Nader set to offer 'real choice' in presidential race - Guardian

OH NO NOT AGAIN!!! UGH!!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2108468,00.html



Ralph Nader, the independent candidate blamed by many Americans for George Bush's election victory in 2000, says he is considering a run for the White House next year - even at the risk of dishing the Democrats again.

The left-of-centre Mr Nader, who made his name as a consumer rights campaigner, won only 2.74% of the national popular vote seven years ago. But his 97,448 tally in Florida is widely believed to have thwarted Democrat Al Gore, who lost the state - and the presidency - to Mr Bush by 537 votes.

Mr Nader said he knew he would be accused of acting as spoiler again if he decided to run. But it was essential that the country be offered a real choice in 2008 and it would be the Democrats' own fault if they did not win, he said.

"The two parties are still converging. I really think there needs to be more competition from outside," Mr Nader told the Politico newspaper today. "Democrats have become, over the years, very good at electing very bad Republicans. Democrats always know how to implode, how to waver, how to not be authentic."

Then again, Democrats open themselves up to this shit by refusing to take on the Republicans ideologically and getting bogged down in policy shopping.

thank God somebody gets it.

Have you received your RNC expense check yet, Ralph? Better keep on them....their not flush like in years past.

What are the big differences between Rudy and Hillary on economic policy?

What is missing in the discussion of the DLC "Republican Lite" corporatism here is the abandonment of economic liberalism, i.e., the philosophy that the government needs to intervene in the economy to level the playing field. Instead we have a party that is liberal on "social issues" such as abortion, etc., but abandons any call for any government intervention in the economy: economic liberalism.

So as long as our party and candidates are beholden to corporate money, no one should be surprised that they don't stand up for the ordinary working Americans who used to make the Democratic party the majority party.

A real awful choice.

too bad he's nuttier than a snickers... doesn't the man have enough shame from helping bush get in office in 2000??? to say he will run again to offer a 'real choice' is showing he wants to try and redeem what he knows he helped bring on the world.

Sorry Nader, you're batshit crazy ass needs to retire and live off your 60's money and your Republican funded pension check that you mistake for a campaign contribution... Jackass!

www.cafepress.com/warisprofitable <<-- top 08 items and antibush stuff!

STILL???

You mean, like they converged in 2000 and 2004?

Nader is not left of center, he is centered on Nader.
If he were a little more concerned about where the
country has been going these past six years, we would
have heard it during moments when there WASN'T an election
campaign going on, don't ya think?

I recall hearing nothing from Nader when Iraq was invaded,
nothing when Roberts was nominated to the Supreme Court, nothing
when Alito was nominated to the Supreme Court, nothing when Cheney
and Enron bilked California out of billions, and then Enron's
stockholders out of everything, nothing when ANWAR was up for drilling,
and nothing when the so-called Patriot Act was shoved down the
national throat.

Maybe he did speak on those subjects at the time (I never heard of it),
but not so publicly that he made anywhere near as much noise as he seems
to want to make every four years around election time.

Nader's "no difference between Gore and Bush" line of 2000 still makes
me sick to my stomach. I thought, "how could he believe such a thing?"
These days, I see it differently. I don't think he ever believed it.
He just wanted to be the star of the Ralph Nader Show. And now he wants
live reruns. Maybe he's pissed at Al Gore for coming across as being more
engaged in saving the planet than he is. Is revenge as sweet as you thought
it would be, Ralph?

It's so much easier to use Nader as a proverbial punching bag THAN to admit the *truth* that Al Gore ran a crappy campaign to include selecting Joe Lieberman (Mr. "bomb them into the stone age") as his running partner.

My husband talked me into voting for smooth talking Bill Clinton in 96' ... I really WANTED to vote for Nader. But I relented because I knew that Nader could not win. It's also true that I've not ever voted for Nader (or any other Third Party Candidate) because I FELT OBLIGATED to the Democratic Party first.

However, this last volley of "Fuck you liberal democrats" has hit home. I will honestly CONSIDER Nader (not Bloomberg :eyes:) if he runs in the General Election.

I'm disgusted with our beloved party being held hostage by the DLC, New Way and Blue Dog Democrats who do nothing more than *serve their corporate masters.* :grr: :thumbsdown:

Remember fellow democrats, respect goes both ways. ;)

Meh, ego gets the best of 'em, I suppose...

He is not a liberal crusader, he is a bought-and-paid-for operative for the VRWC.

Spot the lie, and follow the money. Ralph is not our friend.