Nader-bashing

[Senior citizen]

I switched my voter registration back to Democrat before the last election.

I hadn't registered Green until I'd read Winona LaDuke's book, "All Our Relations," even though I'd always liked Nader, and I've read his books also. But before the last election I knew I had to reregister and vote Democrat, whether I liked it or not.

There are some DUers who seem to get rabid whenever someone mentions Nader. They seem to think that Nader, not Bush, stole the election from Gore.

I don't like the 2-party system. It isn't democratic. I've always voted for the lesser of two evils, except for the one time that I voted for Nader, and Gore carried my state, California, even without my vote. I'm tired of having a choice between boogeyman and boogeyman-lite.

A post like "fucking Naderite" is an ad hominem attack and sheds no light on anything.

What I am beginning to suspect is that some DUers are familiar with the Green Party platform, oppose everything in it, and feel that people who are anti-war, anti-NAFTA, anti-electoral college, pro-equality, pro-environment, and want proportional elections, like me, have no place in the Democratic party, and they don't want my fucking Naderite vote. In other words, they're freepers in disguise.

Too bad. I'm not only voting Democrat, I know scores of Democratics with democratic beliefs akin to mine. And I think we're going to take back the whole damned party.

[JHBowden]

1. Gore is not the boogeyman.

Neither is Kerry. Asscroft, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rove, etc. need to go ASAP.

[Senior citizen]

6. Boogeyman-lite

No, Gore is not the boogeyman. Who said that "the only thing necessary for evil to prevail was for good men to do nothing?" Bush did evil, Gore did nothing. Admittedly, Gore is trying to compensate for that now, and, I believe, doing very well.

As for my man Kerry, who has my vote no matter what, I fully understand that he has to make some attempt to attract moderates and cross-party votes. At least I hope that explains his statements about continuing the war.

Maybe what it boils down to is that unless you've got nothing to lose, you can't afford to be honest.

[MAlibdem]

14. Yeah, i disagree...

"Gore is trying to compensate for that now"

It's ironic that on a board so hyped up about media coverage, no one cares to mention that Gore was bitch slapped by the media into some dull, moderate, uncharismatic guy. Of course, that we've seen that he's otherwise only "recently" is crap, some of us saw it before, too.

[noiretextatique]

2. all i can say is: good luck

:hi: "fucking naderites" in three, two, one...

[info being]

3. I've felt the same way

Their bashing of "Naderites" isn't practical or even effective...they are doing it for purely selfish and mean-spirited reasons.

[Taylor Mason Powell]

4. Fine. "Take back" the Democratic party.

As long as you're working to implement the Green agenda within the framework of a party that can actually get something accomplished, then you're not part of the problem.

I disagree wholeheartedly with your thesis. I think many Dems, especially here at DU, support many Green policies. But Ralph Nader is not the Green Party. He is a self-aggrandizing egomaniac who cares not a whit for the consequences of his extremely irresponsible actions. You seem to be making the too-common mistake of thinking that Nader is the same thing as the Green Party Platform. Bollocks! He's an opportunist who doesn't give a fig about the Greens, really.

If anything, HE's the Freeper in disguise, not the DUers you speak of.

So, I will continue to "bash Nader," because I think the man is a slimebucket. As for the Green Party, that's another thing entirely.

[Senior citizen]

11. Getting things accomplished

Like Clinton did, you mean?

If you'd read my post, you're realize that I'm a LaDuke Green, not a Nader Green. I'm not the one mistaking Nader for the Green Party platform.....

[Taylor Mason Powell]

16. Well then what is your point?

Just bashing DUers who bash Nader? Okay, thanks! I'll make a note of your disapproval.

And I'm not sure what your crack about Clinton means, but yes, I happen to think he was overall a terrific president. I guess that makes me The Enemy to a pure progressive Green like yourself.

:eyes:

[GreenPartyVoter]

19. Clinton had his good points.. but he had some real drawbacks too.

Did you read the chapter on him in Moore's "Stupid White Men"?

[Taylor Mason Powell]

38. I believe I said "overall."

Sure there were things Clinton did I disagreed with. Signing the Defense Of Marriage Act was definitely the worst. Getting rid of Joycelyn Elders as Surgeon General in response to phony right wing outrage was another low point. Also, more people were thrown in jail for nonviolent drug offenses during Clinton's term than ever before.

I have no illusions that the guy was perfect. But the Greens' defining characteristic, to me, is that they're always willing to make the perfect the enemy of the good.

[debsianben]

40. Yeah, Clinton accomplished a lot

Among the happier accomplishments of the Clinton era were the million or so Iraqis, dirorportionately kids, who died from Clinton-era sanctions and bombing. Other highlights included pushing NAFTA through Congress, fulfilling his 1992 campaign pledge to "end welfare as we know it" by signing away federal welfare requirements, championing degrading, union-busting "workfare" programs, and sending fighter planes all around the world to defend the interests of corporate America. Oh yeah, and lets not forget the "Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996", a draconian step in the direction of USA-PATRIOT that is today one of the favorite tools of the Ashcroft Justice Department.

