Knowing what you know now how would you have voted in the laste election?

[TheHarshTruth]

Maybe you didn't realize what you were getting into during the last election. If you could do over how would you vote now?

 

[Hatuey]

Maybe you didn't realize what you were getting into during the last election. If you could do over how would you vote now?

I think you mean...

How would you have voted in 2004 if you knew then what you know now?

----------------------

I dont think I would have voted for either Kerry or Bush had I had the chance in 2004. Not even Nader. They all seem like sleezebags to me.

 

[TheHarshTruth]

I dont think I would have voted for either Kerry or Bush had I had the chance in 2004. Not even Nader. They all seem like sleezebags to me.

Why's Nader a sleezebag?

 

[Hatuey]

Why's Nader a sleezebag?

All politicians are sleezebags my friend.

 

[TheHarshTruth]

Yeah, can't disagree with that. I'm waiting for Nader to prove he's just like the others. He has had a great track record of helping our country though so I kind of hope against hope with him.

 

[Kandahar]

Yeah, can't disagree with that. I'm waiting for Nader to prove he's just like the others. He has had a great track record of helping our country though so I kind of hope against hope with him.

How did Nader campaigning for Bush/Cheney in 2000 make this country a better place?

 

[TheHarshTruth]

How did Nader campaigning for Bush/Cheney in 2000 make this country a better place?

He was campaigning for himself. The Democrats in their arrogance figure nobody else should be allowed to run that can take votes away from them. United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Democrats barred him from running in those states that he had the votes and signatures to allow him to legally run. They did this with a lot of illegal activities. The Republicans seized on this and got him in to many elections where he belonged so he could "steal" votes away from the Democrats. Nothing wrong with that.

The Democrats then proceeded to win the election but the Republicans had some tricks up their sleaves. Along with, now that the medical records have been released to the public, a truly crazy and paranoid leader of the supreme court. With this crazy leading the supreme cout Bush was able to steal the election away from Gore.

Not that it matters who wins, Democrats or Republicans, they are both controlled by the same financial backers. And those financial backers will stop at nothing to keep their payouts going to only two parties. They can't afford to have a multi party system. Having to make payouts to 5 or 6 different parties is too costly and they'd lose the ability to control their stranglehold on politics.

Nader made the 2000 election a better place because he was there. And would you really have wanted Gore to be president?!

 

[Thelost1]

Yes, I would have wanted Gore to be president.

 

[Kandahar]

He was campaigning for himself. The Democrats in their arrogance figure nobody else should be allowed to run that can take votes away from them. United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Democrats barred him from running in those states that he had the votes and signatures to allow him to legally run. They did this with a lot of illegal activities. The Republicans seized on this and got him in to many elections where he belonged so he could "steal" votes away from the Democrats. Nothing wrong with that.

The Democrats then proceeded to win the election but the Republicans had some tricks up their sleaves. Along with, now that the medical records have been released to the public, a truly crazy and paranoid leader of the supreme court. With this crazy leading the supreme cout Bush was able to steal the election away from Gore.

None of this rant answers the question. How did Nader's 2000 campaign make the world a better place?

Not that it matters who wins, Democrats or Republicans, they are both controlled by the same financial backers. And those financial backers will stop at nothing to keep their payouts going to only two parties. They can't afford to have a multi party system. Having to make payouts to 5 or 6 different parties is too costly and they'd lose the ability to control their stranglehold on politics.

Nader made the 2000 election a better place because he was there. And would you really have wanted Gore to be president?!

Gore would've been adequate, I suppose. Certainly better than Bush (or Nader). Do you think we'd be in Iraq if Al Gore was president? I highly doubt it.

 

[TheHarshTruth]

None of this rant answers the question. How did Nader's 2000 campaign make the world a better place?



Gore would've been adequate, I suppose. Certainly better than Bush (or Nader). Do you think we'd be in Iraq if Al Gore was president? I highly doubt it.

That "rant" was in response to your statement about Nader supporting Bush in 2000. I thought you were perhaps confused about your facts.

I'm not sure about Gore not being in Iraq. After all, you've seen his distortions if not out right lies in "An Inconvenient Truth". They remind me very much of Bush.

So Nader was giving us the opportunity of having somebody in office who wasn't part of the political system. A president who can actually think and get his views accepted into law. Despite big business. I'd say that's being very helpful.

 

[cherokee]

He was campaigning for himself. The Democrats in their arrogance figure nobody else should be allowed to run that can take votes away from them. United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Democrats barred him from running in those states that he had the votes and signatures to allow him to legally run. They did this with a lot of illegal activities. The Republicans seized on this and got him in to many elections where he belonged so he could "steal" votes away from the Democrats. Nothing wrong with that.

And just how did they bar him from running?...hmmmm?

 

[TheHarshTruth]

And just how did they bar him from running?...hmmmm?

OMG, just go look it up! It ain't a secret and it is very well documented.

 

[cherokee]

OMG, just go look it up! It ain't a secret and it is very well documented.

I take it you cant tell me how you bar a person from running in a FREE election? Even if you dont get your name on the ballot you can ALWAYS write a name in...So tell me how you BAR someone from running...

Other nominations

There were four other candidacies on the majority of the 51 ballots (50 states plus the District of Columbia):

* Harry Browne of Tennessee and Art Olivier of California (Libertarian, 50 ballots)
* Ralph Nader of Connecticut and Winona LaDuke of Minnesota (Green, 44 ballots)
* Howard Phillips of Virginia and Curt Frazier of Missouri (Constitution, 41 ballots)
* John Hagelin of Iowa and Nat Goldhaber of California (Natural Law, 38 ballots)

Also, Joe Schriner of Ohio ran as an Independent write-in candidate, having started his run in Republican primaries.

United States presidential election, 2000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Navy Pride]

God knows I have my differences with President Bush but if kerry would have been elected we would probably speaking arabic by now.........

 

[Dingodog]

The Democrats then proceeded to win the election but the Republicans had some tricks up their sleaves. Along with, now that the medical records have been released to the public, a truly crazy and paranoid leader of the supreme court. With this crazy leading the supreme cout Bush was able to steal the election away from Gore.

Not that it matters who wins, Democrats or Republicans, they are both controlled by the same financial backers. And those financial backers will stop at nothing to keep their payouts going to only two parties. They can't afford to have a multi party system. Having to make payouts to 5 or 6 different parties is too costly and they'd lose the ability to control their stranglehold on politics.

Nader made the 2000 election a better place because he was there. And would you really have wanted Gore to be president?!

Sounds a little schizoid there friend. You seem to be coming from all angles at once.

If it doesn't matter who wins why do the two parties compete and why would the Democrats try to keep Nader out if it didn't matter.

I think he made the election better because he added an element of comedy to the proceedings.

He appeals to the fringe loones and is the only Dem with the courage to openly court them in public.

 

[OKgrannie]

I take it you cant tell me how you bar a person from running in a FREE election? Even if you dont get your name on the ballot you can ALWAYS write a name in...So tell me how you BAR someone from running...

Aside from the difficulties in getting a name, or party, on the ballot, not all states allow write-in votes. Oklahoma does not, and never has. How would write-in votes be counted by machine?

 

[Kandahar]

How would write-in votes be counted by machine?

If a plurality of the votes were write-in, they would probably count them by hand.

 

[TheHarshTruth]

Sounds a little schizoid there friend. You seem to be coming from all angles at once.

If it doesn't matter who wins why do the two parties compete and why would the Democrats try to keep Nader out if it didn't matter.

I think he made the election better because he added an element of comedy to the proceedings.

He appeals to the fringe loones and is the only Democrat with the courage to openly court them in public.

It's possible people don't understand basic politics. I suppose. Here's an interview with Nader from last week that might help Cherokee and you understand politics a little better.

Democracy Now! | Ralph Nader on Why He Might Run In 2008, the Iraq War & the New Documentary "An Unreasonable Man"

 

[Dingodog]

HENRIETTE MANTEL: Well, this film originally became what it is, because we started on a sitcom idea. We’re both comedy writers. And Steve had a development deal. And we had discussed this over the years -- Ralph's story --

To be fair Harshtruth I read the interview with Nader and his cohorts and I didn't see anything I haven't seen before.
It's typical Nader being superior and above it all.

I had to quote the above passage, it was too priceless when she said they started on a sitcom idea. I can't think of anything more appropriate for telling Nader's story.

As to understanding politics... I'm sorry but ROFL. I have been involved in politics at different levels for nearly thirty years.

What Ralph does isn't politics, at least not honest politics. He courts the disaffected loners who form those mushy coalitions around the fringes of the Democrat Party, the votes that go to the most liberal canidate available whether that candidate is worth the time or not. He sucks those candidates away from the more main stream Democrat's and gets to act all rightous and noble because he offered an alternative.

 

[TheHarshTruth]

To be fair Harshtruth I read the interview with Nader and his cohorts and I didn't see anything I haven't seen before.
It's typical Nader being superior and above it all.

I had to quote the above passage, it was too priceless when she said they started on a sitcom idea. I can't think of anything more appropriate for telling Nader's story.

As to understanding politics... I'm sorry but ROFL. I have been involved in politics at different levels for nearly thirty years.

What Ralph does isn't politics, at least not honest politics. He courts the disaffected loners who form those mushy coalitions around the fringes of the Democrat Party, the votes that go to the most liberal canidate available whether that candidate is worth the time or not. He sucks those candidates away from the more main stream Democrat's and gets to act all rightous and noble because he offered an alternative.

Lots of labeling but no facts... I understand.

 

[Misfit]

I can't believe there are still 6 people in the country who would vote for Bush. :doh

 

[OKgrannie]

If a plurality of the votes were write-in, they would probably count them by hand.

Hmmm, that is probably why OK doesn't allow write-in votes, however they were not allowed even when all ballots were hand-counted.

 

[jamesrage]

Maybe you didn't realize what you were getting into during the last election. If you could do over how would you vote now?

I would still vote for Bush,because the thought of having a buddy fu<king Hanoi Fonda siding scumbag in office repulses me.

 

[Dingodog]

Lots of labeling but no facts... I understand.

O K facts later when I'm not so tired. Too late now, have to go to work in the morning.

 

[Hatuey]

I would still vote for Bush,because the thought of having a buddy fu<king Hanoi Fonda siding scumbag in office repulses me.

Who? I dont think Jane Fonda was running in 04...