Nader served green lemon-lime Flavor Aid in Conneticut (there is a connection)

[LoZoccolo]

People in the Green Party like to say that there's no connection between Nader and them anymore, but look what we have here on the Green Party web site, an press release about Nader campaigning for the Green Party:

http://www.gp.org/press/states/ct/ct_2006_10_30.shtml

It is also notable that the Green Party ran a candidate against Lamont in the Senate election, which basically tells you that no matter who wins the Democratic Party primary, they are willing to engage in spoilerism. They set no definite criteria for not running, where they promise to be satisfied and form a coalition, so you never know when they will serve as spoiler. If they run against Lamont, I don't trust them not to spoil.

[Sturmrabe]

1. If the Green Party wants to get ANYTHING going...

They should put up a candidate in EVERY uncontested election...

[alarimer]

4. And stop taking money from republicans

as in Pennsylvania.

[Quantess]

5. Absolutely.

Taking republican money makes people question their motives.

[greeneggs708]

2. Ignore Them

nuff said.

[NaturalHigh]

3. I can't see myself ever voting for a Green candidate...

but I support their right to run a candidate to in any race of their choosing. That's part of our democratic system.

[LoZoccolo]

6. This is bad. People need to know this.

Whine whine whine whine.

[Bonobo]

7. God, would you stop talking already!

Some of us want to turn the other cheek, but when we do you slap it again!

I don't like Lieberman, I DO like the progressive politics of SOME Greenies.

I DO wish the Dems would adopt more progressive policies and absorb the Green party's platforms.

I WILL vote democratic.

Could YOU just stop talking so much.

[LoZoccolo]

12. Look at my two reccomendations I got for this thread and weep. n/t

[DancingBear]

8. Oh, look! Another Green bashing post!

You know, the Green Party - the party that (many feel, for some bizarre elitist reason) is supposed to when push comes to shove vote Democratic, even if the particular Democratic candidate doesn't appeal to them!

You know, the same party that "causes" Democrats to lose elections because they didn't vote for them. It is, after all, their moral obligation to do so, for as many here have stated third party voters are only allowed to vote their consciences if it doesn't directly affect "our" side!

Astounding. Truly astounding. I'm at a loss to understand what is more ludicrous - this ridiculous belief that voters who did not like your candidate cost you an election(s) or this belief that somehow a voter owes you something.

Can you imagine a Virginia Republican voter going "those damn Greens cost a seat - if they had only voted Republican!" :rofl:

[LoZoccolo]

11. "It is, after all, their moral obligation to do so..."

It's hard to argue that making futile gestures is one's moral obligation.

[inthebrain]

9. first the greens prevented Lieberman's Vice Presidency

and now they rocketed Lieberman back in to office. I'm waiting to see what the little green martians fit in.

Believe in conspiracies much?

[LoZoccolo]

10. All I'm saying is that the Greens disowned Nader for a while...

...which was supposed to be to their credit. They tried to shake off his reputation. Now they don't seem to care as much about that, if they're handing him the bucket of Flavor Aid to pass around.