Don't like extortion or Nader? Don't read this. But if you are pragmatic

[GreenPartyVoter]

or looking for election reform in this country, then give it a go.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0728-10.htm

"Ralph Nader must be feeling a little frustrated.

He's a man who cares passionately about the issues, who has exciting ideas for making things better and who is spending these hot summer months campaigning tirelessly all over the country. But all his efforts are overshadowed by the one huge question that has come to dominate his campaign: Will he split the anti-Bush vote enough for George W. Bush to win?

Though Nader insists the idea is nonsense, most other people believe it could happen. Shameless Republicans are helping Nader get on the ballot in a number of close-call states. And furious Democrats, desperate to take back the White House, are trying to beg and bully him out of the race.

It occurred to me the other day that perhaps Nader could take advantage of the Democratic desperation."

--------------------------------------------------------
An open letter to John Kerry, John Edwards, and the DNC:
http://www.geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/OpenLetter.htm

[TeacherCreature]

1. I don't think Nader gives a damn about the issues

He cares about Nader and he cares about punishing the democratic party.

[Selwynn]

6. I agree, and that is why I'll never support him.

He is not the real deal.

[K-W]

2. He will never create a single reform by running for president.

He could use his profile to get power to make change, he chooses cosmetic campaigns instead.

People that he could be rallying to a politically effective block are instead voting for him making them invisible to the system.

Unless he plans to arm them and take over the government, he is detriment to people who truely want to see change.

Change starts with John Kerry as president. If he cant see that, he is lost.

[Eric J in MN]

3. I don't believe there is anything Kerry could say which would

persuade Nader to drop out.

[eyesroll]

4. I took a look at your open letter (and sorry to hijack) -- just wondering

what you'd use for "qualified candidates" for debates. (Don't get me wrong -- I agree with most of what you said about election reform.)

Here in Wisconsin, we've got maybe 20 people on the ballot for President in any given election -- all of the major parties, all of the smaller parties, plus bunches nobody's ever heard of, plus independents.

Obviously, not all of these people could debate at once (it would be a mess, and most of them are only on a handful of ballots). What would your threshold be?

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. thread hijacking is not a problem here :)

I'd be happy to talk with you about this because I've wondered how we can work that out with a multitude of candidates.

I've got to put my small fry to bed now, but I'll be back in a bit and we'll see if we can come up with any solutions to the problem. :)