BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?

Subject: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 01:13 PM

Now that it is obvious that American voters' disgust with Bush, while at an all time high, is still less than American voters' disinterest/disgust with Kerry, it looks like Bush may be a shoe in come November.

With Kerry being so gung-ho in support of continuing the war on Iraq and staying the Bush course there, the ONLY alternative for the peace movement is Nader. So what appears to be happening now is that while Nader can't beat Bush when you put them head to head, there may just be a realistic chance he can beat Kerry, take enough Bush votes, and register enough new/inactive voters who want to register a protest vote, to do what Ventura did to win the governor's race in Minnesota.

And Nader can possibly do it without campaigning against Kerry at all, and focusing his entire campaign message on being the anti-war, anti-corporate, anti-Bush alternative candidate.

What I guess I'm saying is, Nader is looking like the candidate the Dems SHOULD have nominated, but refused to, and now appear to be paying the price for choosing the most unelectable candidate of the once strong field of Democratic candidates.

What with the shaky economy (from the point of view of the workers who lean Democratic or independent, not investors who lean almost exclusively Republican), the quagmire in Iraq, and the US foreign policy and home fronts being in such disarray, Nader is the only alternative to Kerry that most Democrats can support without feeling like they are supporting a lunatic fringe candidate.

So if voters start gravitating towards Nader over summer because of strong alienation from both parties and the current state of affairs, what impact on the American electorate might we see?

If a Ventura factor plays itself out?

In the Minnesota race, Ventura was able to run a viable media campaign with few campaign volunteers on the ground and virtually no money. He was able to bring in enough voters who either had never voted or hadn't voted in several elections, who wanted to register a protest vote against the two party duopoly. Finally, Ventura drew enough voters disgusted with both parties away from both the Democrats and Republicans, to win the race in a three way split.

If it happened in a battleground state in recent times, why couldn't it happen on the national level too, at a time when it is obvious that voters are fed up and disgusted by both parties, and there is such a deep sense that the nation is careening out of control down the wrong course?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: CarolC
Date: 02 May 04 - 01:23 PM

The problem there is that in the Ventura case, there was no electoral college to contend with. The electoral college is a pretty sure-fire way to kill any third party candidate's chances of winning a presidential election.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST,Puppetmaster
Date: 02 May 04 - 01:30 PM

What a surprise to find GUEST doing it again. Working for the Reps. Divide and conquer.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 02:33 PM

You know CarolC, I was wondering about the electoral college. There may not be a way for the rules of the electoral college to work in the event of a three way vote split where no candidate gets enough of a majority to win the electoral college. For instance, where threee candidates split enough votes, that no one wins the necessary electoral votes to win the race.

So what would happen then?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 02:49 PM

Just googled this, and came up with this fascinating testimony given by the League of Women Voters in 1997. Prophetic or what?

"Testimony of Becky Cain, President, League of Women Voters
to the House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on the Constitution
Subcommittee Hearing on "Proposals for Electoral College Reform: H.J. Res. 28 and H.J. Res. 43"

September 4, 1997

Since 1970, the League has supported an amendment to the Constitution that would abolish the electoral college and establish a direct, popular vote for the President and Vice President of the United States. The League arrived at this position through its time-honored study and consensus process. Leagues in over 1,000 communities across the country participated in the study and came to the same conclusion: our method of electing a President must be changed to ensure a more representative government.

Political developments since the 1970s have only underscored the need for the elimination of the electoral college system. The downward trend in voter participation, coupled with increased cynicism and skepticism amongst the public about the ability of elected leaders to provide meaningful representation are the warning signs of a potential electoral fiasco.

Picture if you will a future national election in which a presidential candidate receives a majority of the popular vote, but is denied the 270 votes necessary for election by the electoral college. This has already happened once in our nation's history, when, in 1888, Grover Cleveland out-polled Benjamin Harrison in the popular vote but lost the electoral college vote by 233 to 168. It caused a public furor then, when political office was often gained through back-room deals and closed-door maneuvering. Imagine the public outcry today, after a long primary campaign and a grueling race for the Presidency. Imagine the public's rage at being denied their candidate of choice.

