Tim, You're probably right that if we're just looking at policy papers, that I may have more in common with Nader. I might not though. Remember I am a strange pro-gun, anti-union liberal.
If the race was say... Hillary/Romney/Nader I would vote Nader as a protest vote.
The difference is, at this point, I think that I would honestly rather see McCain as our next President than Hillary. I'm not trying to be dramatic or rude, I'm being serious.
I think he'd be WAY MORE likely to clean up Washington and lessen the partisan bickering than she would. McCain scores much better with Independents than she does and with good reason. Despite my Obamania, I'm an Independent at heart.
With this in mind I would want my vote to count (no offense).
I think Robert and others here are more focused on the generals than the battles and why they're being fought.
Protest votes are of the same stuff that gives us shrieking two year olds in ACME. I.E. if I can't get what I want, then neither will mommy.
This is about The Supreme Court kids, which is perilously close to becoming arms of Opus Dei or the Southern Baptist Convention.
Guns aren't an issue because they're guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Unions are concept of a bygone era. So what else have you got Robert besides defining your position with two non-issues ?
McCain clean up Washington? He couldn't even keep his buddy Rick Renzi in line.
The reason that I stuck that line of green text in is we have seen a trend in poll averages over the past 3 months that Obama beats McCain by around 3 points while Clinton loses to McCain by around 6 points. This ten point national gap is undeniable now.
A McCain/Hillary race would be so close (at best) that the sliver that Nader pulls would set the stage up for another Gore/Bush party trauma. And Ron Paul has decided not to run as an Independent which means that there won't be a spoiler on McCain's right.
Hillary's best shot was a super delegate reversal. But with a protest-vote-magnet like Nader in the general election, cheated, enraged Obama voters would abandon a party that allowed 796 Washington insiders to overrule 30 million Americans in a mass exodus.
dont' you think it is just sooooo strange that he is joinging now? I mean, I love what the guy stands for, but really....now? just seems fishy. GOP paid for.
no candidate "owns" anyone's vote. i hate the spoiler terminology. ppl voted for nader in 2000 for whatever reasons they wanted to. it's their vote, not gore's or bush's.
damned democracy! how dare we give ppl more choices!!!
Bob - You should just hope Wayne Allyn Root gets the libertarian nomination instead and vote for him. His views on guns, unions, and personal freedoms are more on par with yours, plus he is the King of Vegas, which should be a plus in anyone's book.
ada, I'm all about third-party candidates. I would love to see a Green and particularly a Libertarian Party that was more than an asterisk. I'm not holding a grudge against Nader for 2000.
I actually donated to Ron Paul a few months ago, and not just for strategic reasons. To have a voice that rails for the Constitution and fiscal responsibility is welcome, even a crazy voice.
mencken, ok, take your argument to the next level. why not just say, then, that bush cost gore the election? if bush and nader hadn't run, then gore would have won. if only we had a single person running for office, then no one would cost them the election.
you may say that that is extreme or stupid or whatever, and it is, but the logic carries through. and if it's stupid, then what about saying that a thrid person cost one of the other two the election?
we as citizens can vote for who we want why we want.
How can you say Nader cost Gore the election? Gore cost himself the election. He could have rode the Clinton wave of a strong economy and should have easily won. Instead, he proved to be an unelectable candidate, ala Hillary.
But back to Nader, that was a poor comment by Obama when he said that Nader thinks "very highly of himself" or something along those lines.
My only statement to Obama would be...Nader has accomplished a hell of a lot more than he has.
Of course you have the right to vote for whomever you choose to. But don't spend years telling me you want change, hope, and health care, and then when you can't get your dream candidate, you chuck it all on somebody without a snowball's chance in hell of creating any change, just so you can pamper your idyllic view of the universe. You might as well vote for Scooby Doo. You'd get the same results.
It's been 8 friggin' years of war, deficit spending, deceit, and the erosion of your personal freedoms. You can do something about it, even if it's distasteful sometimes, to end at least some of the misery. Or you can brag about your fucking moral high ground for the next four years all while bitching about how nothing's changed.
I think my hypotheticals were a little more substantive than the stupid post about your t-shirts or the pictures that went along with it.
In case you did not get it, I was applying a hypothetical that parallels Kosovo's independence. Now if you are too shallow to take a stance on it, that is fine. But do not discredit my statements as non-substantive.
"I am focused on 2008" ~ Robert
So am I you fool. Kosovo just declared its independence two weeks ago, which would put it in 2008.
Talk about relevant, this directly goes to foreign policy issues, something that is Obama's supposed weakness.
And that is great you're anti-union Robert. I mean, the roaring 1920's and the Rockefeller and Carnegie eras were really about spreading the wealth. I suggest you read a couple of history books and try to comprehend that before unions, the working man was absolutely shit on and there was no such thing as a middle class (see Pinkertons). While I would whole-heartedly agree with anyone that thinks unions got greedy, I feel to be anti-union is to support mass concentrations of wealth.
Voting for Nader was voting for change. It was a signal that the people were sick of machine-like politicians who are out of touch with the people (see HRC, John Kerry, Al Gore). It was a signal that someone different was needed to rally the party, and that is exactly what has happened (see Obama, Barack).
In 1968 George Wallace began to lead the transformation of Dixiecrats to Republicans and did very well for an independent. His strong showing sent a signal to the Republican Party (that has just gotten blown out in the 1964 Goldwater contest) that they needed to begin courting Wallace's independents. This helped bring forth the Reagan Revolution.
SM, Over the course of the last year I've found time to go back and forth endlessly with you in the comments and answer hypotheticals like Mexican revolutions in the year 2050. This week I don't have the time. I came out here to lend the campaign a hand and time is of the essence. I know that that won't be good enough for you, but right now I have bigger fish to fry. Once we're through this week I will explain to you what I mean by "anti-union."
What a wonderfully smug response. We realize you have bigger fish to fry Robert. By saying that though, what exactly do you mean? Do you mean "hey, I'm so busy that I cannot respond to some stupid blog!"
Did you want us to recognize how great you are for running all over Ohio? Good job.
mencken, i voted for nader in 1996. if clinton had been in a weaker position, i would have voted for him, instead. i voted for gore in 2000 i voted for kerry in 2004 i will vote for clinton or obama in 2008.
i don't claim any moral high ground. i never have. i take great pains to try not to sink to the level of name calling or personal attacks, not because i think i am better but because negative campaign attacks frustrat me so much. i can be a hypocrite, but i try not to be. it doesn't matter whether it's in support of the person i like or against them...the fact that i like obama better doesn't matter.
it's be really easy to call someone here or elsewhere a partisan hack, and so on. i may think it, but it doesn't advance the discourse. if that is what you mean by moral highground, then ok.
i can tell you that if this were a pro clinton site and had similar types of posts and comments against obama, that i would be taking issue with them, as well.
Silent Majority, Your right shipping jobs overseas is not the answer. However most people think it was done just so companies could make more money. It is for survival. Akron is a perfect case. The tooling business(Akron was once the capital of tool making) was decimated the last ten years here. The companies could not compete with the Asian tooling( their prices were a minimum of 20% less) and the Akron tooling companies customers were forced to have their tools made overseas to remain competitive. As far as unions they were part of the reason years ago why companies left an area but now the unions are a minor player in this trend.
I disagree if unions would relent on their ridiculas work rules anufacturing could be very competitive in the US and many non union facilities flourish in the US. The American workforce is far and away the most productive in the world
Oh for god's sake! Can't we just make this guy the "President Emeritus" of crudmudgen politics, and shuffle him off to some think tank to lecture and write to that small segment of 'anti-authoritarian' people removed and segregated from our mainstream body politic?
31 Comments:
Tim,
You're probably right that if we're just looking at policy papers, that I may have more in common with Nader. I might not though. Remember I am a strange pro-gun, anti-union liberal.
If the race was say... Hillary/Romney/Nader I would vote Nader as a protest vote.
The difference is, at this point, I think that I would honestly rather see McCain as our next President than Hillary. I'm not trying to be dramatic or rude, I'm being serious.
I think he'd be WAY MORE likely to clean up Washington and lessen the partisan bickering than she would. McCain scores much better with Independents than she does and with good reason. Despite my Obamania, I'm an Independent at heart.
With this in mind I would want my vote to count (no offense).
I think Robert and others here are more focused on the generals than the battles and why they're being fought.
Protest votes are of the same stuff that gives us shrieking two year olds in ACME. I.E. if I can't get what I want, then neither will mommy.
This is about The Supreme Court kids, which is perilously close to becoming arms of Opus Dei or the Southern Baptist Convention.
Guns aren't an issue because they're guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Unions are concept of a bygone era. So what else have you got Robert besides defining your position with two non-issues ?
McCain clean up Washington? He couldn't even keep his buddy Rick Renzi in line.
Mencken
The reason that I stuck that line of green text in is we have seen a trend in poll averages over the past 3 months that Obama beats McCain by around 3 points while Clinton loses to McCain by around 6 points. This ten point national gap is undeniable now.
A McCain/Hillary race would be so close (at best) that the sliver that Nader pulls would set the stage up for another Gore/Bush party trauma. And Ron Paul has decided not to run as an Independent which means that there won't be a spoiler on McCain's right.
Hillary's best shot was a super delegate reversal. But with a protest-vote-magnet like Nader in the general election, cheated, enraged Obama voters would abandon a party that allowed 796 Washington insiders to overrule 30 million Americans in a mass exodus.
dont' you think it is just sooooo strange that he is joinging now? I mean, I love what the guy stands for, but really....now? just seems fishy. GOP paid for.
no candidate "owns" anyone's vote. i hate the spoiler terminology.
ppl voted for nader in 2000 for whatever reasons they wanted to. it's their vote, not gore's or bush's.
damned democracy! how dare we give ppl more choices!!!
Bob -
You should just hope Wayne Allyn Root gets the libertarian nomination instead and vote for him. His views on guns, unions, and personal freedoms are more on par with yours, plus he is the King of Vegas, which should be a plus in anyone's book.
Sorry, that link is broken. His website is www.rootforamerica.com
ada,
I'm all about third-party candidates.
I would love to see a Green and particularly a Libertarian Party that was more than an asterisk. I'm not holding a grudge against Nader for 2000.
I actually donated to Ron Paul a few months ago, and not just for strategic reasons. To have a voice that rails for the Constitution and fiscal responsibility is welcome, even a crazy voice.
Is it true that Dennis K. is Naders love child? Perhaps they could spend their time traveling the country together debating and passing the hat.
"I'm not holding a grudge against Nader for 2000".
No Nader. Gore wins. No Iraq War or any of the rest of Bush's toxic legacy. But hey all of that is less important than foolish political ideals.
Mencken
mencken,
ok, take your argument to the next level.
why not just say, then, that bush cost gore the election? if bush and nader hadn't run, then gore would have won. if only we had a single person running for office, then no one would cost them the election.
you may say that that is extreme or stupid or whatever, and it is, but the logic carries through. and if it's stupid, then what about saying that a thrid person cost one of the other two the election?
we as citizens can vote for who we want why we want.
Menchen,
How can you say Nader cost Gore the election? Gore cost himself the election. He could have rode the Clinton wave of a strong economy and should have easily won. Instead, he proved to be an unelectable candidate, ala Hillary.
But back to Nader, that was a poor comment by Obama when he said that Nader thinks "very highly of himself" or something along those lines.
My only statement to Obama would be...Nader has accomplished a hell of a lot more than he has.
Of course you have the right to vote for whomever you choose to. But don't spend years telling me you want change, hope, and health care, and then when you can't get your dream candidate, you chuck it all on somebody without a snowball's chance in hell of creating any change, just so you can pamper your idyllic view of the universe. You might as well vote for Scooby Doo. You'd get the same results.
It's been 8 friggin' years of war, deficit spending, deceit, and the erosion of your personal freedoms.
You can do something about it, even if it's distasteful sometimes, to end at least some of the misery. Or you can brag about your fucking moral high ground for the next four years all while bitching about how nothing's changed.
Your call.
Mencken
Robert,
I think my hypotheticals were a little more substantive than the stupid post about your t-shirts or the pictures that went along with it.
In case you did not get it, I was applying a hypothetical that parallels Kosovo's independence. Now if you are too shallow to take a stance on it, that is fine. But do not discredit my statements as non-substantive.
"I am focused on 2008" ~ Robert
So am I you fool. Kosovo just declared its independence two weeks ago, which would put it in 2008.
Talk about relevant, this directly goes to foreign policy issues, something that is Obama's supposed weakness.
And that is great you're anti-union Robert. I mean, the roaring 1920's and the Rockefeller and Carnegie eras were really about spreading the wealth. I suggest you read a couple of history books and try to comprehend that before unions, the working man was absolutely shit on and there was no such thing as a middle class (see Pinkertons). While I would whole-heartedly agree with anyone that thinks unions got greedy, I feel to be anti-union is to support mass concentrations of wealth.
Actually nevermind.
I forgot Obama has not really taken a stance on Kosovo, and therefore you mouthpieces do not know what to say.
My bad, I know your log cabin t-shirts are much more "substantive" than our foreign policy.
Voting for Nader was voting for change. It was a signal that the people were sick of machine-like politicians who are out of touch with the people (see HRC, John Kerry, Al Gore). It was a signal that someone different was needed to rally the party, and that is exactly what has happened (see Obama, Barack).
In 1968 George Wallace began to lead the transformation of Dixiecrats to Republicans and did very well for an independent. His strong showing sent a signal to the Republican Party (that has just gotten blown out in the 1964 Goldwater contest) that they needed to begin courting Wallace's independents. This helped bring forth the Reagan Revolution.
SM,
Over the course of the last year I've found time to go back and forth endlessly with you in the comments and answer hypotheticals like Mexican revolutions in the year 2050. This week I don't have the time. I came out here to lend the campaign a hand and time is of the essence. I know that that won't be good enough for you, but right now I have bigger fish to fry. Once we're through this week I will explain to you what I mean by "anti-union."
You can call your vote whatever you want, but there
are only winners and losers in politics.
The Naderites, lost in the political desert for 40 years.
Mencken
What a wonderfully smug response. We realize you have bigger fish to fry Robert. By saying that though, what exactly do you mean? Do you mean "hey, I'm so busy that I cannot respond to some stupid blog!"
Did you want us to recognize how great you are for running all over Ohio? Good job.
mencken,
i voted for nader in 1996. if clinton had been in a weaker position, i would have voted for him, instead.
i voted for gore in 2000
i voted for kerry in 2004
i will vote for clinton or obama in 2008.
i don't claim any moral high ground. i never have. i take great pains to try not to sink to the level of name calling or personal attacks, not because i think i am better but because negative campaign attacks frustrat me so much. i can be a hypocrite, but i try not to be.
it doesn't matter whether it's in support of the person i like or against them...the fact that i like obama better doesn't matter.
it's be really easy to call someone here or elsewhere a partisan hack, and so on. i may think it, but it doesn't advance the discourse.
if that is what you mean by moral highground, then ok.
i can tell you that if this were a pro clinton site and had similar types of posts and comments against obama, that i would be taking issue with them, as well.
Being anti-union in the 20's and now are two huge differences Silent Majority
Mike D,
"While I would whole-heartedly agree with anyone that thinks unions got greedy" ~ from my post
fair enough
Unions are why manufacturing jobs are leaving the country. They share atleast equal responsibility with big business
Unions got out of control, no one can deny that. However, the solution was not shipping the jobs overseas and enriching China and India.
Anyone see Billy Cunningham's comments? He might need institutionalized.
Silent Majority,
Your right shipping jobs overseas is not the answer. However most people think it was done just so companies could make more money. It is for survival. Akron is a perfect case. The tooling business(Akron was once the capital of tool making) was decimated the last ten years here. The companies could not compete with the Asian tooling( their prices were a minimum of 20% less) and the Akron tooling companies customers were forced to have their tools made overseas to remain competitive. As far as unions they were part of the reason years ago why companies left an area but now the unions are a minor player in this trend.
I disagree if unions would relent on their ridiculas work rules anufacturing could be very competitive in the US and many non union facilities flourish in the US. The American workforce is far and away the most productive in the world
Oh for god's sake! Can't we just make this guy the
"President Emeritus" of crudmudgen politics, and shuffle him off to some think tank to lecture and write to that small segment of 'anti-authoritarian' people removed and segregated from our mainstream body politic?
Buy cheap WOW Power Leveling,sell wow gold.welcome to buy cheap wow gold-We can have WOW PowerLeveling,buy wow gold game, World Of Warcraft Gold,wow Gold, world of warcraft gold deal,Cheap WOW Gold. Welcome here to buy the professional World Of Warcraft Power Leveling service, World Of Warcraft PowerLeveling for Cheap Wow Powerleveling, WoW Power leveling Guide. The best of luckgoogle Best wishes
Allow me to offer my heartiest wishes.
Don‘t waste your time on a man/woman, who isn‘t willing to waste their time on you. bjseek Hi Best wishes。bjseek by数据恢复loves xicao xicao lovesby bjseek数据恢复专业从事数据恢复领域的产品开发与技术服务自主研发RAID数据恢复服务器数据恢复分析程序来提供高、中、低压锅炉钢管、合金无缝管无缝钢管钢管化肥专用钢管，流体无缝管、结构无缝管、石油裂化无缝钢管、地质钢管、液压支柱钢管通常说的加密狗的破解大致可以分为三种方法，一种是通过硬件克隆或者复制一种是通过SoftICE等Debug工具调试跟踪解密一种是通过编写拦截程序修改软件和加密锁之间的通讯。娱乐幸福女人娱乐博客相册导航google排名google排名google排名台州网站建设优化推广台州网站建设优化推广台州网站建设|网站推广|网站优化|网络公司台州网站建设|网站推广|网站优化|网络公司 google左侧排名google左侧排名google排名论文发表资讯刊物信息，协助客户制定论文发表方案google排名google优化网站优化搜索引擎优化搜索引擎排名网站优化搜索引擎优化百度优化SEOgoogle排名SEO同声传译同声翻译我们致力于提供一流的同声传译设备租赁服务，在同声传译领域，同声翻译设备租赁具备一流的新一代博世会议设备租赁服务。更衣柜文件柜流水线SEO流水线台州鞋帽服装|台州食品饮料|台州礼品|台州阀门水泵|台州服装机械|台州家电及制冷配件|台州模具塑料|台州医药化工|台州汽摩及配件百度搜索夕草SEO北京google左侧排名广州google左侧排名上海google左侧排名杭州google左侧排名
The best of luck Best wishes Best regards .by bjseek
Post a Comment
<< Home