Ralph Nader?

You have got to be kidding me. Does he realize he could siphon off the more liberal democrats and then Bush would waltz right into 4 more years?

I really feel that he's doing it for himself this time. I pray he doesn't get a lot of support and people are smart enough to use their votes strategically.

There still isn't enough momentum for his Green and/or Independant party. I think he should start out small with local and state governments, then build themselves up to the national stage. But going right for national when you KNOW he's only going to get maybe 3% of the vote? He's backpedaling on himself.

He is an idiot.

No worse than Al Sharpton running.

He's the most rational presidential candidate I've ever heard in my lifetime - a guy who has spent his career as a successful consumer advocate.

We need to establish a third party (as many civilized coutries have at least that many) and get big business out from under the desks of politicians. There are almost no differences among Republicrats nowadays because they are ALL corporate pawns and career politicians who are out of touch with the 9-to-5 exploited Worker. Corporate welfare, environmental exploitation, the health care disaster, war on drugs, the military-industrial complex - he's the only guy whose views make sense to me on these subjects.

I think he should have stuck with us Greens, but I voted for him in '00 and I'm voting for him in November. Take a look at what he says and what he's done throughout his career at the very least before you call him an "idiot".

Nope, idiot

I agree there should be more parties, but they need to be built from the ground up. I think he's got an excellent stance and if he had a viable chance, I would probably consider my vote with him.

Think of when you're voting for Nader, you're taking away a vote from the viable democrat, which will result in another 4 years of Bush. I have no problem with Nader running, but not this election. It's too serious. There's a lot to lose in this one. By voting for the best, you're going to end up with the worst.

We don't want that now, do we?

Bush is a powerhouse this coming election and it's going to be a tough race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Nope, idiot

---

Indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drewmaztech

I agree there should be more parties, but they need to be built from the ground up. I think he's got an excellent stance and if he had a viable chance, I would probably consider my vote with him.

Think of when you're voting for Nader, you're taking away a vote from the viable democrat, which will result in another 4 years of Bush. I have no problem with Nader running, but not this election. It's too serious. There's a lot to lose in this one. By voting for the best, you're going to end up with the worst.

We don't want that now, do we?

Bush is a powerhouse this coming election and it's going to be a tough race.

---

Nah, I'd vote for the socialist candidate before I'd vote democrat if Nader wasn't running. There's some legitimacy to that argument, but it's this sort of thinking that keeps a third party from starting. It's the only thing (voting) that we have control of, and votes are the only things that can build another party.

So vote Green in 2008. https://forums.windrivers.com/images.../2006/04/1.gif

Personally I can't stand the man.He built his reputation on "Unsafe at Any Speed" , the book that destroyed Chevys Corvair. I had a Corvair at the time, drove hell out of it like most kids do ..........it never rolled , flipped or anything else , was great in snow and got 28 mpg which was fantastic at the time.I'm a firm believer he was a bullsh**er then and is an even bigger bullsh**er now! Bit then I guess thats why he's in politics !

If it weren't for him, we'd have Al Gore in the White house. And obviously if Kerry looses a tight election we'll have our 'consumer advocate' Ralph Nader to thank.

I wonder how he thinks the Environment will fair under 4 more years of Dub'ya. I think he's senile. Worse than that he's a traitor.... :flames: :flame:

I had thought the Green party was not going to run a candidate this election so that they would not siphon votes from the Dem. in order to get Bush out. Odd.


Oh, also note that the republican party and Democrat party have not been around forever and it is not uncommon in our system for someone like the green party or a libertarian to find a place in our political system with all of the former voters from 1 party comming to it. I would not be shocked to see one or both of these parties come to power in our future and the old guard left on the wayside or absorbed in the change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovetheusers

I had thought the Green party was not going to run a candidate this election so that they would not siphon votes from the Dem. in order to get Bush out. Odd.


Oh, also note that the republican party and Democrat party have not been around forever and it is not uncommon in our system for someone like the green party or a libertarian to find a place in our political system with all of the former voters from 1 party comming to it. I would not be shocked to see one or both of these parties come to power in our future and the old guard left on the wayside or absorbed in the change.

---

Nader's actually running as an indy this year.

I'd love to see some revolution.

BTW, lots of Greens are running in local and state elections around the country - give change a chance!

Then let them grow the party from the ground up, rather then top down. We do need some better party choices, but this isn't the right way. He is just going to seriously piss a lot of people off this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Nope, idiot

---

Yep, Nader sucks and blows

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkstar

Nader's actually running as an indy this year.

---

He's making Bush happy and Democrats sad now. He's doing the "right" thing but he's taking votes away from someone who is closer politicaly to his own goals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovetheusers

He's making Bush happy and Democrats sad now. He's doing the "right" thing but he's taking votes away from someone who is closer politicaly to his own goals.

---

Yes, I think there's some credence to this, but when will this not be the case for a third candidate? The same thing was said about Ross Perot. You could say this every time, and that's what both parties want people to think when they see a 3rd party threat. No better time to start than the present for revolution.

