No wonder why Nader hates the Democrats. They're useless.

[European Socialist]

OK, they did good on Social Security. And there is Conyers and dozens more who are reliably progressive. But, the horrendous cave-in of the past 5 years to this totally corrupt President and Congress is inexcusable. If I Had to grade their performance- D- And the pukes would get an F. The Country would have been much better off with no Congress or President the past 5 years.

[KarenInMA]

1. Or a third party.

I long for a third party.. one that will have the best interests of the American people at heart. Failing that, I vote for the Dems.

[GreenPartyVoter]

3. I long for a multi-party gov't, but until we get

election reform, we won't have one.

http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/electionreform.htm

[Telly Savalas]

11. Totally agreed.

Replacing first-past-the-post elections with an alternative like instant-runoff voting or proportional representation would be the quickest way of opening the doors to major reforms in the political process.

[Tesha]

21. That's probably what the Whigs said too.

"Don't worry about those third-party Republicans; they'll never amount
to anything; third-parties never do!

Tesha

[whistle]

2. "...better off with no Congress or President the past 5 years"....

...not a bad idea.

[Tyranny_R_US]

5. That means the PEOPLE will get to make the decisions for once

NOOOOOOOOOO!

:sarcasm:

[thereismore]

4. Well said. most dems are useless. repugs are still worse. nt

[TheDebbieDee]

17. This is not meant in an argumentative way.......

but everyone here at DU seems to forget that Democratic leadership faced their own (domestic)terrorist attack shortly after 9-11. They were anthraxed! (Quite probably but indirectly, by the people in the White House.)

The leaders of the MSM were threatened by terrorists, too. Tom Brokaw never even attempted to recover his backbone. Dan Rather was beginning to rediscover his backbone and then he was promptly swiftboated in the AWOL * documents scandal. Peter Jennings, well, we'll never know if was ever going to become more outspoken about what is really going on in this country.

And, let's not forget what happened to Paul Wellstone, a progressive Democrat that many at this forum "joke" about as being assassinated in what was to appear as a small aircraft crash that also included his wife and one of his children.

We can only speculate about threats and insinuations that may have been made to Democrats that we've never been made aware of. After all, "evidence" was produced to get many in this country to support a pre-emptive invasion of a sovreign nation. Who is to say that more "evidence" won't be produced to justify calling a couple of Congressmen "traitors" and detained indefinitely?

[marbuc]

6. Aside from the criminal war

An absentee Congress is basically what we've gotten. Between fighting over judges, Terri Schiavo, and rubber stamping Dubya's nominees and ill advised policies, the Congress has ceded its oversight role and devolved into Dubya's largest cheer section. This is starting to change, but too little too late.

[tjdee]

7. Nader has no credibility at all anymore.

I mean, the man filmed a debate video with puppets.

With puppets, for pete's sake.

[lateo]

18. Neither do the Democrats.

So what to do?

[bottomofthehill]

8. No wonder why Democrats hate Nader

Or no wonder why Republicans LOVE Nader.

Due to his big fat ego, we have the Shrub in the Whitehouse, the war in Iraq, this administrations war against workers, the environment and judicial fairness.

Ralph can eat shit and die for all I care.

[Jacobin]

9. That's not true at all!!!!!!!

Any good PretendDemocracy must have a PretendOpposition, and they are perfect in that role.

So stop saying that.

[beetbox]

10. Amen

From Herbert Marcuse: " Within the affluent democracy, the affluent discussion prevails, and within the established framework, it is tolerant to a large extent. All points of view can be heard: the Communist and the Fascist, the Left and the Right, the white and the Negro, the crusaders for armament and for disarmament. Moreover, in endlessly dragging debates over the media, the stupid opinion is treated with the same respect as the intelligent one, the misinformed may talk as long as the informed, and propaganda rides along with education, truth with falsehood. This pure toleration of sense and nonsense is justified by the democratic argument that nobody, neither group nor individual, is in possession of the truth and capable of defining what is right and wrong, good and bad. Therefore, all contesting opinions must be submitted to 'the people' for its deliberation and choice. But I have already suggested that the democratic argument implies a necessary condition, namely, that the people must be capable of deliberating and choosing on the basis of knowledge, that they must have access to authentic information, and that, on this. basis, their evaluation must be the result of autonomous thought."

From Me: Until the Democratic Party asks for Dramatic Reductions in Military I have no respect for them. As long as they vote for further spending they are responsible for the atrocities and the lack of funding for social programs.

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes...known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few…No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.
– James Madison, Political Observations, 1795

[oasis]

12. Gore would have been USEFUL if it wasn't for Nader's USELESS ego.

:grr:

[European Socialist]

13. It's like Nader said-the Democrats slipped on 18 banana peels in 2000....

and he's the banana peel that got the blame.

[oasis]

19. And now he needs to slip into the dust bin of history.

:yoiks: and exit stage left.

[second edition]

14. Nader, this man holds some responsibility for Bush's Presidency.

His ego got in the way in 2000 and contributed to Gore's "loss". I use to respect the man, but not anymore. He knew he wasn't going to win any significant vote in 2000, but he ran anyway knowing it was a tight race. He then tried the same tactic in 2004. I even heard he took money from repubs in 2004 to keep his campaign alive.

[NYCGirl]

15. If Nader REALLY cared, he'd be leading the movement for a strong,

viable third party. But he's done absolutely NOTHING toward this end in the past 5 years, because it's all about Nader.

[no_to_war_economy]

28. he is great at pointing out the failures of the two parties

but horrible in changing the third party into a viable alternative

in that way he is just as useless as the democrats

[Frances]

16. Nader gave us Bush

so Nader is a lot worse than useless.

Anyone who can't see that should not cast stones at Bush supporters.

The end result is the same. Our democracy is being lost because of ignorant voters, whether they supported Bush or Nader in 2000.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[no_to_war_economy]

27. no nader did not give us Bush

the supreme court gave us bush

http://www.unprecedented.org/

[walldude]

20. When the rest of the Abu Grhaib photos are released

and we see what the Dems have hidden from us there is going to be alot of explaining to do....

[Ian_rd]

22. True ...

1. Nader gave us Bush in 2000 (along with countless other "deciding factors").

2. The Democratic Party is a 1/2-inch from being completely worthless, and only retains power because of its "lesser evil" status supported by genuine progressives.

But I wish he would work more like Kucinich and try to change it from the inside.

[moobu2]

23. If you vote for a third party,

you might as well vote for Bill Frist, Tom DeLay.

The Dems have been pretty effective at using the little power they have. After all, the Republicans control all 3 branches of government. They can only do so much.

Ralph can kiss my ass..

[Ian_rd]

24. I hate to state the obvious ...

... but people wouldn't vote for Nader if the Democrats actually deserved the progressive vote.

Have you been following the positions of the DLC lately?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/beltway-dems-regurgitate-_b_5990.html

[AndyTiedye]

26. Nader Pushed The Dems Off a Cliff, and Now Complains...

...that they aren't doing anything.

Of course not, they were hanging on by their fingernails.

Then in 2004, he comes along and stomps on their fingers a bit.

[no_to_war_economy]

30. democrats and their " Kerry is our captain of the war boat"

in 2004 was wrong and Nader was a true anti Iraq option as well as the greens

if the democrats cared about Iraqi children they would have put the Kerry out there who said " How Do You Ask a Man to Be the Last Man to Die in Vietnam? "

instead we got Kerry, a better war president

[AndyTiedye]

32. Yeah, But We Were Counting on Him to Flip-Flop After the Election

[sniffa]

29. everyone that agrees with you on this thread

get out. go start your own party and your own board.

[no_to_war_economy]

33. greenpartyunderground.com

who is with me ?

[sniffa]

36. go for it

have fun

[PunkPop]

34. Touchy, touchy.

I believe this site probably gets a lot of donations from those same people. Believe the admins might not agree with you.

[oasis]

37. Donations? Can we assume that you refused your star?

[trekbiker]

31. F--- Ralph and the Corvair he rode in on....

[laureloak]

35. And you offer what as an alternative to Democrats? nt

[Moderator]

38. Locking.....

From the rules.....

Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here.

You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.

Democratic Underground may not be used for political, partisan, or advocacy activity by supporters of any political party or candidate other than the Democratic party or Democratic candidates. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic party candidate.

Do not post broad-brush smears against Democrats or the Democratic Party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html