Nader ~ Kerry share the same objective "Defeat the Bush Government"

We talked about that and I told him of my belief that I would take more votes away from Bush than from him," Nader said. "He basically said it all comes down to what happens just before the election."

Nader said he and Kerry would meet again in the future. "We both agreed to keep the communication lines open and the common objective to defeat the Bush government," Nader said.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ct--kerry-nader0519may19,0,5944396.story?coll=ny-ap-regional-wire

Hmmmmm, should be interesting to see how this all plays out. :freak:

Tricia Enright, president of the National Progress Fund that launched the site, said they planned to start airing television ads next week in which a Nader voter says he made a mistake that helped put President Bush in office.

Here's a better idea: instead of alienating Nader supporters by blaming them for Bush 2000, how about telling them EXACTLY which of Nader's positions Kerry will support.

Verifying that he is, in fact, quite liberal so brazenly would make it easier for Bush to win.

Kerry just acting exactly like Bush*. Didn't work for Gore, won't work for Kerry.

ELECTION. ;)

Both candidates are going to move to the middle for the general election. That's how you when elections.

Now, if he started acting like Bush has governed (ie, far right), that would be a problem.

If Kerry is just suppose to reflexively do what Bush is not, that raises problems of its own. If Bush were suddenly to support repealing his tax cuts, would Kerry be expected to change his stance on the matter, just to prove that he wasn't just like Bush?

The problem is that you can't reason with irrational people. If people think that someone who is consistently one of the most liberal members of the Senate is just like a President who has governed the furthest to the right in recent history, they just are refusing to face facts.

They'd be idiots to ignore Nader this time.
They tried that in 2000.

I don't like the idea of alienating Nader supporters, but I also dont want to pander to anyone - Nader supporters included.

No Nader vote helped put Bush in office. Gore got the majority of popular votes, and if not for purges and BBV fraud, would have had even more. Nader votes came from both Republicans & Democratics about equally.

On the other hand, since the Democratic machine would hardly permit Kerry to support any of Nader's sensible ideas, there is no way to announce that. But this National Progress Fund is going to air TV ads that lie, which makes me feel sick that I can't vote for Nader. I'll bet it loses more votes than it gains--Nader voters are sophisticated enough to recognize and see through lies, and decent enough not to want to support liars.

if this group wanted to really beat bush, instead of trying to sabotage nader's ballot efforts, they should have tried to keep dumbya from getting the rules changed by DEMOVRATIC legislatures so that he could still make the ballot and have his late NYC convention (as was the case here in WV)

"Nader's positions" include causes Kerry has fought for for years! If Nader wants something more or something different, there are ways to organize and build that don't involve counterproductive political blackmail. Ask NOW or the Sierra club.

And I really don't understand all the touchy "don't alienate them" emotional stuff. We're not talking about joining a junior high school club here, we're talking about electing a president who isn't GW Bush. You don't have to socialize with the other voters, or even like them, to vote for the same candidate. I keep seeing the equivalent of "It's hard enough for me to vote for Kerry -- don't make me mad or I won't vote for him at all!" It's silly.

That self-description and your post reveal a lot.

the name sounds familiar.

lure anyone from Nader?It seems to be a waste of time and money, if someone is planning on voting for Nader, that tells me that they delusional radicals that care not about beating Bush. They just want to make a point at the countries expense.

this time around.

I edited out that portion of the story, as it misses the larger point.

I simply copied 4 paragraphs from the story and copied it in.

article I read. This one was "Woo", I understand what you are saying mzmolly. Do you think Ralph is going to do anything other than promote himself and get free press whenever he can? He is not about helping anyone but himself! I am not intentionally flaming you, I do not trust Nader, the point to my original post was, why are Dem's wasting resources on an INTERNET site aimed at Nader supporters. It makes no sense, these people are not middle of the road fence sitters. They are hardcore radicals, anyone that had voted Nader in 2000, that can be swayed have pretty much seen the error of their ways, I think. :shrug:

I simply think we can't "ignore" him this time. I don't think their strategy to shame and woo will be effective.

I'd rather see them run ads about Naders hypocricy along with the positive Kerry ads.

Nader should be treated as any other political opponent.

I just thought it interesting he claims to be on the same side essentially.

:toast:

I know some people who voted for Nader in 2000 as an expression of general disgust with the state of politics and two candidates both hewing to the center. They know better now. Others voted for Nader because they have some ideological stick up their ass and it's as pointless to try to win their support by pandering to them as it would be to court the hardcore religious right. Some people are engaged in politics; some are playing a self-indulgent game they call "politics".

