<p>Even if I have to write his name in. I love the guy, and we need a 3rd party. Badly. Having one would prevent partisanists from exploiting the system, for one. He is absolutely the guy I want to be president of my beloved United States. I'd even advocate voting for him at the mass scale, not just my pointless vote, since it's only for the most part stealing votes from Barack Hussein Obama--whom I'm proud of for defeating the succubus Hillary-- but is just too much of a BSer when it comes to the issues*.</p>
<p>While BHO can talk for 15 minutes about nothing, Nader tells it like it is non-stop. He's like the Maddox of politics. If you see him in action, it makes the main candidates look like a couple of phonies.</p>
<p>Here's a sick quote from my man RP:</p>
<p>" 'He wants to show that he is not a threatening . . . another politically threatening African-American politician,' Nader said. 'He wants to appeal to white guilt. You appeal to white guilt not by coming on as black is beautiful, black is powerful. Basically he's coming on as someone who is not going to threaten the white power structure, whether it's corporate or whether it's simply oligarchic. And they love it. Whites just eat it up.'"......</p>
<p>I can understand someone preferring another candidate. I can expect people to despise the idea of a third party because of their ingrained opinions. But if you hate on my man Ralph Nader, you should crash into a tree without wearing a seatbelt. See where that gets you. jk lol. :)</p>
<p>I'm glad you conveniently grew a political conscience on the eve of potentially one of the most decisive Democratic/liberal victories in American history.</p>
<p>I saw Nader in action back in May. This guy went over his time limit, had to hold himself back from exploding, and didn't stumble a single minute.</p>
<p>Sad thing is he won't get elected and the last thing we need is another 2000 situation.</p>
<p>Voting for Nader is pointless. What is this, like his 6th time running for president? Sheeesh, he needs to get over himself and admit the fact that he will never win. It's more pathetic than anything, really. </p>
<p>And it's funny how you feel the need to keep referring to Obama's middle name, Hussein, as if it makes him some sort of terrorist when Nader's the one that's Arab...
(Note: General CC public, not being racist, just making a point).</p>
<p>While a lot of the things that Nader says are relavent, I just can't get past his personality. He's so bitter that it is sickening. I agree that we need a third party (I'm not a fan of the two party system that controls the debates and such) but I think that Nader is not the best canidate. </p>
<p>First of all, he appears to only have one issue and everything somehow connects to it. I understand that corporations have a large role in our political system, but what if someone didn't agree that it should be changed, then they wouldn't agree with a thing he says.</p>
<p>That and he is just condesending, disrespectful and stereotypical of our country's youth.</p>
<p>
[quote]
he needs to get over himself and admit the fact that he will never win
[/quote]
</p>
<p>While I agree, I think in some ways he is trying to promote change. I think that though he won't win, he sheds some light into our current political system. After Buchanan ran as an idependent and actually had some support (oh no) the Republicans and Democrats teamed up against third parties. I think that this makes our system of election very very unfair. Nader is unable to join in with McCain and Obama in the debates because he doesn't have the 15% popular support required, but how is he supposed to get that support if the media doesn't cover him? I mean seriously. His name is on the ballot in 44 states and the District of Columbia, meaning that mathamatically, he could win by majority, therefore I think he should be included in the debates and such. So basically, I think the largest flaw is our political system and the fact that debates and such are not run by someone unaffliated, but by the parties themselves.</p>
<p>If you're going to vote for a third party, why vote for the socialist when you can vote for the libertarian? At least many of his foresights have come to be true</p>
<p>I'm just saying.</p>
<p>Speaking of which, Ron Paul vs Bernanke. Great vid. </p>
<p>If we want to talk about a guy with some real foresight...</p>
<p>PS, Burning Down the House vid. Rein ad by McCain. It's bad enough that we have Dodd/Frank/Pelosi, etc. flowing in Fannie/Freddie money.</p>
<p>You can throw away your vote if you want but I think it's imperative that if the party that caused this has control of Congress, they at least don't hold the pen to sign the bills, appoint the Justices.</p>
<p>While 82% of voters who support McCain believe the justices should rule on what is in the Constitution, just 29% of Barack Obamas supporters agree. Just 11% of McCain supporters say judges should rule based on the judges sense of "fairness", while nearly half (49%) of Obama supporters agree.</p>
<p>Ron Paul, Bob Barr & Ralph Nader are looking better & better with each crisis addressed only by vitriolic nastiness of one major party candidate against the other.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ron Paul, Bob Barr & Ralph Nader are looking better & better with each crisis addressed only by vitriolic nastiness of one major party candidate against the other.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's called politics. Get used to it. Besides, while Obama has been aggressive attacking McCain's policies, McCain is the only one attacking Obama on his character.</p>
<p>Paul, Nader, and Barr would be no different if they were in a position to win the presidency.</p>
<p>nbachris: Unfortunately I think that you are right and this is what politics has become. Thank you for enlightening me in such a gracious manner. I will be sure to follow your instructions on election day.</p>
<p>
[quote]
nbachris: Unfortunately I think that you are right and this is what politics has become. Thank you for enlightening me in such a gracious manner. I will be sure to follow your instructions on election day.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My point is that you should hold politicians to certain standards, but if you keep them at an unrealistic level that you yourself could never even hope to aspire to, then you might as well vote for the greater of two evils (if you view Obama and McCain that way). In this case, it most certainly is the Republicans. Why not grow a conscience sometime in the future when the Republicans are poised for victory?</p>
<p>Judging by your last post, I assume that you are either a Harvard Fellow or holding a chaired professorship at Princeton. Thank you for sharing your deepest thoughts with me. They will be treasured.</p>
<p>Obama's focused on policies while McCain's focuse on character...</p>
<p>LOL</p>
<p>Somehow tying Limbaugh to McCain with out of context statements.
Talking about his wife's houses
Talking about how he guys green cars rather than American cars
Talking about how he's not technologically adept</p>
<p>Twist it how you want, Obama is not a new kind of politician. Once you realize that he's not someone kind of mythical sweet man (Hillary supporters already knew long back ago), you'll realize that his strange friends (Rezko, Ayers, New Socialist Party, ACORN), and his liberal worldview is either a means-fit-the-ends radical's dream, or an ethically-inclined moderate's nightmare.</p>