Ralph Nader, America's Last hope?

omnicorp

People are saying (and shouting) "Vote Kerry, get this madman out of office(Bush)"
"A vote for Nader is a Vote for Bush"
"Vote Kerry"

But... if you look closely, Kerry and Bush's campaigns are very similar.
Both Pro war.
try to be religious.
and so on.

And then we have people saying
"yeah, but Kerry's the lesser of two evils"

is everyone forgetting Ralph Nader?
He wants to get rid of the Death Penalty.
He is a peace activist.
He'd stop Commercial take over of the American Government.

In these days of "Free Enterprise" where a few multinationals with billions of $$$ control the market Ralph Nader looks like Americas Last hope for morality, peace, and success.

Can anyone give me ONE reason why Nader should NOT be in office instead of Bush or Kerry?

I can't.

aidan_walsh

Because everyone votes either Democrat or Republican. Simple as that.

omnicorp

The most democratic country in the world(!)
A or B, your choice.

i thought the Simpsons told it best.

Voter "I believe I'll vote for a 3rd party candidate"
Evil Alien (Kang)"Fine then, throw away your vote"

Kang won.

Hobbes

From what I have read, Kerry is not pro-war. He knows sometimes you have to go to war, but you should explore everything else beforehand. He made this clear in his senate hearings.

chewy

hmm kerry is not pro war? but he voted for a very dodgy one, perhaps

It was only the other day when rte screened the The Choice that I saw footage of him being spokeperson for vietnam vets and doing these winter? forums which allowed vets to describe the war and the war crimes they committed in Nam, very interesting...

seems he not against war, but illegal wars and war crimes, ill give him that...

im not sure about nader I'd like to see a third and fourth and fifth become a pernament fixture in us...

do you see this votepair.org thing, not the worst idea

I thik i wouldn't vote if i was in america now I'd prefer to see people get active in their commuinity rather then nominate somebody else to rep them and do something

sovtek

Hobbes wrote:

From what I have read, Kerry is not pro-war. He knows sometimes you have to go to war, but you should explore everything else beforehand. He made this clear in his senate hearings.

Kerry's not so much "pro-war" as he is a typical pol.
If most of us new that Bush was full of crap when they started talking about reasons to attack Iraq.....Kerry, being on the Senate Intelligence Committee shouldn't have voted for the resolution.
It was political expedency at the time. He has said that he's going to "hunt down and kill" terrorists as well as insurgents in Iraq.
Therefore I don't see his strategy working much better than Bush's and many more people are going to die either way.
The Iraqi's can handle their own country just fine. They were doing it just fine after the Saddam regime dissolved.
Kerry is talking about "winning" in Iraq...it's the same mistake LBJ and Nixon made....and I think he'll end up in a similar situation.
Nader has a plan to pull out NOW, as well as many other true reforms for the US government that are long overdue. The status quo-ism is under Clinton is what led to Bush....Kerry represents that paradigm.

Hobbes

sovtek wrote:

Kerry, being on the Senate Intelligence Committee shouldn't have voted for the resolution.

I believe he voted on it based on that all other avenues should of been explored and the UN given the time to check. Once this wasn't happening he was against it. Hence the so called "flip-flop".

billy the squid

A vote for anyone but kerry would be a vote for George Bush, Nadar might be an honerable candidate but it all boils down to numbers and it would be the democrat candidate John Kerry who would suffer if too many people voted for Nadar.

In an ideal world Nadar might make a better candidate. But because america is stuck on this two party roundabout that will not happen.

Our proportional Representation system here in Ireland may not be a perfect system to elect our politicians but it is far better than what they have in the states.

omnicorp

It is not a thread about John Kerry.
It's abut Ralph Nader.
And America has one of the least democratic systems in the world for a democratic country.

Vote A or B.
If you don't like A or B, waste your Vote on C is their attidude

Cork

omnicorp wrote:

Can anyone give me ONE reason why Nader should NOT be in office instead of Bush or Kerry?

I can't.

Nader to win the Presidency needs to win either the Democratic or Republican nomination.

Naders poor openion poll ratings highlight this.

He won't be the next US President.

I think Nader (at this late stage) should pull out of the race and urge his supporters to support Kerry.

Kerry will be far better for the environment than bush.

omnicorp

Yes, Vote for the Lesser of two evils when there is a perfectly good environmentalist (albeit independent) to vote for.
Makes sense.

Cork

omnicorp wrote:

Yes, Vote for the Lesser of two evils when there is a perfectly good environmentalist (albeit independent) to vote for.
Makes sense.

An RTE jornalist said today that the US electorate were evenly devided. 50/50.

Nader is not getting much coverage in a 2 horse race.

But that said, Nader has come out with some decent ideas.

Stabshauptmann

Why do ppl say a vote for Nader is a vote not gone to Kerry, instead of a vote gone to Kerry is a vote not gone to Nader? Why is it so enshrined in ppls minds that it has to be one of the two main parties?

Nader running and stealing votes from Kerry should in theory force Kerry to adopt Nader's policies in order to defend his market share; Nader can win witout being elected. The more elections Nader costs the democrats the sooner they will reform their ideas and become a true alternative to the republican party not a weak mirror of them.

Nader should run and it will be a good thing if Bush wins as a result. Think about it, 4 more years of Bush; Europe has developed and matured so much since WW2 because of the distruction and the rise of dictators. Americans aren't as mature, they're still a gun happy, unempathetic nation. What it needs is someone like bush to destroy the economy and take them into countless wars based on his own self rightiousness, his council with God and the backing of Big Business before their eyes are opened to the flaws of their system. Only then could a real and lasting change come about and perhaps then Nader or someone like him will come to office.

omnicorp

go bush! I never thought I'd say that but I've been necromanced.
anyway.... America, the "Land of Freedom", "Home of Democracy", should really evolve and become the democratic nation it says it is.
How can they justify wars to bring democracy when they are little more that a dictatoirship of the Republicans and Demi-Republicans (DFemocrats)