portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting oregon & cascadia

community building selection 2004

Nader Announces: We have the Signatures!

Nader today released through the Portland Campaign office this statement: "We are now confident that we have the signatures to qualify for the Oregon ballot. The county clerks and elections staff throughout Oregon have the important responsibility to finish the validation process in time for us to deliver the signatures to the Secretary of State on Tuesday at 5:00p.m."
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 22, 2004

"We salute the efforts of those who have recruited additional staff and those who have worked overtime and on the weekends in order to assure that every signature is counted, as they have traditionally done. Their willingness to do what one county clerk called "whatever it takes" is enormously appreciated. By their professionalism, integrity and diligence, they safeguard the core of our democracy, which is nourished by more voices and choices."

In any petition campaign, the last weekend is always the most productive. Last week, the Nader campaign sent e-mails to the eight larger counties, advising them that they could expect a large number of signatures to be dropped off at 8:00 a.m. on Monday and suggesting that they take whatever steps were necessary in order to have the signatures which had already been delivered to them completed by then and to have available the necessary resources in order to validate the new signatures in a timely manner.

Multnomah County has had some difficulty. The county had 4,000 signatures completely validated by August 11th, then on instructions from the Secretary of State, the county began the entire process over. The county has acknowledeged that it initially failed to perform the required step of checking for duplicates. As of Friday, August 20, the Nader Campaign still had not been allowed to retrieve those signature sheets, nor any of the other signature sheets that Multnomah County has validated.

A second county has also had signature sheets since August 12th and by Friday had apparently not completed validation of any of the signatures.

Observers from the Nader Campaign have watched the process at Multnomah County of the basic validation procedure (excluding a check for duplicates and a second review of rejected signatures). Normally, it takes one staff member thirty seconds to validate one signature. With ten people at the computers, the basic validation should be capable of being completed at a rate of at least 600 signatures per hour.

All of the counties have experience in ramping up their capacity when necessary. The campaign has made regular deliveries of signatures to the various counties, and more than 20,000 signatures had already been delivered to the counties before the end of last week.

For More Information: <>Greg Kafoury
(503) 224-2647 or
(971) 563-4139

As Dick Cheney says. . . 22.Aug.2004 18:48

Hal E. Burton

"Principle is OK up to a certain point, but principle doesn't do any good if lose."

That's on page 178 of "Worse than Watergate" by John Dean, former counsel to Nixon. Just make sure you know who you are up against and how they play the game.

Go Nader! 22.Aug.2004 18:49

George Bender

Congratulations to the campaign. I hope the counties come through in counting the petition signatures.

As for the Oregonian's editorial on Nader, I hope they choke on it. Rich corporate assholes.


Nader is a distraction 22.Aug.2004 19:16

Pravda or Consequences

Nader will face greater hostility than rogue democrats even if he were elected.

Hey Ralph, while you may have your own clique of supporters, the vast majority of voters will not take you seriously because you have not taken the electorate seriously.

We are talking about the course of America and will not follow someone who is only a reactionary not a visionary.

Pravda 22.Aug.2004 19:37

George Bender

You seem to be unclear on the concept. We don't care about "the vast majority of voters." The Nader campaign represents those who are being left out economically, the working class and the poor. The object is to use our small percentage of the vote to make the Democrats, who have betrayed us so many times, lose. This is the only way to get their attention and force them back to the left. We are also interested in wrecking the two-party system, which has turned the U.S. into a dictatorship of the rich. We can do that by making it nonfuctional.

As for taking the electorate seriously, that reminds me of something the comedian Red Skeleton used to say: "Why I take it just as seriously as you can take one of them there things."


To George 22.Aug.2004 20:07

Pravda or Consequences

Nader will accomplish nothing except political theater.

I am very clear on what and where America needs to be as the role model of democracy.

Ralph is a gadfly and neither he nor you will force the dems to do anything except what they want to do.

The dems occasional acknowledgement of those not affiliated with their party does not constitute movement to more progressive ideas.

Why? Because Ralph cannot even stay loyal to the Green Party and no one is going to vote for Ralph because there is no 'Consumer Party' or 'No Duopoly Party'. There is only Ralph.

George, what you are not clear on is that most voters have already decided between Bush and Kerry and the undecided have not heard how Ralph is going to make the world a better place. And more importantly, what has Ralph done to assist the disenfranchised.

What has he done? In recent times, what impact to everyday Americans outside the election circus has he accomplished? The answer is sadly, nothing.

dangerous rhetoric for the democrats 22.Aug.2004 20:41

.

"What has he done? In recent times, what impact to everyday Americans outside the election circus has he accomplished? The answer is sadly, nothing."

But let us look at, say, what Kerry has done to impact everyday Americans.

He voted for:
* The war on Iraq
* The Patriot Act
* The Homeland Security Act
* The Anti-Terrorism Act
* NAFTA
* GATT
* FTAA
* Welfare Reform
* "Leave No Child Behind"

And his campaign seems to want to keep Nader from legally being allowed on ballots while allowing Bush to be on ballots illegally.

Are you sure this a road Kerryites want to travel down? Kind of like accusing Nader of accepting money from republicans when Kerry accepts 100 times as much (yeah Kerry sure is going to crack down on Halliburton's war profiteering after they give him a few hundred thousand dollars). You might want to think before you make yourself out to be hypocrites.

To . 22.Aug.2004 21:10

Pravda or Consequences

It doesn't matter what Kerry Bush Clinton or any Repub or Dem has done, what matters is what has Nader done?

If your political philosophy is nothing more than finger pointing, the question still remains what has Nader done?

At the end of the day, the collective memory and attention span of voters only includes Bush or Kerry.

Nader must take the presidential more seriously and that means more than just showing up every 4 years and tell us how bad this are. We already know that, what we need is someone who can produce something more than rhetoric.

Yawn 22.Aug.2004 21:22

B

So what? It's all a distraction.

Pravda 22.Aug.2004 21:26

George Bender

"George, what you are not clear on is that most voters have already decided between Bush and Kerry and the undecided have not heard how Ralph is going to make the world a better place. And more importantly, what has Ralph done to assist the disenfranchised."

We don't need the votes of the undecided to make Kerry lose. We already have our votes, we just need a ballot line to manifest them. Failing that, we'll write Nader in. Those of us who plan to vote for Nader are well aware of his 4 decade record of fighting against corporate power, and of his current platform. How do you manage not to be aware of these things?

I'm not sure what you mean by "the disenfranchised." If you mean the people who were prevented from voting in Florida in 2000, I would say that's everyone's responsibility, not just Nader's. As we saw in Michael Moore's recent movie, Farenheit 911, the Democrats just sat there in the Senate and didn't lift a finger to fight what happened in Florida. My guess is, seeing their recent dirty tricks against Nader, that they had secrets of their own they didn't want brought to light.


What Nader has accomplished 22.Aug.2004 22:30

Independent UK

Born in Winsted, Connecticut, to Lebanese immigrants who ran a bakery, Mr Nader studied at Harvard and edited the Harvard Law Review before graduating and setting up a small practice.

Mr Nader soon started speaking out against the abuse of corporate power, making headlines with his 1965 book Unsafe at Any Speed, in which he condemned the car industry for producing unsafe vehicles. Nader's status soared when executives of General Motors hired private detectives to harass him and were then forced to apologise publicly before a nationally televised Senate committee hearing.

Backed by a group of young activist lawyers known as Nader's Raiders, he went on to produce exposés of industrial hazards, pollution, unsafe products, and governmental neglect of consumer safety laws. He is credited with a key role in the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the Freedom of Information Act and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.


boring 22.Aug.2004 23:00

glassguy

Considering the difficulty nader has had achieving the ballot in a county where 10000 people came out and paid to cheer him 4 years ago, it's pretty clear that nader's only going to get the votes of the 500 people who genuinely support him. The republicans who helped put him on the ballot will be voting for bush next fall.
" The object is to use our small percentage of the vote to make the Democrats, who have betrayed us so many times, lose."
Karl Rove couldn't have said it more succintly. What have the republicans done for you that you find them so much more palatable than the democraps?
You carp and complain about how the democraps collaborated with 95% of the republican agenda, but I ask you, when all of the post 911 garbage was happening, WHERE WAS RALPH? I truly don't remember hearing much of anything from him about patriot act et al. while it was being "debated".
My question is, Mr. Bender, when nader gets 500 votes in multnomah county, and another 500 throughout the rest of the state, will you shut up and quit helping the republicans implement their agenda in 2008?
Have you travelled around the people's republic of Southeast Portland lately? I do. I see hundreds of anti-bush and "pro" kerry signs/bumper stickers every day. I have only seen one sign for nader, on Gladstone.
Anyone supporting nader is seriously deluded.
Please answer the questions without name-calling.
I covered my old nader bumper sticker with an "impeach bush" sticker, and I feel better now.

glassguy 22.Aug.2004 23:32

George Bender

"What have the republicans done for you that you find them so much more palatable than the democraps?"

Nothing. I don't plan to vote for any Republicans. Or any Democrats, because they have done nothing for working-class people like me, while pumping out the liberal rhetoric during every election. The game is over.

"WHERE WAS RALPH?"

Right where he has always been, doing his work, writing his columns. People like you pay no attention to what Ralph is doing, read nothing about him, know nothing about him, and then you complain that he hasn't paid attention to a particular issue. Ralph does what he does, and he has accomplished a lot more in his career than John Kerry. Right now what he is accomplishing is giving us an alternative to vote for, and a neat way to screw the Democrats, which they so richly deserve.

"My question is, Mr. Bender, when nader gets 500 votes in multnomah county, and another 500 throughout the rest of the state, will you shut up and quit helping the republicans implement their agenda in 2008?"

I'm not helping the Republicans implement their agenda. That is a stupid remark. I'm implementing MY agenda. That aside, the answer to your question is no, I will never shut up. My question to you is, if you really believe Nader will only get 1000 votes in Oregon, why are you so threatened that you write this crap? Also, how do you translate a few percentage points in the Oregon polls into only 1000 votes?

"I covered my old nader bumper sticker with an "impeach bush" sticker, and I feel better now."

I'm sorry to hear you're feeling better.


Tools 22.Aug.2004 23:46

Frank

Naderites are tools of the right wing. Wake up.

"political theater" 22.Aug.2004 23:53

truth

and that's not what we have now with BushKerry Skull & Bones?

'Naderites' are tools of the "right wing"? who/what are the 'tools' of the "left wing" - the DLC?

Fool Me Once 22.Aug.2004 23:54

Shame on whom?

I am so fed up with this political crap (anybody but Bush) that I am now considering voting my party line-which would mean voting for David Cobb and Patricia LaMarche.
Nader had my vote in 2000 because I supported what he stood for then and before. But where has he been the past three plus years? Disappointing there.
Still, he was not the 2000 election spoiler that everyone erroneously trots out to make points that miss the mark about what is really happening in the world.
I don't pretend to know what is happening other than it seems much bigger than me.
The two party system must go if we are to experience the drastic changes necessary. Dare we make the leap and tell both Skull and Bones members to go away?
What will it take to make a better world?

glassie, go home 22.Aug.2004 23:56

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

"I truly don't remember hearing much of anything from him about patriot act et al. while it was being "debated.'."

Oh, yeah. Because the corporate media was just soooooooo anxious to report Nader's every move in the last four or five years. So if you didn't hear anything from him, it MUST be because nothing happened, glassie. It couldn't be because you couldn't stir yourself to turn on CNN or peer at Common Dreams a few times in those four of five years. Hell, Nader was even in *The Nation* a couple of times, despite the tantrums of the Alterman-worshippers who stamped their feet and threatened to cancel their subscriptions if they DARED publish Alterman's version of The Great Satan EVER AGAIN !!

Shiiiiiiiiit, glassie. You ought to be smarter than that.

Y'know, Sen. Leahy told an NPR reporter in the Winter of 2001 that Nader offered to assist the Democrats in repelling Ashcroft the Repellant's bid for A.G., and Leahy actually TOLD THE REPORTER THAT HE NEVER RESPONDED TO NADER BECAUSE HE THOUGHT THAT NADER'S WRITTEN OFFER TO ASSIST WAS FAKE !!! So the majority of the Democratic leadership, as so tellingly illustrated by Leahy's little comment, are basically a combination of vindictive and unimaginitive liars and Keystone Kops. Oh, but that couldn't POSSIBLY have anything to do with how little you've heard from Nader in the last few years, either, I suppose.

Tsk. What was *I* thinking ?!

(Don't even get me started on all the idiots who proudly cut off membership to groups like Public Citizen to "teach Nader a lesson." Never mind that Nader hasn't been directly involved in such groups for years. But, yes, I'm sure it accomplished a lot to strip tons of money from such groups at a time when they needed it most. And the idiots who did this are the same ones who said a vote for Nader was "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

I bumped into one such specimen at the Jim Hightower lecture a few weeks ago. Then I went home, kissed my bottle of Lexapro and offered up a silent prayer of thanks to the people who invented it.)

Just like if Nader hasn't "managed to accomplish anything in years," as your comrade in stupidity says earlier in this thread, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that the Democratic Party has become increasingly Right-Wing itself in the last twenty-five years. Ummm... glassie... You've heard of the DLC. Helllllooooo ?!?! The traditional avenues through which Nader and others like him once managed to push an activist agenda have been sealed off for years now. Sealed off with the eager co-operation of those so-called "champions" of the people, the Democrats.

But you go ahead and just keep rewarding Kerry and his friends if it makes you all warm 'n fuzzy inside. After all, it's really important to continually enable all the cowardly fuckwits who voted for the Patriot Act in the first place. Don't hurt your brain by asking yourself just what more Nader was supposed to do about the Act other than publicly opposing it, as he always has. What exactly did you want/expect, glassie ?

A hunger strike ?

Maybe a demand for his own show on Fox so he could have his own bully pulpit to land right in your living room, so you'd never have to stir from your (mental and/or physical) easy chair.

Wait! Maybe he could've HELD a hunger strike UNTIL Murdoch gave him a show !! Brilliant !!

You're funny, glassie.

(Who can forget the classic plea from one of his former Nader's Raiders in 2000 for Ralph to play nice and get out of Gore's way ? Surely you remember it, glassie... the plea in which it was conveniently left out that said Ex-Raider had long ago abandoned consumer activism for a lucrative gig with Monsanto. <rolleyes> )

But how very nice for you that you have a lovely new bumper sticker, glassie-poo. Really, I'm so happy for you and I'm sure all of Oregon is, too. <Yawn.> Just as sure as I am that Kerry is alllll set to ladle out truckloads of gravy to you once he's been swept into office thanks to your teary-eyed repentance/renunciation of your former evil ways. If he doesn't decide to draft you first.

Listening to you talk about the remaining Nader voters as "delusional" is like listening to Avril Lavigne call Brittney Spears "shallow."

Cheers ! :)

The DLC have succeeded 23.Aug.2004 00:08

Kerry

All Hail The New Republican Party!

DLC + DNC = A Party Any Reagan Could Love

NADER PLATFORM WINS DISCUSSION 23.Aug.2004 02:36

TRUTH B TOLD

well that settles it >> the pro naderites win discussion hands down <<
please review previous post before attempting a rebuttal !!!
very well explained and informed point of views on naders position
hopefully the ignorant can digest the philosophy


Nader goal, 4 more years of Bushit 23.Aug.2004 08:03

no way, jose

Bender writes above "We don't need the votes of the undecided to make Kerry lose. " This directly reveals the goal of the Nader campaign. And the unspoken corrolary necessarily follows. Defeating Kerry, with no hope of a Nader victory, means granting the facist idiot Bush another 4 years to destroy America, to imprison its people in a police state, to bankrupt its future and wipe out what's left of its natural environment.

"Making Kerry lose" is code for "helping Bush win". Nice thinking. I can only believe most people in Oregon are smart enough to see through these republican shills.

Thanks for the deep thoughts 23.Aug.2004 08:21

glassguy

"HOPEFULLY THE IGNORANT CAN DIGEST THE PHILOSOPHY
Listening to you talk about the remaining Nader voters as "delusional" is like listening to Avril Lavigne call Brittney Spears "shallow."
But how very nice for you that you have a lovely new bumper sticker, glassie-poo
Maybe a demand for his own show on Fox so he could have his own bully pulpit to land right in your living room, so you'd never have to stir from your (mental and/or physical) easy chair.
as your comrade in stupidity says earlier in this thread."

Boy howdy, you really know how to answer questions, and to do so without name-calling.

Will you shut up when nader gets a thousand votes? Will you notice from bumper stickers and lawn signs that nader has nearly no support? Will you continue to drag what may be left of nader once good name through the mud by hurling epithets devoid of reason at persons you shouldn't antagonize if you want their good will and votes? Will you rejoice when(if) bush gets to appoint supremes? Do you honestly think kerry's supreme nominations will be as bad as bush's? Do you really want to see more tax cuts for the ruling class? I can't say a whole lot of nice things about kerry, because there aren't a lot of nice things to say, but at least kerry professed that he wants to get rid of bushco tax cuts, and get the deficit under control.

BTW, I read common dreams, indy media, FTW, TSTBP, the Progressive, and listen to KBOO. My fox consumption is limited to "The Simpsons," who have the good sense to trash rupert murdoch on a regular basis. Nader said very little in any of those forums, although I do recall the incident with Leahy now that you mention it. I don't watch much tv, and I don't waste my money on cable.
I'm sure that you're well acquainted with scientific methodology and statistics. Let's have some proof about your allegations that 25% of nader voters (not supporters) are republicans. Let's see some figures about the number of times nader had anything to say to common dreams as opposed to, say, Greg Palast, or Matthew Rothschild, or George Monibot, etc.
Ok, You may now respond by calling me the same names I call bushco.
Or you could actually present some facts, but if you looked at them with any objectivity, you'd discover that you've been completely brainwashed.
Y'know, if I wanted to stoop to name calling, I'd point out that the brain washing was done with some kind of acid in a sewing thimble, but I'd rather deal in FACTS.

Isn't the real 23.Aug.2004 08:44

question

How is it that Kerry would be any better than Bush? I mean substantially better. If he is going to carry forward the same imperialist agenda, with the same high maintenance defense budget mentality, and the same sacrifice of basic civil liberties for the "security" of the people, just how sisgnificant are the little differences he will make?

Perhaps longer chains and bigger cages? What?

I don't consider myself a conspiracy therorist, yet there seems ample evidence to at least conjecture that their is an elite, select group of people who control the deeper agendas of both parties who are working in harmony, systematically, over a calculated period of time, to change America from a land governed BY the people to a land governed FOR the few. Is it really so paranoid to contemplate the possibility that there is an organized, empowered and unscrupulous cluster of people with this agenda?

Factor in the exploding population worldwide, and it is conceivabable that a handful of wealthy people could see it as there duty to assume control of the economy, the environment and the peoples of the earth, "FOR THEIR OWN GOOD." At least in their minds.

Factor in the total control of the Media, which in this day and age closely amounts to thought control of those whose perceptions are vacant of critical thought and skepticism of the motives of the rich and powerful, and one has a formula which, if administered slowly and carefully could succeed in enslaving the massess, WITH THEIR OWN COOPERATION; witness public reaction to the PATRIOT Act, and how easily Congress and the people rolled over and gave up those rights which were designed to protect them from the tyrant, the growing power of the "monied class."

Is Kerry something outside looking in, or just the next phase of a long range conspiracy to eventual global hegemony? I can't say, because I don't know. But, one must determine whether what separates him from "W" and his ilk is anything fundamental or just seductive window dressing.

So, the questian is, for those who might have an answer, How is it that he differs from, or would be any fundamentally better than, this born again nut job puppet occupying our Presidency? Is he just another puppet, oir does he have an personal agenda favorable to retrieving and nourishing Democracy in this country and encouraging true Democracy in the rest of the planet?

End the cult of personality 23.Aug.2004 08:46

Green Guy

I'd encourage all of you who are fed up with the 2 party/1 party system to vote Green, not Nader. The point is to build a viable alternative party, not just to vote for a single personality. Where will you be, when Nader dies? Will you still be voting Nader when he's 80 and senile? Your organization will shatter without a viable personality and name to rally around. Don't just destroy the old system. Work to put a new one in its place. Go Green, not Nader. Vote Cobb for president.

It's not a conspiracy. . . 23.Aug.2004 09:15

Hal E. Burton

C. Wright Mills documented "The Power Elite" several decades ago; the cliques, the private schools, the whole shot; yeah, they ARE two parts of the same party. What's new. . .? This dates to the 1700s when only white, male, land-holders had the vote.

The question is, do you want to take a symbolic stance and risk the electoral votes for this state? Seems to me that spitting in the warden's face would be a great symbolic gesture, but after the bars slam shut the next four years might be a bit rough.

Consider: No-bid contracts for Halliburton vs. Ground-breaking investigation of Iran-Contra. That's Bush versus Kerry. The latter ain't perfect, but he IS better.

"number of times nader had anything to say to common dreams" 23.Aug.2004 09:46

"glassguy" = CLUELESS.

Ralph Nader writes 1 article per week for Common Dreams -

Rothschild, Monbiot, Palast much less frequently.

Whatever, glass... 23.Aug.2004 10:35

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

"Will you shut up when nader gets a thousand votes? Will you notice from bumper stickers and lawn signs that nader has nearly no support?"

Uhhh... no, and no. Or in answer to Query No. 2, I don't care. I'm out of High School now, glassie, and I have been for twenty years. I don't brainlessly rally 'round the popular and shallow under the impression that it will elevate my character nor the country's character, such as it is. Frankly I think the problem with most Liberals and Progressives in this country is that they do just that. They trash or write off people like Nader and Kucinich without even waiting for the Right to come in and do it. Deep down, they just wanna' hang with the captain of the football team and his Prom Queen, not with the nerds, though they feign otherwise. This is why I call myself a misanthropic Progressive. :p I have Progressive leanings but don't really like most other Progressives all that much, because as a whole I find them to be a bunch of passive-agressive chickenshits with no spine and no pride. :p

"Will you continue to drag what may be left of nader once good name through the mud by hurling epithets devoid of reason at persons you shouldn't antagonize if you want their good will and votes?"

Oh, snap out of it. Who fired the first round in this little tete-a-tete by using the word "delusional" ? That'd be you, glassie. Or are you sooooo worried about John Kerry's dewicate widdle feewings that you're afraid my epithets are hard on *him* ? Sure. Whatever.

"Will you rejoice when(if) bush gets to appoint supremes? Do you honestly think kerry's supreme nominations will be as bad as bush's?"

I'm not interested in blackmail and being held hostage, glassie. I'm not going to behave like a prisoner out of fear of a Right-wing Supreme Court. And in case you didn't notice, we've already got one that's headed that way in no SMALL MEASURE to the machinations and complicity of people like Al "I'm Very Principled Now That I'm Not Running" Gore.

"Do you really want to see more tax cuts for the ruling class? I can't say a whole lot of nice things about kerry, because there aren't a lot of nice things to say, but at least kerry professed that he wants to get rid of bushco tax cuts, and get the deficit under control."

Is that before or after he bribes U.S. corporations to keep jobs in the U.S. If Kerry had two brain cells to rub together, he'd have followed Jim Hightower's suggestion and called for a curtailment, or at least cut, in the payroll tax. Hell, if Hightower were running the Dems, I'd be back with them in a heartbeat. But he's not, Blanche. He's not. :(

Need I say more 23.Aug.2004 10:49

glassguy

They trash or write off people like Nader and Kucinich without even waiting for the Right to come in and do it. Deep down, they just wanna' hang with the captain of the football team and his Prom Queen, not with the nerds, though they feign otherwise. This is why I call myself a misanthropic Progressive. :p I have Progressive leanings but don't really like most other Progressives all that much, because as a whole I find them to be a bunch of passive-agressive chickenshits with no spine and no pride. :p

Hey, I've been out of high school 30 years. That means I can remember having a draft card. I voted for Kucinich in the primary. I gave him $50
"delusional" is the diagnosis of a PHD psychologists.
If you just narrow your blinders a little bit, you won't be able to see your keyboard, and that will spare us all from wasting time reading your drivel.
More character assinations, please. Each one hurts your cause.

Way to go Nader Oregon Campaign! Congrats! 23.Aug.2004 11:40

mwb morganbrown@gmail.com

Way to go Nader Oregon Campaign! Congrats!

Great work.

If it is possible for someone to do, I would appreciate being receiving updates related directly to these and related matters as they become available so I can have additional and timely information in order to possibly consider using when blogging my Unofficial Vote4Nader Blog (blog address has been listed with this comment post).

Thank you Oregon for Nader 2004!

http://vote4nader.blogspot.com/
Montpelier, Vermont

Still not hearing any real differences in Kerry 23.Aug.2004 11:48

questian

The reference to Iran-Contra floats no boats for me. I'd like to hear something significant concerning Kerry, not in what the Democratic Party did years ago. Let's hear what Kerry really stands for that would separate him from those generating a current streaming this country away from its Democratic principles.

What, a kinder, gentler, more sensitive oligarchy?

I'm not into getting "W" elected; I'm into supporting people of character. Unfortunately, life is riddled with nuances of gray, and there is no clear path for those who choose to think for themselves. We're limited, not only to the selection, but to the information we are able to gather from available sources, most of which seem to have their own agenda, right and left.

Does Kerry have positions that would effectively protect the environment; the worker; the disinfranchised-whether gay, of color or poor; civil liberties and guaranteed freedoms? I wonder. Clinton was supposed to go to bat for the gays. Who did he eventually use that bat on? Campaign promises are only so much seduction devices

I'm not willing to hold my nose, ears and mouth, and hope for the best, believing that getting "W" out will solve any of our problems. Remember, promises come easy, and we need an integrated platform, one whose center of gravity addressess the particulars of the major problems of the day,-energy consumption, population, the economy, the environment, the insane military spending, to name just a few off the top of my head.
I get the feeling that we're being "good cop, bad copped," and it seems there is a hysteria in this country that is going along with this scenario, inflating it, nourishing it, disseminating it in the liberal and progressive arena. Anybody But Bush is a formula for destruction, in that no one is sufficiently examining "anybodys" credentials, positions or character. What we are getting are cheap shots coming from the right, that question superficial things which go broad but not very deep. I'd rather hear them discuss energy policy that military records; I'd rather hear them speak, knowledgabley about the PATRIOT Act and job outsourcing than ribbons and medals.
Our wealth and momentum will only carry us so far, for so long. Eventually it will wither away, and we will be left with a devastated and contaminated global environment; an economy of wage slaves, grateful for crumbs from pie in the sky promises; energy resources dwindling while consumption continues to skyrocket, here, and most importantly, in China.

Still waiting to hear how Kerry will protect us, ultimately from ourselves.

it's been said before and I'll say it again 23.Aug.2004 12:02

strategist

Without Nader Gore would have lost the 2000 election. Likewise, it is Nader that is helping motivate the Kerry supporters. I don't understand why Bush wasn't enough motivation in 2000 or 2004 but the reality speaks for itself. Of course, one could argue that Gore could have won by a much larger margin if his campaign had shifted resources from attacking Nader to attacking Bush. In 2004 the same is true for Kerry, though that money could also be spent of making sure there are verifiable and fair elections (which doesn't seem to interest the democrats too much). I suppose they want to plan their blame game for when they lose, and the republicans will be only to happy to shift votes from Kerry to 3rd party candidates like Nader, as they did in 2002 and 2000.

One other point is that talking up Halliburton's benefits from Bush makes little sense when Kerry is receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars from Halliburton and has made no statement that he will change the contracts in Iraq.

If the Kerry supporters want to win:

1. Spend money promoting Kerry and attacking Bush and to ensure a fair election instead of wasting money in a costly, pointless anti-Nader campaign. The anti-Nader campaign is basically spending money to push people away from the Democratic Party. That money could best be spent elsewhere as it is not effective in doing what it purports, to convince people to vote for Kerry instead of Nader.

2. Focus on the few actual differences between Bush and Kerry. Frame the election as a religious fundamentalist versus a religious moderate. Concentrate on Kerry's reluctance to use nuclear weapons versus Bush's casualness with their use.

3. Bush is not able to handle pressure so keep it on him. Don't shift it and don't be distracted. Let Bush know how unpopular he is and eventually he will do himself in. At the RNC he will probably have to be heavily medicated.

4. Find out what voting machines are used in your district, whether there will be a paper trail, and what the procedure is to request an audit or a recount. If there is no paper trail the election will be unverifiable, start hypothesizing and talking to lawyers about what that could mean in your state.

That's all you need to win. What you choose to do with this information is your business.

Oh, glassie, you brute ! 23.Aug.2004 12:11

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

"Hey, I've been out of high school 30 years. That means I can remember having a draft card."

That's nice. Did the captain of the football team alternately ignore you and treat you like shit no matter how much you kissed his ass back then, too ? Kerry's attitude should have an all-too-familiar ring, in that case.

"I voted for Kucinich in the primary. I gave him $50."

Bully for you. Too bad no one running the Democratic Party considers poor Dennis anything but a useful idiot. He's too good for the fuckers, but I don't really blame him for not bolting. He needs the Party and its coffers behind him if he expects a real shot at being re-elected. :( And, yeah, I sent him some money, too.

" 'delusional' is the diagnosis of a PHD psychologists.

Not the diagnosis of anyone who knows grammar, though. Or so it would seem. Can I have this part one more time in English, glassie ?

"If you just narrow your blinders a little bit, you won't be able to see your keyboard, and that will spare us all from wasting time reading your drivel."

If you just go out and spend a few more bucks on John "Tank" Kerry bumper stickers, you can plaster your screen with them and never have to hear/read squat from me again, glassie. Until after the first week of November, at least.

I mean, you know and I know that all this squabbling between the last remaining fragment of Nader's base and the penitents, like you, doesn't mean diddly-shit when that time comes. Whether it's Kerry, or Bush, or no fucking election at all, we're all going to be needed and the time for pointing fingers will be officially at an end.

But, hey, a little distraction is always good, I guess, since it's my lunchbreak at work and booze is thus out of the question. Want half my sandwich ?

:p Cheers.

Errr, Green Guy... 23.Aug.2004 12:15

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

"...Where will you be, when Nader dies? Will you still be voting Nader when he's 80 and senile ?..."

Oh, hey. Let's be ageist. That's always fun. <rolleyes> Possibly I'll be voting for Camejo or some other Green, if the Party regains its real purpose and stops behaving like Kerry's lickspittle.

"Your organization will shatter without a viable personality and name to rally around. Don't just destroy the old system. Work to put a new one in its place. Go Green, not Nader. Vote Cobb for president..."

But, GG, Cobb doesn't want my vote, remember ? He wants me to vote for Kerry, too. Pay attention, will you ?

fight to win vs preparing to concede 23.Aug.2004 12:34

a fighter

The republicans are fighting to win. The democrats are preparing to concede.

The question for the democrats is:

Would we rather lose and be "right" or win and be "wrong"?

The democrats need to fight to win, and the only way they can win is to acknowledge that they're up against a rigged election that Nader has nothing to do with, other than being the democrats favorite scapegoat for their failures.

In a 2-way race in Florida in 2000 Bush would have won 49% to 47%.

What does that tell you about Nader's role?

According the American Research Group who conducted a poll in Oregon Kerry would beat Bush by 8% with Nader in the race and only 7% without Nader in the race.

What does that tell you about Nader's role?

If Nader was truly going to hurt Kerry's chances don't you think the republicans would be anxious to get Nader into the debates where he would be seen and heard by millions of Americans? Yet the republican leadership appears completely opposed to the idea (as does the democrat leadership).

What does that tell you about Nader's role?

If the democrats decide they want to fight to win they can count on my support (not just my vote) but if they're going to be a party of shifting blame and failed strategies I think I have better ways to spend my time.

Re: Iran/Contra 23.Aug.2004 12:36

Hal E. Burton

The Boston Globe has a fairly extensive (and not really glowing) biography of Kerry. He's done some good stuff. By their reckoning, he was investigating the Iran/Contra affair before the Dem's were even on to it. Likewise, he was on the senate committe investigating BCCI.

I couldn't agree more that the whole Viet vet thing is just stupid. Energy policy would be high on my list for discussion, too. Kerry has said he'd push for energy independence. I can't Bush ever doing such.

I would point out, too, that Nader's site is pretty scant on detail as to how he'd bring about his energy policy. My ideals -- Hell, yes I'd like to see somebody like Nader or Kucinich. But I seem to be stuck living in reality.

silly voters 23.Aug.2004 13:13

ann R key

silly voters leaders are for sheep! bah-ba-a-ah ba-a-a-ah bah
will you people ever learn, kerrybushnader will not hold the whip any looser, will not lift the yoke a little, and definitely will laugh that much harder at your growing misery. take a moment from your groveling, and look around. there are many more of us, we can do it better. the fetishized and reified vernacular of democratic oppression stinks of death and this computer screen reeks as i read these comisar rantings for the death culture of amerikkka.

don't vote, do it yourself

who's more delusional? 23.Aug.2004 14:22

glassguy

Man, I'm getting tired of this. Who's crazier, Alsis 38 or George Bender?
I vote for alsis 38. Man, your hatred becomes you. I never cared enough about sports to know who the captain of the high school football team was, but I guess you know it all, no need to confuse you with facts.
If Kucinich is such a dupe, why'd you support him?
If you can get past your hallucinatory delusions long enough to read what persons with critical thinking skills think, you recall that my nader bumper sticker was replaced with "Impeach Bush." I don't like kerry, I'm just voting for him because the alternative is worse.
I'll ask my s.o., who has the psych. phd to analyze your copious but incoherent ramblings. You can probably get the meds you need then.
At least the energy you spend trashing basically like minded people isn't helping your cause.
BTW, I doubt that nader's candidacy will hurt kerry at all. The 500 fools throwing their votes away on nader would've thrown them away on "NOBODY/NOTA" if nader weren't around to misdirect your energy. God knows, I've voted for Bart Simpson and NOTA plenty of times.
I hope you get all the alcohol and other legal drugs you clearly need when you get off work. The stuff they're giving bush is probably just about right for you, too. Be careful about using them simultaneously, and please don't drive anywhere. This thread is like a conversation with alzheimers. I'm done.

Note for alsis 23.Aug.2004 14:25

green guy

Calling me ageist just completely misses my point. I'm saying it's a bad idea to build an organization or political campaign around a person instead of a party. If you don't support the greens now, why do you suppose they'll still be around to vote for in the future? Nader isn't trying to win, and he isn't trying to build an organization for the future. He's trying, as near as I can tell, to punish the democrats by helping defeat them. Not really great ideals, in my view.

Cobb DOES want your vote, especially if you are in a state where Bush is going to lose badly. Cobb and the Greens simply realize that building up a third party movement under a facist system like the one Bush is busy imposing on us is next to impossible. That seems like a pretty smart realization, in my view. Planning for the future and making smart choices today isn't "lick-spittle", though that's a kind of cool word. What's lick-spittle is blindly following one man as he leads you off the cliff.

In the meantime, the Green party is working hard to win elections where they realistically can. They came within a whisker of putting a Green in the Mayor's seat in San Francisco. That's big time!

Your sarcasm doesn't represent "paying attention" to anything but your ego. You might try giving reasoned responses, instead of name-calling, which only detracts from your own ideas.

glassguy 23.Aug.2004 15:26

George Bender

"... hurling epithets devoid of reason at persons you shouldn't antagonize if you want their good will and votes?"

No, no, you still don't understand. We don't need or want your "good will and votes." We're sick and tired of being screwed and we're out to get you.

It's actually the other way around: you need our votes to win close elections. It's a sellers' market. Better start giving us something we want or you could be on the outside looking in forever.

And campaign rhetoric doesn't count. Democrats are famous for being liars. They never keep their promises.

As for antagonizing people, what do you think your party's war on Nader has done? Or state Democratic legislators helping the Republicans destroy the safety net? Nominating a presidential candidate with a bad voting record who supports the war?

As for building the Green party, no, I don't want to do that, not since they basically opted out of the presidential race by running an unknown who doesn't seem to be interested in fighting the Democrats. I also doubt that the left is capable of sustaining any large-scale organization. What I would like to do instead is to build up a RESISTANCE to the Democrats and the two-party system. To do that in electoral politics, you have to run someone who could actually get enough votes to have an impact. You have to be a threat, or you just don't count. Nader is a threat. Which is why we're having this discussion.

When Nader is too old to run we'll find someone else. Granted that he will be hard to replace. But the Greens haven't been able to come up with a good candidate either.


Glassie, O'Reilly Called... 23.Aug.2004 15:32

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

...he wants his script back. ;) I appreciate your cheap sho-- er, concern about my mental health. No, really.

Oddly enough, if you'll read back, you'll note that I never said that I personally regarded Kucinich as a dupe. I said that he was being used by his own party to lend them a legitimacy and connection to a once-proud history that they don't deserver and don't understand. Is it really that hard to understand the difference between those two concepts ? Oh, well. I tried.

<Shrug.> If your bumper sticker makes you feel better, have at it. Trouble is, that's all it's good for. If the Democrats can't even control their own built-in 5th column that constantly undermines them (and us) by siding with Republicans, how are they going to even set their own agenda, much less impeach Bush ?

Can I have your autograph after you get your Fox show ?

Hmmm... 23.Aug.2004 15:32

Wauchope

As for the consistant complaint that we evil people who voted for a candidate we liked back in 2000 (Nader, or whoever wasn't Gore/Bush) are helping (or have helped) Bush, I say Bushit!
If I am an average person who voted for Nader, and I am, then we would NOT in a million years have voted for Bush/Gore then, or for Kerry/Bush now. Those who vote for "third party" candidates want a third party. Duh.
Those who want to perpetuate the norm, who want to lend support to a system of inequality and illness, will vote for Bush/Kerry/Gore/Reagan/Clinton/Republican/Democrat. The system will never change if people keep pretending that supporting it can help encourage it to do so. That concept is as unhealthy and deranged as the system itself. Those of us who oppose the system as it is now, who oppose the "two-party" stranglehold on the country, and who oppose the fact that "third-party" candidates have "no hope" of winning (not to mention being abused and berated for even running against the status quo!), will vote for a "third-party" candidate.
I find it offensive that people assume that my vote for Nader would have gone for Gore if Nader didn't run. Most of us who voted for Nader would probably have NOT VOTED otherwise. I suppose that's what you whimpering democrats want- everyone but you to refrain from voting or having an opinion. When more than half of the country isn't even bothering to vote, it is ludicrous to blame the "pResident" on those who vote for an "underdog" candidate.
I am encouraging everyone to vote- regardless of who for- because if everyone voted the elections would be more meaningful, and the candidates would have to listen to the people a little bit more. If only people who like Kerry/Bush vote, we will continue to get greedy fascistic pResidents who pander to the 20% of the country who like them and don't mind being lied to and controlled.

I wish people would accept the fact that Nader is NOT to blame for Bush's current position of power.
I am not sure if I will vote for Nader this time around, but I AM sure I will NOT vote for a democrat or a republican pResident this year, or probably ever. I want this country to have more than two political parties, and I will vote to show it.

Oh, Excue Me, Greengage... 23.Aug.2004 18:42

alsis38 alsis35@yahoo.com

"Calling me ageist just completely misses my point."

Then why use obnoxious phrases like "old and senile" ? If you don't want your point missed, don't indulge in ageist b.s. Simple, no ?

"I'm saying it's a bad idea to build an organization or political campaign around a person instead of a party."

Ummm... thanks, I know that. And I would have no trouble supporting Cobb and LaMarche if they weren't kissing up to Kerry/Edwards with absolutely no hope of earning anything for their supposed "strategy" but more contempt and more distance from the latter. I don't believe in vote-swapping or this "safe states" b.s. Either run, or don't run, for pity's sake.

"If you don't support the greens now, why do you suppose they'll still be around to vote for in the future?"

Again, you're ASSuming a lot. Where did I ever say that I haven't, or wouldn't continue to, vote for local Greens or send the party money. My quarrel is with Cobb/LaMarche, not the rest of the Green Party,.

"Nader isn't trying to win, and he isn't trying to build an organization for the future. He's trying, as near as I can tell, to punish the democrats by helping defeat them. Not really great ideals, in my view."

Perhaps not, but the Democratic leadership deserves it, frankly. Their perpetual attempts to have their cake and eat it too are insulting and destructive. They trashed Nader for not wanting to work "within the system" anymore. Yet you only need to look at the contemptable way they've treated Kucinich and his delegates to see that they are no more interested in listening to attempts at activisim within the party than they ever were. They claim that they don't need Naderites or other "fringe voters" to win, yet they are spending precious time and money to vilify said voters all over again. They offer said voters nothing for their vote but more abuse. What the hell is even the use to trying to get through to these arrogant, spoiled, insulated jokers anymore ? They kiss up to the Republicans across the aisle, and kick the rest of us in the teeth. Some damn party, the Democrats.

"Cobb DOES want your vote, especially if you are in a state where Bush is going to lose badly."

I live in Oregon. They don't want my vote and have said as much in on the record. And as I said above, I think that's nonsense and worse than pointless. You might also check out some of the CounterPunch links that various Naderites have linked to here. Those writers have done a better job of summing up the utter ridiculousness of the Cobb/LaMarche "strategy" than I ever could.

"Cobb and the Greens simply realize that building up a third party movement under a facist system like the one Bush is busy imposing on us is next to impossible."

The Democratic leadership isn't interested in IRV. It isn't interested in anything but token campaign finance reform. It isn't interested in removing voting machines from the filthy paws of assholes like the CEO of Diebold. It isn't interested in assisting those who've had their right to vote stolen or unjustly revoked. It isn't interested in de-consolidating private media. And it sure as fuck isn't interested in re-examining the Electoral College. To pin one's hopes on Democrats opening the door to 3rd Parties if we all just play nice and kiss their feet some more just this one last time is ridiculous. Fear works for them. They will continue to use it as their primary tactic for keeping the discontented in line until they cease to exist as a party, until we cease to respond en masse to their bullshit, or until the U.S. ceases to exist as a nation, whichever comes first.

"That seems like a pretty smart realization, in my view."

Not mine. I don't believe in playing games. You're in to build your party and treating your opposition like what it is-- opposition, or you're not.

"Planning for the future and making smart choices today isn't 'lick-spittle', though that's a kind of cool word. What's lick-spittle is blindly following one man as he leads you off the cliff."

I'm pretty sure that your guy is just leading us off a different part of the cliff that has slightly more convincing flowerbeds obscuring the sheer drop. But do what you want.

"In the meantime, the Green party is working hard to win elections where they realistically can. They came within a whisker of putting a Green in the Mayor's seat in San Francisco. That's big time!"

Sure is. And they did it by running a real campaign and by not wasting any time trying to placate Newsome or slavishly begging him to buy them off-- something he would never have done in any case. Which is why I respect local Greens a hell of a lot more than I respect Cobb/LaMarche.

"Your sarcasm doesn't represent 'paying attention' to anything but your ego. You might try giving reasoned responses, instead of name-calling, which only detracts from your own ideas."

Ask me if I care, Greenguy. Neither you nor your buddy glassdome up there came here to be converted, any more than I did. You came here to blow off steam and to cherry-pick for any comment you could use to help cement the position you have already chosen. If you can't actually pay attention to what I've written, which is, in fact, more than just sarcasm, at least be honest about your motives for reading it in the first place.

it would still be wrong, by the way! 23.Aug.2004 21:24

me

it's been said before and I'll say it again 23.Aug.2004 12:02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
strategist link

Without Nader Gore would have lost the 2000 election.




---and such a statement would still be wrong, by the way, if you actually look at the massive Democratic surge for Bush in Florida in the same group that voted for Democrats in 1996, because Gore was a weak candidate. Second, you so obviously forget the whole federal stopping of the vote and the court suit in which the Supremes selected Bush. The Florida vote totals had nothing to do with it. And even if they did, it would be hard to blame Nader on anything except your anal fixation on him, because even with Nader, Gore actually won the vote of the state of Florida. This of course ignores the 'weeding' of civil rights for those who typically vote Democrat in that state as well, which was engineered illegally by Secretry of state for Florida, Katherine Harris--who happened of course to be the FL Campaign Chairman for George W. Bush '00 as well. Give Nader a break. I wish him well, and I wish the person who wrote such nonsense the hell of coming to terms with reality.

Right-wingers rejoice! 23.Aug.2004 22:50

Bush in 2004

Comments by the owner of the most heavily trafficked GOP website in the country:



BUSH LEADS KERRY IN NEW FLORIDA POLL; GALLUP- BUSH 48- KERRY 46 NADER 2


Go Nader!!



Posted by Jim Robinson to Nascardude
On News/Activism 08/23/2004 5:34:03 PM PDT · 4 of 56

hmmm 24.Aug.2004 00:13

ex-democrat voter

If the democrats are in agreement with the analysis of nascar republicans they are in deeper trouble than even I thought.

---

Independent candidate Ralph Nader, who is waiting for papers to be filed on his behalf by the Florida Reform Party to be included on the Florida election ballot, garners 2 per cent -- half of which appears to come from each of the major parties.

Gallup says that the slight lead enjoyed by Mr Bush is mostly owed to the fact that the percentage of Republicans supporting him (90 per cent) is higher than the percentage of Democrats supporting Mr Kerry (84 per cent). But, Gallup says, that advantage is precarious because political independents favor Mr Kerry by a rather strong margin: 51 per cent to 36 per cent.