RTF, I hope that my knee-jerk happens to be aimed squarely at the scrotum of afore-skin-mentioned Ralph Nader. That bastard took his supporters home, bent them over, gave 'em a pillow to bite down on, and didn’t even touch the Vaseline on the nightstand.
He could have negotiated with Gore; he could have thrown his weight when it stood to make a difference–when it looked too close to call; instead he sank the whole bloody ship and let a ten-year spread of ignorant voters play straight into the hands of the “free-market environmentalists” who with executive authority can pave half this fucking country and want to do it–and Nader, of all people, knew the odds. I want those who tossed their votes into the straight-piped primary-source sewer to know exactly what they did so we can avoid this the next time.
As we know, a few thousand voters would have made the election decisive, either way. This merely underscores my argument: the Naderites have trashed the very cause they purported to uphold.
And thank you, RTF for that last post, which is far more cogent than I can elucidate myself, particularly in my last fulmination. It’s obvious we agree on many things.
Norton’s first words: the Federal gov’t owns so many percent of land in the West, blahblahblah… That’s the set-up; here comes yet another resurrection of that bit where the US is somehow better represented by a bunch of welfare ranchers than by its gov’t.
Wasn’t Watt the one with the “Loose shoes, etc…” soundbite ? Which jerk picked this evil twit ? Cheney ? Baker ?
Sofa King, I am with you all the way on the environment and Bush, and I also voted for Gore with that reasoning in mind. But I still don’t think it makes sense to malign Nader. He raised a lot of awareness on some very important issues, including the environment. The Dems needed a wake-up call. There were more than 10,000 votes for the Socialist Worker’s Party in Florida! If you’re looking for someone to demonize, I recommend Antonin Scalia :).
Mandelstam, it could not possibly be simpler: in an election this close, he should have taken his ass * out of the race *. He could have. He was asked to. He didn’t. And as a result, we have George Bush picking people like Gale Norton to run the department of the Interior.
Nader kept saying there was no difference between Bush and Gore. He was lying.
blessedwolf said
“Well, we knew from the beginning that dubya was going to look out for the oil companies (while somehow avoiding the special-interest groups–it’s magic!). At least he didn’t let us down.”
Dubya was not looking to cozy up to the oil excutives??!?!?
What the?!??!
Cheyney is a former head of an Oil company
and one of his first few cabinet members is an oil tycoon who sinked $10 million into W.'s campaign!
How could he not be cozing up to the oil execs??!?!?
Stoidela, Greetings. I do understand the anger. But I also understand why Nader couldn’t have pulled out without disappointing a lot of people.
“Nader kept saying there was no difference between Bush and Gore. He was lying.”
I agree that there is a very great difference. But I understand why some people felt compelled to take a stand and would have felt betrayed had he pulled out and not given the Green Party its chance at 5%. Believe me, I am as revolted as anyone by the prospect of four Bush years. Everytime I see his photograph I physically wince.
Someone in The Nation pointed out that you could just as easily say that Buchanan lost the race for Bush in a few close states as that Nader had done it for Gore. And yet no one on the right was bashing Buchanan. I thought this was a good point.
The truth is that the American people need to be woken up from their stupor. Loads of them bought his unifier, moderate BS when, if they’d paid any attention at all, they would have known better. In that regard, I think Nader helped. In any case, things being what they are, I’d rather focus my anger on the likes of Scalia, Norton, Katherine Harris, etc., etc., than on Nader who, whatever, his faults, has devoted his life to a lot of causes I believe in.
I must have been away when Nader allegedly ass-raped his supporters … this is America, pal. We get ass-raped equally, and the W administration is exhibit A. I maintain that the blame for the legion of upcoming abuses by the W administration lies not with the handful of Nader voters, but with the millions of deluded dupes who were brainwashed into thinking that W was an acceptable choice. Why not blame the Socialists or the Libertarians? … Or by blaming Nader, are you just parroting what you heard from a few bitter Congressmen or media pundits?
Again, I should think there will be a lot of opposition to this nomination, and to freak out as if she’s already been confirmed and has approved H-bomb testing in the ANWR is premature. Yes it’s good to get organized. Yes, it’s correct to say that W will toady to the worst impulses of the right wing. But seriously, folks: what took you people so long to realize this?
It’s ironic, really. If it took the rise of an obvious shadow Christian-Corporate dictatorship to shake you complacent yuppies and show you that this game is played for real, and that there are forces which will screw you if they think you don’t care or aren’t watching, and that if people don’t get organized and act up right this minute then the dark side is going to wreck it all to satisfy their instant gratification, then Nader actually WON the election - or at least, the hearts and minds of the American people. Because that’s what he’s been saying all along.
The GOP is evil and a stake needs to be driven into its black heart. But if it takes something as bad as a W administration to slap you people in the head with a clue-by-four, then I welcome that development.
RTF: I parrot nothing. All of the research in the OP was conducted by me alone. And I note that it was posted only hours after the official nomination. The day prior, my two top guesses were Ben Campbell and (shudder) Slade Gorton. Norton didn’t even make the long list.
Even if the nomination is opposed, this may simply be a bowling-pin nomination designed to clear the path for Gorton, who would be worse and which other people have already noted. Regardless, as you suggested, the conservative hand is now played, and we’re all looking at four Aces of Spades.
I specifically blame the Nader voters, and Nader himself, because they had two clear choices for the future–Bush, or Gore. Their swing vote would have been influential, and before you accuse me of 20-20 hindsight I would point out that most media sources were calling the election a tossup well before that fateful Tuesday.
Those people had a responsibility that others did not have. Their commitment was to the preservation of our non-renewable resources–that’s the cornerstone of the Green Party platform. So when it became obvious that a “protest vote” had become a “swing vote,” the commitment to their ideals should have taken prevalence. And Nader himself should have spelled it out publicly.
Instead, he did the equivalent of razing the forests in order to say “I told you so.” That’s not responsible; in fact it completely discredits the Green Party as an entity which claims to uphold its ideals. For the next four years, Ralph Nader and his Green Party zealots are going to have to fiddle while a non-renewable Rome burns. I hope they brought along plenty of sheet music.
As for the irony, I cannot disagree. However, it could have been averted. It could have been averted by people realizing that sometimes pragmatism takes precedence over idealism, and those who ignored that also skipped a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to advance their agenda far beyond that which they will ever achieve by the ensuing destruction. I want those people to know that, because the rest of us need their support.
As an aside, this is just a brushfire compared to what’s going to happen when our complacent fellow Americans figure out what “strict constructionist” means.
Still holding my breath waiting for the saintly Demos to challenge any of Bush’s nominations. Don’t know how much longer I can hold out.
Here’s another grim thought - under Bush, the climate will be favorable for corporate mega-mergers! What a horrific change that’ll be from the Clinton years.
Sofa (if I may), I’m not sure what RTF was referring to specificially, but I have noticed a sudden spate of press about “the Nader effect.” I find it a bit strange that the media is suddenly paying attention to Nader’s effect when that effect has been transparent and undisputed since Election Day. The articles that I’ve read feature alleged ex-Naderites fuming at Nader’s egotism, etc. It occurs to me that this is a concerted ploy to defuse lingering questions about Bush’s legitimacy by making Nader into a convenient scapegoat for Gore’s “loss.” (I doubt anyone reading this thread questions Bush’s tentacles in the media so I won’t even try to justify that.) Although I haven’t been reading exhaustively, I’ve noticed little if anything on the subject of the Florida counts, but suddenly much on the subject of Nader’s “betrayal.” Doesn’t this seem suspicious to you?
I guess I’ve read the same articles, for example this one. These folks don’t appear to be “alleged ex-Naderites” but the real thing. And of course Conyers has no wish to further Bushism.
I think it’s more of an end-of-the-year wrap-up by news services than a directed effort to legitimize Bush. Also, I think it’s taken some Naderites this long to see just how abjectly they failed–2.6% of the vote not 5%, a resumption of regulation by industry, governmental exploitation of federal property.
Just stay tuned for the real spinning; Reagan/Bush Elder cronies equal Reagan/Bush Elder style newspeak.
Flowbark, Thanks for correction. More fool me for repeating something I’d heard in conversation (though with a reliable person, usually) without checking. If I am remembering my friend correctly, the unexpectedly large number of SWP votes had come in in Volusia County and this was one of those many strange things that were being reported in the immediate wake of the election. I’m not sure what happened to account for it, but perhaps you know. In any case, the point stands: one could conceivably blame Gore’s loss of Florida on those 562 measly SWP voters, whomever they are. But I’d rather focus on de-rigging the system. The larger point: divisiveness between Nader’s supporters and Gore’s is only going to help the cause of The Great Unifier.