Nader accepts sigs from republicans

[Montgomery-Scott]

Recently in the news, I saw that Nader wouldn't be able to get on the ballot in many battleground states. I cheared with joy. But then, they said that he did -- with the help of the republican party. The republican party came out en masse for Nader, gaining him thousands of signatures, and getting him on the ballot in battlegound states, where he may detract votes from the democrats and lead to a republican victory. So, do you guys think that it is wrong for Ralph Nader to accept signatures from his idelogical mortal enemies: the republicans?

[RedSkunk]

Gee wiz! He's accepting signatures from Republicans? What next - Democrats? Greens? Ugh.

I'll tell you one thing, he wouldn't get on a single damn ballot anywhere if he didn't accept signatures from people affialiated with one party or another. And the Democrats are just as ideologically opposed on most issues as the Republican Party is, compared to Nader's platform. Give me a break.

[theburningliberal]

Yeah, I think Nader should just go away... He's ran in what? The last 3 Elections? And gotten what? Like 3% of the vote, at best? Maybe he should just give up. He ought to know that he has as little chance of winning the presidency as I do of endorsing Bush for President.

But it doesn't surprise me that they want Nader on the ballot. They are beginning to get scared because they see their leader falling further and further behind John Kerry in the polls, and they know that if Nader isn't on the ballot, John Kerry will have an even wider margin of victory. With Nader on the ballot, he'll siphon off votes from John Kerry and (god forbid) give Bush an edge.

[fli]

At 7/23/04 01:28 PM, Quanze13 wrote: ...Ralph Nader to accept signatures from his idelogical mortal enemies: the republicans?

Wow, now that is a very SMART tactic... Well, if Nader goes in, let him. But now Nader is in a Dr. Faust situation...

[bumcheekcity]

At 7/23/04 02:51 PM, theburningliberal wrote: Yeah, I think Nader should just go away... He's ran in what? The last 3 Elections? And gotten what? Like 3% of the vote, at best? Maybe he should just give up. He ought to know that he has as little chance of winning the presidency as I do of endorsing Bush for President.

There are 300,000,000 people in your country. Approximately 100,000,000 people voted in the last elections, I believe. 3% of the vote is three million people. Nader owes it to those three million people to run, and I commend him for doing so.

[theburningliberal]

I totally agree with you bumcheekcity. But in an election as important as this one, with not only the future of America but the future of both Iraq and Afghanistan on the line, wouldn't it be prudent for Nader to drop out and let the people who actually stand a chance of winning run instead of trying to detract votes from them, regardless of who they are taking votes from.

[antiklaus]

At 7/23/04 01:28 PM, Quanze13 wrote: Recently in the news, I saw that Nader wouldn't be able to get on the ballot in many battleground states. I cheared with joy. But then, they said that he did -- with the help of the republican party. The republican party came out en masse for Nader, gaining him thousands of signatures, and getting him on the ballot in battlegound states, where he may detract votes from the democrats and lead to a republican victory. So, do you guys think that it is wrong for Ralph Nader to accept signatures from his idelogical mortal enemies: the republicans?

I actually agree with a lot of the republicans on this one. He does derve the right to get support from anyone, elsewise how would a third party cndidate arrive.

If we buy into the idea that the only one of the two party candidates are allowed as choices, then we are giving up our rights for the formation of politcal parties and we are trapped in a two party dictatorship.

Now as far as inidividual Republicans issuing support for a third party, more power to 'em. Same with Democrats.

That said however, I do find it suspect that the entire Party is working together on trying to help Nader become a candidate. Nader's views politically deviate from their own even more than Kerry's deviate from Bush's. And given the 'democratic leech factor' that 3rd parties generate (most magazines and political analysts agree that without a Third Party last election would have shown a much larger majority voting for the democratic candidate than there already was), one has to wonder about their motives even more.

[Grimbaldous]

I think alot of you are missing the point of why Nader continues to run. He isn't running because he thinks he has a shot of winning. He knows he wont win. The reason is so he can push the issues that are important to him and his party. Basically it forces the other party's to take a stance on certain issues that otherwise would be forgotten. If the dems are really worried about losing votes to Nader, then they can adopt some of his ideas to get some of the votes. His effort to run isn't as worthless as most people assume

[darkphantom]

Its pretty obvious why the republicans did that... To split the democrat vote. They know its gonna be another tight call and there gonna need to get as many votes on there side as possable... Or draw as many votes away from there primary opposition.

[Morextremist]

democracy is such a fucking joke.

[Alejandro1]

At 7/27/04 04:02 PM, darkphantom wrote: Its pretty obvious why the republicans did that... To split the democrat vote. They know its gonna be another tight call and there gonna need to get as many votes on there side as possable... Or draw as many votes away from there primary opposition.

Splitting the vote has been a common theme in Democrat politics too. That's how Wilson won in 1912 and Clinton won in 1992.

[Alejandro1]

At 7/27/04 05:04 PM, Red_Hot_Bakshi_Sauce wrote: This is example of the far left reaching out to the right right to prevent the centrists from getting elected?

The Democratic party is not centrist anymore. The Libermans who used to hold the power of that party are now small players in the game.

[GooieGreen]

At 7/27/04 05:04 PM, Red_Hot_Bakshi_Sauce wrote: This is example of the far left reaching out to the right right to prevent the centrists from getting elected?

*giggles* I thought you'd never notice ^_^