Ralph Nader Will Run for Presidency

-

Ralph Nader.jpg
I wonder if some of the nation’s Republican stalwarts will fund Nader this round?
I don’t think Nader can impact this election — but this is an example of a person who was great allowing extreme vanity to take over.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

27 comments on “Ralph Nader Will Run for Presidency

  1. Melissa B says:

    I have a feeling that Nader knows exactly what he is doing. He is a brilliant man and he knows better than most exactly how the system works. He see’s how the nation is starting to get sick and tired of the so-called important candidates not really showing us a clearly defined plan. They say we will do this and that but never reveal the exact steps they will be taking in order to accomplish these goals. It is all based on Hope and no substance or on tha fact that so many will choose their candidate based on Myspace bulletins and soundbites from Youtube but I am starting to see the clouds lift from their eyes the closer it gets to the voting date.
    So many are losing jobs and they will be asking the candidates what do they plan to do to protect Americans from being treated unjustly at the plants and all the BIG BOX corporations. They will not be able to give a good enough answers and then in walks Ralph Nader. Guess where his heart lies? He is determined to stop the corruption of corporations and he has had 40 years to come up with how to do it. Just go to his official campaign site to see his outline.
    http://www.msplinks.com/MDFodHRwOi8vd3d3LnByZXNpZGVudGlhbC1jYW5kaWRhdGVzLm5ldC9yYWxwaF9uYWRlci5odG0=
    or find other unbiased sites. I have a couple..
    http://www.ontheissues.com
    http://www.votesmart.com

    Reply

  2. rollingmyeyes says:

    Nader was a Bush enabler, as such he was an Iraq War enabler. How many scalps of dead Americqns and Iraqis does he have in his belt? Now he wants to help “Bomb, bomb bomb Iran” McCain? How does the song go, “When will they ever learn?”

    Reply

  3. AlanSmithee says:

    How DARE Nader think he can run for president! He’s obviously a delusional egomaniac! Doesn’t he know there are ONLY TWO legitimate parties? Every good democrat should work to deny Nader ballot access this year. It’s the only way we can make our democracy work!

    Reply

  4. Kathleen says:

    Pacific Coast Ron…
    and the Demz are taking suggestions from the bottom up???? I hadn’t noticed.
    I agree Nader should build other lower office candidates to run as well… I wished he had been the one to challenge Joe Lieberman for the nomination in 06 instead of Ned Lamont because he could have won and effected major change from the US Senate.
    If Nader succeeds in getting enough signatures and a slate of Presidential Electors filed with the Secretary of State in CA or CT, I’ll vore for him because it’s the only way I can vote for Impeachment, assuming we actually have another election and not another war and Martial Law, etc.

    Reply

  5. Homer says:

    Lurker: Gore and the Democrats lost 2000 all by themselves.
    Ever hear of Bush vs Gore?
    A LAYMAN’S GUIDE TO THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN BUSH V. GORE by Mark H. Levine, Attorney at Law.
    http://www.iknowwhatyoudidlastelection.com/bush-supreme-court.htm

    Reply

  6. pauline says:

    I’ll admit to putting an electronic-voting mark next to Nader’s name in 2000, but not 2004. Why Ralph can’t convince others to run for congressional seats in some established party — Libertarian, Green or Constitutional would, imo, be a whole lot more effective.
    Nader could campaign collectively with his congressional running mates and draw more interest for a true, strong third party. At this point in time, it may be too late. And I’d hate to see marshall mcwarrior sneak in because of Ralph. We’ve been there done that awful nightmare.
    He has obviously been somewhat of a consumer’s savior and he definitely digs into unfair corporate practices and products. And he knows the many wicked ways of money in DC! I love him for that.
    But Ralph, really, is your old wrinkled suit hanging in your closet ready to go it one more time?

    Reply

  7. Tahoe Editor says:

    Nader is vain and self-important, but what presidential candidate isn’t? Poo-pooing any third-party candidate does a disservice to this so-called democracy. How dare any other American think he or she should be able to contest the two-party system? Why not?
    Poo-poo Nader on the merits — not because he exists.