:toast:

Karp's book, "Indispensable Enemies: The Politics of Misrule in America" explained how the 2-party system fails us.

But since you're a Republican, let's put it this way: How would you like it if cars were offered in only two colors? Or you could only use 2 types of golf clubs? Or there were only 2 channels on TV? Or towns could only issue one business permit, so that only one person was allowed to own all stores and businesses within city limits, and it was done on a winner-take-all majority vote of the city council? Does that sound like open competition to you?

For an informed electorate to make intelligent choices, there have to be more than just two viable options.

front and we'd probably end up with 10 viable leftist parties.

Think back to Nazi Germany here.

It means people are listening to each other. The more political choices there are, the less people listen.

a low number of posts that you have not been around here very long. Therefore I will give you the benefit of the doubt. First, I am not a republican, I am a card carrying DEMOCRAT. I have been for over two years and have been posting on these boards even longer. Jeb Bush helped to recruit me for the Democratic Party when he took office down here in Florida. If you bother to ask anyone that has been posting here for any length of time, they will tell that I am what some might call a "Yellow Dog Dem". I left the republican party because it has been totally taken over by corporatist, neocons, religious zealots and chicken hawks.Now that we have that straightened out, your other points are not really valid. Americans do have more choices than two parties, if you have not checked lately there a bunch to choose from, Greens, Libertarian, Reform, Socialist and on and on. If none of those strike your fancy, then Americans can write in their votes. Remember when Pat Paulson could have been elected and that was on a lark, he actually had to tell people not to vote for him. So this two party crap that I keep hearing about is just semantics. We could banter back and forth all night long about, which I will not do. My Focus is to get the criminals out of the white house and take back my country. As far as the two colors for cars, yada yada yada, I can always paint it the color I want. Just because someone only only gives me two choices does not mean that I have to by it. Thats the beauty of the American way, I have the freedom to buy it or not. I also believe in American ingenuity, if some one is not offering something that I want, well it is my right to build, invent, paint create or whatever, an alternative choice. Your comparison to the city council theme means thats what the majority of those citizens want, if I did not agree I could always move to another community, that to is my right as an American. We could also go back and forth on this topic as well. One thing is for sure I am not a Republican, I chose that handle so that any freeper moles that may be lurking would know that the party is loosing people, I am not the only former repub on this board, there are many us. If you stick around long enough you will see many names with republican or GOP in the title, but all refer to being EX. I love my country, I love our freedoms, and this admin has made a mockery of what I have fought for!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=567361
Check out posts # 9, 13, 15, 17, 19, 24, 25, 29, 31

I bet they'll be lining up to vote Kerry once their mistake is made clear to them.

My guess is the press tossed in the other to get us bitching at one another?

Worked.

I'll stop thinking that Nader is delusional when I start hearing Republicans warning each other that a vote for Nader is a vote for Kerry.

That was a good one! :P

exactly what? They've heard it before. If anything's going to get them to vote for Kerry, somehow I doubt that finger pointing is it.

I do think we need to address who Nader is, and his run for office, but shaming people is foolish.

Period!

there's always namecalling.

:D

I say it like it is and if the Bush enablers don't like it then fuck em!

I like your description better. Thats what I like about Floridians, we don't mince words.

:toast:

Of Defeating Bush. If they did, then Nadar would not run. Nadar's objective is an ego rush of personality regardless of what it might do to the election outcome.

I'll take that for now. ;)

LOL, yet he stays in the race. Talk about doublespeak and living in bizarro world. :crazy:

Nader has absolutely NO PURPOSE in running this time. It's not to build a third party in any way. It's to take votes -- and take votes from Kerry.

Nader can make statements against the Bush govt. without running, or at the least he can atleast make it clear that he doesn't want to be on the ballot of swing states. Yet, he wants to be on all states' ballots.

What an ass...Still I'm glad Kerry met with him. It was a good gesture. It shows that Kerry wants to build as large a coalition as possible.

he'd campaign for Kerry. That's what everyone else who supports the defeat of the Bush government is doing.

;)

a no brainer.

Tell Ralph they have some Corvairs on Mars.

Get 'em Ralphie!

he'd pick up the vote of most third parties, left-leaning and otherwise. Bush would be toast.

:hi: