Poll: Do you agree with Nader's opinion of current 2 party system?

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: chess9
After giving it a second thought, I don't think Nader will be much of an influence in the upcoming election.

a. He's too old (70).
b. He has no serious organization.
c. He has very little money.
d. A lot of liberal democrats have learned their lesson. Better a President with half a brain, than one who is brain DEAD.

Republicans would be much better off finding and funding a real conservative candidate than contributing to Nader. One without helium between the ears would be helpful.

Let the games begin.

-Robert

It looks like Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore (famous for the 10 Commandments episode) will run as the candidate for the Constitution Party. Even though I don't agree with anything he says, he'd probably be the most honest candidate in the race.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Allright Moonie, fess up, you're the one who clicked on:

"Only as a warrior can one survive the path of knowledge"



I'm shocked @ the poll, I suspect we'll see an independent win in the next 10-20 years if the 2 parties don't start listening.

 

[Harvey]

Nader raises valid, important issues, but if he was serious, he should have started an independent campaign the day after the last election and kept it up to build some momentum for a realistic candidacy.

Politics has been defined as "the art of the possible." Nader's late entry is a futile gesture that cannot possibly result in his own election. By now, it should be clear to even the most die hard indy and Green that, like it or not, in the last election, from their point of view, Gore really was a lesser of two POSSIBLE evils, and their previous clown show directly resulted in the election of the greater of the two.

At this point, even Nader acknowledges the primary objective is getting rid of Bush. Nader should stay in arenas like consumer advocacy where he is effective. If he thinks he can be equally effective in politics, he should first take the time to learn how to do it, instead of simply dumping his turds in the current punchbowl.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

I'm shocked @ the poll, I suspect we'll see an independent win in the next 10-20 years if the 2 parties don't start listening.

I'm convinced that a Libertarian would have already been elected if the tax burden was equally distributed. As it is now, those who pay little taxes are allowed to vote for huge government expenditures and deficits. Its a psuedo-democracy.

 

[Nietzscheusw]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

I'm shocked @ the poll, I suspect we'll see an independent win in the next 10-20 years if the 2 parties don't start listening.

I'm convinced that a Libertarian would have already been elected if the tax burden was equally distributed. As it is now, those who pay little taxes are allowed to vote for huge government expenditures and deficits. Its a psuedo-democracy.

Yeah, those Halliburton billionaires who pay next to no taxes and buy votes in DC to boost their sales really pervert democracy. All billionaires behave the same way.
Down with corporate capitalism!
We want a direct democracy!

 

[Nietzscheusw]

Harvey, do you believe that maybe Nader is a spook, used by the CIA/Wall Street for strategic goals?

 

[0roo0roo]

A Two party system sucks ass and we need more parties. I've yet to see why anyone would vote for fvcking John Kerry or reelect Bush. What is with this BS lessor of two evils chit? Someone needs to run that will WIN because they are GOOD and have a nice stance on issues.

not in a winner takes all system. the last thing we need is a winner only supported by a tiny portion of the vote.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
As it is now, those who pay little taxes are allowed to vote for huge government expenditures and deficits. Its a psuedo-democracy.

You're talking about the very rich, right?

Originally posted by: Nietzscheusw
Harvey, do you believe that maybe Nader is a spook, used by the CIA/Wall Street for strategic goals?

What planet did you say your were from? Welcome to Earth.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Dissipate
As it is now, those who pay little taxes are allowed to vote for huge government expenditures and deficits. Its a psuedo-democracy.

You're talking about the very rich, right?

Originally posted by: Nietzscheusw
Harvey, do you believe that maybe Nader is a spook, used by the CIA/Wall Street for strategic goals?

What planet did you say your were from? Welcome to Earth.

No, I am talking about the top 50% of earners who pay over 90% of federal revenue. The other 50% get to vote for government programs they essentially don't pay for.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
No, I am talking about the top 50% of earners who pay over 90% of federal revenue. The other 50% get to vote for government programs they essentially don't pay for.

Oh -- I thought you were talking about the top 1% who pay nothing except tything the Bush re-election machine and the legislators who passed those tax cuts. :disgust:

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Dissipate
No, I am talking about the top 50% of earners who pay over 90% of federal revenue. The other 50% get to vote for government programs they essentially don't pay for.

Oh -- I thought you were talking about the top 1% who pay nothing except tything the Bush re-election machine and the legislators who passed those tax cuts. :disgust:

Tax cuts good, out of control spending BAD.

The only party that really wants to bring government spending under control is the Libertarian Party.

LP

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
The only party that really wants to bring government spending under control is the Libertarian Party.

Sounds like a pile of Bush-wit to me.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Dissipate
The only party that really wants to bring government spending under control is the Libertarian Party.

Sounds like a pile of Bush-wit to me.

Huh? Bush is no Libertarian.

 

[arsbanned]

Just because Tesla couldn't speak in public doesn't mean that he wasn't smart. Bad public speaker != low IQ.

OK, how about that fact that he looks like a fcking deer caught in the headlights WHILE he rapes the language and sounds like a total moron, does that count?

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Dissipate
The only party that really wants to bring government spending under control is the Libertarian Party.

Sounds like a pile of Bush-wit to me.

Huh? Bush is no Libertarian.

It was just a pun with an added twist directed at one of Nader's prime targets. With full recognition of the forum language filter, would you have preferred the word, BULLSH8?