Kerry 48, Bush 46; With Nader It's a Tie - How to remove Nader?

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=812

...or at least get mollify the Nader Repugs?

And before NaderTraitors slime back with "well are you scared?" answer in short - "FUCK YEAH!"

I don't want 4 more years of Bush. NaderTraitors do. They should just cash in on their trust funds now, ditch the Birkenstocks and become the Repugs they salivate about being once they turn 28...

I work for a living - so 4 more years of "Outsourcing is GOOD for the economy" won't cut it for me!

Great idea dude!

Besides, Nader's policies would bankrupt our country.

n/t

One can sound like a lot of things. If Kerry makes a proper effort directly at progressives (mainly throgh demonizing Bush), Nader will not be much of an issue in November. I'm glad at least it's alarming people enough to see the hill we have to climb. This doesn't require we cut aid to Israel or some such Nader policy.

ZERO and we need to keep it that way.

Wouldnt it be funny if we freeped the signup sheets?

How about if your candidate incorporated some of Nader's ideas, instead of Bush's ideas? Is that too obvious?

What specifically does Nader stand for? Seriously.

And Nader only.

I seriously think if the man ever got elected he'd end up running the country like those psychotic dictatorial idealogues we all feared (Pol Pot, Guzman from Cendero Luminoso, Mao Tse Tung, Stalin...etc)

then you're full of :hurts:

Idealogues don't make good politicians. Politicians need to be able to negotiate, especially when their party doesn't control any other branches of government. If you think Bush is bad, the one thing you can say is that workers get paid their paychecks at least. If Nader won, the economy and government would come to a grinding halt.

such nonsense, without any proof whatsoever. bush is hands down the worst thing to ever happen to this country...with reagan a close second. nader would be a breath of fresh air in comparsion.

Name ONE!

There have been many idealogues over time. Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung. Even if we're not talking dictator, one of the biggest problems with the early Carter administration is that they clung to ideals rather than reality and didn't comprimise with their own party. As a result, things were very shaky until they learned to play the game.

Politics is not a set of ideals; it is give and take. It's comprimise. It's "scratch my back, i'll scratch yours."

If Kerry wins, please understand that his hands WILL be tied. The Repugs own Congress and the Supreme Court. If Nader wins, government would come to a screeching halt.

and pointless...

<sigh> idealogues.

why "defend" something that's based on nothing but your beliefs and opinions? i would first have to agree that nader is an ideologue, of at least agree that your assessment of him has merit. i don't think it does...end of story. i think it is an accruate assessment of bush, though.

from the ashes.....nader rocks!

Didn't know we had our own faction here!

Wow - so what would you name the camps? Re-education? Re-NEDucation?

Because the KR and you hold the same idea - turn the clock back to DAY ONE.

forum wants change all i'm saying is sometimes you need to break a few
eggs i don't understand your reference to the kr

This is EXACTLY what the Khmer Rouge did. They tore down Cambodian society as it was 'polluted' with capitalism, forcibly moved the cities into the fields and systematically starved them to death. They abolished the calendar and called 1975 "Year 0." They elimnated cash, industry, writing, EVERYTHING MODERN. They weren't too far off from Ted Kaczynski (sp?) calling for an end to technology. Technology was their enemy - and they tried to start over from the ashes.

If that is what you mean by break some eggs, I'd rather not have the omlette thank you very much. That kind of thinking leads to very dangerous things....

the Khmer Rouge, Stalin? Do you honestly think you are going to convince any intelligent person of anything by casually throwing around the names of genocidal murderers? :argh:

I'm guessing the Greens will formally back Kerry (given his stellar environmental record, that's not a stretch)

Nader is running as an independent. Chances are he's just going to be one big whinefest. Uniting all the trustfund whiners.

anymore than you know who democrats who voted for bush in 2000 will vote for. i just hope the republicans don't steal the election...again.

You can count on it.

Just as a dog will always return to where it can get food
Just as a kid will steal cookies as long as he can get away with it

As long as we reward the GOP with NaderTraitors, giving them the edge to steal, they will do it.

while their voters got disenfranshised.

he never was, he just ran on their ticket

http://votenader.org/issues/index.php
Educate yourself.

Not gonna post it here.

But basically Kerry has the SAME platform!

