Nader: 100% Chance Obama will be challenged in primary

[James48]

Source: the Daily Caller

Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate and perennial third-party presidential candidate, announced last month that he would work to find a Democrat to challenge President Barack Obama in 2012.

Nader now says that a primary challenge is a near certainty.

“What (Obama) did this week is just going to energize that effort,” Nader promised in an interview with The Daily Caller. “I would guess that the chances of there being a challenge to Obama in the primary are almost 100 percent.”

The only question, he said, is the stature of that opponent and whether it will be either “an ex-senator or an ex-governor” or “an intellectual leader or an environmental leader.”



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/nader-almost-100-percent-chance-democratic-primary-challenger-020811577.html

---

I'm not a Nader fan, but he is absolutely correct. We need to find a "Bernie Sanders" out there who will stand up for America.

[Botany]

1. Gee, Ralph who might you be thinking about?

an intellectual leader or an environmental leader

[go west young man]

138. Gore/ Dean would be the golden ticket.

America could get a fresh start with the two people who were most robbed when they were most needed.

[ncpmd]

148. Spot on, That ticket would be great!

[jmodden]

166. Sanders/Gregoire - that's the ticket

If I were Al, I wouldn't get off the Apple gravy train for anything.

[markpkessinger]

208. I love Bernie Sanders, but ...

... FOX, et al. would be all over his self-professed "socialist" label. I don't think he's electable nationwide.

[SemperEadem]

211. I thought Sanders already said he wasn't interested in the presidency

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/12/27/sen_bernie_sanders_sorry_im_not_running_for_president.html


Grayson... Hmmmm... I could go with that.

It's too bad Weiner sunk his own boat--he would have certainly gotten my vote.

[jmodden]

218. Potomac fever

The full course of Potomac fever can have many strange turns.

[Fruittree]

171. And two months into their administration when...

they didn't do everything you wanted because they would also have to deal with the reality of the American system, you'd be looking for someone else.

[robinlynne]

195. nope. that isn't how it works. When you dont' TRY to do the right thing, you get challenged.

[go west young man]

199. No thats go along folks like yourself.

I was always for the two of em when half of Du was against. Its no different this time around. Real progressives don't think about placating the middle.
They are idealistic and push on. The problem with DU is we got over run with centrists after Obama came around. Hence your post. The country needs a hard left turn.
A true progressive could make it happen. Sorry to rain in your half empty cup.

[ozone_man]

212. +1

"Real progressives don't think about placating the middle.
They are idealistic and push on."

[Fruittree]

228. Seems a bit presumptuous to label someone you

don't know but at any rate...Whatever the label may be, to me it's more about getting things done vs. ranting and taking an all or nothing attitude. In a country (and world) as large and diverse as ours, the president has to take a middle road a lot of the time just in order to get something done and make any progress. Pres. Obama has gotten a lot done. Just to take one example - The Healthcare Bill...Had he taken the road of nothing short of single payer, we'd likely have nothing...Did you not see what happened when the idea of healthcare reform was even brought up? Yes, we could've had a big fight - right vs. wrong but in practical terms of helping those in need what would that accomplish? Instead we have a bill that, in my own case, allowed young people back on their parent's insurance and it leaves open the possibility of single payer established by individual states - not unlike what was done in Canada. In the current debate over the debt ceiling, Obama managed against incredible opposition to include in the deal protection of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and a road to ending those Bush tax cuts. It's really easy to be a pure progressive when you're you or me or Al Gore or Bernie Sanders (and,by the way, I like Bernie Sanders a lot) but the pres. has to get things done more than just state positions and have theoretical arguments - that's not what he's hired for and Obama has gotten things done. Perfect? No but is anything? Honestly, who's the one with the half empty cup - the one seeing the good in what we have or the one always unsatisfied and looking for the next savior?

[sendero]

239. ah yes..

.... the old "George Idiot Bush can do whatever hard right idiocy he wants but the left has to settle for the middle, even when poll after poll shows Americans on our side".

FUCK THAT IDIOCY.

[Fruittree]

303. So any point of view other than yours is

just dismissed as idiocy? Great... ...

[demwing]

307. The only people who use the term "all or nothing"

are the people that are accusing the far left (pure progressives) of wanting all or nothing at all. First of all, what fills in for the "far" left in America in centrist. It only seems far to the left when viewed by those standing far to the right.

Second, the left doesn't expect "it all" and you know it. That's a meme designed to shame progressives into compliance and acceptance of whatever the self-styled pragmatists have decided is appropriate.

As far as the health care bill is concerned, your single point in it's favor is that it helped young people get back on their parent's insurance.

Which IS a good deal, if your ideal is to have everyone on private, employer based, profit driven insurance. Universal Medicare would have accomplished the same end you praised (coverage for children), and changed the entire game but taking the profit out of withholding coverage.

Regarding the Debt Ceiling debate, "saving" Social Security is a hollow win. SS never needed saving. What your doing is the equivalent of blowing an "anti-alligator" whistle on the top of a mountain, looking around at the ridiculous lack of alligators, and taking credit.

Again, the idea that what the President "accomplished" for Social Security and other social safety nets is a "win" only makes sense form a very particular POV. You have to buy into the rhetoric that the only way out of the financial crisis is to cut social spending. Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense.

Raise REVENUE. End of fucking story.

Of course, any of those goals would have been too hard to fight for, so why try, right? Pragmatism is so convenient...who knew that you could make a political career out of the philosophy that the easiest way to avoid losing is to avoid fighting at all?

[demwing]

253. Soundslike crabapples, Fruittree!

Those who stand for something are always accused of expecting everything by those who are willing to settle for anything.

[Fruittree]

304. Nope...

What I want and what I see as achievable in a society where I'm not the only person, to me anyway, are two different things...Doesn't mean I don't want something different but I've seen too often the consequences of thinking there's no difference between Dem and Rep - see Wisconsin and see the 8 years of Bush..

[No Elephants]

256. Just curious--why do you disable your profile?

[Fruittree]

305. Do I?

Just curious...why do you ask?

[robinlynne]

194. YES!

[Maraya1969]

219. Yes!

[defendandprotect]

220. Gore who wouldn't fight the elelction after word came down from the elites?

Gore who co-founded the DLC backed by Koch Bros, Pfizer and Chevron among other

criminal corpoations?

Gore who gave us Liebermann?

Gore who himself had career long funding from the oil industry?


Dean is a nice guy -- but he's not going to criticize the party or the president --

and he travelled the country with Koch Bros DLC Rahm Emmanuel soliciting rw Dems

to oppose liberal Dems --


We need two strong anti-war candidates -- not anyone already pre-bought and pre-owned

by corporations -- !!

[Fruittree]

232. I agree but what I think we need is a progressive

congress because that's where the power really is - I still believe that if Obama were sent more progressive legislation, he would sign it.

[stklurker]

296. Sense

Stop making sense. Don't you know the president can author and sign his own bills without any leadership from the party in the house or senate?

:sarcasm:

[defendandprotect]

298. hmmm....

Rather, I think we need to overturn the Congress --

and Obama is finished -- the mask is off -- it's over!


Try some Wm. Greider -- "Who will tell the people?" which was written in 1992 --

I read it then and I've been rereading it recently --

As he reports it -- the Democrats colluded with the GOP in 1978 -- while Dems were in FULL

POWER -- and long before Reagan -- to break the tax code for the benefit of the wealthy!


You might also benefit from some info re the Third Way -- which connects to DLC --

PPI, PNAC --


And make no mistake about the role of Third Way. Third Way runs the policy apparatus of the Democratic Party. In Congress, staffers attend regular Third Way policy briefings, where the group hands out pre-packaged legislative amendments in legal form, generic press releases, polling around those policy ideas, and talking points. It’s a soup-to-nuts policy apparatus. Most of these ideas are harmless – like increased volunteerism – but some are not, like various tax proposals.

The group has enormous juice. On the Congressional side, it has six honorary Senate co-Chairs, and seven House-side co-Chairs. Jim Clyburn, a co-Chair, is in the House Democratic leadership. Two current cabinet members are former co-Chairs. Steny Hoyer, the House minority whip, held regular briefings for the freshmen member staff in the last Congress.

(sic)

Finally, most of the Board members are from the FIRE Sector (Wall Street and real estate), including the head of equity trading for Goldman Sachs and one of the heads of investment banking for Morgan Stanley.

It’s a highly optimized political operation for the White House and Congressional Democrats, with PR muscle, elite validators, access, and policy-making infrastructure


http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/07/third-way-document-proves-democratic-party-supports-institutionalized-looting-by-banks.html



And, you really believe that Obama, who put Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid "on the table"

would sign progressive legilation?

Here's Rahm "crowing" about what he and Obama did and how "grateful" business should be to

Obama ...


Ramh .... crowing about preserving "private health care industry" ... business s/b grateful!

Posted on DU 8/12/10

”In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the

overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system;

the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18FE-70B2-A835FE1E7FA8D74C


If that doesn't make you sick to your stomach nothing will -- !!


We have tens of millions of suffering Americans who desperately need unviversal health care --

We have a real figure of unemployment more like 21% --

and this budget deal by Obama will create even more downward pressure on jobs and the economy.

[Fruittree]

306. I will admit, I skimmed a bit in reading as I'm on my

way out to release my desperate chickens but I will try to read as you say. What I'll respond quickly though is that even with what you say - everything is such a tangle of finances and debt and need - and not just here but in the whole world - that how can one person be held responsible for remaking not just the present but the past? What we have now is the result of decades of policy decisions. If we don't support business to an extent in a society where these businesses are citizen's only means of employment, then what? If we immediately institute a universal single payer (which I support) health care plan when the unemployment is so high, who pays for it? I like the idea that the wealthy pay more but that seems trapped in the Congress. And can they really pay for everything? Maybe they can but for how long? I believe that had Obama been sent a bill where the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expired, he would have signed it. Do you honestly believe otherwise?
My concern is that if enough people get into the mindset that Obama, Perry, Romney, Bachman = no difference - we're going to end up somewhere none of us really want to be. Obama may not be perfect but he's a heckuva lot better than the alternative and I suspect that Sanders, Feingold, Gore, Dean would all end up in the same stalemate that Obama has encountered until the congress changes.
Believe me, I don't like what I see either. I have children, I'm worried but I don't blame Obama. I blame all of us for letting ourselves get to this point. All this "progress" has turned out to be anything but...Now to the chickens.