I think people generally believe there are a lot more differences between Dems and Repubs than there really are. In theory yes, but in real action, no. Perhaps on the local/state level. Not on the US congressional level and up. They're all pretty much the same corrupt bastards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkstar

Yes, I think there's some credence to this, but when will this not be the case for a third candidate? The same thing was said about Ross Perot. You could say this every time, and that's what both parties want people to think when they see a 3rd party threat. No better time to start than the present for revolution.

I think people generally believe there are a lot more differences between Dems and Repubs than there really are. In theory yes, but in real action, no. Perhaps on the local/state level. Not on the US congressional level and up. They're all pretty much the same corrupt bastards.

---

We are on similar pages but I disagree about the Dems and Repubs not being similar.

The real difference comes in so called "moral" agendas. I.E. things that government should probably stay the heck out of in the 1st place. The similarity comes in spending which they both do in ample amounts. No matter which side you get you will wind up with larger government, more taxes and more spending on any given issue.

Pseudo edit - While writing this I started to think of how many differences they do have and they examples are far more ample than the similarities but the thing is, they are the things that matter the least, well at least to me. Things like sex ed., religion in government, abortion, death penalty and other issues that really should only glanced at by government but they get top billing. Meanwhile issues like a budget no over 3 trillion dollars and a tax burden of about 40% for most individuals often times takes a back seat. The insane taxes, lack of services for the money spent and the like are insane. We are getting away from being a capitalist republic and we are becoming a socialist state. Drug policies that cause more harm than help. The baby boomers getting older and nearing retirement and the lack of services and money for their care and the crisis it will bring. Etc. Etc.

Basically what I’m getting at is that they both put important issues at rest while morality driven issues take the front seat. That’s BS and the parties in charge now are not getting done the things that they need to get done IMHO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Then let them grow the party from the ground up, rather then top down. We do need some better party choices, but this isn't the right way. He is just going to seriously piss a lot of people off this year.

---

I hardly EVER get into politics but I will totally aggree with this!!!! *Stands up and applauds Cleetus!!!!*

And , the man who can manage to organize this 3rd party and build it into something that can compete with the Donkeys and the Elephants Will have my Vote!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovetheusers

We are getting away from being a capitalist republic and we are becoming a socialist state. Drug policies that cause more harm than help. The baby boomers getting older and nearing retirement and the lack of services and money for their care and the crisis it will bring. Etc. Etc.

---

I disagree. I think we are finally feeling the theoretical and realistic downside of capitalism. The disparity between the working class and those who benefit on the backs of the working-class Joe-Six Pack is at an all-time high. Think about what you do and what the CEO of your company does and how you both got there. The ability for the average person to move upward in our society is almost nonexistent - nothing like it was in post-WWII America for example.

Those people who exploit the working class do their best to band together and perpetuate their power through nepotism and cronie-ism. It takes millions of dollars to run for a two-year term in the House of Reprsentatives, for example. That alone pretty much prohibits anyone who has ever known what a 9-to-5 day-to-day, bill-paying grind, is like from leading our country and making decisions in our best interest.

Your examples (which I agree with) are not of socialism, but what socialism is theoretically designed to prevent. Your examples are more of an ill-ran capitalist society. I love my country, but there is sooo much more potential that could benefit the whole human race here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkstar

I disagree. I think we are finally feeling the theoretical and realistic downside of capitalism. The disparity between the working class and those who benefit on the backs of the working-class Joe-Six Pack is at an all-time high. Think about what you do and what the CEO of your company does and how you both got there. The ability for the average person to move upward in our society is almost nonexistent - nothing like it was in post-WWII America for example.

Those people who exploit the working class do their best to band together and perpetuate their power through nepotism and cronie-ism. It takes millions of dollars to run for a two-year term in the House of Reprsentatives, for example. That alone pretty much prohibits anyone who has ever known what a 9-to-5 day-to-day bill-paying grind is like from leading our country amd making decisions in our best interest.

Your examples (which I agree with) are not of socialism, but what socialism is theoretically designed to prevent. Your examples are more of an ill-ran capitalist society.

---

This is where we part company and you are in the Green party and I am closer to being a Libertarian (I'm non party). My feeling is that the vast majority of people are better off than ever before faster than any other system has brought about prosperity. And, if we didn't have the enormous tax burden asociated with all of the social spending that we would have a heck of a lot more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilovetheusers

This is where we part company and you are in the Green party and I am closer to being a Libertarian (I'm non party). My feeling is that the vast majority of people are better off than ever before faster than any other system has brought about prosperity. And, if we didn't have the enormous tax burden asociated with all of the social spending that we would have a heck of a lot more.

---

You say there is too much of a social spending and tax problem, but before you said there isn't enough money for social security for care of the elderly. You can't have one without the other. The problem is the inefficient allocation of those tax burdens. True socialism eliminates these inefficiencies.

Libertarianism always seemed to me to be way too much "survival of the fittest" with the millionares being the "fittest". It essentially wants no regulation on things and is compassionless and perhaps a bit racist. For the eccentric, non-republican rich or poor anarchists.

I like this discussion, though :)

I don't believe I wrote all of this:

Well, if you look into other post I've put up I'm for reform of SS. The crisis with the elderly is going to come to a head and I don't know what's going to happen if "we the people" don't pony up for them. Either way, I don't have a fully formed opinion of what to do for those presently in the system but think that those who are still working could or should be given alternatives. I like forward thinking rather than the patchwork that government/business usually call the norm.


I do understand you position on "survival of the fittest" and why you might be apprehensive. I don't agree fully with the "total free enterprise" model the libertarians want. I do know that business owners are "greedy" or whatever term you wish to apply. Still, capitalism works faster and better than any other system in getting the most people a better life and I feel that history proves it. No it's not perfectly equal for all but nothing ever is. Sure some will fall to the way side but most of those people would have would up there no matter the system. Some people simply wind up in a bad way due to bad luck, economic downturn and the like and I do feel a need for a small safety net. You may call me callous or cruel for stating that some people with F up no matter what but I’m just being honest. I don’t feel that Ernie the crack head or Ray the smack fiend (I actually knew both of them) became what they are due to bad luck but due to bad decisions and create a major drain on resources that should be directed to those who really need them like the young lady with few job skills that got pregnant and the father disappeared. If you think I’m cruel for saying “to hell with Ray and Ernie” then we just have a fundamental difference in opinion.

I personally do not bear a grudge towards persons with a lot of money. They are the proof that the system can work for you if you work hard and maybe have a little luck. Sure a lot of people inherited that money but a lot of them earned it. CEO and other top level executives should earn more due to the weight upon them and the fact that many of them sacrifice friends and family for business. I do agree that the salaries for many a person are simply out of touch with reality. Our former CEO was getting millions each year which seems crazy when we were looking for ways to cut the budget all over. Thing is that he grew a multi billion dollar corporation from a single mom and pop business. So, doesn’t he deserve the payoff? I do know that’s the best case but it is true and I work for that company. Though we do need more $$$ and benefits I’m actually happy to have the job in a place where I have been recognized and promoted several times.

Anyway, I’m getting off track but then again maybe I’m a good example. I’m lucky – I have 2 parents who both give a damn about their children before themselves. I did nothing with my life after 18 and squandered my college years and worked a low paying retail job while keeping the party going for as long as I could, living next to cokeheads, junkies and crack heads with 4-6 room mates. I made a choice to slack off then one day something clicked and with support from my grandmother I was able to go to school, got straight A’s and got a job working for more money than ever before. Hard, hard work has paid off and a willingness to keep learning about anything thrown at me will keep paying off.

Now, I was lucky. My GF I presently live with didn’t have it so good but poor decisions kept her in place as much as circumstance. She was pregnant at 20 and the father turned out to be irresponsible, drunk and didn’t care enough about the child to get his $h!t together. She eventually left him and struck out on her own with little support from family (they had their own problems). They lived with crack heads and roaches and didn’t have but what was given to them for a long time and just got by, barely. Lack of family support and a system that does not demand fathers care for their children over all other needs and bad credit kept her where she was. Still, once I got to know her and her situation a little better I saw that many a bad decision would knock her back whenever she was starting to get ahead just a little. With every stride forward there was something she did to knock her back and it became apparent that many of the issues in her life were up to her and she was the one keeping herself where she was to no small extent. Whether it was depression about her situation, lack of support from others or the meager $30 a week in child support what the solution came down to was the proverbial “boot in the @$$” that she needed to get her going. We now live together and she’s paying off her old debts and eventually will have good enough credit for us to buy a house together and we can have a child together.

Maybe struggling to get by and doing things the right way is not your idea of utopia or maybe it’s just not what you feel is the best for everyone but I disagree. I take all the hardship in stride and when I come out on top in the end, I’m damn proud. Maybe I’m crazy or vain but I’m damn proud that I can give a kid and a woman a far better future and vise versa. I get up in the morning, get the kid to school and get to work and most days work my butt off (not today obviously) and even work a second job so that I can have the little things I want and will want in the future. My pride comes from the fact that I tried and I did it and most importantly that I keep on doing it and not just for me.

The end.

Prologue: Ray is dead or in jail and Ernie is probably the same and no one probably cares but that was their decision and their cross to bear, not yours, not mine. They didn’t try, they kept not trying and paid the price. If that makes me cruel to think that way then call me a monster like others here have but that’s the way I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkstar

Nah, I'd vote for the socialist candidate before I'd vote democrat if Nader wasn't running.

---

I thought they were the same thing. Hmmm :flame:


But anyways. I really do not think that changes for things like medicare, social security, and other things that are designed for the elderly will ever be made right since all of the members of congress will never ever be subjected to these things because of the nice neat little cushy pensions they get. If they were faced with these things for themselves, then maybe they would get their useless arses in gear and fix it.