Subject:
|
Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 27 Feb 2004 12:32:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
268 times
|
| |
![Post a public reply to this message](/news/icon-reply.gif) | |
"Tom Stangl, VFAQman" <talonts@vfaq.com> wrote in message
news:4039AC44.FA1D7E0A@vfaq.com...
> Once again, Ralph Nader is shooting for the impossible, and once again
> (hopefully NOT, this time, as people will remember last time), he will
> take votes from the Dems, possibly putting GWB back into office.
If you look at the two states where the Bush/Gore decision was narrow,
you'll find that even if Nader hadn't run, the non-Dem non-Rep votes for
fringe candidates would have put Gore over the top.
It seems typical that the Dems. (or Reps. for that matter) lay claim to all
non-major party votes.
The fact is that in the upcoming election, I could vote for the party that
brought me "The Digital Millennium Copyright Act", or the party that brought
me "The Patriot Act".
...or I could vote for a party that actually represents my views.
If more people took the time to learn about the other parties, they might
find one that met their views better - instead of sucking up republicrat
nonsense about how the two parties platforms are so vastly different.
I don't want Bush in office. I don't want Kerry in office. I don't really
want Nader in office, but of those three he's the only candidate I haven't
ruled out. A vote for Nader (or any fringe candidate) is a vote against a
two party system.
The Dems. need to face the music though. If they can't beat Bush in an
election, they need to reconsider their platform to appeal to a wider array
of Americans. They already have one strike against them - and so far
they're on track to nominate another dud.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply: ![](/news/x.gif) | | Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy?
|
| (...) Get real. You're deluding yourself. A vote for Nader at this point is *a vote for Bush*. Keep voting indirectly for Bush. But don't whine if GWB gets reelected and continues hauling the US into a decline that may take decades to reverse. I (...) (20 years ago, 27-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
12 Messages in This Thread: ![Is Nader really THAT stupid, or just a secret lapdog of GWB? -Thomas Stangl (23-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really THAT stupid, or just a secret lapdog of GWB? -Scott Arthur (23-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really THAT stupid, or just a secret lapdog of GWB? -Neb Okla (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really THAT stupid, or just a secret lapdog of GWB? -Don Heyse (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader Really a Threat to Democracy? -Neb Okla (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader Really a Threat to Democracy? -Don Heyse (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader Really a Threat to Democracy? -Neb Okla (28-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![You are here](/news/here.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy? -Thomas Stangl (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy? -Neb Okla (27-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy? -Thomas Stangl (28-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Is Nader really a threat to Democracy? -Neb Okla (28-Feb-04 to lugnet.off-topic.debate)](/news/x.gif)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|