Ralph Nader: Pressure Obama with primary

[Freddie Stubbs]

By JENNIFER EPSTEIN | 4/27/11 2:57 PM EDT

Ralph Nader is convinced that Barack Obama will win reelection in 2012, but that won’t stop him from trying to organize a slate of Democrats in the coming months to challenge the president in party primaries next year.

Nader told POLITICO on Wednesday that he is working on bringing together about half a dozen presidential candidates who could “dramatically expand a robust discussion within the Democratic Party and among progressive voters across the country.” Each would focus on a specific issue where the far left says Obama hasn’t done enough, including the environment, labor and health care.

Nader, who has run for president five times as an independent or third party candidate — including his 2000 run on the Green ticket, which some Democrats say cost Al Gore the election — said that for next year, he believes an ideologically based, multi-candidate primary challenge would be the best way to pull Obama to the left ahead of the second term he believes Republicans will not be able to stop.

In an op-ed published Wednesday morning by Bloomberg News, Nader laid out the argument that Obama will be reelected due to weakness and confusion in the Republican field and because he’s kowtowed to corporations and others who can help him win a second term. “Obama is averse to conflict with corporate power and disarmingly expedient in compromising with Republicans, leaving the latter to argue largely among themselves,” he wrote.

more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/53825.html

Although I am glad that Nader is finally working through the Democratic Party rather than against it, I doubt that he will be able to get credible candidates who are "dedicated Democrats who could benefit from party infrastructure." The only potential candidate he mentions is Jim Hightower, someone with a history of bolting the party.

[JoePhilly]

1. Punxsutawney Ralph.

[emulatorloo]

9. LOL n/t

[onehandle]

2. How'd that Bush Presidency you helped give us work out, Ralph?

Bush and Gore are exactly the same.
Bush and Gore are exactly the same.
Bush and Gore are exactly the same.

[elocs]

6. Exactly. How many thousands of voters bought that big lie? n/t

[Armstead]

15. If you look at it historically, Nader's assessment was correct

I don't condone what Nader did in terms of refusing to throw his support to Gore in the late campaign after his point had been made.

But in a historical context, what Clinton and the "centrist" Democrats did in the 1990's was just as responsible for the mess that we have now was the GOP was under Bush 2.

Clionton pushed corporate power in the form of deregulation, globalization, welfare deform, etc. as well as legitimatizing the theories of Alan Greenspan, that right-wing acolyte of Ayn Rand.

Yes Bush knocked the final slats out, and headed us on a devestating and expensive set of wars. But, again, the centrist corporate democrats, were complicit in enabling that too.

[leftynyc]

41. Bullshit

Neither Bill Clinton or Barack Obama has put anyone like Scalia on the court. You don't like the Citizens United decision? Thank Roberts and Alito with a hat tip to Ralph fucking Nader for speading the "no difference" lie.

[Armstead]

49. They put tame centrists who are socially liberal on the courts

better than scalia, but not people who are likely to rock any boats regarding the concentration of wealth and power.

With the mindless pushing of "free trade" and deregulation and the corporate conventional wisdom in the 1990's (which continues today) the Democrats like Clinton handed the economy to the wealthy and powerful as surely as any Republican ever did. And they are just as culpable for the devestation that has caused.

I am NOT referring to the great liberal and progressive Democrats in Congress who resisted this kind of crap -- but the Centrist Democratic Establishment doesn't much like them, and does everything it can to marginalize them.

[leftynyc]

59. If your choices are

more Scalias or not more Scalia's, which one do you pick? To me, it's a no-brainer and I consider anyone who sees the parties as the same as too hopeless to reason with.

[Armstead]

64. They're not the same......One is just less bad than the other

The less-bad party, the Democrats, has some great people in it...But it also has a lot of people who support the right wing corproatist agenda. just in more subtle and less obnoxious ways than the GOP. Unfortunately they are the ones who have hijacked the bus over the last 30 years.

[leftynyc]

66. I'll agree with that

But I maintain the Dems are head and shoulders above the reps when it comes to governing. And those, like Nader, who say are the same are utter, complete to their bones morons.

[Armstead]

74. I guess its a mater of terminology -- and the GOP sets the bar really low

Better than the GOP is not saying much because they are so awful. But the Democrats are much better than the GOP for sure.