Now go one step further. Consider a close three-way race for President in which no candidate earns the necessary electoral college votes to win. This has happened twice before in our nation's history, in 1801 and 1825, when the House of Representatives chose Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams, respectively. While the League believes both of these men were great presidents, we are troubled about the potential for a future presidential candidate with the highest number of popular votes to lose the election in a House of Representatives dominated by one or another political party.
_____________________________________________________

You can read the complete text of her remarks, which includes a fascinating history of electoral college related constitutional crises here:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary/222313.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: annamill
Date: 02 May 04 - 02:57 PM

Those considering voting for Nader, who would you vote for if Nader was not available? In my case I will vote for Kerry. I feel that a vote for Nader would be a vote for Bush because I would be taking a vote away from Kerry. I don't want to register my peace vote, I want Bush out!! What, you think Bush will end the war,er, excuse me, police action?

Maybe I'm too simple.

Annamill

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 02 May 04 - 02:57 PM

still less than American voters' disinterest/disgust with Kerry, it looks like Bush may be a shoe in come November.


Fellow Mudcatters, this is a classic technique in the world of debate. One sets a false premise, gets folks to debate it as fact and then lures them into the argument. This is our northern troll at her best. I wouldn't debate this issue, but I will point out that Americans aren't disinterested or disgusted with Kerry. In fact, interest continues to grow. The one they are disinterested in is the hypocritical Ralph Nader. They tire of his megalomaniacal actions, as well as his playing the role of the "poor monk" while harboring a secret fortune. Further, they tire of his acting as if he is a friend of labor, when the facts are that (when it comes to his companies) he is a union buster of the first order. Now, and once again, he is willing to try and split the progressive vote so that he will insure GWB a second win.

You folks might be on to something. Maybe this GUEST is, indeed, working for the Bush folks.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 03:04 PM

If Nader or some other 3rd party wasn't available to me to vote for, I would do what I have done in the past when there hasn't been a real, true choice between presidential candidates, which is not vote at all in the presidential race.

It is possible to cast a ballot without voting for president, and many people do it, which is why the number of ballots cast doesn't usually equal the number of votes each presidential candidate receives.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 03:10 PM

Actually Big Mick, I think the tactic and practice of smearing a dissenter by painting them as being in league with the enemy, which is what those of you who are claiming I'm a Bush plant are doing, is the older tactic of the two.

But go ahead and accuse me of being a Bush plant all you want fellas, it doesn't bother me a bit. Intelligent people can actually see through your Democratic "Anybody But Bush" and "A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush" transparencies.

BTW Big Mick, could you provide some proof of your claim that Kerry is rising in the polls while Nader and Bush are sinking? All the polls I've read in the past week show Bush sinking, Kerry remaining where he is or dropping slightly, and Nader gaining, from around 3% (where he was at in the final tally of the 2000 election) to 6% today.

Nader has also raised twice as much money to date as he did in his entire 2000 campaign. So much for Nader needing the Greens, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 03:20 PM

BTW, the answer to what would happen if no candidate gets the necessary number of electoral college votes to be declared the winner, certainly ought to give some of you pause for thought.

The House of Representatives would decide who the next president of the United States would be. Any guess who the Republican House would choose? No? I thought not.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 02 May 04 - 03:20 PM

Really???? Gosh, just another example of you using the old tactic of saying falsehoods as if they were truth.

According to the Fox polls, as of 2/18-19/04 Nader was at 4% support. As of 4/21-22 he was at 2%.

According to the CBS/NY Times polls, for the period of 3/10-14 Nader was at 7% support. As of 4/23-27 he was at 5%.

During those same times Bush dropped from 1 to 3 points, depending on the poll. Kerry either stayed the same of picked up 1 or 2 points. If you weren't so bent on being deceptive, you would understand that means the gap is closing.

Cheap tricks and misinformation. I have seen your types my whole life.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 02 May 04 - 03:23 PM

And do you see the faultiness of your logic? If you don't want a Republican House to pick the President, why would you take actions that might lead to that? This isn't about your committment, it is about you being so lost in your philosophy and bitterness that you can't see truth. The truth is that you are advocating a position that will not lead to a positive outcome under any circumstances.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:06 PM

I find it amazing how many people seem unwilling to get their heads round the actual voting system you have, in which the popular vote as such just doesn't make any difference.

As I understand it, most of the country is sewn up, in the sense that either Bush or Kerry will be well ahead in the vote that determines electoral college votes. Wherever this is the case, it won't make any difference at all if a fair number of people switch their vote to Nader or the American version of the Monster Raving Loony Party (though I suppose it'd have to be called something different, to avoid getting confused with the people in power).

It's only in the relatively small number of "swing states" that that kind of thing could make any difference to the outcome. Or in States where the electoral vote is divided up to reflect the popular vote, rather than being allocated on a winner takes all basis - I think there are some like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:18 PM

McGrath, the popular vote does make a difference. When a candidate wins with both the popular vote and the Electoral College, s/he has a mandate that is simply not present without both.

In our kind of system, if both go for the winning candidate, I'm willing to abide by the notion that the "people have spoken". This is not true otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:29 PM

I am not now, nor have I ever been, a registered Democrat. Four more years of Bush would be a great disappointment to me, but not enough of a disappointment to make me vote Democratic in the 2004 presidential race, unless by some fluke, Kucinich became the Democratic candidate.

Here is what I think. I think Democrat who insists that Nader's supporters are traitors unless they vote for the Democratic nominee so that Bush won't win, is just plain arrogant, and clueless to boot.

Either the anti-Nader Democrats don't understand that independent voters don't think or vote like registered party voters, or the anti-Nader Democrats think they should have the political power and control over independent voters and candidates, in order to dictate who should be allowed to run, and who independents should all vote for in close elections where it looks like the Democrat's candidate stands a very good chance of losing.

Either way Big Mick, it just makes the Democrats like yourself look like arrogant, controlling bullies who are inherently undemocratic in their tactics. Those sorts of bullying tactics don't work on me, which clearly further enrages you. I know full well that making me bend to your will isn't why you are bullying me. You also don't bully me because of your passionate beliefs in the righteousness of your Demcratic party jihad against Nader.

Nope, I know you better than that Big Mick. You bully me for the same reasons any guy bullies others: because you get applause for it from a certain group of people you want to impress, and because bullying makes you feel so damn good. I know that is what floats your boat, so you just keep trying to bully me.

You won't succeed in intimidating me, shutting me up, or making me change my views. Not in this instance, or any instance.

Have a nice day.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:29 PM

I wonder if Nader will even get on the ballot in many states? Most of the states have previous-election percentage requirements and the Green Party didn't qualify in all states last time 'round. This time Nader has not signed onto the Green Party, making it even more difficult for him. Write-in candidates have historically never had a great impact.

This time Nader has to circulate get-on-the-ballot petitions with X number of certified voters' signatures and in addition, petitions have deadlines when the books must be turned in. It can be done but it's not a stroll. (Talk about running for president.)

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:44 PM

It might make a difference to how some people feel, but it doesn't alter the power structure any. Is Bush any weaker than he would have been if he had managed to get more people to vote for him than voted for Gore?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:56 PM

Yes, I, for one, definitely think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 04:59 PM

Excellent point, McGrath. Of course the answer is no, Bush would be no more or less powerful today had he won the popular vote and the electoral college vote, because he never would have won by a large majority. But Bush's power grab is rooted in the fact that he was president at the time of the 9/11 attacks, and less so, that the Supreme Court intervened on his behalf.

Ebbie, your question is unanswerable right now of course, but Nader was on the ballot in 43 states and the District in 2000. He has twice as much money now as he did on election day in 2000, which should help. His goal is to be on the ballot in all 50 states.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:05 PM

And here is the list of what is necessary to get on the ballot in all 50 states:

Here's the task Nader has ahead of him. The deadline for Texas is May 10, only 11 days away:

# Required Signatures/Deadline or fee


Texas: 64,076, May 10

New Jersey: 800, June 8

Arizona: 14,694, June 9

Illinois: 25,000, June 21

Indiana: 29,552, June 30

Colorado: $500, July 5

North Carolina: 100,532, July 6

Nevada: 4,805, July 9

Georgia : 37,153, July 13

Florida: 93,024, July 15

Michigan: 31,776, July 15

Oklahoma: 37,027, July 15

South Carolina: 10,000, July 15

Missouri: 10,000, July 26

Arkansas: 1,000, Aug 2

Kansas: 5,000, Aug 2

Maryland: est. 28,000, Aug 2

Pennsylvania: 25,697, Aug 2

West Virginia: 12,962, Aug 2

Massachusetts: 10,000, Aug 3

South Dakota: 3,346, Aug 3

Alaska: 2,845, Aug 4

Connecticut: 7,500, Aug 4

California: 153,035, Aug 6

Maine: 4,000, Tent. Aug 15

Montana: 5,000, Aug 11

New Hampshire: 3,000, Aug 11

Iowa: 1,500, Aug 13

D.C.: est 3,450, Aug 17

New York: 15,000, Aug 17

Ohio: 5,000, Aug 19

Tennessee: 25, Aug 19

Virginia: 10,000, Aug 20

Wyoming: 3,644, Aug 23

Nebraska: 2,500, Aug 24

Oregon: 15,306, Aug 24

Idaho: 5,017, Aug 25

Washington: 1,000, Aug 24

Alabama: 5,000, Aug 31

Delaware: 5,182, Sep 1

Hawaii: 7,711, Sep 3

Mississippi: 1,000, Sep 3

North Dakota: 4,000, Sep 3

Rhode Island: 1,000/one meeting, Sep 2

Utah: 1,000, Sep 3

Louisiana: $4,500, Sep 7

New Mexico: 14,527, Sep 7

Minnesota: 2,000, Sep 14

Kentucky: 5,000, Sep 7

Wisconsin: 2,000, Sep 7

Vermont: 1,000, Sep 17

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Peace
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:09 PM

GUEST: Get a fu#kin' name and stop trolling.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:18 PM

Does anyone know or care what a brucie is?

Besides a grovelling, boot licking troll that lives under the Mudcat bridge, that is?

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:41 PM

Allow me to introduce you to Bruce Murdoch, oh, gestating one. (No capitalization, obviously- no proper name.)

Elva Bontrager

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:42 PM

Why would anyone with a brain larger than the size of a pea ever consider someone like Nader? Being an advocate does not give someone the tools to be president. He doesn't have a clue.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 05:56 PM

Which I suppose is meant to be a recommendation for Kerry? I don't see it that way, Guest 05:42 PM, but you are entitled to your opinion.

People who are interested in shifting the political power dynamic away from the two party gridlock we've had for the past 20 years in the US might support Nader, for one.

People opposed to the Iraq war, for two.

People interested in taking control of our government back from corporate looters, for three.

People who want to see more government, not less, for four.

People who believe integrity in politics isn't something we should just pay lip service to in the marketing plans, for five.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 May 04 - 07:35 PM

It's not about names and identities in the big world, ebbie, and he/she/it knows that perfectly well. It's about making it harder for people to distinguish between different posts - for example is the anti-Nader GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 05:42 PM really the same as the ostensibly pro-Nader GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 04:29 PM? And which if these, if either, is the rather unpleasant one at GUEST Date: 02 May 04 - 05:18 PM ?

A good working rule is, never reply to them, never address them directly, and work on the reasonable assumption that noone who was actually interested in the discussion, rather than playing silly games, would go in for that kind of nonsense.

...........................

It's true enough that votes in themselves do give a candidate or a party a certain authority, even where they don't add up to getting elected. That's why Nader is running, to remind people that there are millions of people out there who aren't represented, and whose views are casually dismissed, and that the USA has a system of elections in which money buys power, and that that undermines your aspirations to have a genuinely democracy.

But the trick is to find ways of achieving that which do not land your country and the world we share with four more years of a seriously deranged and dangerous regime in Washington that threatens us all. And that isn't particularly difficult - but it does require a sense of priorities when it comes to picking fights.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 02 May 04 - 08:49 PM

Now see, there you go again. You make an assertion, I counter it with cites, in fact I show that you just made crap up, and the best you can come up with is I am a bully? I have watched your bullying tactics ad nauseum, including the use of some pretty awful language.