Nah, Gore wasn't a bogeyman at all, I mean sure he supported each and every single one of the policies just mention as veep and he would have given us more of the same (instead of the accelerated, religiously-tinged Bush version), but God forbid that we admit that he was basically a reactionary scumbag who campaigned in 2000 on a pro-"free trade," pro-"muscular internationalism"(read "violent colonialism") platform.

It doesn't bother me if people felt the need to tactically hold their noses and vote for Gore in 2000 and feel the need to tactically hold their noses and vote for Kerry (who makes one pine for the idealistic liberalism of the Gore/Lieberman ticket by comparison) now, but what bugs me is that people have to justify it to themselves by pretending that they aren't even the lesser evil, since they aren't evil at all...deluding themselves into thinking that these people are anything but the bought-off, pro-imperialist Corporate McCandidates they obviously are.

[tomorrowsashes]

44. great post

Great post! Clinton was terrible, and I can never call myself a member of a party that celebrates his presidency. I am not convinced that Gore, or even Kerry will be any different. I would have some hope for the democratic party if it wasn't for all the Clinton/Gore/Kerry apoligists around. I'm fine with people making a tactical decision in voting for Kerry, but I don't understand when people try to spin it as a moral decision.

I'm not a Naderite. I preferred the Jello Biafra/Mumia Abu-Jamal ticket in 2000.

[KG]

5. fuck nader! is considered deep political analysis by many on DU

:eyes:

[NNN0LHI]

23. True. But the freepers say nice things about him. Doesn't that count?

:hi:

[Webster Green]

7. I'm with you.....Green voting Democratic,,,,,,,No brainer.....

I agree with just about everything Nader says, he tells it like it is. I'm not crazy about him running, but that is his choice and his right.

I hope the progessive Dems can be more influential in the party. There are far too many cowardly representatives who think only of their own careers, and are afraid to speak out.

[Cheswick2.0]

8. yes and you calling people Rabid is the height of brilliant debate

.

[BillZBubb]

9. Nader is a piece of dried up shit.

How's that for you?

If you think the difference between Bush*/Gore or Bush*/Kerry is boogeyman/boogeyman-lite, I really feel sorry for you because you don't know much about politics. About 40,000 dead Iraqis would have attested to that.

And don't give me the Kerry voted for the IWR crap. President Kerry would NEVER have started Bush*s war of aggression--and you KNOW it.

[sendero]

10. No ideology...

.... is better than the character of its proponents.

I agree with 90% of what Nader has to say, but he is such a sorry excuse for a human being I would never vote for him, period.

Liars and people who promise one thing and do another are tops on my list of disrespectables. Nader is both.

[havocmom]

12. and some of us who agree with much of the Green Party Platform,

are anti-war, anti-NAFTA, anti-electoral college, pro-equality, pro-environment, and want proportional elections just don't think Nader is the answer.

Nader didn't steal 2000, but he didn't help progressives much either.

I must have missed all the news about him fighting the danger of computer voting with no way to verify and no guarantee of hack-proof systems since 2000. I'm sure he was Johnny on the spot, even in non-presidential election years. Must just be that none of the 24 newspapers (minimum) I peruse each week carried a darned bit of Nader's exploits for 01, 02, 03.

Sorry, but as long as Nader shows up every leap year to pontificate to the Democratic Party, we get to whine back at him if we are so inclined.

Yes, we would like your vote in November. Yes, we have a ways to go to get all of our shopping list made into policy. Yes, we live in a world where it all doesn't happen at once.

Nader insists there is no difference, Democratic or Republican, and that may well be the case in some CONGRESSIONAL districts. But there was a big difference between what would have happened under a Gore Administration and what is happening under the rule of the junta. Now, if you will pardon me, I need to write a letter of condolence to some neighbors who just lost a son in Iraq. They are Republicans, but I bet they see the difference. Sorry Mr. Nader can't see it. He would be very good somewhere in government if he would realize we make changes one at a time and you don't start at the top. Jeeze, even the shrub had to pretend to be a governor before he sneaked into the White House.

[lapfog_1]

13. I can't believe

that ANYONE is left in the US (especially liberals) who thinks that
Gore is simply "Bush-lite". Yet that was the message from the
anti-war, anti-NAFTA, pro-environment Green party members in 2000.
I was also a registered Green party member in 2000. I resigned my
membership the day the election was "gifted" to *.

However, I'm probably not as leftist as most Greenies. I think we
had a right and a duty to invade Afghanistan, find Osama and shoot
his ass (along with all of his followers). While I believe that
Bushco is evil, and LIHOP and lots of other things, I also believe
that OBL (or UBL) and his terrorists actually did cause the planes
to fly into the buildings and kill 1000's. I wish Clinton hadn't
gotten a BJ (and I wish that repugs weren't so partisan and hateful)
and that HE would have unleashed the military after the embassy
bombings. There are times when we should all be together.

But I blame Nader (and the Green party) for allowing the election
to be decided by the SCOTUS. And I really don't think we need Nader
in the race right now. I'm sure he has a lot to say, and I wish we
had a fairer democracy instead of this all or nothing thing that we
have. But we don't right now, and 4 more years of * and his gang
are not going to cause us to change it.

I want your vote for Kerry. I want it so bad that I've donated
$2,000 of my last dollars (I'm out of work and have been for a
year) to his campaign. He may not do exactly what you want, I doubt
he will do what I want (which is to fund about $1 Trillion dollars
into a National Renewable Electric Power grid... and maybe another
$1 Trillion into fuel cell cars)... I hope he does some of these
things or at least starts them. As a former NASA scientist doing
some of the EOS (Earth Observation System) projects, I feel very
strongly that terrorists will be the least of our worries in 10 years.
Hunger and shelter (and a global refugee problem) may be a much
larger concern if we don't stop (and REVERSE) global warming.
But first we have to remove Bush and the Oil companies, then we
can start weaning ourselves from fossil fuels (I hope)... without
building 100 nuclear plants.

So please, vote for Kerry, donate to Kerry, tell Ralph and the other
Greenies that I don't talk to anymore, please, please, please, wait
until another time (2008 or 2012). We must also retake the House and
establish a firm hold on the Senate and, eventually, the SCOTUS...
and then retake the state and local governments (down to the school
boards). But first is the presidency. We can't afford Nader.

[Senior citizen]

15. Thank you.

I agree with most of what you said, and truly appreciate the way you said it. And I did donate to Kerry (not as much as you, but as much as I could), and I take every opportunity I get to persuade others to do the same.

[GreenPartyVoter]

21. I am with you on voting against bush via Kerry

but the greens didn't allow Scotus to decide the election, a screwy and corrupt system did.

I voted for Nader figuring Gore would win. I just "misunderestimated" 2 things: the sheeple having such low self-esteem and needing a candidate who made them feel good about themselves intellectually, and the willingness of the BFEE to stop at nothing to "win".

[noiretextatique]

17. some of the anti-nader rhetoric is just plain ignorant

e.g., equating the green menace to the red menance, for example. some of it is motivated by more reasonable ideological and strategic differences. some people are just pissed off :D
i have always thought the blame for 2000 lies almost completely (95%) with the republican party....and i still do. the rest of it (5%) goes to the democratic party.

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. Welcome to DU. I totally understand your post.

But you're right. There are lots of dems out there who have a very strong common ground with greens. I do hope they can push the party leftward.

[Egalitarian Zetetic]

20. I agree with you but most people are not voting dem this time around

I would say at least 850-1000 people i know who are on the left refuse to submit to the battered wife syndrome. I'm on edge weather i can ethically vote for kerry, it all depends on his vp canidate,a nd weather they were pro murder or anti murder

[sangh0]

22. "we're going to take back the whole damned party. "

That's EXACTLY how it's supposed to be done. Kudos

[Forkboy]

24. Many have the exact same mentality of the Hillary Haters on the right

there are valid criticisms of Nader but you'd never know it from some of the yobbos who froth at the mouth like Pavlov's dogs whenever his name is mentioned.

[Nlighten1]

25. This thread is sure to bring out the Nader haters..

Their irrational hatred of him is not atypical of the sort of hatred Freepers have for the Clintons. Usually, they come into these threads with spittle-flecked lips, screaming "FUCK Nader, if it wasn't for him President Gore would be in the White House!"

I just have to laugh at them. Silly, silly blind people.

[sangh0]

27. It's sure has brought out hater-haters

Silly blind people, indeed

[Forkboy]

30. note who repsonded to you first NLighten

comedy is most certainly not dead yet :)

[sangh0]

39. Not as long

as your still posting

[Forkboy]

46. You bet!

:thumbsup:

[phattyt]

26. No...

Nader didn't cost Gore the election, Jeb Bush and his cronies did. Although I think Nader's presence as a "spoiler candidate" certainly didn't help Gore's cause, much like it will harm Kerry's in November if Nader doesn't pull out.