[defendandprotect]

308. Well ... as to the chickens ....

what's going on with them -- are they overheating -- ?

Am I wrong in noticing that in this post ....

everything is such a tangle of finances and debt and need - and not just here but in the whole world - that how can one person be held responsible for remaking not just the present but the past?

your main concern seems to be exonerating Obama?

Now, I'm not going to say that Obama is to blame for it all, certainly, but it does seem to

me that it might help to look at this from a much higher perspective --

Like who has caused this international "tangle of finances/debt/need" -- ?

When you look at that question, the answer is clearly corporate-fascism put in play by elites.


And since the people allegedly have control over government, how did this all happen?

Capitalism is an economic system intended to move the a nation's wealth and natural resources

from the many to the few -- and it does that everywhere quite successfully!

Most of the world long ago discovered the evils of capitalism -- and it seems like Americans

are now waking up, as well.

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime.


There is only one way the rw can rise and that's via political violence -- and we've had 50

years of that quite out in the open. We have permitted corporations to attain great wealth

which has been used to buy elected officials and corrupt government and its agencies.


And, maybe at this moment, the place to begin thinking about this again is with Wm. Greider's

report on Democrats colluding with the GOP in 1978 to break the tax code for the rich?



If we don't support business to an extent in a society where these businesses are citizen's only means of employment, then what?

We have for 100 years or more been supporting "bus-i-ness" with our MIC and CIA --

See Brig. Gen. Stanley Darlington Butler on that one -- "War is a Racket!" --

There is no where business can go internationally -- or even for that matter -- domestically --

without the protection of our military! Why?


There can be no war and no MIC right now without Oil -- no Oil/no war --

That's why oil is a "national security issue" and why we've invaded the ME --

And why the horrors of the BP oil "spill" -- and Obama continuing drilling in Gulf and Arctic --


The bailout's were a mistake because they don't support business, they reward criminal behavior

by corporations -- banks, financial institutions, etal.

Detroit was certainly either dumb or strongly allied with the oil industry in keeping MPG

low and continuing with the gasoline engine. Which was it? Certainly they could have competed

with foreign cars but chose not to do so. Ergo, the "rescue" -- rather than taking over the

industry and putting the employees back to work making electric cars -- solar batteries.


Same with the banks -- why keep corrupt banks in business -- the banks should have been

NATIONALIZED as the economists advised Obama to do.


And we have these financial disasters because of deregulation --

America was looking to Obama to re-regulate capitalism -- that hasn't happened.

Rather, Obama has given us only more pro-corporate decisions and actions.

RATHER -- Obama put in place the very people who created the meltdown!

How does that make any sense to you or anyone else?


And rather than overturning NAFTA and CAFTA -- Obama has given us 3 new trade agreements!


If we immediately institute a universal single payer (which I support) health care plan when the unemployment is so high, who pays for it?

Begin with the question -- Why is unemployment so high?

Why is the FED setting the employment goals for our nation?

Why is the FED setting our economic agenda?

This is the responsibility of our Congress -- people we elect and can UN-Elect -- !!


Additionally, MEDICARE FOR ALL would save the government money -- and it would create

2.3 million new jobs.

ONLY large corporations want to keep this current system going -- it highly benefits them

because they have a hold on employees who fear changing jobs and losing benefits.

It puts employees in a downward spiral where worker production keeps rising but their

wages keep falling -- over 35 years now!

Small businesses want universal health care -- they are suffering unfair competition in

trying to provide health care for their employees in competition with larger corporations.

We would all benefit from immediately moving to MEDICARE FOR ALL.


I like the idea that the wealthy pay more but that seems trapped in the Congress. And can they really pay for everything? Maybe they can but for how long?

Look back to the 1950's when the tax rate on corporations/elites was at 90% --

That's where it should be now --

Who should make any profit greater than 10% on any investment?

We have CEO's making 500X what the average employee makes?

And, what do you mean "Can they really pay for everything?" We all pay together --

and when tax rates on the rich are progressively set -- according to their earnings --

we have a healthier economy -- and investments in business rather than profit-taking --

and investment in the nation rather than profit taking.


I believe that had Obama been sent a bill where the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expired, he would have signed it. Do you honestly believe otherwise?

I have no way of knowing the answer to that question --

However, I think the nation is tired of the "back room" deals Obama has made with Big Pharma

and the private H/C industry and with the GOP. These are matters for the Congress to decide

and pass -- just as unemployment benefits/extensions should be. Not something for a president

to be negotiating behind closed doors.

And, certainly this last farce where Obama responded to the GOP game-playing by putting SS and

Medicare/Medicaid on the table pretty much will finish Obama and the Democratic Party.

Social Security has nothing whatsoever to do with the debt -- rather its SURPLUS helps mask the

immense MIC debt -- and btw, Obama just increased the MIC budget!

Social Security was never intended to run a SURPLUS -- that was engineered by rw to create a slush

fund for elites for taxs cuts and wars!


My concern is that if enough people get into the mindset that Obama, Perry, Romney, Bachman = no difference - we're going to end up somewhere none of us really want to be. Obama may not be perfect but he's a heckuva lot better than the alternative and I suspect that Sanders, Feingold, Gore, Dean would all end up in the same stalemate that Obama has encountered until the congress changes.
Believe me, I don't like what I see either. I have children, I'm worried but I don't blame Obama. I blame all of us for letting ourselves get to this point. All this "progress" has turned out to be anything but...Now to the chickens.

Rather I think we seriously need to end "lesser evil" voting which has only moved the party

and Congress to the right. And, with Obama's latest moves on SS/Medicare, certainly if there

is any difference between the parties, it is fading fast!!

And I certainly wouldn't give Obama another crack at SS or Medicare --!!


We also need to end fear-based thinking if we want to turn this nation around and regain

control of our government and our Congress. Btw, our Congress is under the control now of

the oil and coal industries! Does Obama not know that? Does our Dem Party not know that?

How often have they spoken of it? See Al Gore's Rolling Stone article.


No one is looking for a "perfect" president -- we are simply looking for someone who is NOT

pro-corporate -- a liberal/progressive who will work for the people, not elites.


The greatest issue we face right now is Global Warming and it may be too late --

that's something to think about if you have children --

There was a 50 year gap in Global Warning's effects being felt -- except that the glaciers

have been melting since the 1940's -- and we are now about to begin to feel the effects

of human activity from 1960 onward.

The melting of the glaciers is bringing more earthquakes and more severe earthquakes --

and increasingly catastrophic weather --

We have to think about the 103 nuclear reactors we have in US which will take 6 months to

shut down properly -- each of them -- and I'm not sure if that includes disposing of the

waste in some safe fashion?

The Fukushima reactors will take a year to shut down properly given their design.

This may make the difference between "a whimper or a bang."



:hi:

[Fruittree]

309. I'll reply piece by piece later but I agree with most of what you

say on quick reading - put simply- my question is how to get from here to there with minimal suffering for people who can't afford to suffer (most of us)? The theory of what you say is great but the practical creation is mind-boggling to me. As to the chickens - I have teenage chickens refusing to leave the chick pen they were in and it makes for very crowded sleeping conditions so by morning, they are ready to come out! I've just set up what I think are very enticing conditions in the big pen and am hoping for the move tonight!

[defendandprotect]

310. Obviously, Global Warming is going to bring immense new suffering .... for all of us ...

and that is being completely ignored --

Think the solutions are something we all have to work on together --

but first we have to understand what has happendd.


:)


Don't worry about reply -- except if you want to take exception to something --

I wrote that up mainly for my Journal --

[Fruittree]

311. your main concern seems to be exonerating Obama?

My main concern is not exonerating congress which has blocked or caused to be watered down a lot of what he's tried to do. And given that - he has accomplished a lot. I see the difference between him and Dean or Sanders as one of style and also of position. As president, he has to try to bring people together or risk getting nothing whatsoever done. Bernie Sander's role is to push for a purer agenda - He's one of many and doing exactly what he should be. Were he in Obama's position, he would have to compromise too. And given the state of our "news" industry, where does this "Obama caved" meme come from anyway?

and Obama continuing drilling in Gulf and Arctic --

Don't like this either but we have a society that thanks to past decisions is based on the use of petroleum. Obama has tried to bring in more alternative sources and he just signed a bill which requires an increase in mpg to 54. There is plenty of money being pumped into all kinds of research but it takes time to go from lab to application - Could he really single-handedly be expected to "take over the auto industry"? Really??


Additionally, MEDICARE FOR ALL would save the government money


Absolutely. And the healthcare bill allows for states to institute single payer if they want- as Vermont has. Canada which has single payer also, in my understanding, did not do it all at once but rather province by province. Once people start seeing the benefits, I think that's the direction we're heading. It takes time particularly given the political climate.


I have no way of knowing the answer to that question --

However, I think the nation is tired of the "back room" deals Obama has made with Big Pharma

and the private H/C industry and with the GOP. These are matters for the Congress to decide

and pass -- just as unemployment benefits/extensions should be. Not something for a president

to be negotiating behind closed doors.


I think you do know the answer but would prefer to avoid it - but that aside...So when Obama acts alone as you say on healthcare, unemployment benefits, auto bailout and tries to institute his agenda by what power the president has, he's wrong. But when he waits for congress or tries to work with them and compromise - he's also wrong. So what would be right in your opinion?


And rather than overturning NAFTA and CAFTA -- Obama has given us 3 new trade agreements!

Can he really do that on his own? Would that not have to come from Congress and, further, if we have agreements with other countries do we really have the right to terminate them one-sidedly because we don't like the way it's going? Someone in the past (Clinton) made the stupid deals and now we're all stuck with the consequences. I have family in Mexico and NAFTA has been no paradise for them either..


Look back to the 1950's when the tax rate on corporations/elites was at 90% --


Definitely the tax rate should be higher but beyond that, money shouldn't be in so few hands. Look at what people get paid millions to do!! Meanwhile recent graduates like my son and his friends - smart, talented, energetic young people can't find jobs - It makes me sick!


As to your final point on global warming - I agree but again - I say give us a congress filled with Bernie Sanders', Nancy Pelosis, Alan Graysons and you'd see a different Obama.

Be well and thanks for making me think!

[BuelahWitch]

231. There was a Draft Gore movement in 2006-2007

He still chose not to enter the race, even though he probably would have won in a landslide.

[rhett o rick]

236. Only if Gore promised to fight for a fair election. nm

[tomp]

260. i won't vote for gore or dean. i want a progressive.

neither of those two qualify in my book of progressives.

[defendandprotect]

299. True -- Gore was a co-founder of the DLC ... !!!

And Gore also gave the "nod" to Clinton re overturning 60 years of

Welfare Guarantees!!

[lovuian]

266. that would be a great ticket

and I like Bernie Sanders and Kucinich

[Whisp]

293. I kinda like Ziegfield and Roy

or maybe Benny and Joon

[yurbud]

206. how about one who just works for the people who voted for him?

[defendandprotect]

221. First I think we need a thread to rehash what went wrong with Obama ....

let's not make the same mistake again -- !!

How many more Democrats in the Democratic Party are willing to do exactly what

Obama has done?

We need two strong anti-war candidates -- two humanists -- two people with conscience --

willing to criticize the party and Obama --

[loyalsister]

271. HOW would they accomplish those things?

Why is it they didn't have leadership positions to leverage in congress to get all of those things done via legislation? Really how would this be done with the opposition of extremists?

[defendandprotect]

297. What are you saying ... that the rw is omnipotent -- ???

Well, Obama did resurrect the GOP from the ashes after 2008 --

and he has obten behaved as though they are "god" and/or Superman combined!!

As we just saw again in his caving to Boehner re the budget ceiling fakery --


Why is it they didn't have leadership positions to leverage in congress to get all of those things done via legislation? Really how would this be done with the opposition of extremists?

Did you notice the back room deals that Obama made with Big Pharma and the private H/C

industry which trampled MEDICARE FOR ALL?

Why didn't Congress protest those deals?

Do you notice that our economy is in the hands of the FED -- a private bank which sets our

economic, employment goals -- rather than in the hands of our Congress which is supposed to

be doing that job.

Did you notice that there will be a new Super Congress which will supercede the Congress we

have in place -- which we elect and which we can unelect if we don't like what they're doing?

Did you notice Harry Reid asking why he wasn't included in the private negotiations that Obama

held with Boehner? This isn't something that should be left up to one individual -- it should

be debated in the open in our Congress -- so that every citizen can hear it!!



"Extremists" -- ?

Everything the rw has now and for the last 20 years has been funded by their wealthy elites.

GOP gave start-up funding for the Christian Coalition --

Richard Scaife funded Dobson's group -- and other rw wealthy financed Bauer's group.

GOP/"pro-lifers" -- were funded by white Christian militia groups -- and Supreme Court failed

to permit RICO laws to be used against them! They also solicited volunteer protesters from

Methadone clinics - and paid them!

GOP radicalized the NRA and used it to target not only liberals and moderates in the Democratic

Party -- but liberals and moderates in their own party, thereby moving the Congress to the

far right.

GOP/T-baggers are funded by Koch Bros. and run out of a PR firm which guarantees them publicity!


And, if you don't know it, Koch Bros. funded the DLC and infiltrated the Dem Prty for 20 years!!


OK -- so where was the Democratic Party in all of this time -- how come you didn't hear about

any of this? Why have we had more than 25 years of SILENCE from the Dem Party --

omnipotent in the face of RW propaganda?


Try to understand that this couldn't have happened unless the Democratic Party was standing

down from its responsibilities to protect the nation from corporatism/fascism. And to protect

the Constitutional/Bill of Rights!


Try some Wm. Greider -- "Who will tell the people?" -- available in most libraries --

As he reports it -- the Democrats colluded with the GOP in 1978 -- while Dems were in FULL

POWER -- and long before Reagan -- to break the tax code for the benefit of the wealthy!


Let me know if you need more info --

but also keep in mind this is a liberal nation --

that's why the RW has to have complete control over our press --



:)

[littlewolf]

2. as I have said before ... Russ .... or Dr. Dean .....

[Jackpine Radical]

12. Neither of those 2 would ever do it.

And personally, I don't endorse a Primary effort unless it's obvious Obama is going to lose. At that point, a primary effort might make it clear just WHY he's losing, and it's not because he didn't go far enough right.


BTW, I wrote a post yesterday warning of primary & leftist 3rd-party possibilities, & it got locked because everyone thought I was ADVOCATING such a solution. I was not, and do not.

[libmom74]

115. Censorship

it's oh so democratic! In a DLC/New Democrat/3rd Way sort of way. :sarcasm: I personally do think a primary effort would be good, Obama by caving on every basic democratic principle has lost all credibility and by going along with Repug framing of issues and passing Repub friendly legislation (where Repugs got 98% of what they want regardless of massive public opposition) the economy is now on even weaker footing, more jobs will be lost and the Democrats can't even go out on the campaign trail and argue against the Republicans talking points because most of them voted for the same legislation.

[defendandprotect]

222. +1 --

[defendandprotect]

116. How "obvious" was 2010 to you?

[robinlynne]

196. i think it is imperative that we have these discussions. Who is going to change the

Democratic Party if not us?

[defendandprotect]

223. And, first, we have to find out what's left of the Democratic Party ... !!!

How many Democrats right now would pick up where Obama left off?

How many elected Democrats see this power shift to the right and are willing to go

with it to save themselves?



And make no mistake about the role of Third Way. Third Way runs the policy apparatus of the Democratic Party. In Congress, staffers attend regular Third Way policy briefings, where the group hands out pre-packaged legislative amendments in legal form, generic press releases, polling around those policy ideas, and talking points. It’s a soup-to-nuts policy apparatus. Most of these ideas are harmless – like increased volunteerism – but some are not, like various tax proposals.

The group has enormous juice. On the Congressional side, it has six honorary Senate co-Chairs, and seven House-side co-Chairs. Jim Clyburn, a co-Chair, is in the House Democratic leadership. Two current cabinet members are former co-Chairs. Steny Hoyer, the House minority whip, held regular briefings for the freshmen member staff in the last Congress.

On the administration side, former Third Way board member Bill Daley is now White House chief of staff. Ron Klain, who was Biden’s Chief of Staff, is now with Third Way. The White House is pretty much full of Third Way-style apparatchiks.


http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/07/third-way-document-proves-democratic-party-supports-institutionalized-looting-by-banks.html


How many elected Democrats aren't asking themselves if this is illegitimate power --

and what they should be doing about it?

[swilton]

257. By the time that it's 'obvious' that Obama will lose

it will be too late to find somebody...It would not be obvious to some of the people here on DU until Obama loses the 2012 election.

What would be the selling points of this administration???? The only people who are pleased with him are his Wall Street crowd - and they are not the majority.

The Democrats need to find somebody the sooner the better....They have nothing to run on right now other than Obama's rhetoric. And after his first term in office revealed his doing precisely the opposite of what he campaigned on in the 2008 campaign, why should/would believe what he promises now? He has lost all credibility - the longer the Democratic Party sticks with him, he will drag them down quicker than the sinking of the Titanic.

[maddogesq]

35. BERNIE, BERNIE, BERNIE.

OMG, could you imagine a general with Sanders v. Paul? My mouth waters...

[abelenkpe]

50. Paul?

Screw that. That guy is a lunatic.

[me b zola]

203. v, kind of like vs which is really just saying versus

...meaning against.

[Jackpine Radical]

204. As in Roe v. Wade.

Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific

[mwrguy]

89. SANDERS!

Amen

[defendandprotect]

117. Sen. Bernie Sanders --

[AllyCat]

112. No!! We need Russ when we recall Walker in January!

[Buenaventura]

124. agreed! n/t

[Fantastic Anarchist]

141. Nice Username!

Nice username, comrade.

:toast:

[defendandprotect]

114. Dean is NOT calling out the president -- BERNIE SANDERS is ... !!

[meegbear]

3. If Nader supports him, I ain't voting for him

[bowens43]

6. why not?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

75. Nader is going to rally many Dems around Obama for being "100%" sure of something.

I just don't think he understands the electorate. He was also positive that Gore would win Florida in 2000.

[socialist_n_TN]

79. Gore DID win FL in '00

The SCOTUS took the win away and awarded it to Bush the Lesser.

[yellowcanine]

102. Yes but without Nader Bush the Lesser couldn't have stolen it.

[paparush]

105. Had Gore won his home state, FL wouldn't have been an issue.

[Enthusiast]

139. Thanks for the Republican talking points.

So refreshing.

[derby378]

173. Big heapin' dose of truth

Florida could have been neutralized if Gore had taken Tennessee, but that didn't happen. And Gore wouldn't have had to embrace any GOP talking points, either.

[robinlynne]

198. bullshit. Gore won. There never was any doubt about that. only if you drank the kool-aid.

[derby378]

201. I don't doubt that Gore won Florida fair and square...

...but we were tlking about Tennessee, unless you have new information to share with the class.

[customerserviceguy]

176. Instead of that trite phrase

Why not tell us why the person you're responding to is simply wrong?

Al Gore simply didn't have what it took to win what should have been a blowout election. He was part of an administration that brought the US back from the Reagan/Bush fiasco, economically.

I will give a bit of blame to Bill Clinton, if it had not been for the Lewinsky scandal, Gore might have won easily enough not to have needed either Tennessee or Florida. I'll also toss some blame to Janet Reno for the way she handled the Elian Gonzales case, that picture of a helmeted, armed cop/soldier aiming his weapon at a helpless child and the man holding him enraged the Florida Cuban community, and really turned out the Bush vote.

There are a lot of reasons that Gore lost, and the Supreme Court is only the last of them.

[frylock]

179. if 250,000+ registered DEMS in FL had voted for gore instead of bush..

then they couldn't have stolen it.

[JackRiddler]

225. You are excusing a crime.

Nader didn't commit a crime.

The Bush mob did.

[No Elephants]

258. Not the point and not necessarily so anyway.

[defendandprotect]

300. Right ... there was no Jon Ellis/Fox, no fascist rally to stop vote count, no Supreme Court -- !!!

:rofl: --- :rofl: --- :rofl: ---

[Fantastic Anarchist]

145. It's convenient that some people forget that the election was given away by the USSC.

And that the election was stolen. Some people whine and bitch about the Democratic party not being left enough, but when someone actually tries to do something about it, they get excoriated (even here on DU). Nader is a million times more progressive than Obama, yet he's vilified.

I just don't get it.

(I voted for Obama falling for the hype; boy, what a disappointment he turned out to be).

[No Elephants]

264. Very simple.

The posters here who "bitch and whine" that the Democratic Party has gone too far to the right are not the same people who are criticizing efforts to primary Obama or vilifying Nader.

The group that professes to love the Party just about as it is are also the group that excoriate Nader and anyone speaking of primarying Obama.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

286. You may be on to something. ;) n/t

[defendandprotect]

302. +1000% ---

Nader has always been a strong critic of the Dem Party for good reason --

Did you see his recent exchange with Howard Dean re corporate funding of the party?

It was posted here. Wow -- !!

The Koch Bros. DLC really didn't want the funding discussed -- or voters to wake up

to what was actually going on in the Dem Party they were infiltrating for 20 years!

Scapegoating Nader was the usual rw tactic -- sideline him -- silence him.


Well, I wasn't able to listen to Obama or see what others were seeing in him -- and

very sorry I did vote for him -- but until everyone else wakes up and decides on

a Plan B, I'm kinda stuck in limbo.

But from now on, I will vote my conscience -- that's the end of the "lesser evil" voting

which only moves the party and Congress further to the right.



:hi:


Here's the exchange between Nader and Howard Dean -- !!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1675374&mesg_id=1675452

[skyounkin]

119. Gore DID win in FL.

[Ozymanithrax]

96. Sanders is an independent, and to challenge obama..

would have to become a Democrat into order to primary him. Otherwise, he could run as an independent.

[defendandprotect]

120. Nader supported Obama -- did you vote for Obama?

[No Elephants]

265. Nader endorsed Edwards. He may have supported Obama over McCain, I don't know.

If so, I can't fault him for that.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7647.html

He has since recommended impeaching Obama. http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/03/ralph-nader-impeach-obama-bush-and-obama-are-war-criminals/

[tomp]

262. and people say you're not open-minded. nt

[Name removed]

277. Deleted message

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

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

295. So, come general election, Obama vs. Some Republican, Nader says...

"Please vote for Obama."

What do you do?

[tritsofme]

4. Yes! Lee Mercer Jr will be the champion of all true progressives!

[harmonicon]

33. all three!! nt.

[Iggo]

90. National and International. (n/t)

[JBoy]

161. Is Jeb Bush still all in his house with disease?

[Iggo]

163. I'll have to check with Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence. (n/t)

[meow mix]

5. id only go back to working mode for a challanger.

put someone up and im there.

[davidwparker]

32. +1

[Fantastic Anarchist]

147. +2

[woodsprite]

7. I think a lot of conservative Dems or Independents

wouldn't vote for Bernie. I like him, and think he'd be good, but only if we could guarantee a win. I think a lot of people don't know anything about him (or only what is said on the Repub talking head shows) so they wouldn't put their vote behind him - or worse yet, people just wouldn't vote - period. I don't know what the answer is. We need to get back to the Democratic values that shaped America, but I think to primary Obama would be to divide the party, turning the Presidential election into a total crapshoot. Let the splintering Republican party work in our favor instead of fighting it with our own splintering party.

*edited to clean up readability.

[demosincebirth]

16. "win" is the name of the game.

[go west young man]

159. Win what? Change you can believe in? You've already won that.

And look what it's given us. I do hope your post was sarcasm.

[demosincebirth]

192. It's a matter of prospective. I use no sarcasm, Sir.

[JDPriestly]

24. People did not know anything about Obama in 2008 either.

But they knew they wanted change and Obama promised it.

Obama has not delivered. Bernie would. Bernie is a guy you have to like. He is kind of funny but he is so sincere that you can't dislike him. He would make a different but very impressive candidate. I think he would win. He has spent a long time in Congress, and he knows where he stands on things. He won't be wavering and confusing people during the campaigns. He thinks consistently. And what he says makes sense.

[Rabblevox]

57. There is no such thing as a "Conservative Dem" you are either...

pro- human rights, pro-union, anti-war, and anti-corporation, or you are not a Democrat.

Sanders is a Democrat, so is Kucinich, so is Wyden, and so is Nader (Yes,...NADER!)

Give me a relative outsider, speaking truth to power, over a slick suit mouthing empty (but inspiring) phrases any day.

[emsimon33]

71. Right on!!!!!

[whistler162]

87. Ah... another litmus test "democrat"!

senseless and stupid.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

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

[FiveGoodMen]

168. My, but that's a great characterization!

:toast: :rofl:

[frylock]

180. beat. down.

:applause:

[Fantastic Anarchist]

150. Sadly ...

Sadly, the party as a whole no longer holds those values consistently. Sure, some in the party do, but not the whole of the party.

[INdemo]

104. Would someone explain to me what a conservative Democrat is

....is a conservative Democrat a Republican? What is the difference?

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time” Harry S Truman quotes

[Mnemosyne]

165. A conservative Democrat is a repube that infiltrates as a D, cross-filing is a major culprit in

taking away our party. Apathetic and lazy voters that do not educate themselves, that only vote for whomever is listed as D on the ballot, are more than partially to blame, never knowing they have actually voted for a cross-filed R. When I began voting I was guilty of it myself, if there was a D, I voted for them.

I have not been able to find a history of cross-filing, nor a list of states that allow such deceptive bullshit. PA does and it sucks.

Just my observation over the years and humble opinion...

[Bodhi BloodWave]

250. does that mean a liberal democrat is a socialist /communist who has infiltrated the dems?

or does the infiltration only go in one direction?

and no, i'm not totally serious as my combined examples show :p

[Mnemosyne]

252. If the lib dems have infiltrated, they have certainly done a terrible job of it.

:rofl: :hi:

[No Elephants]

269. LOL!

[jmodden]

111. SANDERS!!!!

Bernie is The Real Thing

He's from VT so I can understand some questionable votes on gun control.

[defendandprotect]

123. It's a liberal nation -- the voters are liberals --

why worry about a handful of "conservative Dems" who backed Koch Bros DLC --

or "independents" who are likely involved in a protest vote, at any rate, against

the Democratic Party?


You can't have it both ways -- by now, it's pretty obvious that Obama does not support

"Democratic values that shapped America" --

and rather than "dividing the party," I think it's more likely that we would simply

be picking up what's left of the Koch Bros. DLC Dem Party and walking off with it!!

[stopbush]

8. Who is Nader? (sarcasm)

[Fearless]

9. K&R! ...Anyone but Bush syndrome strkes again... sadly. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

10. Is Nader still accepting Republican donations to support his political activities?

What a perfect cover for him.

[JTFrog]

21. Of course.

The pukes will be the sole beneficiaries once again. It stands to reason they will continue to fund his efforts.

[roxiejules]

58. Are the Democrats still accepting donations from Corporate criminals?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3262027


Nader: I think just what you said about that group, it was a legitimate smear. Do you know what a legitimate smear is, Howard? It's a smear premeditated and knowing.

We don't even know this group. Don't try to tar us with this. There have been groups that supported your campaign you wouldn't want to have breakfast with, even if you were starving.


Dean: Then just renounce them. That's all I ask.


Nader: Well, fine, I renounce them. You know what else to renounce. Do you renounce Pfizer and Chevron and other companies who were criminally convicted of crimes by the federal government, giving millions of dollars in the year 2000 to the Democrat Party, and they did not return the money? That's a matter of record.

[defendandprotect]

125. "from Pfizer and Chevron and other companies criminally convicted of crimes by Fed government--!!

Nader: Well, fine, I renounce them. You know what else to renounce. Do you renounce Pfizer and Chevron and other companies who were criminally convicted of crimes by the federal government, giving millions of dollars in the year 2000 to the Democrat Party, and they did not return the money? That's a matter of record.

Thank you --

and Ralph Nader -- :)

And that's a pretty strong indictment for Howard Dean also being out --

nice guy, but he's with this corporate Dem Party!!

[iandhr]

11. Any moron who does not think...

... there is a differnce between Dems and the GOP need to have there head examined. Mr. Nader is partly responsible for Bush being President.

[A Simple Game]

14. And any moron that doesn't think the difference is

getting smaller every day needs to have their head examined.

Nader was wrong about Bush and Gore, but he wouldn't be so far off if he said it today.

[Hawkowl]

39. No. He's not

The Supreme Court stole the election. Gore won Florida. Fox News is more responsible than Nader.

You are simply repeating right wing myths.

[leftynyc]

64. If Nader hadn't LIED though his fucking

teeth about not campaigning in a state that was up for grabs, the court wouldn't have been able to steal it. He's useless and nothing but an enabler for the right.

[Rabblevox]

95. makes it a real bitch that Nader was right, dunnit? /nt

[KittyWampus]

70. No, you're just attempting to revise history.

[dbonds]

83. If you in any way think that Gore didn't win you have been fooled.

Gore won 2000 and it was stolen from him. To say anything else is to propagate right wing myths.

[defendandprotect]

126. +1 --

except that actually, it looked like the Dem Party/DLC did the scapegoating

of Nader -- which made it easier for them to not challenge the outcome --

not acknowledge all that happened --

and, it smeared one of their biggest critics -- quite conveniently!

[dbonds]

142. I'll buy the DLC in that...

but isn't that still right wing?

[defendandprotect]

156. True -- Koch Bros. funded DLC is right wing -- but still Dem Party ....

and often still supported here --

YOU are of course right -- but not everyone here sees it that way --- yet -- !!