Do you really want to know why I counter everything you say? It isn't because I am bullying you. There is no need to, as your faulty logic trips you up all by itself. And I am not trying to shut you up. Having you around makes it easy to show what is wrong with the Nader candidacy. Nope, the reason I show up is simply because I don't like your tactics. I have seen you use multiple personalities. I have seen you try and create new realities that suit your desires. I have seen you be crude. I have seen you show absolutely no respect to others, to the point of abuse.

You seem to like to analyze me so let me give you something from my childhood to chew on. Then you might get a picture of why I come after you, but only when you start your crap. I have always been a big fella. When I was a freshman in high school (14 years old) I was 6'2" tall and weighed 195 lbs. I was a very strong young man, and fully capable of taking care of myself physically. I could have been the biggest bully of them all. But I wasn't raised that way. I was raised to never start a fight. If my parents found out that I did, I got a whipping. I also was in trouble if I didn't finish one. This caused me to always watch for bullies, and when I saw them bullying someone, I would give them a dose of their own salts. I have been that way all my life.

Yep, I am coming after you. But only when you start that crap you start. Like phony stats, and twisting the facts to suit you.

And, the stuff that you pull in this thread is an example. You are trying to make it seem (look at the title of the thread) as though Nader is legitimate when every single observer, no matter the party - no matter the persuasion, knows that he will cause more harm than good. In fact, it could be tragic. He is a megalomaniac. You are his acolyte.

So, please continue to express your views. When they are just that, fair enough. When you put out phony crap, I will be there. And when your opinion seems faulty, I will point it out. That is my right.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Thomas the Rhymer
Date: 02 May 04 - 10:10 PM

Thanks Mick... You're right on the money... imo.
ttr

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 10:36 PM

"Yep, I am coming after you."

So what else is new.

Everyone on this forum already knows you love to stalk and bully me whenever you disagree with me Big Mick.

All it proves is you are a tiresome bore.

And Thomas the Rhymer, applauding the popular bully on the block: so what's that make you?

A suck up to a tiresome bore.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Amos
Date: 02 May 04 - 10:57 PM

Guest, I usually try to cut you slack because I perceive you are burdened with past pain in some way, but I have to say that your assertions are just as boring and tiresome as anything Mick has said, at least to me. I don't see him being a bully here.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 May 04 - 11:22 PM

For me to respond to the obnoxious macho bores of this forum, I'd actually have to read your drivel. I rarely bother. I routinely scroll down past anything with name Big Mick, Amos, Teribus, Rapaire, Strick, and few others who aren't worth my time or eyestrain to read, much less respond to. None of you have anything to say I am willing to read through your macho blustering to decipher.

That is y'alls failure to communicate, fellas so you just might want to think about it.

Considering how I'm not worth listening to, you guys sure spend a lot of time and energy in the threads I post, and responding to what I write, even if it is just to respond with your childish tantrums and insults, that demonstrate you all have the debating skills of three year olds.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Amos
Date: 02 May 04 - 11:28 PM

Gee...you assert that your failure to read anything we post is our failure to communicate? How do you reckon that? You pour out clouds of blame asserting that we are throwing tantrums, call us "obnoxious bores" and assert we are insulting you... and demean our debating skills while launching ad hominem diatribes.

Sorry it turned out this way, but I don't think any further exchange is needed on this theme.

I hope you recover. I know you can!

A

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Peace
Date: 03 May 04 - 12:35 AM

GUEST: Your posturing as a nerd of an intellectual bent--well, with your political savey and a buck you could ride the bus, just like the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Peace
Date: 03 May 04 - 12:41 AM

And as to your May 2, 11:22 PM post: Up yers you for not including me. My drivel is often every bit as good as theirs, or yours for that matter. So, bite me. You are the reason some mammals eat their young.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 03 May 04 - 07:42 AM

Once again you prove yourself as lacking in honesty. You indicate that you rarely read anything with my name on it, but I note with interest that you respond each time I post. So much for another of your assertions. And the fact that others jump in, well GUEST, it is called a forum, ya know. That is its purpose. The fact that folks don't agree with your position is not evidence of ganging up. The fact that I take you on is not evidence of bullying. It is evidence of disagreeing mightily with the positions you take.

By the way, I set you up in my last post. And wonders of wonders, you took the bait. I wanted to see if you would give another example of how you take things out of context. You did. The "I'm coming after you" piece was put there to show how you operate. And, of course, you took it and twisted it.

Now, to the context of this bogus thread. The answer is no.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 04 - 07:47 AM

Yeah right Big Mick, you think coming back in here, bitching at guest some more, and then feigning interest in the thread is going to bring anyone back into the conversation now that you bullies have pissed in all the corners of the room?

I don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 May 04 - 07:50 AM

I routinely scroll down past anything with name Big Mick, Amos, Teribus, Rapaire, Strick, and few others

That of course is a main reason why posting with a name makes life easier for everyone else, and why posting as unamed GUEST makes it harder. A name means you can pick and choose. If people scroll down past un-named GUEST, it isn't just a particular person posting that way you screen out, it's all the others, some of whom even have something to say worth reading.

On balance scrolling past the unamed GUESTs does make most sense. Arguing directly with them doesn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:19 AM

You respond to my posts all the time too McGrath.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Big Mick
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:35 AM

On balance scrolling past the unamed GUESTs does make most sense. Arguing directly with them doesn't. McGrath post.

I disagree mightily with that contention, Kevin. It is far too general a statement. I think that one has too weigh what the motive is and the effect of what is being proposed. I take this GUEST on because s/he is destructive and has an agenda that is not honest. I respond because of what is being said. I think that is the criteria. This place is a Forum. That indicates to me that it is exactly the place for debate. Folks espouse ideas and see how they fly. This person uses this in a very manipulative way. That bothers me, and as an active participant in the idea exchange, I feel it necessary to respond. To me, that is what a forum is all about.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Amos
Date: 03 May 04 - 09:41 AM

I find it remarkable, dear GUEST, that in spite of your anonymity, the thread has now become about you -- tha tis not meant in a demeaning way, just an observation. I of course have no way of really knowing what this lashing out is all about, but I can tell you this much: until the true source of your upset is identified all you will get is persistence of pain. When you address the right source, it will shift. Blaming is not part of the truth. Most hardly never...

A

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 May 04 - 10:15 AM

I'm not saying, Big Mick, that it isn't fair enough to comment sometimes on something an un-named GUEST has posted, especially when other people are drawn in. But I think it is generally a mistake to address the poster directly.

And it's always to remember that "this person" might not be the same this time as "this person" last time. A nameless GUEST, by definition, excludes themselves as being treated as "this person", or as a serious contributor to any discussion, since pretty clearly that's not his or her priority.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Peace
Date: 03 May 04 - 11:07 AM

GUEST: I respond to your posts because I dislike people who hide behind namelessness. It shows a lack of substance; a certain quality of "I can say whatever I want and no one will know who I am". In my opinion, that makes you quite worthy of contempt. It would be far better for you to stand up for your ideas and put your name behind it. However, you seem not to have much belief in your ideas--or you politics either. If I agreed with you, I would support your arguments in public and sign my name. And if that meant taking on the whole damn crew, I would. You suffer under the delusion that you are really smart and effective with your argument. You would be a helluva lot MORE effective if you showed your support of your views with your name.

I too have been shot down by some people who are shooting you down. Know what? I still like these guys and gals. And I would accept censure from these people because they provide well-considered arguments, and they also have the cajones to say who they are. I happen to like Big Mick even though he has disagreed with my views on a few occasions. Same with McG of H. If I ever met these guys, I am quite sure we'd get along and maybe have a few beers and a few songs. Same with Rapper, Ebbie, alanabit, Amos, et.al. Do all of us have the same politics? Hell, no. Do I think they're wrong when they disagree with me? Hell, yes! Know what? It don't matter shit.

Bruce Murdoch

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 03 May 04 - 07:42 PM

Oh, you fucking boobs. Turn yet another interesting thread into a GUEST-bashing. You don't like anonymity, everyone understands. Get over it already.

And, no, I doubt that Nader will pull off a Ventura, though it would be nice. Even if we had elections by popular vote for president, the racist majority in this country would never accept an Arab-American.

I'm voting for him, though. :)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Bobert
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:00 PM

Well, still being more than angry about the DNC/RNC hatchet job that they conspired on to get Howard Dean, an outsider, ahhhh, outside their little ball game, I'm not ready to be told by the Dems that "I'm either with 'um or aginst 'um". I didn't like it when Bush did it to go to war and I don't like it any more for Dems, who are not so much as throwing thr progressives a bone, doing it to us.

If they want to have a party that isn't RepubLite then they are gonna have quit catering to rednecks and fundamentalists.

Can Nadar pull a Venura? Of course he can't. But he might just get the Dems to being scared to be an "opposition" party rather than a rival fraternity on campus.

The US is totally screwed up. It has a political system that is broken. It has corporations running everything. It has a terribly flawed foriegn policy. It has the highest infant mortality rat of any industrialized vountry. It's working class gets scrwed daily by Boss Hog. It is steeped in racism and stereotyping people. Its governemnt lies thru their teeth on just about every issue. And this is Repubs and Dems alike.

Maybe the Dems just need another dose of Nadar, and maybe another next time and the time afterwards until they figure out how to be an opposition party that is based on pro-human and pro earth values... It ain't all that hear to know what is right and wrong once you get the money out of the equation...

Plus, another 4 years of Bush's crapolla might create a more receptive scenerio for the Dems to step up to the plate with some real alternatives.

Until then, sorry to my Dem frineds, but this Greenie is having one heck of a hard time trying to think of any reason to vote for BushLite (Kerry).

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Peace
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:28 PM

Lepus: Take a pill.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:31 PM

"You don't like anonymity, everyone understands. Get over it already."

How many times does it have to be said - it's nothing to do with anonymity. "Lepus Rex" is anonymous, so are most people on the Mudcat, members or GUESTs. But when they post, it is possible to distinguish one from another, and link posts by the same person to each other in a thread, because of that label at the top of their post, however anonynous that may be. (And that applies to the normal run of GUESTS.)

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:37 PM

Hey LR, nice to see you. How pathetic is it that it's under the same sucky circumstances as when you left, eh? Some people never change, no matter how many times they apologize for doing the same rude fucking things over and over.

AAAANNYYYWWAAAAY.

For the obvious reasons, I've abandoned this thread. Not much point hanging around where everyone is pissing on your shoes, I figure.

Hope to see you around now and again, LR.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 May 04 - 08:44 PM

And Bobert, I apologize that I am such a lightning rod for Big Mick and his Band of Bullies, that we can't have a decent, reasonable discussion about Nader anymore. But do know that I'm listening. I just think I won't be posting much about Nader anymore, because Big Mick is going use every one of posts for target practice, obviously.

Maybe we can chat in threads about corn bread or something. But the military Mudcatters have made it impossible for me to participate in any of these threads, so I'll be bowing out for awhile.

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: Bobert
Date: 03 May 04 - 09:05 PM

Well danged, GUEST, I don't think Big Mick would want you to do that since he is a believer in democracy and in a democracy we need all folks involved. Right, Mick?

Hey, the Dems shouldn't be mad at the Greens or the Nadar folks 'cause , hey, at least we're keepin' everyone corraled over here so if and when the Dems want to make a few consessions, we won't have to go out and round everyone up. But like I said above, doesn't look like this year is going to be one of them years...

The DNC/RNC assasination of Dean purdy much signaled that.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Can Nader pull off a Ventura?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 03 May 04 - 09:24 PM

Having lived through several extremist candidates--Henry Wallace, George Wallace, a pig farmer from Secaucus whose name I forget, Ralph Nader, to   name a few--I can only colclude that this is a singularly dumb way to get anything done (if you exclude getting your name on a ballot as an accomplishment.) Like our system or not, it's the one that exists. If you want to try to change it, the only way that can work is to create a voting bloc inside an existing party.

As far as Ventura is concerned, I don't think Ralph Nader could qualify as the third man in a two-man tag team.