And we all know Nader doesn't really support that, otherwise he'd be backing Kerry!

I love George Carlin, but I disagree with him -- there is a choice. Kerry will do very well -- he has made courageous decisions in the past. And we must get rid of Bush if we want to have any civil rights left. Please, Nader people, vote for Kerrey -- and get Bush out of office. Kerry will listen to all factions -- Bush absolutely will not.

As much as that guy hates the religious right, he really doesn't see a difference. Please tell me he didn't say that.

Hannity had to open his big mouth afterwards.

structure whatsoever. After all, I want certain businesses to do well in certain environments. After all, I take the profits from our small business -- to help liberal causes!

...and Kerry or any of his people flailing away at Nader will only make the situation worse.

If Kerry just keeps on course, doing what he is doing, then Naders numbers are going to go down.

The initial number of 7% attributed to Nader was an angry reaction immediately following the primaries. These numbers are lower, and I predict that in a few months Nader will be at 2% tops.

I also predict that if Kerry does nothing to inflame him that Nader will drop out and throw his tentative support to Kerry.

And his support among likely voters is considerably less than among registered voters.

The reason people leave a party is because they feel that that party does not represent them. If you want Nader voters, you have to earn them...and saying "we're not as bad as Bush" doesn't earn anyone anything.

would rather see Bush in the White house than a Democrat. Why should we pander to them, especially if we would loose more votes in the center than we would gain from them?

would rather see nader in the white house

they obvisouly are OK with having Bush there instead of a Democrat, otherwise they'd do something constructive about it.

But that might be hard since they don't have jobs, and don't plan on working for a living.


No worker in their right mind would vote for Nader.

fun, and right on, but a waste of time. He has every right to run for president, dogcatcher, or whatever. We Dems fight for his political beliefs as well as our own.

Get pictures of him dumping mercury into a salmon stream or beating a baby seal with a baseball bat.

I know, I know, it's extreme. But someone has to save democracy!

Okay, that was bad taste, I know.

I fell out of my chair (drafting stool too - man that hurt)

But I love it!

Someone photoshop it! Nader dumping mercury on top of a baby seal swimming in a salmon stream wearing a baseball cap!

the description of your pictures, or that you actually think that would "save democracy"

I don't think he was seriously advocating that...and I found it funny.

unless Nader actually gets on the ballot. Some pollsters, including Rasmussen, aren't including Nader in their polls because they ultimately don't believe he'll be a factor. As for the Zogby poll, a tie means Kerry wins because the challenger gets the overwhelming majority of the undecided vote.

and IF the supremes don't enter the fray...again.

that'll show that ego maniac

or tennessee? so we don't see a repeat of 2000.

about nader would be interested in actually doing something to make sure kerry wins :shrug:

I live in this state called California, it's on the other side of the world.

I'd love to spend November in Florida, however, and will take the time off if someone pays for it. You see, I work for a living, and I don't have a trust fund.

just offering you a suggestion on how to make sure kerry wins...since you asked.

Since I can take the day off....

i am doing the same.

about nader would be interested in actually doing something to make sure kerry wins :shrug:

Nader and his apologists are a reality. To quote General Sherman, "You may as well appeal against a thunderstorm."

He will not help anyone but his repuke buddies, so we have to win with him in the race.

I think the American People are waking up to the reality though. I very much doubt at the end of the day that the abysmal lie "There is no difference" will have much appeal. Our country is in a tailspin into the abyss, and at the end of the day, people will recognize the cause.

Fuck Nader. Fuck his minions. Once we've won we merely need to let the full force of the contempt they deserve fall on them.

We're sick of losing elections. Especially when we win them. Especially when a spoiler helps the opponent get the edge they need. And especially when that spoiler is too thick skulled to realize they are part of the problem.

then why dont you examine your candidate(s) platform(s). one poster already suggested you urge your candidate to adopt some of nader's platform. but apparently you do not equate issues with electorial polotics. we need some of the more "fringe" issues to get inacted (like real campaign finance reform) if the dem candidates would pick some of these issues up they would carry more votes. instead you choose to ignore the issues and go down in a blaze of "nader'ssssssssssssssssssssssss faultttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt!"

Fuck people who say Fuck his minons!

and Bush wins, I hope you guys jail cells are separated from ours.

Nader's left-of-center swing state supporters are politically mentally impaired. They're the ones still with blood on their hands from 2000. They're the ones who vote for the coat hangers, for second class citizenship on homosexuals, for executing minors and mentally challenged, and on and on. Is this shooting the progressive cause in the foot? No - it's shooting the progressive cause in the head.

And no, I'm not saying it's totally their fault that we lost in 2000. Gore's campaign could have been improved. The GOP cheated. The Supreme Court is corrupt. I rail against all of these like I rail against Fake Progressive Nader. But what I am saying is that in a difficult fight with odds like this, we don't need yet another variable stacking-up against us - we don't need to take any chances with the Chimp. And Nader, by running, is doing exactly that.. lengthening the odds.

blood on the hands of nader 2000 voters?
or
poor gore campaign + fraud and corruption?

I blame them ALL.

if gore's campaign was less than desireable, how can you blame someone for voting for another candidate? and if there was coruption and fraud, doesnt that trump any votes cast by whoever. if a sniper shoots a football player before he can cross the goaline and score the winning td, is it the fans' fault for not cheering loud enough for the loosing team?

Several events can all add-up together to cause another event.

but in the case of the coup of 2000, that is not the case. a full state recount in florida would have proven gore the winner. the votes for nader did not matter. gore did not pursue a full state wide recount. gore laid down and in doing so cost himself, the dem party and the american people the election. he could have been an american hero, instead he turned his back on the folks who voted for him.

Stop being so black and white. You remind me of a fundy Christian!

It isnt a matter of this OR that. It's a matter of the perfect storm. Gore didn't run the best campaign, but it was good enough to win without a spoiler. Unfortunately, there was a spoiler working for the GOP. That, matched with the disenfranchisement gave Bush a hairline of an edge - just enough to win.

If Nader didn't run, in Florida there would have been no contest, and Gore would have won. We wouldn't be at war, and Nader might be able to look in the mirror and not see a Republican face leering back at him.

okay......you remind me of of of oh never mind

comparing planed human events (coup of 2000) to unpredictable weather patterns is just plain off the mark. post 70 was a better response. keep at it though kid

But without the NaderTraitors, Gore would have won. End of story.

end of story.

And for the life of me I will never understand why Gore didn't bring up the disenfranchisement...the phony felon lists..etc...

To be honest tho, I think Gore saw the writing on the wall. The Repubs stole it, and they were not going to give up, and he wasn't going to win.

He should have at least brought it up tho....

i wanted him to run again...just so the entire issue of 2000 could be revisited. i don't blame gore...it wasn't just him...it was the party leadership.
the cowardice was unforgivable, imho. even if the fix was in (and it was), the democrats should have put up more of a fight.

But a vote for Nader doesn't help anything. It simply makes it worse.

but a vote for a third party might help that party get 5% and matching funds in the next election. since the mainstream dem party does not want to address the most important issues, perhaps i will look for a party that will

and Kerry's platform almost matches Naders.

I think you either (1) are really Republican or (2) like living under a tyrranical state.

Because that is exactly what happens when Bush wins...

This proves the opposite. And there are similar numbers in Pennsylvania, a key state.

Of course, there were similar statistics proving it in 2000, but they overlook that as well.

"if we ignore it it will go away." That just might prove suicidal this time around as well.

Honestly, Kerry should counter Nader at every move - seeing him as every bit the enemy Bush is.

Kerry should take out ads in the lefty mags, showing his (stellar) environmental record. Nader has no ground when compared to that.

on the environment. Then show the Clinton/Gore years environmental record vs. the Bush years.

Have you seen his one ad to date?

YAWN.

SNORE.

He looks to the upper right corner as he reads a cue card with so much conviction (for "much" read "LITTLE") that he makes Al Gore look like William Shatner on dope by comparison! And Gore was an energy deprived robot during election 2000...

Unless Kerry gets some chutzpah, I think we're screwed.

His new ad is like a bloop single to shallow left field, drops in for a single. Safe at first. Snoooooore . . . . .

will vote for Nader. The Nader voters did not have the ability to comprehend what their silly "protest vote" would do to this country. I think they have learned their lesson. No matter what the polls say now they will not be stupid enough to waste their vote on a fringe candidate like Nader.