yeah, nader's a weird guy alright. it seems, on the surface anyways, that he's playing the "too corporate" card because he knows that's a popular sentiment. but then the thing is, if it wasn't for commercial type shit, what would america be today? without the strength of our economy, which is all about the business, this country would get really fucked up really quickly. from what i've heard, the great depression wasn't any kinda picnic or anything. so it's like, on the one hand, yeah, american politics shouldn't be some ugly bound-to-money kinda apparatus. but then on the other hand, what's the solution then? i don't know if i've heard him give any semblance of an explanation as to exactly how his solutions work.

but then, and i'm gonna spell his name wrong, the times i heard kusinovich speak in the debates and everything, i got the impression he was a total tool. and then i heard him speak on bill maher, just for a couple minutes and all, but he was able to express his ideas with a little more clarity. so i guess never judge a book by what it tells you the first few times it answers questions, or something like that. but then again, fuck nader!

Perhaps he is on a Republican payroll under the table to act like a sponge and soak up all of the disenfranchised votes that would have otherwise gone to the "lesser of two evils". All politicians lie...why should he be any different? Because he says he is? Give me a break.

lostboy wrote:Nader's decision to run for President this year: crap or not crap?

I voted Not Crap. I voted for him last election and I still think he is a candidate who tells the the truth about private industry's corruption of both parties, its alarming encroachment into local government and about the totally unpatriotic practices of so many US-based corporations.

That said, this post 9/11 election is a special case that calls for the immediate removal of President Dick Cheney, titty-coverer John Ashcroft, war-troll Paul Wolfowitz, and nookular flightsuit-wearer GWB. So, sorry Ralph. Besides, if you were serious this time around you would have at least been visible in the time away from the elections.

Okay, so it's Kerry then. Well, why not, he's a popular guy. He's well liked by powerhouse corporate litigators Skadden Arps. Seems he's friendly pals as well with Goldman Sachs, FleetBoston Financial, Citigroup, Verizon, Viacom, News Corp, Morgan Stanley, Staples, and Credit Suisse.

Oh wait, he said those contributors didn't get anything for the money, right?

-r

I wish he would win but I know he wont ever have a chance.
My friend just told me that John Kerry is anti gay marriage too, so fuck, I dont think I'll be voting. Gay marriage doesn't effect me either way, but I think people should be allowed to do it if they want to. To have these 2 fuckheads bring their own personal or religious feelings into the matter pisses me off to no end. And Bush and his anti-abortion shit. Sure, abortion is a great option, alot of people just shouldn't be allowed to breed, I think, but he isn't a woman, he has no idea.
That's it. It wouldn't be crap if Nader was president, but it is crap that politics are shit.

by the way, I'm half awake so I dont even know if that last post is very coherent or ramblin man.......anyhow I'm pissed...no I'm just tired....sorry. I dont even know why I'm posting shit.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:The days where Ralph Nader can cause any political mischief are gone.

Wow! Was I wrong!

"Kerry remains locked in a very close race with Bush — with the incumbent at 46 percent, Kerry at 45 percent and independent Ralph Nader at 6 percent in a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll."

Hey, Mr. Nader. You've done a ton of great work in your lifetime. You have saved thousands of lives through your zealous consumer advocacy. You strike me as a good and honorable man. I respect you.

But you're killing us all.

You're killing us.

Bradley R. Weissenberger wrote:Hey, Mr. Nader. You've done a ton of great work in your lifetime. You have saved thousands of lives through your zealous consumer advocacy. You strike me as a good and honorable man. I respect you.

But you're killing us all.

You're killing us.

Holy shit. Well, all I can hope for is for one of the following to occur:

- Nader pulls out of the election right before it, and goes out yelling, "VOTE KERRY, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, VOTE KERRY!!"

- Kerry starts impressing the nation with wonderful, meaningful speeches and strong, concrete plans to fix the Giant Mess-O-Potamia (hey, one can dream, right?) and pulls ahead to 60%

- The 6% Nader camp wakes the fuck up in November and says, "hmmm...ya know, I told all those pollsters that I'd vote Nader, but I don't really want to get drafted, I'd like some money left in Social Security when I retire, I don't want our forests to keep getting destroyed, and I'd like to feel that the rest of the world actually wants to look out for us in the War Against Terrah (c)...so maybe I'll stop being a total dickwad douchebag and vote for Kerry".

One can dream.

stewie wrote:
Holy shit. Well, all I can hope for is for one of the following to occur:

- Nader pulls out of the election right before it, and goes out yelling, "VOTE KERRY, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, VOTE KERRY!!"

...

Or perhaps we can hope for some enterprising young photographer to snap a pic of Nader slaying an antelope or something...

The gorier the better.

he's playing the "too corporate" card because he knows that's a popular sentiment.

I'm no Nader fan, but this is unfair. Nader is one of the pioneers of modern corporation bashing.

With the polls looking the way they are, Nader is going to poll 2-3%, and that is rather likely to cost Kerry the election. And the Republicans are giving Nader all the help they can.

this has a little to do with this:

im will be a first-time voter in a state that Bush pretty much already has in his pocket. i feel like voting for Badnarik (i know the majority of this board's opinion on the Libertarian party, no need to bring that up again) purely because i dont really think my vote matters, and that party gets more money with each vote they get.

i dont really think its right to vote for someone you dont like just to get the other person you dont like out of office, but i also think that that line of thought is pretty idealistic. but voting to support a 3rd party the best way i think i can seems pretty practical.

crap idea?