On Democracy Now Nader just said Kerry

[messiah]

has a good voting record and that Kerry needs to be pushed by the people and not the corporations to do better. Nader said that both Kerry and Edwards are better than Bush. People should take a wait and see attitude before making judgments.

[maddezmom]

1. then why the heck is Nader running

can't he just light the fire under their butts, without getting in the ring? :shrug:

[SaddenedDem]

2. Because it's obvious

that the DLC/DNC has no intention of allowing the Johns to BE liberal or populist unless someone forces the issue.

Nader intends to keep the liberal agenda on the table. If he doesn't, the DLC/DNC will shove it under the rug and move further to the right.

[Tinoire]

3. Bingo./ Thanks n/t

[maddezmom]

6. ok, if I follow your line of reasoning

Why the heck didn't he get behind Kucinich with an endorsement and campaign for him?

[edzontar]

32. He did endorse Kucinich verbally. I saw it on TV.

I don't know if it was formal.

But on CSPAN, he called Kucincih the "Real thing" and a "Great congressman" who he was "supporting" for the nomination.

I am sorry this is all memory, I don;t have a link.

[IndianaGreen]

10. Terry McCauliffe was on TV this morning, and guess which issue he ignored?

The war and occupation of Iraq!

McCauliffe also did not mention the jobs lost because of NAFTA and other trade agreements, or the civil liberties in jeopardy because of the PATRIOT Act, or the discredited war on drugs and the human rights crisis created by Plan Colombia.

[redqueen]

25. OOOH shocking!

Not.

[Donna Zen]

30. McAuliffe off the hook

Clark and Dean no longer in the race.

Relax Terry...take a nap now, and dream of the grassroots you can get money from on the internet. Easy pickins, and you don't have to do a thing for them.

War...Great! PNAC..how's your daddy? Patriot Act...freedoms just another word for pissing in your shoes.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. Gee...

and that nasty old rightwing DLC agenda actually got us a win in the last three elections.

Can't have any more of that, can we?

[IndianaGreen]

17. The DLC hasn't won a single election, ever!

The 1992 and 1996 Presidential Elections were won by Bill Clinton's charisma. It was Clinton, and Clinton alone, that won those elections. The DLC was irrelevant.

It was the DLC that restrained Al Gore so much in 2000 that most voters saw a plastic candidate instead of the passionate man that Gore really is. The DLC blew that one!

It was the DLC that blew the 2002 elections by insisting on candidates that represented an echo instead of a real choice to the GOP. The DLC blew that one too!

If Bush is defeated this year it will be for the animus that Bush and his policies have generated among the public. It won't be because of anything the DLC does or says. In fact, the DLC is doing all it can to make the voters hold their noses as they vote for the Democratic candidate. That's no way to elect a President, much less to build a lasting coalition.

[sangh0]

21. So let's see if this makes sense

The DLC is powerful enough to shut Gore up in 2000, and all of the Dems tunning in 2002, but it had nothing to do with the election of the candidate who billed himself as a "New Democrat".

[Toronto Ron]

18. Note that there's a difference

between BEING liberal (i.e., once elected as President) and CAMPAIGNING as a liberal.

[mzmolly]

20. There are Dems in this race pushing the liberal agenda, thus I am left to

assume it's about an Ego stroke for Mr. Nader...

Should he drop out just before the GE, I'll change my mind on that. But, I won't hold my breath.

[redqueen]

26. Yes, there are

What are their chances of getting the nomination?

[sangh0]

22. That's nonsense

The DLC is powerful enough to keep Edwards and Kerry quiet, but not powerful enough to withstand that Omnipotent Force of Nature, otherwise known as Ralph Nader?

:shrug:

[redqueen]

27. Has anyone said they're forcing anyone to do anything?

Please.

Politicians choose who they listen to. Edwards and Kerry think the DLC gives good advice, so they heed it.

Nader, however, sees that they are nothing more than the corporate kissups they are, so he ignores them.

[sangh0]

29. Yes redqueen. Someone has said that

the posters name is Saddened Dem and it is his/her post I was responding to. Shouldn't you read the posts before responding?

This is what Saddened Dem posted:

that the DLC/DNC has no intention of allowing the Johns to BE liberal or populist unless someone forces the issue.

Nader intends to keep the liberal agenda on the table. If he doesn't, the DLC/DNC will shove it under the rug and move further to the right.

According to Saddened Dem, the DLC "will shove it under the rug". Please note that it's not Kerry or Edwards who "will shove it under the rug". It's the DLC/DNC.

[redqueen]

31. I just brushed that off as bad writing technique

I gleaned that they were implying that those who listen to the DLC will follow their lead, not that the DLC will force them through threats or what have you.

Saddened Dem? Care to clarify?

[flpoljunkie]

4. We now understand that we must fight for our republic, Ben Franklin.

When Benjamin Franklin was walking out of the last session of the Constitutional convention, a woman from Philadelphia stopped him on the street, and said, "Dr. Franklin, what have you produced?" And he said, "A republic—if you can keep it."

John Kerry often ends his townhall meetings with this Franklin admonition. It could not be more critical for this time in our nation's history.

[glarius]

5. I don't care what good things he has done in the past

It's too crucial now that Bush be beaten...That should be his main concern. He doesn't help the cause by diluting the vote....I think it's mostly his EGO that is driving him to run....

[Iverson]

7. This could be a problem.

Judging by the last 48 hours, 90% of the posters would now be willing not to believe that Kerry and Edwards are better than Bush, simply on the basis that Nader said they were.

[buddhamama]

15. another excellent observation, Iverson.

a problem yes, and disturbing.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. So if they are both better than Bush

why the heck is he running?

[IrateCitizen]

9. Whether or not you agree with it, this is why...

He's running because he sees himself as having the ability to harshly attack Bush by promoting a lot of policies that the Democratic nominee (save Kucinich, and I know what you're going to say about him so don't even start) would never be free to advocate. Essentially, he feels that he can be the "point man" for really hitting Bush's policies hard, enabling the Democratic nominee to take a more progressive line while still able to seem like a "moderate".

Personally, I think that his ego is playing a big part in this, as much as I might agree with him on basic issues and analysis of the current state of politics. Even Michael Parenti has said that he will support the Democratic nominee because it is that important to get Bush out, if that tells you anything.

[glarius]

12. I don't buy his reasoning for running!

"He's running because he sees himself as having the ability to harshly attack Bush...etc."....Then he should be attacking Bush and supporting the Democratic nominee (whoever it is) instead of diluting the vote by running himself....HE'S AN EGOMANIAC...

[Freddie Stubbs]

13. So will he refrain from attacking the Democratic nominee this time?

Or will it be a repeat of 2000, where he attacked both Bush and Gore?

[sangh0]

23. Nader can do all that even if he doesn't run

None of that explains why Nader is running.

BTW, even Marc Green, a Nader protege, thinks that Nader shouldn't run.

[pansypoo53219]

14. how come

he didn't say that ON MEET THE PRESS?!?

[Jen72]

16. Doesn't Nader running damage The Green Party too.

The vote will be split between the two parties and the Greens will suffer. Nader has the least to lose.

[Monte Carlo]

19. Nader _knows_ Kerry is a good ally.

Nader knows that Kerry is not just another self-interested politician. He will be pushed by the people.

[redqueen]

24. He's not an idiot nor a stooge

Head-in-the-sand Democrats want to hate on him because it's much easier than facing the ugly truths about this party.

:eyes:

[Walt Starr]

28. This is great news

This means his third party run will be a benefit to the Dems and a detriment to Bush.

Looks like we'll have two people bashing Bush in the GE.

[Raya]

33. Don't Forget Kerry MEETUP THURSDAY