    Reply

  8. Tom S says:

    POA:
    How many people in Florida voted for Nader?

    Reply

  9. Pacific Coast Ron says:

    Well let me get in the middle and see if I can offend everyone.
    I was v. big on Nader in ’96 and ’00, in ’00 I was one of the top 10 or 12 Nader operatives in my state, one of three people at the first meeting and the last meeting of the Nader committee.
    His focus on corporate corruption, and the idea that corporations need to have their rights and privileges severely trimmed back, is still a lot closer to my ideals than the Dems.
    However I have gone with MoveOn.org in ’04 and ’06, being part of their campaigns to elect Kerry and then a Dem. Congress. (And have I been disappointed in the performance of both those horses in the stretch? Definitely, yet neither is it making me say ‘forget those idiot Dems.’)
    I still want a strong political party to the left of the Dems … but I will not be supporting Ralph this year. Ironically, both the need for, and ease of organizing, a left third party go way up when a centrist Dem. is in office, and go way down when an ultra-fascist Repub. is in office. To the extent that Obama cannot fulfill the hopes he raises, organizing a left third party for 2012 will be a breeze, relatively speaking.
    Several specific criticisms of Nader. As a former insider, I know, there is no internal democracy or bottom-up idea flow in the Nader campaign. Everything is done through cronies & relatives, problems referred to headquarters seldom come back in timely fashion with answers. The guy is a charismatic speaker who will fulfill promises he makes, but you’re following him, there is no reliable access or input from the followers.
    And as a serious political activist who helped create a grassroots Green party in my state which was essentially shipwrecked and abandoned after ’00 (and one effort in August 01 which was not followed through after the shock of 9/11), Ralph is now officially a political idiot to announce now in Feb. with no previous preparation of ballot access party vehicles in a dozens of states. His friends in my state got ballot-qualified with a vehicle they hope to use to give him a ballot line here (although they signed up a lot of cultural conservatives in their effort), but that’s a different ballot line than the Green party, which nationally is highly unlikely to nominate Ralph again — especially by anyone who remembers how he remained outside the Green party in ’00 — and how many other states are gonna have that kind of dumb luck with a ballot line for him? Anyone, any organization would need several years of prep to have ballot lines in a majority of states.
    I want a serious political effort on the left for 2012, and I am beginning my organizing now for 2012. We need the serious people who are not going to be distracted by the personality politics & fads of the corrupt media. I am going to send out letters to people I respect, outlining my project and asking their advice/help, in a month or two, I’d like to have committees formed and advertising and fund-raising by the fall, I have few grand in seed money to begin. I have successfully created/cooperated in small-d democratic organizations in the past, the goal is to get to a movement with internal democracy, however in the first phase there need to be some semi-autocratic organizers in charge.
    Political talking points: this organization will focus first and foremost on the goal of ending imperialism in American foreign policy, and re-organizing the Defense Dept to actually focus on defense of our actual boundaries, rather than aggression all over the globe. We are spending more on defense than all other nations on earth combined –!!!– yet we are not safer than small nations who actually cooperate with their neighbors.
    In order to achieve these two goals, we will have to be part of a movement that drastically changes both the traditional media and the Democratic party, and restores the Constitution. Specific domestic policy points to be focused on in this part of the effort will be determined by our internal democracy. We have no over-riding ideology, we invite all persons of all nationalities & faiths & interests who are ready to work for the goal of a non-imperialist America.
    We need to be ready to work politically in this country both with the Democratic party, and against it. We need to have our own ballot lines ready for use when necessary, we also need to have a non-profit educational branch that can solicit money from people all over the world.
    Code Pink and Global Exchange come close to the organization I envision, yet to the best of my knowlege they’re both 501(c)3’s, unable legally to endorse candidates. We need something that is organized specifically as a political organization.
    If I’m speaking your language and you’d like to communicate, you could go over to TPM and send a personal message to my screenname featherfamily. (I am leaving on my first vacation tour with wife in 17 yrs., so I won’t be answering for 2 weeks.) Yet all these things need to be done, I’ve been preparing for this for years and I will need your help and everyone you can recruit, from now to 2012, 2016, 2020 and beyond … intelligence and small-d democracy are possible in American politics, we must greatly reform our foreign and domestic policies, and our children will not forgive us if we don’t try our damnedest.
    America needs a serious left political organization, let’s start now for 2012 !!

    Reply

  10. Kathleen says:

    Adam… perspicacity has been replaced by ass kissing obsequiousness… no thinking outside the box allowed… only Pavlovian conditioned responses… like little lab rats we are supposed to pull the right lever, Column A or B…. that’s it.
    susan.. what have the Democraps done in the last 7 years besides bend over,,, what has Obama done in the Senate, or for that matter Hillary or Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi…. anything besdies take accountability off the table after sending thousands upon thousands to be killed and maimed???
    Al Gore lost because his lawyer was a giant jerk calling for only a partial recount which opened the recount up to legal challenge. Gore was entitled to a toal recount.. had he done that, we would not be having this discussion but it’s easier to blame another than take responsibilty for one’s own bad decisions.
    I am thoroughly offended by the assertion that “extrme vanity” is Nader’s motivation. He alone has put the pulbic welfare above his own politcal career. If you compare curriculum vitae, Nader is far and away the best qualified. He alone wants to hold this criminal regime accountable. Dems are too chickenshit to defend our Constitution and like lawyers and doctors who refuse to testify as expert witnesses in malpractice cases for fear of setting legal precedence that might someday effect them, politicians refuse to hold this regime accountable to protect their own sorry asses in the future.
    The ends don’t justify the means, so it’s how you win that matters…, if you have to cheat and lie, there is no honor in winning…when I vote for Nader, it will be a vote to restore honor to our electoral process. I’m sending my tax rebate to Nader… my son says tax rebates are just incumbents buying votes..he’s right, so mine is going to buy votes for Nader.
    If there’s any fairy dust around it’s all in Column A or B. Denz thought Mukassey was going to be an improvement over Gonzongo.., twinkle twinkle.
    Demz learned nothing at all from the Niger Forgery fiasco and let the “skirmish” in the Straits of Hormuz go by without a whimper…let’s all wave our flags now…
    Getting the Strait Story
    By Brian Beutler
    The Media Consortium
    Friday 22 February 2008
    The Pentagon spun a minor melee off the coast of Iran into a direct menace to US interests. Why isn’t Congress concerned?
    “You will explode in a few minutes.” According to the Pentagon, those menacing words, directed at U.S. warships, came from an Iranian Guard Corps sailor aboard an armed speedboat that maneuvered uncomfortably close to the American ships in the Strait of Hormuz early last month. The incident very nearly escalated into a military confrontation with Iran.
    But there’s a problem with the Pentagon’s version of events: it was highly misleading. The threat likely didn’t come from an Iranian sailor, nor was the confrontation as dramatic as the Pentagon portrayed it. Yet, the administration nearly spun this fairly insignificant episode into a casus belli. How has the Democratic Congress reacted to the Pentagon’s phony depiction of this encounter? It hasn’t. Six weeks have passed without any hint of a congressional inquiry.
    Should Congress decide to probe the administration’s portrayal of the Hormuz confrontation, its jurisdiction over the issue would be fairly broad. An investigation into the matter could hypothetically involve any number of congressional committees, including the House and Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services committees, as well as Henry Waxman’s House oversight committee.
    In the days following the January 6 confrontation, I asked staff members of all the relevant committees what action, if any, might be taken. The House Armed Services Committee, I was told, was following the matter closely. And in its first week back from the Christmas recess the Senate Armed Services Committee received a staff briefing on the incident. But since then neither committee has indicated that its members are concerned with the possibility that the Pentagon may have misled the public. (Aides on the House Foreign Affairs and the Senate Foreign Relations committees did not respond to repeated inquiries.)
    The lone voice of congressional concern appears to be Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.), who chairs the House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs. Last fall, his committee held a series of hearings examining the tense relationship between the U.S. and Iran, including the possibility that a minor melee-quite like the one in the Strait-could trigger an accidental war.
    “The recent incident in the Strait of Hormuz underscores the need for means to be developed to prevent inadvertent armed escalation between the U.S. and Iran,” he says, adding that “incidents involving Iranian speedboats are not unforeseeable…. We’ve known about these tactics for many, many years.” He notes that his subcommittee will continue to investigate “conflict de-escalation mechanisms that should be in place in order to ensure that our country does not fall into an armed conflict that would not be in our national security interests.”
    But the possibility of an accidental war is somewhat tangential to the matter at hand. The real question is whether key details of the Hormuz confrontation were distorted by the Pentagon.
    And evidence suggests that they were.
    During the January 6 confrontation, according to news accounts, three Navy ships crossed paths with five Iranian speedboats manned by perhaps one or two dozen Iranian sailors. The sailors taunted their American counterparts as they blazed through the Strait of Hormuz and passed near the Navy vessels. It was aggressive, to be sure, but too common an occurrence in this well-traveled waterway to be accurately described a threatening maneuver.
    About a half-hour later, after warnings had been traded back and forth between sailors, a new male voice crept onto the radio frequency the Americans were using to communicate with the Iranians and issued the now infamous warning. He spoke in English, but, as an audio recording of the the encounter indicates, his accent was not Persian.
    The Pentagon chose to describe the incident differently. Senior Pentagon officials attributed the mystery voice-now thought by many observers and Navy officials to belong to an infamous maritime prankster known as the “Filipino Monkey”-to the Iranians, ultimately releasing video footage of the confrontation with audio of the threat superimposed over it to the public.
    What did the Bush administration stand to gain by emphasizing this confrontation? It’s hard to say. But one possible explanation is that this was a way to play up the Iranian threat after the administration’s claims about Iran’s nuclear ambitions were seriously undercut by the latest National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, released in November, which found that the country had terminated its nuclear weapons program four years earlier.
    With Iranian naval forces threatening Americans, Iran could be depicted as a direct menace. Is that why the Pentagon engaged in this cut-and-paste exercise? Who ordered it? Was there any vetting before the Pentagon released its misleading account of the incident? Was anyone held accountable? There are many questions that linger in the wake of the January confrontation. But for the most part Congress seems uninterested in seeking the truth.
    Brian Beutler is the Washington correspondent for the Media Consortium.
    Maccaca, is that you??? Time for some monkeyshines…. don’t worry about the Demz… they just know how to bend over.

    Reply

  11. Bartolo says:

    What JohnH said. However, I just can’t get the taste of the 2000 election out of my mouth, plus the fact that Nader has a zero chance of winning.
    Our evenly split country can’t afford a protest candidate.
    Also, he is a couple of years older than McCain.

    Reply

  12. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “Simple question to those who claim there is “no difference” between the Democrats and Republicans”
    “Would we have invaded Iraq with Al Gore in the White House?”
    Well, Al Gore wasn’t allowed to win, was he?

    Reply

  13. jim miller says:

    nader has some good ideas…but they are policy possibillities…mountains are moved a stone at a time…nader is the pie in the sky….just not viable….

    Reply

  14. Adam says:

    “Ron Paultards.” “Democraps.” “Change my a*s.” “ROFLMAO.” “Nader has becomne synonymous with Fool.” “Dropping fairy dust on his adoring elves.” And of course, “Republiscum.”
    So helpful. Such perspicacity. Thanks, friends.

    Reply

  15. JohnH says:

    The Nader page: http://www.nader.org/
    It’s a laundry list of topics too delicate for discussion in polite political circles inside the beltway…somebody with money might be offended.
    If not Nader, who will raise these issues?

    Reply

  16. Tom S says:

    Simple question to those who claim there is “no difference” between the Democrats and Republicans.
    Would we have invaded Iraq with Al Gore in the White House?