[sangh0]

28. Good point "Nader didn't cost Gore the election" is not much of a defense

and even less of a reason to vote for a third party

[GreenPartyVoter]

31. Welcome to DU, PhattyT *wave*

[veracity]

29. Dems are nervous.... understandably!

Redo the party after the election. This infighting is counterproductive and dangerous for the election. The Green Party was smart enough NOT to support Nader this time around. Good for them. They've come to realize that getting rid of Bush is far more important than quibbling over policy. Once again, people with similary values and goals are hung up on labels. Let's all just get along....:-) Really....Nader is on an ego trip, - let him do his thing. Many people who adore him and his achievements will refuse to vote for him again, knowing it's a vote for Bush. Whatever else....the fact remains that this will be a very close election. Bush and Rove are not about to sit back without doing something very drastic close to election time. Nader is not the issue. Winning is. So damn much is at stake.

If you're a Naderite, welcome to the Dem party for this election, - and work from within to get Nader a seat at the table.

[Senior citizen]

37. I'm Green, but not a Naderite

The ones I'd like to see with a seat at the table are Winona LaDuke and Peter Camejo. I don't know too much about other Green Party candidates, but I do support the party platform, and I think that the Democratic leadership would do well to support it also. Of course the pro-environment part would alienate many big corporations and endanger their big campaign contributions, but in the long run I think clean air and water should count for something with anyone who has to hydrate and breathe in addition to running for office.

When Kerry is elected and those DLC advisors pile off him, I'm hoping he shows the strength he has shown in the past and gives a place at the table to humans with humanitarian concerns.

[Killarney]

32. It's too bad Nader is a liar.

It would be nice to have someone in his position that we could look up too.

I think the closest would be Dean or Kucinich.

Not Nader.

Nader has done more damage to the cause than good, IMO.

http://www.repentantnadervoter.com

[Nlighten1]

42. LOL!

Liar! Liar Pants on fire.


Wipe that spittle off your chin my friend.

[Killarney]

45. lol

Continue to bury your head in the sand and worship the liar, my friend.
:toast:

[Nlighten1]

47. Please explain something for me.

Exactly how is he a liar? And given that ALL politicians lie what makes his lies so condemnable?

[mot78]

33. If you want to change the Two-party system, change the Constitution

In the system we have now, two parties are a must, otherwise if there are three parties, the party that is the most dissimilar to your ideology would win. It's been like that throughout history.

[trumad]

34. Nader is a 3rd party canidate so fuck him

and fuck the idiot's who vote for him. Now what's so hard about that? BTW: I say the same about any oppostiton party.. I ain't just pickin on one.

[wellstone_democrat]

35. cry me a river

I have NO problems with the Green Party or its platforms. I DO have a big problem with St. Ralph of Nader. Did before 2000 do even more so now.

Guess if I hadn't worked for him 20 years ago and know personally what a pile of shit most of his public persona is I'd feel differently. But, here I am, stuck with personal experience with the man.

BTW, if you are a LaDuke Greenie (based on the origin of your conversion experience) why fall on the rhetorical sword for Nader? Nader used you people too. He will use anyone to prop up that ego and sell out anyone to keep it propped up.

My .02 cents and now, back to work. Satan's-hand-picked-editor wants that book done by July 1!

[Sparkly]

43. Same here -- it's not about the platform.

Those of us who dislike Nader -- whether Nader as a candidate, or Nader's candidacy itself, or both -- are not necessarily pro-war or anti-equality or anti-environment or what have you. (In fact, many of these so-called "Nader issues" are issues Democrats have championed for decades.)

Nader's opposing the Democratic candidate. That's all I really need to know.

[wellstone_democrat]

48. Love that Clark picture!

But, then again, I love Clark. I want him for President if I can't have Albert Gore, the *real* President of the U.S.

[adriennel]

36. enjoyed reading your post

and you articulated many of the thoughts I have had on this issue.

I don't register with any party (other than Independent, which isn't really a party affiliation). I do not like the current Dem/Rep two-party system. Third parties have come and gone throughout our country's history, but this is not indicative of the "predetermination" of the two party system we have today.

I vote Democratic because their platform most closely matches what I believe. However, I have serious concerns about the Democratic party that prevent me from becoming a registered member. (Examples--Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policy really made me angry, after I voted for him. Kerry supports civil unions but not gay marriage causes me to have the same reaction. (I know these are not the most important election issues to everyone, but they are very important to me.)

Nader did help Bush win in 2000. However, the election of 2000 was a monumental comedy (tragedy?) of errors and Nader only contributed the opening monologue. end of story. if you like Nader, vote for him. I don't understand how people like Bush, but they do and they vote for him. I won't be voting for either : )

[Deja Q]

41. We need to take back the DFL or else persuade Americans that

the two party system is lacking a second party.

The "fucking naderite" people are toddlers who prefer to put all the blame on one scapegoat. Which is immature and insane when one consideres the numerous factors involved in Selection 2000, of which Nader was by far the least dangerous element.

I didn't vote Nader and these days I'm glad I didn't. We all know he's a repuke in a green shirt.

In the end, it boils down to one simple question: Do the people want to run this country for themselves, or allow a bunch of unethical pirates to? Does "We the People" have any meaning left? :shrug: