How do you feel about Ralph Nader?

[Senior citizen]

Poll question: How do you feel about Ralph Nader?

Time for an assessment.

[LiberalVoice]

1. Ralph Nader is a hypocritical POS.

You should put that on your poll...

[Senior citizen]

2. I apologize if no option was vitriolic enough for you.

Are you sure you didn't mean to vote for the option just below the one you chose?

[LiberalVoice]

3. lol

no...Although I am tired enough to have made that mistake.

[malaise]

8. Isn't he

the only politician not beholden to special interests?
He's done more for ordinary people by fighting special interests than anyone in recent memory. Sadly he was fifty years too early for America.

The Democratic Party would do well to read and digest his criticism of some of the tendencies of more than a few representatives and leaders of a party with an amazing tradition. Unfortunately he and several academics have found that the party appears to be discarding it's own raison d'etre for benefits from special interests.

Democrats should be studying Nader's criticisms of the party rather than trying to reform in a manner acceptable to the babbling, dishonest 'impression managers' in the media and their financiers.


Thanks for the seat belt Ralph.

[The Gigmeister]

10. He's done more to HURT ordinary people than anyone in recent memory.

HE is the reason we have the Idiot in Chief!!!

[AntiCoup2K4]

18. Ralph Nader invented Diebold?

And he nominated 5 members of the current Supreme Court?

And he put the entire US media in the hands of war profiteers and other fascist corporate whores?

Damn that Ralphie gets around.

[d_b]

30. Damn right

:toast:

[Ed C. Finley]

23. I voted for him

As the least worst of the choices, mainly for his stand on the war.

[jpgray]

27. Nader: Nice talk, pretty crappy walk recently (nt)

[Radical Activist]

4. I'm just glad he got so few votes in '04

So I don't have to listen to Democrats bitch and moan and use Nader as a scapegoat for losing again. Damn that gets old. There is so much hate against Nader on this board I'm sure you'll get a lot of responses.

He's done a lot of good in his career and I respect him for that. He has accomplished more without holding office than most Democrats who serve in Congress. I can appreciate that despite his three runs for President.

[LiberalVoice]

5. Now imagine he gave up fighting for whats right...

in order to raise funds for this years run at the elections.

[Radical Activist]

6. Didn't he fight for what was right when

he ran for President? I didn't see him take a conservative stance on the issues. I was hoping Nader wouldn't get on any ballots in swing states, but I can at least understand the '04 strategy of brining up issue Kerry was likely to ignore, even if I didn't agree with it. As it turned out, Kerry did a better job on Iraq and some other Greenie issues than a lot of people like Nader expected.

[LiberalVoice]

33. No he didn't!

Most of his campaign donations came from high profile republicans and there were several college republicans who organized mass gathering in support of him in order to help steal votes from Kerry. Whether or not alot of people were fooled by that assholes attempt is not the question.

The point is the man knowingly took large sums of money from republicans in order to run for office. In a time like this he not only failed us but he failed his own values.

[Radical Activist]

35. Nader will deny that as a false rumor, but

why are you so picky about where Nader gets his money, but not the Democratic party in general? The Dems take millions from the defense industry, and people who also donate to the Republicans as well. Even Howard Dean's top contributor during most of the primary was employees of evil media giant AOL/Time Warner. Are you going to condemn that too, or is there a double standard for Nader?

The main difference is that Nader's campaign themes were always anti-corporate, while Kerry's were half-assed on those issues.

[LiberalVoice]

36. I'm not talking about the Dems because they're not...

the subject of this thread. I have noticed that everytime I make a comment about a certain issue in a thread DUers want to know why "I'm not talking about this" or "not talking about that"

I think the main problem the democrats face is not being able to stay on the issue. At least here on DU.

[LittleClarkie]

37. Did Kerry take money from the Smear vets too

Whatever credibility Ralph had before, he lost it this time around. It wasn't the Repub money so much as he was in denial about why he got it "Maybe they really support what I'm saying." Sure Ralph. He wasn't going to take their help until he realized he couldn't get in some states without it.

And then he took smear vet money. Sorry. That's just not right.

How can he be so against Bush, but work almost as hard against Kerry. He really had to pick one in my eyes.

I'm sorry to see a once honorable advocate go down the shitter like that, but I think he's an arrogant narcissist now.

[UL_Approved]

7. Ralph Nader

One look at this man's history should be enough to show his true colors. After all, does anybody remember how he became famous?

[The Gigmeister]

9. He is more responsible for what we're going through than anyone...

...on the fucking planet!!!


FUCK RALPH NADER AND FUCK ALL GREENS!!!

[depakid]

11. Wow. Sure you couldn't be more emphatic?

It seems to me that it's been Nader and the Greens who have been warning Dems for years about things like corporate media consolidation (by far the worst enemy America has ever faced), energy deregulation scams and NAFTA and the WTO.

Hard to realistically blame anyone other than republicans and complicit Dems or that...

[Ganja Ninja]

13. I think there's a lot of misplaced anger directed at Nader.

Nader didn't concede Florida in 2000.
Nader wasn't the fifth supreme court justice that helped select Bush.
Nader wasn't asleep at the switch on September 9, 2001.
Nader didn't bankrupt the country by giving tax breaks to the rich.
Nader didn't start the Iraq war.
Nader didn't vote for the war then come out against it.
Nader hasn't tried to suppress voting.
Nader didn't promise to make sure all the votes were counted in this election.
Nader didn't run off on a ski trip with Dennis Miller and the Gropenfuhrer and leave John Conyers to fight the fight he should have been fighting.

[leanin_green]

34. Poor Gig, you must learn to direct your anger more. . .

toward the people who stole the election in 2000. If Ralph wasn't there in 2000 they would have found some other way. Perhaps the very thing we are witnessing through this election, but not as well done. If you poll most Democrats you'll find they largely agree with Ralph's assessment of the political climate today. We continue to vote Democratic because they generally are perceived as the only ones in the current structure that have a chance at winning against the Republicans. Now, many of us are questioning if that is relevant anymore.

[The Zanti Regent]

12. Ask my dead son...

Put in the VA Cemetery by Ralph's pal.

[Disturbed]

14. Nadar didn't make Gore lose.

Gore and the Dems that voted for Bush did that.

I agree with most of what Nadar says about Fascist Amerika. He also has solutions for Americans. Go to his Web Site and open your minds.

If this country had open elections for third parties and support for them Nadar's followers and other parties would have a voice in America.

[IndianaGreen]

21. How many Democratic Senators challenged the Florida Electors in 2001?

Not one of them! Watch F911 and you can painfully see the Congressional Black Caucus pleading for at least one Senator to join them in their challenge to the Florida electors. Not one stood in opposition to the theft of the 2000 election. But let's blame Nader for that is easier than to see the real ugliness of the Democratic Party: our establishment is happy in sharing the corruption with the Republicans. Holding office is more important that holding steadfast on principle.

[noiretextatique]

43. but, but, but...if nader wasn't in the race

:eyes: democrats wouldn't have caved

[AG78]

45. Didn't Boxer say

that Gore told the Senators not to stand?

[mrbill]

16. wasn't that your nephew sean?

n/t

[JordanTO]

50. He's an unvarnished egomaniac.

Rather than supporting the only truly electable progressive candidate in the election just past, Mr. Nader chose to engage in yet another orgy of self-promotion, just like he did in 2000's election. Whatever glory he had accmulated in the past is forever tarnished by these two incredibly egotistical attepmts at the office of President.

He deserves the scorn of anyone who professes to truly care about the future of your country.

[AverageJoe]

15. Nadir can rot in hell

for all eternity.

He worked very hard to take votes away from Gore in the swing states. Without Nadir, Florida wouldn't have been close enough to steal. Nadir wanted Gore to lose.

Nadir did some fine work before he lost his mind and his soul.

Nadir is worse than Bush. At least Bush admits to being a Republican

[JerseygirlCT]

17. I don't hate him, but I do think he's an egomaniac nt

[IndianaGreen]

19. As long as we blame Nader, or anyone else, for our woes

we will never engage in the healthy self-criticism that is necessary to win elections:

Who are we? A party of opposition, coalition, or simply a political club.

What do we stand for? For the war, or against it.

What are we willing to really fight for? Full rights for GLBTs, or second class citizenship.

[noonwitch]

20. I respect his work as a consumer advocate, but would never vote for him

I don't think he has the type of experience needed to be president. He should have started out running for congress or something if he wanted to build up a political career like that.

He has been a good consumer advocate.

[Senior citizen]

22. ROFLMFAO! $70 mil buys a lot of hate these days!

I'm so glad I posted this poll.

Thanks to whoever selected, "I'm paid to discredit him--what I feel doesn't matter," either for being honest, or for selecting the option that a lot of others would have selected if they could be honest.

Ralph's newest consumer protection organization is a straight anti-corporatocracy group called Citizen Works, or something like that.

I'm on the mailing lists for all the groups started by Nader.

For those who don't seem to know, Ralph was never a member of Skull and Bones, like Bush*'s friend Kerry. I don't think he actually took money from Republicans, but even if he had, there's no need to look that far for a Bush* friend when a fellow frat boy is available. In fact, in supporting the war, Kerry could be called a supporter of Bush* policy, and therefore a supporter of the Bush* campaign.

For the person who isn't sure what to think, why not google Nader and take a look at some of the web sites that come up. You may find that he is personally responsible for many of the things you appreciate in your life. Wouldn't that be a shock?

I also want to thank all the Nader-haters who refrained from obscenity and vulgarity for a change. You may think that's the way to reach the working class, but all it really does is show that you don't have any class at all.

[paulk]

26. if this thread is about Nader

why do you feel the need for a few gratuitous smears of Kerry? I don't see Kerry's name anywhere in your poll...

Just can't help yourself, Ralph?

[GreenPartyVoter]

24. Second choice for me

------------------------------------------------------
Join the new Boston Tea Party!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/index.htm#shopping

[messiah]

25. A moderate right leaning board voting on this? lol funny question

the results are already known.

[necso]

28. I am reserving final judgment

until it becomes clear what course he will take in the future.

Mr Nader is a good candidate to lead our anti-corporate efforts, since too close an identification with the Party has a downside.

If Mr Nader can do this, without dragging other personal objectives of his into the struggle, then I am all for it -- and I am ready to give him all that he is due for it.

[youngred]

29. other

I respect his work in the past, but think he's become egocentric and arrogant in the last 3 years. I don't blame him for 2000, there is plenty of blame to go around, but I think his actions since have had little to do with advancing progressive politics and more to do with self-aggrandizement

[txaslftist]

31. He's fighting the wrong battle...

Like many greens, he has the opinion that the salvation of the US lies in the democratic party, but the democratic party must be saved from itself first. Rather than leading us to salvation through participation, however, he feels that he must first chastise us, so we repent, by punishing us through public humiliation.

Make no mistake, Nader saw the election of 2000 as a victory, as an achievement, and as a validation of his position as spoiler. Blame for that debacle can be spread into a lot of different areas, and certainly FAUX, the Clenis, the wooden Gore, the fifth justice, and the crappy campaign by insiders can all share in the shame of the loss, but Nader played a role, too.

And when you defend him, be clear. He has never said one word of apology or regret for either the result or his participation in bringing the result about.

No, he is not a republican. No, he does not want the republican platform to become the American future. But he does want America to be so battered and abused by Republicans in the near term that they will "come to their senses" and do what is right, by either doing away with the democratic party altogether and going green (his ideal solution) or turning the democratic party green.

In this ambition, like in all of his ambitions, he is an idealistic fool. He fails to recognize both the loyalty and sense of tradition of the party of Jefferson. The democratic party is like a timex. We'll make a comeback that will be closer to what the country needs than his platform, and he will be just drag.

He is also a dangerous fool, because the American soul does not need saving. Our children and our soldiers need saving, and not in some distant and paridisical future, but right now.

You have today's official position from the Texas Leftist.

[Walt Starr]

32. He's the person that put me off to the Greens for life

:shrug:

[Senior citizen]

38. Maybe you're the person who put him off the Greens for life.

Although they endorsed him in 2000, Nader has never been a member of the Green Party.

:shrug:

[Walt Starr]

44. Doesn't matter to me. He was the GREEN CANDIDATE

in the election that put Bush in office. I hold him AND THE GREEN PARTY responsible for George W. Bush.

[DemGirl7]

39. I don't hate Nader...but I don't really like him either...

to me he is just there...I mean if he really wanted to win or to get his message across to the public he should acturally try selling his message, instead of being there and getting in the way somewhat, he has good ideas...but he is somewhat in the way...plus the fact that he was using republican money in the last election, he was being a hypocrite...even though we all are hypocrites.

[Catherine Vincent]

40. Nader is arrogant but he's no scumbag.

Now Congressman Dan Burton....remember him? He's a scumbag.

[despairing optimist]

41. Oh, am I glad I just participated in the poll

This thread is flame city.

[More Than A Feeling]

42. If I don't get a raise, I will stop discrediting him!

How do ya like them apples?;)

[Niccolo_Macchiavelli]

46. hmmm lets have a look

Votes for Bush: by the malicious and/or very gullible

Votes for Kerry: by the still gullible idealists

Votes for the Green: by the not gullible idealists

He was the least evil in the race in my opinion. At least not the outright evil of Bush and the veiled collaborator Kerry.

Unlike Bush and Kerry he belongs to the bottom league.

[Catchawave]

47. Ralph Nader signed "spoiler" t-shirt

http://www.independencegear.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=067&Category_Code=SP

[VOX]

48. He sacrificed his legacy for his ego.

By the time the right wing is through with this country, all the good works that Ralph did in earlier decades will be trashed, gutted -- and gone.

[malmapus]

49. He's a tool, he proved that in this election

What was he fighting for this time around? At least if he turned down the GOP backing he was getting I would think different. I don't hate him, but I lost respect for him.

[robbedvoter]

51. He brought us BFEE. Most recent contribution: right before this election

when the hot subject was the stolen explosive in Iraq, nader came out saying that this is BS, abd both parties should be talking about unemployment.
For those who forgot, it was a week before the election and it underscored the absurdity of the war/W's incompetence.

[Tinoire]

52. Lots of respect.

How coe people blaming Nader never once bring up the millions of Democrats who voted for Bush or the millions who couldn't even be bothered to vote? :shrug: Pffffft.

The more I learn about the DLC and the "New Democratics", the more I see Nader was right about how too similar both parties have become.

[Philly Buster]

54. Nader has done a lot for the average person in this country

His activism in consumer products has resulted in safer vehicles and products.

I am so sick of people blaming third party candidates when their guy loses. Face it, if it weren't for the Greens threatening to take away some votes, the Democratic Party would all but ignore it's base to go after the mushy middle which some pundits claim win elections. Greens are really Democrats fed up with DLC faction of the party. And I don't fault them for it.

Suppressing third parties is oppressive. (And a lot of states do exactly that by making ballot access tough for anyone but D's and R's.) They serve the purpose of keeping the other 2 parties' feet to the fire.

[Senior citizen]

56. Have you read "Dime's Worth of Difference"

edited by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair? It is a revelation. I knew Nader was right, but I sure didn't know how right he was.

[Tinoire]

59. Yes... Brilliant. & Had the same reaction

I agreed at the time and with each passing day, agree even more.

http://counterpunch.org/cockburn08112004.html

Strangely enough, the first one to say that "there ain't a dime's worth of difference" between the Repulbican and the Democratic Party was George Wallace. I was trying to find the link/context on Wallace saying that during the election between Richard Nixon and Hubert Humphrey but ran across this instead:

Today, candor compels us to admit that our vaunted two-party system is a snare and a delusion, a fraud upon the nation. Our two parties have become nothing but two wings of the same bird of prey. On foreign and trade policy, open borders and centralized power, our Beltway parties have become identical twins. Both supported NAFTA and GATT and the surrender of our national sovereignty to the WTO. Both supported the extension of nuclear war guarantees to the borders of Russia. Both supported the illegal war on Serbia. Both support IMF bailouts of corrupt regimes. Both vote for MFN trade privileges for a Communist Chinese regime that today targets missiles on American cities. The appeasement of Beijing is a bipartisian disgrace, and we will not be a part of it.

Pat Buchanan
http://suppressednews.com/mcinnish/mcinnish99/19nov99.htm

Lol, then found this one that practically had me laughing and crying at the same time! You really need to read the whole thing. I feel the poor man's pain!

George Wallace had it exactly right. While campaigning for president as an independent he said, `There's not a dime's worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans.'

I was thrilled at the Republican landslide last November. I really thought it would make a big difference. I'm 68 years old. You'd think I'd know better.

(snip)

Is it possible that I don't understand the problem? My hero, Rush Limbaugh, coming from the right, challenges that I must understand that `something must be done about Medicare--it will be broke in 2002.' Well, a pox on both their houses. I am willing to accept numbers that we say we can't keep spending at the current rate. I am also more than willing to cinch up my belt and contribute my share. But I am not willing to do it alone.

Limbaugh says the government has become a giant sow with everyone looking for a nipple. Well, he may be right. And I'll agree that one of the nipples may be labeled `Medicare,' but what about all the others?

I'll share my nipple as soon as there is an overall plan to get everyone else to do the same thing. No way will I agree to be penalized as long as I can stand in line at a 7-Eleven in Henderson, Nev., watching a young 30-something buy a package of gooey cinnamon buns with food stamps and then walk across the store to play the slot machine with the change she received in cash. My Medicare is threatened when there is a big new sign in front of the Subway sandwich restaurants announcing, `We now accept food stamps!' Food stamps to eat out! And my Medicare is the economic culprit?

(snip)

The Republicans are reported to be surprised to find from a survey that most people don't realize that Medicare and Social Security are separate and different. Oh, yeah? If so how come the Part B payment I must make for Medicare is deducted from my Social Security check? And where does that money go? Into a `trust fund'? Sure. Just like my 40 years of Social Security payments.

I accept as a fact that the Medicare program needs a close examination but I will not support any revisions that penalize me without correcting abuses that are financially impacting the system.

AARP is wrong. Limbaugh is wrong. George Wallace was right.

FROM THE FRESNO BEE, JUNE 10, 1995
- FRANK J. O'NEILL

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r104:E13JY5-112:

[elaineb]

53. Are the same people accusing Nader of putting Bush in office in 2000...

...willing to accuse Kerry for the same thing in 2004?

Damn, this continued bashing of Nader gets my back up!!

Look, Nader's losing the 2000 election didn't put Bush in office. He ended up in THIRD PLACE! It was *GORE'S* losing the 2000 election that put Bush in office. Be honest, be adult, and blame YOUR OWN CANDIDATE!

And if you want to blame those of us who voted our principles and beliefs and supported Nader in '00 for giving the presidency to Bush, then all I can say is "right back atcha". Because if ya'll had voted for Nader, then there wouldn't have been a problem. Nader would have been President. (God, what a magnificent thought). The solution would have been that simple. But you didn't vote with us Nader supporters, so in my mind, YOU put Bush in office.

Pointing out the forgotten obvious, by the way: Nobody knew just how bad a President Bush would turn out to be in 2000. He was just another typical conservative. I *might* have voted for Gore in 2000 if I'd known how awful Bush would be, but if I had, I would have been voting against my principles, because Nader's stance on issues still would have RULED over Gore's, in my mind.

Now I voted for Kerry in 2004. But he didn't win. If he didn't win because of voting machine shenanigans, then none of us are to blame. But if he didn't win because swing voters just didn't like him, then you and I who didn't insist on a candidate who represented ALL of us are to blame.

[Skittles]

55. sick

:puke:

[Pushed To The Left]

57. Very mixed feelings

I made some anti-Nader remarks here around election time. My only problem with Nader was that he had hurt Gore before, and I feared he would hurt Kerry's chances of winning as well. I don't think he was as much of a factor in 2004. On the other hand, he is definitely a progressive and very good on a lot of issues. He is very progressive on social issues like gay rights and the drug war. He seems like one of the good guys. I just wish he had gotten behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 instead of running against them and splitting the progressive vote. I was so angry about that!

[lojasmo]

58. No "yawn" response? N/T

[fujiyama]

60. He's irrelevant

He got less than 1% of the vote in '04.

Hell, we wouldn't be speaking about him at all, had he not been an ass hole and gone around spouting lies that Gore and Bush were the same.

He means nothing to politics and it will be tragic and unfortunate that the one thing he will be known best for is that he drew enough votes from Gore to let Bush take the '00 election.