He is wealthy and lives a simple life.
He does have an opportunity to air his problems with the government we have allowed to be created. A platform to educate and hopefully raise a few converts.
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
He does have an opportunity to air his problems with the government we have allowed to be created. A platform to educate and hopefully raise a few converts.
[/QUOTE]
So you admit that this is not a serious run for the presidency, but just a way to get publicity for his views?
Wheres’ the fun in that. ?
[QUOTE=gonzomax]
Wheres’ the fun in that. ?
[/QUOTE]
This type of “fun” subverts the political process and gave us Bush. Why don’t you go have fun on your own dime?
That’s a pretty fucked up way of having “fun”. If you say the problem is people that are wealthy and get to use the presidency as their soapbox, then you have to say that Nader’s at LEAST being a dick for just wanting to be heard. Take an ad out in the paper or something. Get a Google ad, rent a blimp, do something else.
With that being said, Nader isn’t even close to relevant anymore. He may be right about campaigns being taken over by commercial interests (or so I feel), but the people that would have voted for him or the ones that did vote for him last time (myself included) aren’t doing so this time because we’re voting for Obama.
On the other hand, you have to respect him going up there and failing a bunch of times. I mean that seriously, too. If he really means what he says and believes it, then I’m for him sticking around and failing some more.
Look at his choice for vice president. You can’t tell me that Nader is serious with someone like that for Veep.
The other side of that is if someone REALLY doesn’t think the Dem’s have any of the answers then they should vote for someone who they think does. Personally I’m with the rest of you…Nader isn’t a serious contender and frankly I think someone who opposed a Republican in the WH should hold their nose and vote for whoever the Dem’s nominate (probably going to be Obama…which I would think would make it easier to hold one’s nose and vote for him as opposed to Clinton).
-XT
[QUOTE=ch4rl3s]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan
Because voting is an excercise of political power, not a form of self-expression.
Sigh… Right, 'cause it’s all about winning. (sarcasm mode) Because you’re not excercising political power unless your guy wins. So make sure you only vote for the sure thing, even if he doesn’t represent your views, 'cause that’s the way to get a politician’s attention. (sarcasm mode off)
Come on. Would anyone advocate switching from Dem to Rep if it was evident the Dem’s didn’t have a snowballs chance? To hell with the two party system, let’s make it a one party system, then everyone’s represented 'cause they all voted for the winner. (oops, there was a bit more sarcasm there.).
[/QUOTE]
I never said don’t vote unless it was a sure thing. But Nader isn’t even a sure thing…he has zero chance of winning. If there was even a 25% chance of him winning, go ahead and vote for him. he may pull an upset. But come november I’m betting he’ll be a foregone conclusion as far as actually winning goes. Maybe the people voting for him in the election will walk to the voting booth and at least save themselves some gas because that’ll be the only thing they’ll achieve.
[QUOTE=Czarcasm]
He still pushes the tired and disproved meme that Democrats and Republicans are basically the same party.
[/QUOTE]
Disproved? Seems like a hard thing to disprove - it depends on your views and disposition.
[QUOTE=SenorBeef]
Disproved? Seems like a hard thing to disprove - it depends on your views and disposition.
[/QUOTE]
Or whether you’ve followed the news for the last 71/2 years.
[QUOTE=Jolly Roger]
But Nader isn’t even a sure thing…he has zero chance of winning.
[/QUOTE]
It’s difficult to imagine what could be more sure…
That who ever the Libertarian’s and Communist’s run will do worse?
-XT
[QUOTE=xtisme]
The other side of that is if someone REALLY doesn’t think the Dem’s have any of the answers then they should vote for someone who they think does. Personally I’m with the rest of you…Nader isn’t a serious contender and frankly I think someone who opposed a Republican in the WH should hold their nose and vote for whoever the Dem’s nominate (probably going to be Obama…which I would think would make it easier to hold one’s nose and vote for him as opposed to Clinton).
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Those Dems that are voting that are anti-Bush have the same fervor, if not, more, than the anyone-but-Clinton people, I’d say.