrats and its supporters are just practicing for the next 4 years.

[wyldwolf]

65. name them

[Tinoire]

66. Yeah right. So you can hit alert? Give me a break.

I'll give you a clue. They're not very hard to spot- they think and act an awful lot like Republicans :)

[wyldwolf]

67. paranoia is common to those in your camp

[Tinoire]

69. Please.

:eyes:

Rah rah DLC. Nothing like standing behind PNAC signers like the DLC's Will Marshall who signed the "Second Statement on Post-War Iraq" of PNAC, is there? And of course PNAC is proud to display the letters he signed on their web-site.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqstatement-032803.htm

Rah rah DLC ;)

Thanks. I'll keep my "camp". At least I know it stands on firmly progressive ground and differentiates itself from Republicans and neo-cons on every issue- from the big ones like war and occupation down to the smaller ones.

Next thing you'll be telling us that the Progressive Policy Institute, headed by PNAC-signing Will Marshall, is "progressive".

Rah rah DLC.

======================================

Lagniappe:


Behind the DLC Takeover

By John Nichols

At the national convention of a major political party, an ideologically rigid sectarian clique secures the ultimate triumph. It inserts two of its own as nominees for the Presidency and the Vice Presidency. Heavily financed by the most powerful corporations in the world, the group's leaders gather in a private club fifty-four floors above the convention hall, apart from the delegates of the party they had infiltrated. There, they carefully monitor the convention's acceptance of a platform the organization had drafted almost in its entirety. Then, with the ticket secured and with the policy course of the party set, they introduce a team of 100 shock troops to deploy across the country to lock up the party's grassroots.

This is not some fantastic political thriller starring Harrison Ford or Sharon Stone. This is the real-life version of Invasion of the Party Snatchers--with the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) burrowing into the pod that is the Democratic Party.

Founded in the mid-1980s with essentially the same purpose as the Christian Coalition--to pull a broad political party dramatically to the right--the DLC has been far more successful than its headline-grabbing Republican counterpart. After Walter Mondale's 1984 defeat at the hands of Ronald Reagan, a group of mostly Southern, conservative Democrats hatched the theory that their party was in trouble because it had grown too sympathetic to the agendas of organized labor, feminists, African Americans, Latinos, gays and lesbians, peace activists, and egalitarians.

And they found willing corporate allies, in corporate America, who provided the money needed to make a theory appear to be a movement. In the ensuing fifteen years, the DLC's impact on the American political debate has been dramatic. The group now controls much of the upper-level apparatus of the Democratic Party.


<snip>

Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone echoed Jackson's view. "There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans," he said. "I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."

It's not surprising that Jackson, Wellstone, Senator Russ Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus, the AFL-CIO, the venerable Americans for Democratic Action, and other upholders of traditional Democratic values are aghast at the DLC. They have seen their party taken over by an ideological force that opposes almost all of what they stand for.

<snip>

http://www.progressive.org/nich1000.htm

Excuse me while I stick with the "Project for an OLD American Century"... When old-fashioned Democratic values were good enough and we didn't have PNAC signatories defining the "New" Democrat.

[wyldwolf]

70. please

:eyes:

Paranoia can be treated.

_____________________________________

The Strongest Economy in a Generation Longest Economic Expansion in U.S. History. In February 2000, the United States entered the 107th consecutive month of economic expansion -- the longest economic expansion in history.

Strengthening America’s Working Families.Tax Cuts for Working Families. 15 million additional working families received additional tax relief because of the President’s expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit. In 1998, the EITC lifted 4.3 million people out of poverty - double the number lifted out of poverty by the EITC in 1993. This year, the President proposed expanding the EITC to provide tax relief to an additional 6.8 million hard-pressed working families.

..more...

http://pearlyabraham.tripod.com/htmls/bill-legacy2.html

[NightTrain]

72. I wouldn't go so far as to call them "Reagan Democrats."

I call them the "Democrats Can Do No Wrong Crowd."

[charlie]

33. Haha

Serious discussion, that's rich. You've never been in a serious discussion in this forum. Shitting in Kucinich threads, snarking at Nader, and howling for the banishment of members you don't like is about the full extent of your life at DU, Mr Red-White-and-Blue.

[NightTrain]

35. Thanks for the heads-up about that guy!

I won't try to engage him in serious discussions anymore.

[TrueAmerican]

37. Serious discussion?

Boo hoo. My feelings are hurt. Boo hoo.

Fuck all you Nader supporters!

[charlie]

39. See what I mean?

What you call serious discussion, the rest of the world calls drive-by assholery.

[KG]

43. oh, give him a break, charlie

'Fuck all you Nader supporters!' often passes for deep, critical political thought on DU. :)

[charlie]

48. It may not be deep

but it sure is wide. Whisper Nader and the teeth-baring and ook-ooking is deafening.

[eablair3]

51. lol, ... I liked and got a kick out of that post.

thanks charlie

[Djinn]

77. I've got to wonder

as an outsider reading all the Nader threads and all the threads during the Kerry v Dean v Edwards etc biffo it seems to me that you should all be complaining about the Republican OR Democrat or NOTHING way that your system seems designed.

What if the Democrats KEEP moving to the right so much so that Zell Miller looks a socialist. At what point do you stop voting Democrat? or do you keep voting for them just because they'er not Republicans?

I don't remember seeing much citizen resistance actions when your presidency was stolen so blaming Nader is a bit lame, as for

"Paranoia can be treated."

yep so can pretentiousness and sanctimoniousness

Fuck all you Nader supporters!

Well done on the mature contribution level – but can more be expected of someone that designates themselves a “true” American – who are the fake Americans? And why do you have more right to claim the American title than anyone else

[Deja Q]

53. BULL SPIT! - there were far greater factors!

So Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, the SCOTUS, Al Gore's own pitiful campaign, the half of the country that seems to have enough sense NOT to vote, et cetera, et cetera, are less important than Nader's followers - who didn't even compose 2% of the vote in Florida!?>?!

:grr: :mad: :argh:

[sendero]

62. But...

... we knew they were our enemies, we thought otherwise of Nader. Key word being "thought".

[ulysses]

55. well, no.

[NNN0LHI]

16. What does Phil Donahue have to say I wonder? n/t

[KG]

19. isn't that wonderful!

ya'll moore-haters, feel better now? :eyes:

[wryter2000]

20. It was fabulous

I think Moore was wonderful. He was obviously chagrinned, and he explained -- honestly, I thought -- about how Nader misled him about his (Nader's) intentions. I felt way better about Moore after that.

Gore was a true gentleman, of course. And they all left us with a feeling that we're all on the same page this year.

Kudos to Franken for bringing that to us.

[peacetalksforall]

26. Everytime I hear Al Gore speak, I have more respect for him...

he handled Moore just right...

what wit...what a great laugh...

[peacetalksforall]

28. And Franken was great...for arranging the three of them to be on air

for appropriate coaching and for his lightness.

It was a healing day.

[NightTrain]

73. I only wish Gore had come across half as liberal in 2000 as he does today.

I might've actually voted for him then!

[stewert]

32. You Forgot Something !

Moore also said Nader lied to him, he said Nader had promised him he would not
campaign in any swing states in 2000. Then Nader broke his promise and campaigned
in swing states.

Moore did a protest vote in 2000 by voting for Nader, as did a lot of liberals. I would
say it worked, look at how united the democrats are now. I would say it has also
energized the liberals to vote, that means Bush is toast in november. By having Bush in
office for 4 years it has also shown the country and the world what a republican white
house is like today.

Now the people here and around the world know what Bush and the far right will do if
they are in the white house. I suggest that is going to be the downfall of the far right.

[NightTrain]

34. I stopped vocally supporting Nader when he went into the swing states.

I voted for Nader in 2000 because I knew full well that Gore would take Connecticut no matter how I cast my ballot. But I do wish the Nader supporters in the swing states had followed the "Molly Ivins Rule." Unfortunately, not enough of them did. *sigh*

[wyldwolf]

46. An argument could be made that it worked out that way, BUT...

...the results you observed certainly wasn't the intention of Nader protest voters.

After all, Nader said Dems and repthugs are no different. A vote for Nader is a vote for that reasoning.

[TrueAmerican]

42. Please don't feed the monkeys

It is apparrent that any issue discussing the complete lack of class Nader and his supporters display bring out the spineless monkeys tenfold.


We need to focus our attention in ousting Bush. Not giving Nader lovers a place to spiel their crap.

Let's just ignore their childish behavior and focus on supporting the Democratic Presidential candidate, John F. Kerry.

[Djinn]

80. childish??

from someone who's argument is "fuck Nader supporters" and refering to people who disagree as monkeys....thanks havn't had a good chucke all day - needed one

[Deja Q]

52. So much for credibility from Michael Moore...

Only admit defeat when there's concrete proof you did wrong.

Moore did no wrong in 2000. Certainly not enough of a wrong to apologize. (let's just be glad there are no WMDs in Iraq...) Moore could have supported anybody at the time. It wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference. There were numerous other factors involved in election 2000 and screw it, I refuse to repeat what's been said 5000 times already.

Nader was a factor, yes, but those who ignore all the other and more significant factors are really, really sad people...

Especially the most obvious one, why the hell does half our country not even bother to vote? 50% nonvoters vs 5% of people so disenfranchised with this joke of a system that they will vote for a fringe lunatic.

[NightTrain]

54. Shh! Quiet, Toad. You'll disturb DU's "delusional" contingent.

You wouldn't want these people to actually question their self-righteous superiority now, would you? :evilgrin:

[sendero]

63. You guys enjoy..

... you little laugh, and convince yourself we're the deluded ones.

Nader is OVER. If a third-party candidate ever gets a foothold, which is highly doubtful because the system is rigged against it, it won't be him.

The piddly 10% or so of folks who aren't fed up with his lies and his massive ego are not going to get him anywhere.

Have fun dreaming.

[Festivito]

59. This is a turning point we need. Thank you MM.

We knew this going in to 2000 that Nader would make or break the election. The denial of that hurt us worse than we imagined. To be sure Republicans sent in operatives to talk up voting my conscience.

MM's stance hurt our country nearly as much as he knows about Bush, 9/11 and the BFEE. He knows plenty. He's a smart smart man. I hope he finds sufficient solace.

[Festivito]

60. This is a turning point we need. Thank you MM.

We knew this going in to 2000 that Nader would make or break the election. The denial of that hurt us worse than we imagined. To be sure Republicans sent in operatives to talk up voting my conscience.

MM's stance hurt our country nearly as much as he knows about Bush, 9/11 and the BFEE. He knows plenty. He's a smart smart man. I hope he finds sufficient solace.

[Festivito]

61. Well, I guess it did post! I thought it was erased. nt.

[w4rma]

68. I have *even more* respect for Michael Moore, now. (nt)

[durutti]

71. Sellout.

First hiding behind a war criminal, now this...

[Township75]

76. Is Moore going to apologize to the US voters, or the military in Iraq?

Just because Moore supports liberal causes he seems to never be on the bad side of people, despite what he did. THIS ASSHOLE HAD SO MUCH TO DO WITH ELECTING BUSH! If he wants to help Nader, fine, that is his right.

What pisses me off about Moore is how he has positioned himself as the great left hope since Bush took office. He has some nice best sellers out about how bad Bush is, and is making a movie about Bush, and gets a lot of love from the left because he attacks Bush. Yet, this jackass trashed Gore in 2k.

I dont' think his apology has as much to do with being sorry, as it does with positioning himself to be in the good graces of the left again. He sees Nader has lost a ton of support from many people, and is not trying to dissociate and put distance between him and Nader.

I for one will never forget the relationship those two have.