Duck Hunting Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
yeah, at first I was a bit startled. I watched and listened to him on Meet the Press this morning when he announced. As I think about it more, I tend think it will be healthy for the country.

John Edwards did a really good job of framing the issues, but since he suspended his candidacy, the rheoric has shifted back to typical politiacl nonsense, to a large degree.

I don't know that I would vote for Ralph, but I think it would be good to have him hold all the other candidates feet to the fire on the issues that really affect the vast majoirity of us, and have distorted who are government officials respond to.

check it out at votenader.org It's intersting and thought provoking... and I love to provoke thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,720 Posts
Dudejcb, not to contradict you really, but McCain will ignore Nader and Clinton/Obama (TBD) will spend the time secretly trying to get him to drop out so the vote doesn't get skewed. Nader voters would trend Democratic so a few thousand in a couple of states could be crucial. Nader won't hold anyone's feet to the fire, he's Harold Stassen for the millenium.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,385 Posts
RMH... you're right... wheel keeps turnin' round and round, can't speed up and can't slow down, can't hold on and can't stand still, if the thunder don't get ya' then the lightning will.

I agree Nader voters would likely trend Democratic, but can't stop it. Nader's going to do what he's going to do. When you listen to him tick off facts, figures and anecdotes he's pretty impressive and you have to admire the guy's intellect, and his dedication to what he believes in. His candidacy may have a postitive impact, or not. for us it will just be additional theatre over the next several months.

What threw the last elections to Bush wasn't just the independent crossover to Nader. If Gore had won his home state of Tennesse, or Clinton's Arkansas, Florida wouldn't have mattered.

I'm not sure McCain or Obama can just ignore Nader, and I don't think any pleading with him will have an affect. They'll probably have some debates with the three of them, and we'll see how pointed the discussion gets and how the drama develops.

The country is stirred up so who knows, but I don't feel like Obama voters are going to run to Nader at the first opportunity. If for no other reason other than we've seen this play twice before... shall the D's fracture?... again?

Personally, at this point, I wouldn't come close to voting for Ralph unless something very extreme and peculiar happened that comletelay threw everything into the air. But I do like the role he's playing and hope he actually gets heard by the voters and the other condidates will engage on some of the issues he raises.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
McCain doesn't have to do a thing/say a thing to Nader...not his voter base.

Already had to listen to Obama beat on Nader in a speach he gave yesterday. I also grow a bit weary about the loopy left complaining of Nader's ability to split the vote.

No...'Darth Nader' doesn't have that kind of force.

The left has a short memory...ol' Ross took nearly 20% of the popular vote in '92...highest in history....gave the election to Clinton. Nader is not even close to that kind of influence.

I wouldn't vote for Nader...but I say let 'em run.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,940 Posts
I heard Ralphie's campaign slogan was going to be :

Hello,,, It's me again ! :rofl:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
991 Posts
Nader is a Jackleg! McCain would eat him for lunch, and Obama will just not give him the attention he wants.

Tonight should be entertaining with the Hilldabeast debating Obama, specially after her little temper tantrum she thru this past weekend. Obama could verry well close the deal tonight!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,846 Posts
I support McCain, not because he's the best, but because he is the lesser of all the evils that are currently running for that office. I was elated to hear about Nader rejoining the hunt. That means that I don't have to worry about that crazy Obama trying to run our country. Nader is just going to be a Democratic vote pirate. my worries are over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
Thank you Captainduckhead....

I think people really have lost sight of the big picture. I will vote for McCain. Not out of a deep love for the man, to be sure.

However, I see him as doing far less damage to our economy than the socialist candidates.

Secondly, I don't shake with fear when I think of him appointing new members to the Sup. Court...not the way Obama Bin Laden makes me tremble with his 'cherry' picks that would seek to dismantle the constitution....A president can come and go in 48 short months. A de facto socialist on the Supreme Court can last a generation and have impacts lasting decades!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,681 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I second that motion for a viable 3rd party candidate.

The Greens seem to think that Nader is a poster child for something...not sure what they think is good....

The Libertarian praty? Ed McGaa, last candidate they acutally pushed...they must not want to win a thing.

Independence? I got two people for you. ROss Perot & Jesse Ventura. Nuff said.

I can't believe he has the cojones to try again....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Trois_beaux_canards said:
I second that motion for a viable 3rd party candidate.

The Greens seem to think that Nader is a poster child for something...not sure what they think is good....

The Libertarian praty? Ed McGaa, last candidate they acutally pushed...they must not want to win a thing.

Independence? I got two people for you. ROss Perot & Jesse Ventura. Nuff said.

I can't believe he has the cojones to try again....
I would love to see jesse run for pres. He really was a good gov. Just lost his temper with the ultra liberial press in mn too many times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,344 Posts
I don't want a third party at all.

If you look at Europe and other parlimentary systems, where there are 2nd, 3rd, 4th, ... parties. Each party becomes completely inflexible in their positions. There is literally no reason to compromise. Almost everybody is a one issue voter.

I'm a person with very strong opinions, as you all well know :oops: However, debating, arguing, and ultimately compromising are very important for a healthy system. If you can vote for a minor party every election and maybe they get a seat or two, I think it leads to a failing system. Almost all issues are interrelated to some degree and you really do have to compromise. Look at the NRA thread. Do we want an NRA party, a pro-life party, a green party, a communist party, a socialist party, ... A winner take all system like we have, with two coalition parties is really the best that I think we can achieve. It's ugly, but politics is going to be ugly because ultimately it is about taking your money and controlling your life. If that's not worth fighting about, I don't know what is.

Third parties do server a purpose and when a party gets too far out of line, a third party can keep them in line. I don't see how the Dems are out of line and that is why Nader is almost guaranteed to have no effect on the Presidential election and is actually likely to have a slight positive effect for the Dems by bringing out the childish all or nothing voters. The same type of voters on the Republican side that are likely to sit at home. Thus ensuring they get even more of the policies they claim to oppose :huh:

The primaries are where the action needs to be. That's the only complaint I have with the current system. However, with such strict limits on campaigns. It makes it virtually impossible for an unknown upstart to be competitive. If you want to convince more and better candidates to run for office, we need to get rid of donation limits. Make all donations public information and let the public decide if their is undo influence. The current system has been so effective :rofl: Effective if you mean at protecting the incumbents :mad:
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top