    Reply

  17. C Locke says:

    Nader has becomne synonymus with Fool

    Reply

  18. cherish says:

    Well, I see I’ll have to trot over to Ralph’s website if I want to find out what his message is. Not even his supporters here can lay it out.
    I hope he does have a message, something that can hook into Obama’s capaign, otherwise I have to agree with the “vanity” meme.
    Having been through the WTO riots and shutdown of Seattle in 1999, the fun of Nader 2000 and what I call the “Progressive Rebellion” that year was that he was the only person of note and reputation who was willing to take that energy seriously. I think the “rock-star” positive response was a new and unusual candy for him.
    His lack of follow-up after all that attention only proved that no, he doesn’t run to win or with any idea of how to lead. And now there’s this wall of anger preventing him from even being heard. That’s what hurts.

    Reply

  19. PissedOffAmerican says:

    ROFLMAO!!!!
    So its “viable” Susan wants???
    Meanwhile, the ethereal personage, Obama, flutters in and our of the clouds, dropping fairy dust on his adoring elves.
    Care to tell us what Obama has “done”, Susan?
    And you needn’t bother to mention Hillary, all we need to do to figure out what SHE has “done” is compile a list of everything this monkey Bush has asked for.

    Reply

  20. JohnH says:

    Susan–exactly what have the Democraps and Republiscum done in the past 7 years to show us that they deserve to rule? Diddly-squat…unless you count Iraq, warrantless wiretapping, massive foreign debt, etc. Result? 20% approval ratings.
    At least Nader has done something positive for people with his life: most of the consumer protections we now enjoy are a direct result of Ralph Nader’s efforts. Meanwhile, the Democrap and Republiscum elites, driven by their corporate paymasters, have been intent on rolling back these protections for 30 years now.

    Reply

  21. dan says:

    Give me a break the guy has every right to run for president. His running has nothing to do with “vanity” it has to do with principles. I understand that it is easier to dismiss other people’s view by using personality attacks rather then engaging them on the issues, but jeez. (Also since when has vanity excluded someone from being public servant?).

    Reply

  22. Lurker says:

    Great!!! Now I have someone to vote for after Paul basically bailed!!!
    Gore and the Democrats lost 2000 all by themselves. As did Kerry in 2004 — he conceded before my vote was even counted and did not demand a recount in Ohio like Nader did.
    Americans are looking for an alternative, as is evidenced by the Ron Paul *Revolution* and false prophet Obama’s false message of *change* that’s sucking the illiterati in, left and right (well, not the illiterati on the *right* — they’re sticking to their *Free Republic* guns, possibly literally 😉
    There ain’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two major parties, and no matter if it’s Obama or McCain we will attack Iran because of the overwhelming and over-weening power of the pro-Israel lobbies, so we can kiss our domestic agenda good-bye.
    Change my a*s. Since I had to switch from Independent to Republican to vote for Paul, I guess I’m now going to be one of the *Republicans* funding Nader.
    Ralph, the check is in the mail.

    Reply

  23. susan says:

    JohnH, just exactly what has Nader done in the last 7 years to convince us that he ought to be president? Diddly-squat.
    he might get a handfull of disaffected Ron Paultards, but he doesn’t represent anything viable as a candidate. running as “not one of those guys” won’t cut it.

    Reply

  24. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Jeez John, you value Nader’s “message”?
    Well listen, Buster, you’ll get the message you’re sold Gawd damnit, without these tangental excursions into reality. Wise up and get back in line, will ya?

    Reply

  25. JohnH says:

    An “example of a person who was great allowing extreme vanity to take over.” Nothing like mouthing standard Democrap talking points! The fact is that Nader’s message makes a lot of sense, if you take time to listen to him. Rovian ad hominem attacks on Nader won’t change that fact but will doubtlessly be the only narrative carried by the corporate media–so they can avoid mentioning Nader’s message.
    Democraps have no reason to fear Nader. Instead of simply tacking to the “center” and continuing to be the Bush-lite party of the DLC, Democraps have every opportunity to co-opt Nader’s message and steal his voters.
    I watched Gore closely in 2000. Occasionally he would trot out a message addressing the needs of ordinary people. Then–it was if his DLC puppet-masters had jerked on his strings–he was back on DLC, corporatist message. Gore “lost” not because of Nader, but because he refused to deal with the issues that are important to those who voted for Nader.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *