Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forum2naSalit
(86,963 posts)Ralph since the 2000 stolen election, he has nothing of value to add to the electoral process and, therefore, is not worthy of my time to listen to him.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)over 97,000 voted for Nader. He made no real difference in the race. If Gore had been a better candidate, those 300,000 DEMOCRATS wouldn't have voted for Bush.
A failed campaign put the loss on Nader, when it shouldn't have been even a close race. The Democratic Party needed a scapegoat, so they chose Nader.
Z
PS. I was a fuck Nader person too, until I saw the facts.
pnwmom
(109,025 posts)like those former Dems, most of whom had been voting GOP ever since Reagan.
He attracted the votes of 95,000 progressive Floridians who bought Nader's lie that Bush and Gore were just "Tweedledee and Tweedledum."
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I still have no interest in any of his political opinions.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)and tell me that his ideas for making our reps listen to us are worthless.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)He is consistently correct.
For example: During the 2008 election season, he recognized Barack Obama is a corporatist. Democrats didnt give it thought; they found out that was accurate soon after he took office; they complained about it throughout Obamas presidency; and, here in 2016, they are shilling for Hillary Clinton while dumping on traditional liberal Bernjie Sanders.
I laugh at everyone who says he/she does not respect Ralph Nader. Very ignorant.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)Cornel West?
(Im not certain.)
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)I don't think Nader is a racist, he was calling Obama a sellout.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)Gotcha.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)You know who uses racial slurs? Racists.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)We'll just have to disagree.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)He clearly felt it was acceptable to call an African American an Uncle Tom. He also said Obama was trying to "talk white". Actions speak loudly here.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)I think your strategy is race baiting, which is itself a form of racism.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)Fairgo
(1,571 posts)wait a minute, i dropped my pearls.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)Maybe Free Republic or Discussionist is more your speed?
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)laughable
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)The "talk white" statement dug his hole even deeper. I still don't think he's hateful or that he thinks certain races are inferior to others.
I think he's a moral guy, who made some foolish and insensitive statements without thinking before he spoke.
sweetloukillbot
(11,163 posts)Because we wouldn't tolerate that from a Republican. Or Biden or Bill Clinton for that matter. And when the dumbfounded newscaster called him on it, he doubled down.
And then I got to listen to all my Naderite friends say "Well, it's true."
Just like they're doing here.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)Loki
(3,825 posts)You seem so ready to support him and not President Obama.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)I've voted for Obama three times, but politically my views are closer to Nader's.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)FDR liberal, while not leaving out women and minorities? Yes, please.
Response to 2naSalit (Reply #1)
yuiyoshida This message was self-deleted by its author.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)Gore won in 2000! Bush stole Florida.
Don't blame Nader, blame Bush!
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Along with Harris and the SCOTUS.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)and oddly how can you say you lost respect during a stolen election. those don't go together. You either blame him for the lose or the Florida fuckup not both. More people voted for Al Gore than Bush. By a Wide margin. Ralph had nothing to do with it. Get over it. It was the Supreme Court not Ralph who selected the president.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts)Surely you aren't interested in only something "of value to add to the electoral
process," are you?
I don't care much for Ralph either. However: What he's talking about works!
If you listen, you might learn how to empower yourself and your neighbors,
learn how to influence your representatives in Washington---not to mention
those at the State, County, and City level---unless, of course, you believe
(as too many do!) that the only thing necessary to make a difference is your
voting, then sitting back waiting for results until the next election . . . meantime,
wondering how banksters and corporations usurped the place and power of
"We, the people...."
If you listen and, then, act on what you learn, you'll find the empowerment
you receive worth the time you spent.
It's all good!
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)But after that he should not have run in 2004, IMHO.
merrily
(45,251 posts)have included some real head scratchers.
I have no problem with his having run in 2000, though. That was his right. Gore should have been a better candidate. Some say he won anyway; some say no, he really didn't. I don't think it much matters at this point. What matters more, IMO, is whether we do better going forward.
PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)and oddly this might factor into this year on Delegates vs Popular Vote. It's not the Popular vote that elects.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)However, if you post on DU that he won the popular vote, someone is likely to reply--"But Nader made it close enough to steal." Well, maybe Gore made it close enough to steal, too. It was Gore's job to win, and Democrats' job to make sure Gore won, not the job of Nader and people who voted for Nader to make sure Gore won. So, whether Gore won the popular vote or not, Gore should have been a better candidate and Democrats should have been better supporters of Gore. I am so tired of anti-democratic whining about Nader.
Uncle Joe
(58,563 posts)Thanks for the thread, thomhartmann.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)I don't say that to be contrary to the first post, on the contrary, I value everyone weighing in on the conversation here.
I wish that I wasn't working at the time of this conference found here: https://www.breakingthroughpower.org
This is what democracy SHOULD look like. What this video addresses is the attempted answer as to HOW.
K&R
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)The answer is right in this video. He'd have been so much better than Gore.
I've just resubscribed to Hartmann again.
johnp3907
(3,737 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)shenmue
(38,506 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)He accomplished a great deal for which I am grateful.
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)I sometimes worry that too many Americans aren't '...doing their homework' when it comes to understanding their political system.
It's easier to blame someone else for the lack of democracy in the USA.
.
Fairgo
(1,571 posts)It has been an honour to have you shining the light from the left all of these years.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)zalinda
(5,621 posts)TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)...even when there's proof that republicans stole the fuckin' thing.
Amazing!
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Assume much? Apparently.
And wait for a reply from the actual person you were asking much, before beating your head against the wall? Apparently not.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)If he'd had a real chance, like Bernie, I would have been all for it. But I can't see that his runs accomplished anything except as cover for election fraud. (No, of course I'm not accusing him of election fraud. But he provided an excellent excuse, and then he did it AGAIN. Maybe I couldn't blame him in 2000, but I do in 2004.)
zalinda
(5,621 posts)It's was a message that could only be heard on a large stage. He didn't set out to be a spoiler, he wanted the Democrats to take a look at what was going on. He probably got pissed off, because he was sidelined, kind of like what Bernie has experienced and took it further than he probably first intended. It took a long time before the American people was ready to hear this message, and still some refuse to see that a problem exists.
Z
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I was just ©¥£ed that after 2000 he didn't sit out 2004. Throwing everything into dethroning Shrub would have been a great statement.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts). . . my reaction to the video at reply #46 (which was in reply to #1).
All best!
Response to thomhartmann (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
ancianita
(36,238 posts)Last edited Sun May 1, 2016, 12:51 PM - Edit history (1)
Some good ones:
1. That we have to have people who don't suffer from "justice fatigue," people who have long attention spans...
2. The Citizens' Summons: A decentralization idea where all it takes is 1% of people in congressional districts that reflect majority opinion to turn Congress around using 435 districts with people who pledge 300-500 hours a year, an office with 3-4 full-time people; they then summon their senator & representative to their own town meetings to tell them where they want the country to go, set a legislative agenda and even write bills...
3. 500 people summoning a senator/rep WILL be responded to
4. Told a billionaire that for $5 million you could make the Pentagon auditable in 2 years
Good stuff.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I'm not totally against him. Appreciate him a lot. Just have some quibbles.
ETA.
DAMN!!!!
Okay, I may have to watch.
And just bookmarked.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(108,485 posts)Is your Cisco stock dividend better these days?
http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/06/27/ralph-nader-turns-rightest-on-cisco/