So, in my opinion, the real goal should not be to undermine the Democrats' political chances, but to hold their feet to the fire and do whatever possible to push the party to become more liberal, instead of allowing the worst corporate aspects of its leadership to continue to take the concerns of liberals for granted.

(I will say, however, in defense of Nader and people who supported him back in 2000, the GOP were actually not as bad as they are now and after 8 years of Clinton the differences were somewhat less. At least then there were still some relatively moderate and influential Republicans who had not totally gone over the edge and added some moderation, as compared to now, when the GOP inmates have taken over their asylum.

Looking below the surface of Nader's statement, it might be that he recognizes the same thing, and this is his own suggestion for doing that -- whether or not one agrees with that particular strategy.)

[leftynyc]

76. There have ALWAYS been big

differences between the Dems and reps. It's never been a close comparison at all and anyone that thinks that Al Gore would have governed the same as bush is flat out lying. And for the record and just cuz I haven't said it today - fuck Nader.

[Armstead]

83. To get back to my original point -- Not always so much

So you can say "Fuck nader" if you want....Part of me thinks the same.

HOWEVER, he was a symptom -- not the cause -- of the problems of the Democratic Party.

If a Republican President and legislature had done some of the things Clinton and Congress did in the 90's, many people on DU would have been howling mad.

Many liberals and progressives WERE howling mad in 2000. You expect such right-wing corporate policies from Republicans -- but not from Democrats.

And back then the attitude of the Establishment Democratic Party was even more insulting and dismissive toward people who objected to things like right-wing cortporate "free trade" policies and globalization, deregulation and privatization and welfare deform.

(The Internets and grass-roots media were not as much of a factor back then, so it was easier for DC Democrats to tell progressive critics to shut up and sit down and let the "adults" run things...... Plus the illusion "an endlessly booming economy" made the con job easier to sell. But Clinton and his buddies did run things -- ultimately into the ground, which resulted in the Crash of 08 and a shrinking middle class.)

The Nader campaign was the inevitable result of ignoring and insulting liberals and progressives.

[leftynyc]

90. I think people were more

forgiving during the Clinton era because the economy was doing well, millions of jobs were being created and the whole impeachment mess made us (Democrats) circle the wagons. The press allowed certain revolting stories about Al Gore get traction (invented the internet, etc) but even with all that, the parties were never the same.

My issue is, was and always will be judges. All the other crap can get fixed later in most cases but federal judges get lifetime appointment and can continue to wreak havoc for decades. When you look at the caliber and philosophies of the federal judges, the notion that both parties are the same is laughable.

It wasn't just that Nader said the parties were the same. He also outright lied when he said he wouldn't campaign in any state that was supposed to be close. I can't be bothered listening to anything that man has to say anymore.

[Armstead]

93. I agree with that...mostly

People were lulled into a false sense of security during Phase One of the "Immense Unsustainable Boom leading to Immense Bust" cycle. And, yes, the GOP Jihad over a minor sexual infraction did prompt a lot more unity.

I'm just sayin' that Clintonian Corporate Centrism did make many people feel legitimately estranged from the Democratic Party, and saw too few differences between that and the Republicans. And also, warnings of what they would lead to were ignored by the party that should have been smarter than to be accepting Greenspan's Supply Side Snake Oil.

Nader's campaign did not exist in a vacuum. If he had not done it, it is likely someone else would have. It is the inevitable result when you tell a substantial segment of your base to "F Off. Your opinions and concerns don't matter."

And, yes, judges are extremely important. Unfortunately, the Democrats helped to make the judicial process more shallow and superficial by making the debates all about abortions, while distracting from the real stakes of the judiciary on issues of wealth and power.

[leftynyc]

96. Supreme Court confirmations

have become particularly odious and I do blame both sides for that. When I look at a decision like Citizens United and think back to ralph calling both parties the same, I want to scream.

Nobody wanted to listen to warnings in the 90's. People were doing well and it's hard to convince them that the good times will not last forever. But having someone claiming both parties are the same was a lie. I'm sorry, I'll never forgive him for that. He also takes money from republicans who only want him on the ticket as a Green or Independent to screw the Dems. And he continues to take it. He's not a friend of the left. He's a friend only to himself.

I've really got to finish up here at work but I've really enjoyed our chat. Have a great weekend. Peace.

[ProudDad]

79. Exactly

The corporations are the ones fucking us up...

The social conservatives are a distraction...

[ProudDad]

78. Bullshit

Democrats could have kept that slime OFF of the COURT...

But they didn't...

FAIL

So, try again --

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

72. Nader's assessment is assinine. The Party's aren't equivalent. Only utter fools buy into that.

quit trying to cover for this asshole.

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. About 97,000 in Florida

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

73. and Florida was supposedly decided by ~500 votes

[Freddie Stubbs]

94. 537 to be exact

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

100. so there can be no doubt. No Nader = President Gore

[ReggieVeggie]

27. you have a link for that quote?

thanks

[sabrina 1]

57. Gore won the 2000 election. The SC stole it and handed it to

Bush. I can't understand why people, (at least democrats, I know rightwingers do not remember that treasonous act), keep forgetting the crime of the century and pathecally help to cover it up by attempting to place the blame elsewhere.

That crime has yet to be dealt with in this country. Why are you attempting to help cover it up?

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. No comment here..

..if you can't say something nice,....

[sharp_stick]

4. And when Ralph

gets his ass kicked around in the Primary system he's going to be out courting third party nobodies to run yet another spoiler campaign.

Fuck Nader

[FSogol]

5. STFU, Ralph. n/t

[Peacetrain]

7. +1

[MadBadger]

8. Then why doesnt he do it himself?

No, he would rather just run during the General for no good fucking reason at all.

[WhiteTara]

10. There's slimy Nadir again. A repuke to the core

and a traitor to democracy. I am always sickened to see his name.

He is NOT working through the Democratic Party, he is working to destroy the last vestige of it. He is an animal on 2 legs.

[DevonRex]

11. Fuck Nader.

[dionysus]

38. not even with wadsworth's... you know...

;)

[DevonRex]

42. Don't let Wadsworth read that post.

You'll surely get a lecture about mentioning "you-knows" in public. Tell him Robert was in fine form and appears to have developed a modicum of good taste over the years. Which means he can now sit down in his jeans. That has to be Wadsworth's influence.

[dionysus]

55. remind me to tell you the story about the time i mowed the lawn in my "led zeppelin jeans"...

[DevonRex]

56. Hahahaha!!!

I'm imaging all sorts of things. :rofl:

[frazzled]

12. Desperately Seeking Relevance /nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

13. If he's convinced that Obama will win re-election in 2012

then why bother with primarying him? Before he could ever do anything significantly progressive anyway, he's going to need a good progressive (or at least more Democratic) Congress to work with. All a Presidential primary is ultimately going to cause IMHO is a bunch of unnecessary division, friction, and recriminations within the Democratic Party when now, more than ever, we need to present a united front against the Republican Tea Party and ensure that they don't get the keys to the WH and/or Senate back. IMHO we need to invest most of our energies to ensuring that the Senate remains Democratic in 2012 and maybe even captitalizing on the GOP's overreach in the House and attempting to win the chamber back in 2012. If we can mobilize to get a few more progressives elected to either chamber, so much the better. We also need to work on taking back state legislatures so that, if nothing else, we can check some of those psychotic Republican "stepdads" in states like Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, etc.

[ProudDad]

80. Maybe because Obama is NOT A LIBERAL

and Ralph would like to pressure him to become more like one... :shrug:

[Tarheel_Dem]

14. ????

:rofl:

[Armstead]

17. Nader goes outside the two party system and he's demonized. He tries to reform from within and....

he's demonized by the same peopel who were bitching that he should have worked within the Democratic Party.

I don't condone what Nader did in 2000, in terms of not tossing his support to Gore at the end of the campaign. But his assement of the political situation, and his goals for fixing it, are what the Democratic Party should be standing up for.

I think a lot of the Nader bashing that has occurred and is occurring comes from peopel who'se partisanship has trumped their willingness to see anything objectively.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

70. Nader is a piece of shit. eom

[vroomvroom]

18. THANK YOU, Nader! Makes Perfect Sense!

It's clear Obama is NOT a Progressive. He, as evidence shows, what many would consider a moderate republican (center-right) president -- he is technically more right-leaning than Regan. However, i think this is because of the Washington winds and the people Obama enjoys surrounding himself with that make him think and act this way. By having the left push him to realize we actually exist it is possible to have Obama start to take the left seriously and move at least an inch back to center. It's highly doubtful he will ever move center-left when governing but its worth a shot since doing nothing will just perpetuate his desires to go even more right.

