Here we go again with Mr. Nader

[dgriffin]

Consumer advocate Nader starts presidential bid

tinyurl.com/37wg76

The entire Republican Party thanks you, Mr. Nader.

[frankcor]

Actually, many within the Democratic party will thank him, too. It will force the eventual candidate to stick to their progressive roots. Nader points out that his candidacy earned more votes for Gore than he would have gotten without Nader in the race because it forced Gore more to the left.

[dgriffin]

Hmmmmmm. Ya think? A turn left for Gore would have generally been considered to have cost him votes, I thought, and Democrats I know (liberals all) feel Nader was detrimental, but I'm no expert.

[froggy]

dgriffin said:

Hmmmmmm. Ya think? A turn left for Gore would have generally been considered to have cost him votes, I thought, and Democrats I know (liberals all) feel Nader was detrimental, but I'm no expert.

Nader will be a vote splitter, but unlike previous elections, I think enough people have figured him out as to negate whatever effect they think he will have. He's either insane to think he stands any chance, or he's a pawn being manipulated to draw away from Democrats again. Either way I think enough people can figure out the significance of his insignificance that his candidacy is nothing more than a draw away from the other parties. Its not going to work this time.

[dgriffin]

Froggy, I'm not sure of this, but I think I read that Nader draws less each time he steps up to the plate, so you may be on the right track.

[rrogers40]

dgriffin said:

Froggy, I'm not sure of this, but I think I read that Nader draws less each time he steps up to the plate, so you may be on the right track.

Yea hes like the Anti-Obama personality wise so my guess is that hes going to get eaten alive by Obama if Clinton doesn't steal the nomination. If she does steal the nomination than OMG watch out for the flying debris once known as the Democratic Party.

[dgriffin]

So, HC would go back to being in the Senate. Then what? Would you say she's finished?

[frankcor]

No matter how I feel about Nader's politics, I have to admire his ability to argue his points. I think he'd chew up Obama in any format of debate and spit him out. It would take someone with the speaking skills of Mario Cuomo to hold their own against the likes of Nader.

I would never want to be in an argument with either Cuomo or Nader. I'd be hard pressed to decide which of them is farther to the left, though.

[dgriffin]

I agree with your admiration of Nader. And he is one of the few public personages of whose sincerity you could convince me. I think he lives his beliefs. Cuomo, I admire only his skills. Do you remember the bi-weekly show ("Mario and Me") on WAMC, the albany NPR station) (you must have at least one of their repeaters in CNY) where Mario was interviewed by that little squirt who runs the station, draws salaries from TWO suny colleges (New Paltz and Albany) and has a weekly newspaper column and an opinion on EVERYTHING? He was the guest political analyst on the one of the Albany TV stations, until everyone got tired of him, most noticeably the anchorman.

[froggy]

dgriffin said:

I agree with your admiration of Nader. And he is one of the few public personages of whose sincerity you could convince me. I think he lives his beliefs..

I don't think there is any disputing the admiration for Nader and all that he has accomplished for the American people. He's probably done more for the people than most ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE politician. That is the irony of it. To this day, I believe he still walks to work, correct me if I am wrong.

But it still doesn't take away from one major fact. He is not an electable candidate. He has got to know that. Money talks, money fuels elections, he is not on the side of money. That is the unfortunate part, he is genuine in his mission but yet a guy like him can't get elected. And as part of the voting public, I share in this frustration as I view most of the candiates as full of hot air, or have businesses in their back pockets, or just know how to sweet talk. Of all candidates right now, only two stand out as somewhat generally noble, not including Nader. That would be Barack Obama and Ron Paul. Ron Paul has enough testicular fortitude to stand there and actually say why 911 happened, that the US is partially to blame for it. And his is right, US foreign policy of the last many years has done more to put us at risk and alienate the US from the rest of the world than any other time. Unfortunately, because he's viewed as a radical in some respects, he won't ever sit in the Oval office either.

As far as Obama is concerned, I think he is the better of the two, he or Hillary that is. I was crossed between the two at Primary time. But then her "crying tears" in New Hampshire gave me pause. Then I realized how tied into big business she really is, so it made my chioce clear and I pulled the lever for Obama.

[frankcor]

Nader remains steadfast in his belief that he is giving the people a choice that no other candidate for either major party offers: an honest person of integrity. He will never apologize for that.

Froggy, it appears you didn't vote FOR Obama, but voted AGAINST Hillary. It saddens me that so many times that's the only choice we're ever given.

[froggy]

frankcor said:

Froggy, it appears you didn't vote FOR Obama, but voted AGAINST Hillary. It saddens me that so many times that's the only choice we're ever given.

No, I actually voted for Obama and against Hillary. I think he's a much better candidate, a much more honest candidate (if there is such a thing in politics), and overwhelmingly a very intriguing and captivating speaker. I think what the country needs is a young, fresh face, who isn't hooked into big business, as is the case with most of the alternatives. Unfortunately, I thought that way of Tim Julian also, when he replaced Hanna and that didn't work out so good.

In 2004, my vote for Kerry was a vote against Bush. Unfortunately, Kerry was not a "real" candidate. He was viewed as the lesser of two evils, or the better of two bad choices. I was almost swayed to vote for Nader, but realized it would be a vote for naught.

Also, at some point, I did view Mc Cain as a very good candidate, up until last year when he started to seem very off.

[thelma]

I, .p0ersonally, don't think Obama or Hillary are qualified to be our next President. I don't like Hillary's platform and the things she believes our County "needs". Obama is a "smooth talker" but doesn't have the backbone or experience to fight for some of his platforms that he believes in. I like the idea he is against the shipping of all our manufacturing goods to foreign countries (that Bill Clinton pushed thru), but I don't believe he could ever put a stop to it at this point.

[froggy]

thelma said:

Obama is a "smooth talker" but doesn't have the backbone or experience to fight for some of his platforms that he believes in.

The experience, its a double edged sword. Yes, he doesn't have a lot of experience in public policy, so it has its downside. But on the upside, he's a new player to the game, which means he has less people to owe favors to later on. That upside to me is worth the chance, to have someone with less outside influencers, pulling the strings and pushing the buttons.

[thelma]

How about "backbone", Froggy? It takes a lot of determination and inner strength to go up against the power makers in Washington, DC.

Are you willing to risk our Country to someone who really has not proven his capabilities as one who can lead and defend our entire Country?

Gotta run for awhile now..................