News of the DLC connection to "Third Way" is still making its way thru the DU grapevine!!




:hi:

[bahrbearian]

130. No, you're just attempting to revise history.

[frylock]

181. fucking ridiculous..

you have no clue as to what the fuck you're talking. no fucking clue.

[No Elephants]

273. According to whose numbers? Finally tally in Florida showed Bush winning by a bit over 500 votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000

I'm not blaming Nader for that.

[SkyDaddy7]

52. I would say he is responsible.

WOW...How different this country would be right now had Nader not ran!!!!

[No Elephants]

274. I guess we can all imagine whatever we choose.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

66. exactly

[Stuckinthebush]

68. Of course he is

You will have those who scream that he played no role but his inclusion made the race close enough to steal. Ralph can go to hell. Anyone who says he had nothing to do with Bush being president is acting the fool. I am no big Obama fan but I'll vote for him because the only ral alternative is GOP.

[socialist_n_TN]

84. WHY IN THE FUCK DO WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT

"...close enough to steal."????? That just gets my goat BIG time. If the electoral system is so rigged that we can't trust it to be fair unless we have an OVERWHELMING majority (like '08) the WHAT GOOD IS IT????? Shouldn't we be outraged about the STEALING OF ELECTIONS rather than some guy who exercised his Constitutional right to run for office?

[Stuckinthebush]

91. Sure

But that wasn't the point discussed by the poster. In the current system we have two real choices - Dem or GOP. A third party candidate hurts the chances of one of those parties.

[defendandprotect]

136. Gore won the election, including in Florida --

the longer you refuse to see that the election was stolen

the bigger the favor you are doing for those who stole it --

2000 had nothing to do with Nader --

You might also notice that the Democratic Party did not protest the election --

neither did Gore -- the only people who did were those connected to the House

"black" caucus because they were less fearful of telling the truth about what

went down.

Gore won the popular vote by more than 500,000 votes+ --

and he won the election according to the journalists who did the recount --

and he won "no matter how the votes were counted -- including in Florida" --

[defendandprotect]

131. Thanks for that ironic point -- however, Gore won 2000, including Florida ...

but it's almost humorous that there are those who just refuse to see

the RW hand in the stealing of the election --

somehow they just miss seeing the role the SC played -- the fascist rally --

the Jon Ellis/Fox link --

or the fact that 300,000 "Democrats" in Florida voted for Bush --


For them, that would make no difference --

They have their scapegoat and its all they need --



Meanwhile, the fact that the election was stolen continues to be ignored by

the Democratic Party!! Even Gore has never mentioend it as anything but his

personal disappointment!!


Though in his recent Rolling Stone article he does make clear that "the Congress

is under the control of the oil and coal industries" -- !!!

And that we have a Goebbels' style corporate-press -- and fascism in America --

though he doesn't actually use those words!!

[frylock]

182. these fucking dumbnuts will never understand despite overwhelming evidence..

it's like dealing with flat-earthers.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

155. Quoted for truth!!!

'WHY IN THE FUCK DO WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT

...close enough to steal."????? That just gets my goat BIG time. If the electoral system is so rigged that we can't trust it to be fair unless we have an OVERWHELMING majority (like '08) the WHAT GOOD IS IT????? Shouldn't we be outraged about the STEALING OF ELECTIONS rather than some guy who exercised his Constitutional right to run for office?"

Hear, hear!!

:toast:

[tomp]

263. talk about morons....nt

[No Elephants]

270. Also responsible, Clinton, Gore, Lieberman and Florida Democratic voters, Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris

the Supreme Court of the United States, and so on.

Democrats need to grow up. No one has any duty to stay out of a Presidential race.

Republicans get challenged all the time. Ross Perot, Constitutional Party, Libertarians, Teabaggers, whatever. Republicans aren't saying, "What a nerve Buchanan, Browne and Phillips had to challenge Bush from the Right. They almost cost Bush Florida."

Why do Democrats think they're entitled to perfectly clear field on the left? Very undemocratic.

[Lorien]

13. Good. nt

[waronxmas]

15. Since when did Nader become a Democrat?

You don't get a say who runs unless you are a member of the party. If you don't like the options the Democratic Party offers, go off and join some other party and put up another candidate or yourself. Oh, yeah, it didn't work out that well for you before...

[JDPriestly]

30. Did you read the article, waronxmas?

Nader said he doesn’t plan to launch another campaign for president, either as an independent candidate or as a primary challenger to President Obama.

http://news.yahoo.com/nader-almost-100-percent-chance-democratic-primary-challenger-020811577.html

Read the article before you respond. Nader will not be running. He is just explaining his analysis of the situation. Also, he may know things about what is going on behind the scenes that we do not know.

[davidwparker]

34. ... the party left him.

[defendandprotect]

140. Ironic point because corporations have been picking the candidates we get to vote for -- !!

And they've been doing that for decades now --

And guess who tried to get us to see that long, long ago --

Ralph Nader -- the man who made clear that while corporations are giving

us the candidates they want us to vote for --

We don't get to pick their Board members -- do we?

[defendandprotect]

224. When did Koch Bros. funded DLC begin to infiltrate the Democratic Party ... ?

That's the real question --

Koch Bros DLC was harbored within the Democratic Party for 20 years --

influencing the party and its agenda -- selecting its candidates --

even its presidential candidates!

[Yo_Mama]

17. Does this mean Nader is planning to run?

I think people want a primary not because they want to get rid of Obama but because they want to change his focus.

[ProSense]

18. "in an interview with

The Daily Caller"

So Nader is talking to a RW rag about a primary challenge to Obama.

Clown!

[LiberalLovinLug]

45. So What?

For one thing the RW has a huge footprint in media ownership. Its hard to find any progressive outlets.

Second, what does it matter who the messenger is? Kusinich as been on FOX News. Does that mean that Dennis has lost all credibility as well?

[cali]

230. Hard to find Progressive outlets? You mean like The Nation? Or Mother Jones?

Yes, it matters that this interview was given to a wingnut site.

[Shining Jack]

169. Maybe you're on to something.

Obama's Contentious Fox News Interview.

http://youtu.be/URJUSlfTgGU

So Obama talked to Fox "news" therefore:

Clown!

[frylock]

183. obama sat with bill o'reilly before the super bowl..

did you have a point?

[Name removed]

248. Deleted message

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

[RetroLounge]

259. and Obama sat with Bill O'Reilly on fox

Clown!

:puke:

RL

[peace frog]

19. A primary challenger is a good idea however

I'll reserve judgement until the candidate is announced. Much as I love Bernie Sanders and Howard Dean, I doubt anyone so well-known and loved among progressives would rise to the challenge. As for the likelihood of Obama moving to the left in response to the primary challenge: his track record for keeping campaign promises is dismal, so anything he says or does to please liberals during the campaign should be treated as highly suspect.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

77. 1980 - Kennedy challenged Carter - enter Reagan. And Perot helped Clinton.

It's not a good idea right now IMHO.

[peace frog]

80. My roundabout point was this

I don't think any primary challenger is of any danger to Obama.

[defendandprotect]

149. Carter should have been challenged by a number of Democrats ... that they didn't ....

challenge him was a huge mistake --

and very telling about the party --

At that time -- with the Dems in full power -- the Democrats were colluding

with the GOP to break the tax code for the benefit of the rich --

See: Wm. Greider's "Who will tell the people?" -- page 80


Also see this post on this thread --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4948712&mesg_id=4949285

that info came from the post above it -- !!


Additionally, Ted Kennedy -- given Chappaquiddick -- was in no condition to challenge

anyone. Later information suggests that Kennedy was framed at Chappaquiddick --

evidence from White House tapes suggests that where John Dean mentions the innocent

in a way which suggests that at Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy was walking into a

"bear trap." E. Howard Hunt and some of the other White House "plumbers" are suspected

in that event.

We've had 50 years of rw political violence which is the only way the rw can rise --

here or anywhere else.

Certainly the way was constantly being cleared for Nixon and the rw takeover --

[jeff47]

187. Perot wasn't in the Republican primary.

And the problem comes from electing ineffectual Democrats who have to be reminded who their party is.

Carter's done great work after his presidency, but he was not an effective President.

[No Elephants]

276. Slow down. 1980 Kennedy challenged Carter. And? Are you claiming Carter would have

won, if only Kennedy had not challenged him? If so, what do you cite to support that claim?

Kennedy was still young then. He could rasily have "waited his turn," rather than challenge a sitting Democratic President, which is much harder than running when no one is up for re-election.

As loyal a Democrat as Kennedy was, my take is that he ran because he thought Carter was going to lose the WH for Democrats.

"Perot helped Clinton." How do you know that? That has been highly debated. Many sources say Perot hurt both candidates equally, some say Perot hurt Clinton more and some say Perot hurt Bush more.

[defendandprotect]

143. Check out this post on this thread ... .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4948712&mesg_id=4949285

and that info came courtesy of the post which appears above this mine -- !!


Howard Dean is a nice guy -- but he was running all over the country with

Koch Bros DLC Rahm Emmanuel who was soliciting conservative Dems to run against

more liberal Dems --

Howard Dean is too much of a party player --

We need someone more concerned with principles/conscience over party!!




:hi:

[peace frog]

162. Then you will be delighted and relieved to know

that Howard Dean would never consent to primary Obama. High five!!




:hi:

[No Elephants]

278. Everything is not about Obama, or even about 2012. It's fine with me if the only

thing that emerges from a primary challenge is that someone in power in the Dmocratic Party thinks twice about the next DLC pick.

[gordianot]

20. Gee did Ralph get some Koch money?

Not real happy with Obama right now however putting Nader in the mix of opposition shows for me someone is trying once again to commit sabotage.

[roxiejules]

69. The DLC and Third Way did

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1234542&mesg_id=1234816

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2445516

Bradley Foundation

Georgia-Pacific Foundation

[defendandprotect]

151. Koch Bros. funded the DLC ... and still lots of corrupt corporate money in party --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4948712&mesg_id=4949285

that info comes from the poster above my post --

[jberryhill]

22. Hmmm.... who would make a good "Bernie Sanders".... /nt

[beac]

23. Ralph Nader -- the GOP's best operative.

Go Cheney yourself, Ralph!

[BlueIris]

25. He won't be the nominee.

I have never been more certain of that.

[rury]

26. ME: 100% sure that Nader's an egotistical asshole

OBAMA 2012!!!!!!!!

[karynnj]

27. The only way he can really be 100% sure is if he will do it as a last resort

The fact is that the first primaries are less than a half year away - and there is NO ONE out there raising money. In addition, all the possible big names have either said "no" or have otherwise shown no interest.

[russspeakeasy]

28. "not a nader fan" ? I'm not a fan of ANY crazy people...

"obama will be primaried" ...I'll bet it's raining someplace...
quit posting what nader says or thinks.:argh:

[Itchinjim]

29. Go the fuck away Ralph.

[K8-EEE]

53. +1 "From the man who told us Bush and Gore were exactly the same.."

Now brings you, LET'S FIND A WAY TO MAKE MICHELE BACHMAN PRESIDENT, HMMMM....

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[w4rma]

36. Very good. (nt)

[onehandle]

37. Thanks for Bush, Ralph. Go away. nt

[dbonds]

46. Ralph didn't give us Bush, that was election fraud

And Lieberman didn't help matters.

[frylock]

184. neither did all those registered dems in FL that voted bush

[dbonds]

186. That would probably fall under election fraud.

[frylock]

190. probably, but it's so much more fun to engage in the two-minute hate

[bluestate10]

237. You continue to live that dream. Wake TFU. nt

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[hay rick]

42. Welcome to DU.

[Miss_Underestimated]

55. +1

[joanbarnes]

40. Dean, Kucinich, Feingold, Gore, Sanders, to name a few.

[AngryOldDem]

76. I'll add Grayson to that list.

Too bad Weiner DQ'd himself.

[defendandprotect]

153. OK on Grayson and Sanders ... but not Howard Dean ---

Howard Dean is a nice guy -- but he's not going to oppose the party or its

corporate agenda --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4948712&mesg_id=4949285

PLUS Howard Dean was running all over the country with Koch Bros DLC Rahm Emmanuel

while he solicited rw Democrats to run against liberal Dems --

Howard is not going to speak out against eithe rObama or this corporate agenda -- !!!

[CakeGrrl]

197. Explain why Grayson couldn't hold his House seat before you proclaim him nationally viable. -nt

[defendandprotect]

217. Alan Grayson is a liberal who's willing to tell the truth about what's going on ....

unless that changes I'd support him over Obama --

Meanwhile, have no idea why he wasn't reelected -- did they change his

district? Did the Party support him? What does he say about it?



The 2010 elections saw $4 billion in corporate money come in --

for every $1 the Dems got, the Repugs got $7 --

[INdemo]

160. John Kerry is still young enough..He won once

and thanks to McAuliffe Bush won or stole it again 2004

[No Elephants]

280. Why would you seek to replace Obama with Kerry?

2004 Presidential primary

In May 2003, as the Democratic primary of the 2004 presidential campaign was starting to pick up, the organization voiced concern that the Democratic contenders might be taking positions too far left of the mainstream general electorate. Early front-runner Howard Dean, who attracted popular support due in large part to his anti-war views despite his reputation as a centrist governor of Vermont, was specifically criticized by DLC founder and CEO Al From. From's criticism of Dean was also likely due to the former governor's opposition to the Iraq War, which most party centrists, including From, endorsed. Dean's claim to hail "from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" (a phrase originally used by Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota) has been interpreted by some as subtle criticism of the DLC and the New Democrats in general. Indeed, Dean once described the DLC as the "Republican wing of the Democratic Party." <26> The DLC countered that Dean represented the "McGovern-Mondale wing" of the Democratic Party, "defined principally by weakness abroad and elitist, interest-group liberalism at home."

Senator John Kerry won the Democratic primary and chose primary contender Senator John Edwards as his running mate. Both Senators are members of the Senate New Democrat Coalition, and the DLC anticipated that they would win the general election. In a March 3, 2004 dispatch, they suggested voters would appreciate Kerry's centrist viewpoints, imagining voters to say "If this is a waffle, bring on the syrup." <27>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

"Like the Clinton-Gore ticket in 1992, the Kerry-Edwards ticket sends the same strong, unmistakable signal about 2004: The New Democrat message can compete anywhere, from the South to the West, from suburbs to small towns. The true champions of the middle class are determined to be a centrist, majority party.

Much to the chagrin of Republican opposition researchers, Kerry and Edwards are New Democrat stalwarts. Both are "Blair Democrats" who supported the use of force in Iraq and advocate a tough-minded internationalism in foreign relations. Both have strong centrist records of support for fiscal discipline, middle-class tax cuts, and work-based welfare reform."

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=207&contentid=252756

[Freddie Stubbs]

41. Bill Clinton had a primary challenger in 1996:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_LaRouche_U.S._Presidential_campaigns#1996

[JJW]

43. Russ Feingold is da man!

[brooklynite]

44. Here's a simple and blunt question...

The notion of finding a Primary challenger for President Obama has been percolating here for the better part of three months by my calculation. This has been deemed essential to either bring Obama back in sync with his base, or to protect progressive principles. So then, how many of the people who have REC'd this and other similar threads have, in that time, made any effort whatsowever to find this knight in shining armor? Wrote a letter or email to the prospective candidate of your choice? Picked up the phone? Stopped by their office to plead with them?

Really, how many?

[tomp]

267. a simple, blunt, and stupid question.

if there is a person out there who doesn't think opposition to obama is essential to a progressive turn in the u.s., that person isn't qualified to be the challenger.

there are many progressives who are thinking about it, and from among those, there are few who would think it feasible.

only a person who saw the need, and thought it was feasible, would be acceptable.

that person would have to be proactive enough to start the drive him or herself and rally the necessary forces, and not necessarily even for him herself but for the idea.

the people would respond.

in addition, any candidate who isn't paying attention to sites like du isn't a viable candidate. all the viable candidates know the score already.

a groundswell behind any one of the potential candidates would likely be split to show less of an indication of the viability of the idea than would be if all those supporting individual candidates were rallied behind one.

[BNJMN]

47. Saw Nader on DemNow and he was calling Obama a coward, a chicken, a sexist, a racist...etc, etc, etc

Pretty much just anything he thought he could get purchase on.

[wicket]

48. 100% chance Ralph Nader is a moron

:eyes:

[LiberalLovinLug]

49. Sanders is not a Democrat

Neither is Nader. I think Ralph should be applauded. It seems like he has seen the error of his ways. (yes yes he did not solely cause Bush to win, but he sure gave the SC an out). He knows it has to be someone carrying a Democratic card.

I pray with all my being that a Dem with true progressive principles will stand up to challenge Obama. Challenge him in every policy decision and his refusal to listen to smart progressive voices on the economy, medical insurance, Wall Street shenanigan convictions, and generally cowtowing to the top 1%. Its almost as if he is delighting in his effort to leap frog over his Republican peers to be the the favorite pet of the ruling elite. (They see he can appeal to a much broader spectrum than the tea party rethugs.)

Even if Obama comes out on top, and I do expect him to with all the money and DLC support, at the very least Americans will be reminded of the piss poor job he done in considering all options and opinions. When Obama promised to listen to all voices we progressives thought that FINALLY our voices would be heard. Who knew what he meant was shutting us "retards" out along with minds like Paul Krugman on the economy and opening wider his door to the voices of those that bankrupted the system in the first place. And on other topics as well...the shutting out of doctors for single payer medical insurance for instance and his utter lack of fight for a public option at the very least. The Bush tax cut extension....on and on.

I think Obama is very much like Tony Blair. He will soldier on with his RW agenda in order for him and his family to be set for generations once he leaves office. But he should be made to feel very uncomfortable for his highjacking of the Democratic Party, and valued principles, for his own personal gain.

[abelenkpe]

51. I love Bernie Sanders

but we don't need to primary the president.

[orbitalman]

54. K & R

[graywarrior]

56. What makes him an expert?

[bluestate10]

238. His enormous ego. Yet there are people here that would jump off a cliff if he said so. nt

[KamaAina]

59. So is he leaving the Greens, then?

Oh, that's right. He never joined them in the first place. :eyes:

[Bolo Boffin]

60. From the man who helped give us President Dubya...

...his next trick will be President Romney.

Go fuck yourself, Ralph Nader.

[Name removed]

85. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dbonds]

107. Reworded post: It is a right wing myth that Nadar caused Dubya to win.

You should be careful that you don't keep spreading them.

[Bolo Boffin]

108. It is nothing of the sort. Nadar put the election down to where Bush could steal it.

Perhaps you should find someone else to pull that crap on, dbonds.

[dbonds]

109. As I explained before...

There were many other factors that caused the election to be close enough for Bush to steal it. Those include voter suppression of many types and Lieberman.

It is disingenuous of you to keep up that Nadar mythology. It just isn't true.

[Bolo Boffin]

110. And if you would look at my post, dbonds, I said Nadar helped.

Not that he was the sole cause.

But if you want to pretend I said something I didn't in order to keep digging a hole here, feel free.

[dbonds]

113. You said "Nadar put the election down to where Bush could steal it"

That to me applies the blame on Nadar, not on the other more important factors. The fact that there are free elections in the US shouldn't ever be a problem, but election fraud should always be a problem. That is where the blame should lie.

[Bolo Boffin]

118. I'm sorry that my posts here don't meet up to your doctrinal purity.

I write what I write. It's my opinion that Nader was a major factor in George Bush becoming president. It's one shared by a lot of Democrats and liberals. Calling it a rightwing myth is bullshit, dbonds.

[go west young man]

134. I'm sorry that he/she called you out on your BS opinion.

But it is what it is. He/she nailed ya.

[Bolo Boffin]

157. No, not at all. n/t

[stlsaxman]

61. "I am not a Nader fan, but..."

if i had a quarter for every time i heard that opening line here i'd have the same amount of money as i would have if i had a quarter for every time i replied with "Go fuck yourself".

[PeaceNikki]

62. lol. Nader.

[Kurmudgeon]

63. Who cares, Nader was dumb enough to think Dubya and Gore were the same, then the body count started.

[fascisthunter]

65. Remember the Tsunami that Brought Obama to a win?

well, like all tsunamis, the water is being dragged back out to see and may very well push somebody else to replace him.

[liberal N proud]

67. This would serve no purpose but to diminish Obama's resources

and make him more vulnerable against a republican kook.

[Rowdyboy]

72. Ralph must be talking to Lyndon Larouche! He's almost certain to run!

After all, he always does.

Good luck with that

[Peacetrain]

73. Nadar...what a piece of work ..

[AngryOldDem]

74. I'm game, as long as it's not Nader himself, or someone he anoints.

He's fucked up too many presidential elections.

Obama has shown himself to be the worst kind of DINO. Talking tough to get the job to give us all hope :eyes: that there's going to be change :eyes:, and then turning into a complete milquetoast. FDR and Truman must be up to 1,000 RPMs now if they can see what's become of the Democratic Party. It'shameful. If Ralph can reinvent it or revive it, more power to him, but not if this is ultimately ego-driven and self-serving.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

78. Nader the shithead is responsible for the 8 years of nightmare that brought us to this disaster

I don't even want to hear that shithead's name mentioned. Sick SOB.

[Firebrand Gary]

81. This is ridiculous! Blow off the steam, we have work to do.

We are just over 14 months out from election day, we don't have time for this nonsense. We need to be standing by our guy and prepare for the no doubt ugly fight that is right around the corner.

I get the disappointment, but let's get over ourselves. We have a lot of work to do.

[dbonds]

88. I will do everything I can to help insure Obama is not our guy for the nomination.

(caveat: that in no way constitutes a physical threat, just making sure we have someone else as the Democratic nominee.)

[Kurmudgeon]

94. Then you'll be doing the GOP Neo-Con's work for them.

[dbonds]

97. No I won't and fuck anyone that tries that overuse fear shit.

Because I work for my liberal values does not put votes on GOP tickets. That is all fear tactics to try to get people to fall in line with the corporatist agenda.

Working for what you believe in is not working for the GOP.
Working for a liberal democratic nominee does not help the GOP.
Supporting Obama who has betrayed us and lied is not a liberal value.

[Name removed]

249. Deleted message

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

[defendandprotect]

154. No -- Obama has been doing their work for them ....

in fact in putting Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid "on the table"

it was Obama who went further to the right than Boehner!!

See Rep. John Conyers' comments on that calling out Obama and making that clear --

[Raine1967]

82. Nader is not nor ever has been a registered DEM.

Why is this on the Front page of DEMOCRATIC underground? Why is ANYONE taking this seriously? Nader is NOT A DEM.

!~

[ooglymoogly]

86. The man who can do it and face down congress isssssssssssss

ALAN GRAYSON.

[libodem]

93. Excuse me

Fuck you, Ralph, traitor.i

[ZombieHorde]

98. Why did you doctor the original headline?

What was your motivation?

[yellowcanine]

99. Whether Obama is challenged or not is up to DEMOCRATS. Nader is not a Democrat. Not his call.

Stick it where the sun don't shine Ralph. And being as you were a big part of the reason G.W. Bush ever became President, giving him the chance to destroy our economy, which put us where we are today, you have a lot of nerve, I must say, to now think you can stick your nose into the Democratic primary process. Butt out Ralph. We don't need your help.

[totodeinhere]

214. Well, Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat either but other posters in this thread have called

for Sanders to run in the Democratic primaries against Obama. You don't necessarily have to be a registered Democrat to get involved in support of progressive causes.

[unionworks]

100. I Stand Behind Obama

We have a democratic president. We fought too hard to get him elected. He isn't doing everything I wish he would, so what, any reasonable person knows that's impossible. Sure I got really pissed at what I percieved as cave ins, but perhaps there is a method to the madness. I got too badly hurt under 8 years of George Bush to fall for any disinformation sown by the echo machines and right wing think tanks. I will support and work for the democratic canidate in 2012. It's not working, freepers.

[bluestate10]

240. Welcome to DU. You will find a lot of Freepers here disguised as progressives.

To find your way, pay attention to the content of their posts, you will sort them out.

[Jim Lane]

268. Look at this thread and you won't see Freepers.

There are progressives who disagree about how best to achieve our goals. Nader's role is one of the subjects that elicits this disagreement most vehemently (and quite frequently). I hold strong opinions on the subject of Nader but I won't assume that everyone who disagrees with me is a disguised Freeper.

Certainly there are some right-wing trolls on DU but I doubt that it's "a lot."

[unionworks]

287. Kinda Got

that feeling, it seems that some propaganda professionals adept at sowing fud have been employed by the freepers. It also is a credit to DU that they would go to such extremes, the real heart of the democratic party is on these boards.

[defendandprotect]

101. Agree -- we need to keep asking Sen. Bernie Sanders to run -- !!!

[Frances]

103. Fools

Fool me once, shame on you,

Fool me twice, shame on me!

[quakerboy]

106. Mr Nader can stay the hell out

Blue Democrats can find our own challenger, no "assistance" needed, thanks anyway.

[No Elephants]

281. So,, who did you find and did he or she accept your invitation to run?

[quakerboy]

291. Really?

Now I am the end arbiter of who can run? good to know. I better get on it, toot sweet.

All's I'm sayin is if we Democrats want a challenger we can darn well pick one with no help from an outside interloper like Mr Nader, who has shown he is not a serious person when it comes to politics, having done absolutely nothing to build a national movement when he had the opportunity.

[jaysunb]

121. How about Pat Paulson ?

If not, I stand by our President 100%.

Oh, and to Ralph...fuck you. You are responsible for the shithole we find ourselves in today. :evilfrown:

[unionworks]

288. Agree 100%

Nader gave Bush his presidency

[tanyev]

122. And, coincidentally, a 100% chance that that challenger would lose.

[Mosaic]

146. Disagree Strongly

We are in desperate times. People will vote for someone on the left. That is NOT Obama.

[Cosmocat]

175. Really?

First, as some have noted, there is not a big name out there that would do it.

Second, not a chance, NONE, that BO loses to whatever tin can they could put up against him.

ZERO.

[jeff47]

188. And?

The point of a primary challenge is to threaten Obama from the left. Right now, "the left" is ignored because the WH thinks we have no other option. So Obama's free to go further and further right.

A primary challenger changes that dynamic, even if they only end up with 10% of the primary vote.

[johnaries]

127. Nader - determined to damage the Democratic Party any way

he can. Again.

Pathetic.

[bvar22]

128. There is a 100% chance that Obama will be challenged from The Left in the general.

Obama and The Centrists have left a HUGE vacuum on The Left,
much bigger than the one left by Bill Clinton.
Vacuums are filled.
Its Physics.

If our Democratic Party Leadership doesn't do something to protect The Left Flank,
bad things will happen.
A Bus Tour isn't going to be enough.



Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

[No Elephants]

282. +1

[Imajika]

129. Poor Ralph, still deluded as ever...

"I'm not a Nader fan, but he is absolutely correct. We need to find a "Bernie Sanders" out there who will stand up for America."

No, he's not. The problem with most of these calls for a primary challenger is they aren't serious. A primary challenger can't run on a platform of "I'm just here to put pressure on the incumbent and am not at all serious about winning". That is what many/most people calling for this primary challenge really want. Senator Sanders or anyone with any real stature is not going to rush out to represent folks that mostly still like Obama and just want to try to push him to the left.

The whole thing is just a bunch of nonsense. There will be no serious primary challenger because at the end of the day, the vast majority of liberal Democrats wouldn't really support it or have their hearts in it.

[MilesColtrane]

132. Suck it, Ralph.

[Capn Sunshine]

133. Why this should make DU JUMP FOR JOY

the DU 24/7 Obama hatefest is vindicated by that great Democrat Ralph Nader!
LOL
:rofl:

[bluestate10]

241. Somebody need to dig up Saint Patrick and have him pay a visit to DU. nt

[Enthusiast]

135. K&R

Pretending that Obama has our best interests at heart is not a realistic strategy.

[Fire1]

137. Fuck that! I'm sticking with Obama! n/t

[Mosaic]

144. We need a Democrat from the Democratic Wing of the Party

Someone who can win! Someone who can defend us, the 99%!!!

[Fire1]

152. They won't win. n/t

[Mosaic]

279. Without jobs improvement

Neither will Obama. A Sanders or someone else who is a real Progressive can win, I'm sure of it.

[lin_e65]

158. Let's keep shooting ourselves in the foot.

Just what the repugs want! Divide and conquer. And there are so many progressives who fall for that crap! We have had 30 years of GOP bull shoved down our throats: government is bad, taxes are bad, corporations create jobs. It's going to take more than three years to break that "tape" in the average American's mind. But no you guys have to have everything right away. We need to back Obama. He's not perfect. But we need to learn to stand together and keep putting Democrats into the White House, into more and more governor's mansions, into more and more local governments. We need to stand together so that the next supreme court justice is chosen by a Democrat. How can you sit here and say that a primary challenge will be good? Blame all those democrats who sat home in 2010 for putting us where we are now. They threw hissy fits, stamped their feet and really gave obama a piece of their mind. Look at what Obama has to work with in terms of Congress. No one's got his back. You people really need to stop and think.

[JohnnyRingo]

164. Some people think we can throw together a truly liberal campaign in a few months...

...put him up against Obama and get over half the country behind them to not only unseat the incumbent president, but go on to win the general election outright. It's incredible that anyone sees this as anything but pure fantasy.

How can anyone stop Fox News from daily coverage about how the Democrats are just flawed and can never be trusted again? The only place I heard Obama was a screaming liberal before the election was on Fox (even to the left of Ted Kennedy!!). Imagine what they'd say about a true progressive candidate, especially if democrats openly admit that Obama was a failed candidate. They'd have a field day with such a beautifully wrapped gift.

Imagine especially if that candidate is Bernie Sanders, a self described communist. (I know he's a socialist, but I also know how conservatives who watch Fox News hear it.)

