Do we need to be concerned with Ralph Nader (again)?

[RiverStone]

Back in February, Nader was whining about DEMS and hinted he may enter the frey again in 08 - Regarding running he said: ...too early to say, (I'm) considering it. We're going to see what the Democrats come up with.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/15/BAGUCO5CPL10.DTL


I've read a few DUers worried about the Nader factor rearing it's self serving head again in 08. For anybody wanting more information on this guy's track record, check out this recommended Sundance Film Festival documentary here:

http://www.anunreasonableman.com/

On tour in 07!!! :applause:

[depakid]

1. If Nader keeps a more credible candidate from running independent

That could work to the Democrats' advantage.

As it is, if the current slate is all the US has to choose from, I have a feeling that a LOT of people are going to stay at home in 2008. On both sides of the aisle.

[aquart]

2. Thank you for your concern.

The Democratic choices are magnificent. Republican, not so much.

[depakid]

6. Mark my words

If this is all the Dems have to offer, then I Lieberman is correct- there will be a 3rd party candidate, and the Dems better hope that it's someone like Nader- and not someone with more charisma.

btw: regarding the Dem candidates, I've heard this from more than a few people.

[RiverStone]

7. Who are you looking for?

Since you seem so dissatisfied with our current DEM pool...

For the record, Obama is my easy number 1 choice at this point; though I'd be thrilled to see Gore jump in. I'd through ALL my support to AL in a heartbeat!

Hillary I'd vote for only reluctantly by default; yet I will support our party's nominee over any rethug! And you?

[depakid]

12. I'm ambivalent as to the current slate

both in terms of their records, their views on the issues, their campaigns and their chances of winning in 2008.

Gore or Clark would be my choices (it's too bad we can't draft Dean).

[DFW]

3. Any Democrat who stays home in 2008 should remember one thing

not even a word, just a letter: W

In this case, it stands for "nightmare."
I'd rather not face the reruns.

[Ignacio Upton]

5. What about Rudy McRomney?

Those clowns will continue to fuck things up both here and in Iraq. And let's not forget Brownbackhuckabeetancredo. The only remotely rational figure in the GOP 2008 field is Ron Paul, but he's still on the fringe when it comes to economic issues (being a libertarian and all).

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

4. Concerned? No. It's still (sort of) a democracy.

The more choices on the ballot the better.

[AlCzervik]

8. imo people that vote Nader weren't going to vote for a democrat anyhow.

Wow i was so voting for Clinton until Nader jumped in!

[deutsey]

9. I was never concerned about him to begin with

We have far more legitimate (and far more dangerous) threats to be concerned with.

[ck4829]

10. I think a deal needs to be made

Promise to nominate Nader to be the head of the FDA, EPA, or the FTC, and in return he doesn't run.

Nader has his heart in the right place, he just needs to realize though, he does not stand a chance and can hurt the Democrats more than anyone else when he runs.

[mdmc]

11. DLC says Gore did better in 2000 with Nader in the race

Nothing to fear but triangulation...

[stillcool]

13. I'm more concerned with ....

electoral fraud than Ralph Nader.

[GeorgeGist]

14. Good quote from the link you provided...

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-George Bernard Shaw

[SammyWinstonJack]

15. He pops up every four years. And always to bash the Dems!

:grr: Self-serving is right! :mad:

[Vidar]

16. Good for Nader.

[Telly Savalas]

17. He wasn't a factor in 2004.

If the Democrats communicate so poorly they can't use Bush's presidency to effectively refute Nader's mantra "there's no difference between the parties," then they don't deserve to win anyway.