Obama, like all democrats, will always campaign as a Progressive especially during important electoral seasons but will always revert back to republican instincts when governing so Nader has the right idea even though no one stands a chance of beating Obama. The idea isnt to harm Obama but to make him take the left seriously; similar to the Tea Party is to the Republicans, but with actual social solutions like no tax cuts for the rich. I am sure if these progressive challengers were to win even a few points and then come out to put their endorsement for Obama near the end it will at least make Obama think the left matters beyond just votes. We can hope.

Thank you Nader.

[ProSense]

19. "Makes Perfect Sense"?

"Obama, like all democrats, will always campaign as a Progressive especially during important electoral seasons but will always revert back to republican bidding when they govern so Nader has the right idea even though no one stands a chance of beating Obama. The idea isnt to harm Obama but to make him take the left seriously. "

Summary: Primary him because he'll campaign as a progressive and then "revert back to republican bidding." It's not to "harm" him. (Woo hoo!)

"Makes Perfect Sense!"

Obama is a "Republican"

Gore = Bush

Ralph Nader is a desperate fool!

Fuck Nader!

[uponit7771]

21. It's clearer that people who call Obama unprogressive don't know how US government works

[Armstead]

23. Horse Manure

Leadership means setting an agenda, and rallying the troops to move in a particular direction.

Yes, with all of the mechanisms and inherent forces embedded within our system, no president or other politician can say "we're gonna make this happen" snap their fingers and make it happen.

Duh that's just f'in common sense, and you will find very few who ever expected that.

However the President can set the agenda and goals for the rest of their party - and use the pulpit to Generate public support. even if instant results or even success are never guaranteed.

That part of it IS straightforward and controllable....And in in those terms, Obama has too often ceded the field and/or actively supported an unprogressive (or even a basic liberal) agenda.

[ProSense]

24. Bull chips!

"And in in those terms, Obama has too often ceded the field and/or actively supported an unprogressive (or even a basic liberal) agenda."

He didn't support Ryan's Medicare plan as "progressive"!

"Leadership means setting an agenda, and rallying the troops to move in a particular direction."

Is this in support of Nader's "leadership"?

[Armstead]

26. You are still misconstruing that old post, eh?

You're really good at misdirection, I'll give you that.

And this one isvnot necessarily in support of Nader's leadership. He screwed the pooch as a political tactician long ago. But his basic message is one that the real politicians like Obama ought to be advocating for, instead of watered-down center-right pap.

[ProSense]

37. "His basic message"?

"But his basic message is one that the real politicians like Obama ought to be advocating for, instead of watered-down center-right pap."

His basic message is Gore = Bush, now being applied to Obama.

Do you mean "watered-down center-right pap" like Wall Street reform?

Nader: Open Letter to President Obama on the Nomination of Elizabeth Warren

An interesting contrast is playing out at the White House these days—between your expressed praise of General Electric’s CEO, Jeffrey R. Immelt and the silence regarding the widely desired nomination of Elizabeth Warren to head the new Consumer Financial Regulatory Bureau within the Federal Reserve.

<...>

Compare, if you will, the record of Elizabeth Warren and her acutely informed knowledge about delivering justice to those innocents harmed by injustice in the financial services industry. A stand-up Law Professor at your alma mater, author of highly regarded articles and books connecting knowledge to action, the probing Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel (COP) and now in the Treasury Department working intensively to get the CFRB underway by the statutory deadline this July with competent, people-oriented staff.

There were many good reasons why Senate leader Harry Reid (Dem. Nevada) called Professor Warren and asked her to be his choice for Chair of COP. Hailing from an Oklahoman blue collar family, Professor Warren is just the “working class hero” needed to make the new Bureau a sober, law and order enforcer, deterrer and empowerer of consumers vis-à-vis the companies whose enormous greed, recklessness and crimes tanked our economy into a deep recession. The consequences produced 8 million unemployed workers and shattered trillions of dollars in pensions and other savings along with the dreams which they embodied for American workers.

Much more than you perhaps realize, millions of people, who have heard and seen Elizabeth Warren, rejoice in her brainy, heartfelt knowledge and concern over their plight. They see her as just the kind of regulator (federal cop on the beat) for their legitimate interests in a more competitive marketplace who you should be overjoyed in nominating.

<...>

An open letter to the President to appoint Warren to head the consumer bureau, which was made possible by the President's Wall Street reform bill that Nader repeatedly denounced? The bureau that the President appointed her to get up and running?

If he's going to grandstand he should at least get the name of the organization right, it's the Consumer Financial Regulatory Protection Bureau.

Fuck Nader!

[Armstead]

47. Do you ever pay attention to anything beyond the Democratic Party?

Obviously not following issues like corporate power and responsibility, consumer rights, energy and the environment, etc.

I am not saying Nader is a saint, or even very smart politically. But in terms of activism and issues advocacy, he has done a hell of a lot over the years to advance the concept of economic democracy.

[ProSense]

52. "I am not saying Nader is a saint, or even very smart politically.

But in terms of activism and issues advocacy..."

Does that make sense? In case you didn't notice this isn't an OP about issues advocacy. It's about someone who is not "very smart politically" talking nonsense.

"Do you ever pay attention to anything beyond the Democratic Party?"

Do you ever pay attention to the point of the threads you enter?

[Armstead]

58. Activism and partisan politics are not the same thing necessasrily

The OP is about issues advocacy in the political framework.

Nader is not very smart at partisan politics -- in fact I'd say he's like a bull in a china shop" when he has tried to play that game.

However, in the case of having symbolic primary opponent(s) campaigning, I think that's actually a good idea. One of the reasons the Democratic Party so smugly dismisses the legitimate concerns of liberals and progressives is this "Suck it up because you have no where else to go" approach.

A real slug-it-out for real primary is not the answer because it is obvious that Obama will win it anyway. But if some progressive candidate(s) at least put his feet to the fire during the primary, it would at least send a message to him and the Democratic elites that they shoud not concerns of a subvstantial part of their base for granted.....And, if nothing else, it would bring actual issues into the campaign.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

28. The right Ha Ha, but the wrong Ho Ho.

Obama more than deserves a primary challenge, but Ralph should keep his FUBAR brand off any potential product. The irony is that he and Bush were both given a pass by SCMSM for their sleazy 2000 campaigns, while Gore, the guy who was demonized in 2000, has rehabilitated himself to the extent he could give Obama a real scare in 2012.

Not that Al would do it, but I wish he would. The only other I would like to see run would be Jerry Brown, but I don't think that will happen either. I'd vote for Franken or Dean or Grayson as well. Come to think of it, Feingold and a few others sound pretty good. Ah hell, anybody but Nader or Obama.

[dionysus]

39. "he is technically more right-leaning than Regan(sic)"

:rofl:

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

71. you're about as much of a Progressive Democrat as Ralph is.

[Rowdyboy]

20. The only name he can offer is Jim Hightower who served 4 years as Texas commissioner of agriculture

way back in the 1980's. Lotsa luck with that one Ralph.

You've "helped fix" the system quite enough over the last 11 years Mr Nader. Enjoy your retirement in the well-deserved anonymity you've earned.

[cottonseed]

22. Ralph, helping fuck things up since 2000.

I remember studying the guy before then. A lot to respect. Now all I see is a pissed off old man.

[polichick]

25. Whether Dems have a primary challenger or not, the prez needs to be...

...pressured from the left on a lot of issues - progressive groups need to unite to get it done.

[Ikonoklast]

29. "Let's you and him fight." - Ralph Nader.

Bite me, Ralph, you con man.

[BklnDem75]

30. Nader is an urban legend

Comes out for a year, spreading as much garbage as possible then disappears for 3 years. Waiting to spread more garbage as another election draws near. During those 3 years, not a peep is heard from him.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

31. We've just elected the first African American president.

Why not the first Nerd American?

[Tarheel_Dem]

32. +1. If he were serious about building a progressive movement, he'd

be advocating for taking over school boards, and state legislatures. That's how the teabaggers did it. This is why we know Ralph is not a serious "progressive", he's a fool & a foil for the rightwing.

[Armstead]

34. A correction -- He is busy between times on a variety of things

The media doesn't cover that though, and the blind partisanship of many Democrats refuse to acknowledge his efforts on behalf of good causes.

The real urban legend is the belief by many democrats that actually coming out in favor of the middle/working classes and true exconomic justice is some horrible monster that would eat them alive if they ever decided to actually advocate for those issues.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

36. Like Bob Woodward, Nader is a former hero.

He did some great things as a public advocate when he was younger, but succumbed to the dark side, e.g. engaging in insider trading to enrich himself based, on the work of his Raiders. Like Jesse Jackson, his public rhetoric is still great today but belies the way he conducts himself. His shameless demagoguery of idealistic young people in 2000 was nothing short of perversion.

[Armstead]

48. I will not totally disagree -- He's not what he used to be. But he is still in the arena...

Democratic Establishmentarians are always chastizing "the left" for being "purists" but it seems to me that when people like nader step out of the partisan straitjacket and are partially impure, they are cast into the outer darkness for not being perfect pure human beings.

It's what might be called the circuklar firing squad, and its why the CONservatives have built a solid power base while the left half of the spectrum spend too much of our time beating each other up and tossing people under the bus.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Armstead]

51. Okay -- We all have our reptillian brains, including me

[Admiral Loinpresser]

54. lol, nice talking with you, see you around.

[Jennicut]

44. Pretty much. Anyone still cares what this guy (who took Repug money) has to say?

[CakeGrrl]

33. Great advice from the candidate who made FL close enough to steal. n/t

[ProudDad]

81. You mean Pat Buchannan?

or do you mean Harry Browne or John Hagelin or Howard Phillips -- all of whom got enough votes to "make FL close enough to steal"

or shouldn't you blame Al Gore? Al Gore does...

Nader is and has been one of your best friends (unless you're one of the uber-rich) over the last 60 years so why don't you give this bullshit a rest, ok?

[applegrove]

35. He never learns.

[FrenchieCat]

40. Yep, Mr. Nader......

that's all that we need, along with the billion+ or so the GOP will get to help them
defeat Obama through Citizens United.

Thanks, but no thanks. The playing field already is fixed to lean Republican.

[DevonRex]

43. Nader is the Donald Trump of the "left."

[cliffordu]

46. LOL....Yep....

[LiberalFighter]

45. Nader does not have credibility.

[ProudDad]

82. Nader does not have credibility with knee-jerk democrats

who refuse to listen to what he says...

[politicasista]

53. And people blame Gore

for the 2000 mess. Still don't trust Nader.

[Phx_Dem]

60. Fuck off Ralph.

[Keith Bee]

61. Shut up Ralphie!

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shellgame26]

65. Eff U Nader

Always turning up around election time..

[Brickbat]

67. He made a bunch of promises without a primary opponent; I think he'd just do the same thing if he

did have a primary opponent.

[robcon]

68. How in the world does that make Obama move to the left?

Obama is in the center of the Democratic Party, and will win any primary easily.

Nader: political expert. Not.

[ProudDad]

84. Obama asked him to do it...

robcom; political expert? NOT!

[robcon]

99. Any evidence?

ProudDad: honest poster. Not.

[ReturnoftheDjedi]

69. just go away, Ralph. wasn't 2000 enough for you?

or do you get off on being a Repuke tool??

[Tarheel_Dem]

75. Well, I think the concensus of this forum is that The Crypt Keeper should STFU.

No chance in hell of winning, just stirs the pot every four years, and always against Democrats? WTF? :shrug:

[Armstead]

95. NOT always against Democrats....But screw the facts when stereotypes will suffice

[ProudDad]

77. He's only following Obama's suggestion...

Obama has said to Progressives (whom he constantly disappoints), "Make me do what needs to be done. Organize public pressure on Congress and the White House."

So Ralph is doing just that...

So why do you hate Obama?

[MercuryRepeater]

85. Ralph Nader hasn't achieved any progress in 40 years.

In fact, he set us back 8 years with his actions in 2000.

[ProudDad]

86. You just haven't been paying attention...

You're mindless hatred based on bullshit has plugged your ears and eyes...

[Armstead]

87. Yeah right...What a lot of hogwash

If Nader had not made the mistake of getting involved in the presidential races, people here would be singing his praises for his successful work on many fronts.

[MercuryRepeater]

89. so what has he done since "Unsafe at any Speed"? enlighten us.

[Armstead]

92. A lot..But I'm too busy to waste time trying to correct someone who's mind is made up, so....

I'll just say Google is your friend. You can look up what the organizations and activist networks he set up accomplished over the years.

I'll also just add,that if you pretend Nader is Joe Blow and look at his accomplishments and goals for the nation objectively you might appreciate his historical role in the years since Unsafe at Any Speed a lot more.

But probably not...So go on and waste your anger on a progressive reformer who is not perfect, and give a pass to corporate abusers and their political enablers.

[ProudDad]

97. +1000

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Freddie Stubbs]

98. Why use quotes when Obama never said those words?

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pisces]

91. Fuck off Nader.