[jeff47]

189. We can't. The Obama administration already blew both of our feet off. (nt)

[bluestate10]

242. Welcome to DU. We desperately need one more voice of sanity to buttress our ranks.

The Obama haters here are legion and stinking up the place.

[struggle4progress]

167. I liked Nader as a grassroots organizer & activist. But as a national political strategist, he sux.

[derby378]

170. Anyone handpicked by Nader to primary Obama will only know bitter defeat

Nader is poisonous to the Democratic Party. We suspected this as early as 2000 and had our fears confirmed when his Republican backers were outed.

[RKP5637]

172. A primary challenger would be excellent and healthy for the dem party. n/t

[xocet]

174. Wanted: Democratic Candidate for POTUS, Must Have Liberal Principles - Others Need Not Apply.

n/t

[nvme]

177. HILLARY CLINTON!!!!!

She is the only one that would have enough oxygen to do it. She would nail it on this go round. but getting her to usurp Obama would be a literal coup de etat.

[LaurenG]

178. Nader has no power over anyone he's a frustrated want to be,and he doesn't know jack.

I am not pleased with the president, in fact I am extremely frustrated with him but I sincerely doubt that any democrat will challenge Obama.

:eyes:

[stlsaxman]

185. Stlsaxman: 100% Chance The Ralph Nader Is Wrong. Period.

Name ONE name of a probable primary candidate.

:popcorn:

[Smarmie Doofus]

191. The shrill meter is off the charts on this one; meaning Ralph hit a nerve.

There will definitely be a primary challenge. The question is by whom and how well organized and financed.

Even "pragmatists" are beginning to see this, as Obama continues to flounder.


Think we got a "shellacking" in 2010? The electorate was just getting to know Obama then.

They know him much better now.

And that ain't so good for DEM candidates nationally, I'm thinking.


Recommend.

[JJW]

193. Nothing wrong with Nader

It's the partisan that ruin the Democratic Party, voting for not as bad as other crook, just isn't doing the nation any good.

Nader has also been correct that there really isn't any difference between a corporate democrat and a republican.

[swilton]

200. Unless an outsider challenges Obama

the Democrats have no/ r. no message. What are they going to run on more Obama rhetoric that would get forgotten during a second term. It would be the only way to save what's left of the Democratic Party who should by now be begging for rescuers rather than discouraging them.

[Riftaxe]

202. Good, a chance to discuss the issues

and a chance to hold him accountable then his campaign babble.

[BenzoDia]

205. After our AAA downgrade, Nader should be eating his words right now.

Idiot.

[mzmolly]

207. I think the S and P downgrade dispells the myth that we didn't have to

cut a deal.

[SemperEadem]

209. he's going to have to pull something monumental out of his ass

for him to keep the presidency--and I mean something monumental that will drive the progressives back to his tent. Frankly, I don't see that happening.

Whoever is chosen will have to have the ability to not only galvanize his opposition, but to bring with him a wave that will sweep all thugs out of all majority positions in the country. Should be interesting to watch.

[Harriety]

210. It's about time we had a woman President. Elizbeth Warren.....

[ozone_man]

215. Maybe better for vice president?

Of course I would like her as president, it's just that she hasn't campaigned, held office. Maybe Dean/Warren. Or Gore. I think Bernie will stay in his position to help fuel the progressive movement.

[Jim Lane]

213. It's interesting that Nader has just NOW discovered the primary system.

Maybe he was browsing someone's garage sale and saw a good price on an eighth-grade civics textbook.

If he'd had this brilliant insight before launching his own hopeless and counterproductive third-party campaigns, think how different things would be. Here's what would have happened if Nader had run in the Democratic primaries in 2000:

* His candidacy would have galvanized progressives across the country -- including those who had no patience for third-party efforts.
* Nader would have been in the televised debates with Gore and Bradley, bringing his ideas to the attention of millions of people (instead of giving an occasional brief interview in the parking lot outside a Bush-Gore debate).
* Many activists who supported Nader's views would have learned the nuts and bolts of the Democratic Party's workings, including the Presidential nomination process. They would have formed a cadre who could support good candidates in future cycles.
* Nader would have received more votes, total, because he would have attracted support from people who agreed with him and who didn't have to worry about wasting their votes and helping to elect Bush.
* There was some small chance that Nader would have won the Democratic nomination and the Presidency -- not a great chance, but better than his chance of winning as the Green Party candidate.
* Most important, of course, Nader's voters would have supported him in the primary but then, for the most part, voted Democratic in the general election, and Al Gore would have become President.

Yes, of course, Nader had a legal right to choose to disdain all these advantages and instead run on the Green line. And we in turn have a legal right to say that his decision, in light of the information available at the time, was clearly wrong, and with the benefit of hindsight can be seen to have been disastrous.

Now Nader calls for a progressive candidate to run in the Democratic primary. I wonder if he'll ever admit that he should have followed his own advice.

[Smarmie Doofus]

226. +1. You are right about everything. But the point is...

.... Nader's right about a primary challenge now.

I just hope he's not the challenger.

[JoePhilly]

251. He's like a ground hog who pops out of his hole every 4 years.

[AllyCat]

216. Yes. I will vote and work for any candidate who will work for the people.

I don't care if Nader supports said candidate. He did not cause the loss of a Dem POTUS in 2000. Nader is a wild card, but if we have a legitimate challenger, I will work and donate. I'm done with "right and righter". The right has failed us. We need to move left, left, left.

[deacon]

227. Ralph's been braindead for a loooong time. The guy's an asshole. n/t

[quaker bill]

229. QB says nearly 100 percent chance challenger loses

every state.

[Atypical Liberal]

233. At this point I'm willing to give anyone a chance at real hope and change n/t

[Edith Ann]

234. Nader

Isn't Nader how we got into this mess. He runs for President and takes votes from Dem Candidate and USA gets George Bush because he election is close enough to steal. We need to stick with Obama and make him do what's right. Send people to demonstrate at the Whitehouse but vote Dem in Nov. Another republican president will destroy this country for the poor and middle class and their kids.

[bluestate10]

243. Exactly. The lack of foresight by some amazes me.

So, they help their pet causes by creating a situation that sets the country back another decade? Bush created a debacle that will take past mid-century to clean up. Another republican President? Do the people that advocate anything that would lead to that end recognize another republican Prez will bury the country, the poor, those longing for basic rights, women, gays, blacks, muslims, hispanics? I have always seen most progressives as living in a privilege world, without contact to what is happening in the real world, they either cross breed or breed with republicans, they in essence are of no significance IMO.

[avebury]

235. I am at the point where I refuse to settle

for voting for the lessor of the evils. Obama and the Democratic Party as a whole has lost its way and my vote. Bring on the liberal challenge or a new party.

[bluestate10]

And what then? Enable republicans well into the middle of the century.

The world view that you espouse is fucking foolish and 1,000% counter to the causes you claim to support.

[ThomWV]

244. K&R and I sure hope he's right.

[bluestate10]

245. I don't unrec OPs. Even absurdly dumb ones. BTW, fuck Ralph Nader.

[Hubert Flottz]

246. RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALPH.

Where'd you park that BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUICK? :puke:

Ralph must be backing Rick Perry this time.

[sandyj999]

247. I Think He Should Be Challenged. n/t

[Edith Ann]

289. challenged

I think he should be challenged but not by another candidate or a Nader. Put his feet to the fire and put pressure on him. His second term he has nothing to loose. He can't run again. Then is when we will see some change. Hopefully he'll have a better congress next term and we can start to undo some of the damage the republicans have done. I we split our votes we don't have a chance.

[Motown_Johnny]

254. Nader 100% chance has lost touch with reality

[Karmadillo]

255. Hope Ralph is correct. It would be great to work and vote for a liberal.

nt

[madinmaryland]

261. So Nader got the "Rent is too Damn High" guy to challenge Obama in the primary??

[loyalsister]

272. Fox and MSM have imposed a belief

that conflict is good.
It seems to have manifested everywhere. The anger and hate represented in "discussion" seems to drive hostility even among people who should be allies.

[Jim_Shorts]

275. This is all just an exercise in futility, one giant cluster f**k

There are no good answers because we are trying to work inside a broken system. Anyone who thinks Obama hasn't just thrown progressives under the bus needs to go back on their meds but if we primary him we end up with a weak candidate who still needs to beg for 1 billion in campaign cash.

We can see on this board what people think of a third party candidate like Nader who tries to break in to the duopoly. Under any scenario, the beating on the middle class and poor is going to continue, so I don't think it really matters if Bama is primaried or not.

I'm all for a candidate like Rosanne Barr, then we can at least be entertained while we're being f**ked.

[ellie]

283. Ralph Nader said this?

hahahahahahahahaha!

The guy is a fucking joke. Piss off Ralph!

[No Elephants]

284. It will be interesting to see who he comes up with.

[bvar22]

285. The Left simply needs to acknowlege contemporary Reality in the USA,

and design our own candidate.

1)Good Looks, preferably someone who has been on television a lot for instant recognition,
like George Clooney or Robert Redford,...
but a charismatic unknown would be good, as long as he/she is pretty.
Previous experience is NOT necessary, and in today's politics is a negative.
An outsider from BOTH Political Parties would be a HUGE plus.

2)Extra points if he/she can ride a horse, shoot a gun, and looks good in jeans.

3)Preferably from a Western, Cowboy State.

4)AVOID ALL ISSUES.
NEVER talk in specifics.
The answer to EVERY question is:
<slow western drawl looking straight into the camera>
"Well, I don't know about all that, but if we don't get some JUSTICE for Americans who Work for a Living,
that isn't going to matter."
"Americans Who Work for a Living have been getting SCREWED for 30 years,
and I'll fix that."
PERIOD. End of DEBATE!

This person could/would WIN in America today.
I'm just facing reality of Life & Politics in the 21st Century United States.

[stevenleser]

290. LMAO, so many deluded people that have no concept of politics at all. n/t

[Arkana]

292. 100% chance Ralph is full of hot air and horseshit

[Rex]

294. Wrong.

I give it 0%. Did he get piefaced again?

[marlakay]

301. shit disturber nt